Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: red scarlet  (Read 7844 times)
John.Murray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 893



WWW
« on: December 15, 2010, 03:56:31 PM »
ReplyReply

no idea if this is the real deal or not......

http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/15/red-scarlet-fixed-lens-camera-shown-in-public-video/

Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #1 on: December 15, 2010, 06:18:40 PM »
ReplyReply


Could it be?  Shocked
I have the impression that they looked in Lu-La recently.
Logged
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2010, 07:39:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Heh, Tonaci is a regular contributor to RedUser.Net and runs a rental house in Vietnam.  That is reportedly the first working Red Scarlet he's holding.  While the pricepoint of the Scarlet is damn attractive, it's sensor size gives it too much depth of field for my taste.  I'm shopping around now for some fast primes that can give a look comparable to my Zeiss 85 f/1.4ZF.

While it may be possible that the Scarlet will reach mass production during 2011, I wouldn't hold my breath.  First Red has to get Epic down the line....  mmmmm Epic.... gularrrghlllll

CB
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2010, 07:49:37 PM »
ReplyReply

While the pricepoint of the Scarlet is damn attractive, it's sensor size gives it too much depth of field for my taste.  I'm shopping around now for some fast primes that can give a look comparable to my Zeiss 85 f/1.4ZF.

Mysterium (Scarlet's sensor) has roughly the same size as (Super) 35mm so it offers cinematic DOF sought after by most cinematographers. Of course if you're after special effects shots with shallow DOF Scarlet is probably not suitable unless you're using some exotic fast glass.
Logged

ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #4 on: December 15, 2010, 08:38:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually, the Scarlet (with the fixed lens) is set to be a 2/3" sensor... nothing like the DOF of a S35 sensor.  The Scarlet S35 sensor camera has been rebadged the "Epic Light" though there is much dissension amongst the ranks of Red loyalist over the naming.  Light?  Seriously?

and you know what's really weird?  After spending 20 years shooting at f/22 or slower I suddenly find myself lusting for fast glass... LoL


CB
« Last Edit: December 15, 2010, 08:49:30 PM by CBarrett » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #5 on: December 16, 2010, 09:00:41 AM »
ReplyReply

I like that Scarlet compactness. It looks like a mixed of German WWII machine and Star-treck kind of device. It seems very portable.

Does anybody has an idea for more or less the public price it will have? 
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 16, 2010, 03:21:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually, the Scarlet (with the fixed lens) is set to be a 2/3" sensor... nothing like the DOF of a S35 sensor.  The Scarlet S35 sensor camera has been rebadged the "Epic Light" though there is much dissension amongst the ranks of Red loyalist over the naming.  Light?  Seriously?

and you know what's really weird?  After spending 20 years shooting at f/22 or slower I suddenly find myself lusting for fast glass... LoL


CB

My bad: there appears to be two upcoming Scarlets, and the one in the video doesn't use Mysterium.

You're right - its 2/3" sensor is roughly the size of Super 16mm and has more DOF than 35mm sensors or film formats. Here handy sensor size comparison chart for motion cameras.

The other Scarlet in development (called S35) will probably use roughly Super 35mm -sized sensor, hence the name.
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #7 on: December 18, 2010, 07:12:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Actually, the Scarlet (with the fixed lens) is set to be a 2/3" sensor... nothing like the DOF of a S35 sensor.  The Scarlet S35 sensor camera has been rebadged the "Epic Light" though there is much dissension amongst the ranks of Red loyalist over the naming.  Light?  Seriously?

and you know what's really weird?  After spending 20 years shooting at f/22 or slower I suddenly find myself lusting for fast glass... LoL


CB
Hi Chris, if you read that post, I'd be interested to know if the Red obliges you to re-learn all the process to the delivery compared to the 5D or other dslrs. Or if it is more like tha same in more complex.
Also, have you noticed that your computers where you'd edit had to be upgraded because of the Raw or could you work fine?

Thanks
Logged
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #8 on: December 18, 2010, 08:18:33 AM »
ReplyReply

I assume you're talking about post production and not the actual shooting?  It is certainly different.  With the 5d2 you shoot your footage and it gets transcoded to ProRes when you L&T in FCP.  Done.  I was immediately comfortable, however, with the Red workflow as it is very comparable to working with Capture 1 Pro.

You import your footage into RedCine-X (a free download) and work with it the way you would a raw still capture.  Typically you apply a "look" which is 2 part, first you apply a color science and then a gamma.  They've just released "RedColor 2" and "RedGamma 2" which are a great start.  Then you fine tune your color balance, your ISO, FLUT(brightness) and from there I usually apply some sort of curve.  Once I've got my footage looking good I usually export ProRes 444 files at 1920x1080... I do a batch export just as I do in C1Pro.

Fortunately I happened to have bought a new 12 core MacPro before jumping into video and that is certainly helping the workflow.  Since the resolution of the Red files is so huge, you are typically viewing them in the software at 1/8th or 1/16th Debayer settings which leaves them looking pretty "Jpegish"  You can view them at Full debayer to see how sharp the images are, but you will not get smooth playback viewing the clip.  Red offers a PCI Card, the Red Rocket, which does provide Real Time Debayering and that's on my shopping list for sure.  That card also speeds up exports as it takes over the debayer during transcoding from the cpu.

So, yeah, it requires learning some new software, but the approach is very similar to how we all deal with Raw stills already.  If you really want to explore it, I'd recommend downloading the latest software

http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eval/REDCINE-X_build_351_mac32.zip
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eval/REDCINE-X_build_351_mac64.zip
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eval/REDCINE-X_build_351_win32.zip
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eval/REDCINE-X_build_351_win64.zip

Damn, there was some sample footage online, but I can't find it.  Let me know if you want some and I'll post my own.

Cheers,
CB
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 03:38:35 PM by CBarrett » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #9 on: December 18, 2010, 11:23:07 AM »
ReplyReply

I assume you're talking about post production and not the actual shooting?  It is certainly different.  With the 5d2 you shoot your footage and it gets transcoded to ProRes when you L&T in FCP.  Done.  I was immediately comfortable, however, with the Red workflow as it is very comparable to working with Capture 1 Pro.

You import your footage into RedCine-X (a free download) and work with it the way you would a raw still capture.  Typically you apply a "look" which is 2 part, first you apply a color science and then a gamma.  They've just released "RedColor 2" and "RedGamma 2" which are a great start.  Then you fine tune your color balance, your ISO, FLUT(brightness) and from there I usually apply some sort of curve.  Once I've got my footage looking good I usually export ProRes 444 files at 1920x1080... I do a batch export just as I do in C1Pro.

Fortunately I happened to have bought a new 12 core MacPro before jumping into video and that is certainly helping the workflow.  Since the resolution of the Red files is so huge, you are typically viewing them in the software at 1/8th or 1/16th Debayer settings which leaves them looking pretty "Jpegish"  You can view them at Full debayer to see how sharp the images are, but you will not get smooth playback viewing the clip.  Red offers a PCI Card, the Red Rocket, which does provide Real Time Debayering and that's on my shopping list for sure.  That card also speeds up exports as it takes over the debayer during transcoding from the cpu.

So, yeah, it requires learning some new software, but the approach is very similar to how we all deal with Raw stills already.  If you really want to explore it, I'd recommend downloading the latest software

http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eva..._351_mac32.zip
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eva..._351_mac64.zip
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eva..._351_win32.zip
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eva..._351_win64.zip

Damn, there was some sample footage online, but I can't find it.  Let me know if you want some and I'll post my own.

Cheers,
CB

Chris, Thank you very much for your help. Your explaination is very clear.
I'm downloading the redcine-x 64 bits.

I've found this link, for footage: http://rojolooks.com/R3DFILES.html

Cheers
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #10 on: December 18, 2010, 11:52:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Whaooo!!!

The wired think is that the Redcine-X does not install in the program files location in windows 7 but I just runs it perfectly from the folder.

It looks pretty much like Capture one as you said.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #11 on: December 18, 2010, 12:34:58 PM »
ReplyReply

After 30min playing with it: I want it, I need it
« Last Edit: March 26, 2011, 08:23:46 AM by fredjeang » Logged
bradleygibson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 829


WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 18, 2010, 01:19:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the info, Chris!  I too am awaiting the Epic Monstro, but I'd be surprised to see them readily available before 2013, honestly, particularly the larger sensors.

For those trying to download the client software, I think Chris' links are malformed.  If you're having trouble, try:

http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eval/REDCINE-X_build_351_mac32.zip
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eval/REDCINE-X_build_351_mac64.zip
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eval/REDCINE-X_build_351_win32.zip
and
http://red.cachefly.net/redcinex/eval/REDCINE-X_build_351_win64.zip

Those should work.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2010, 01:22:03 PM by bradleygibson » Logged

ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #13 on: December 18, 2010, 03:39:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Thx, Bradley, I modified the links in my OP to save headaches.
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2207


WWW
« Reply #14 on: December 19, 2010, 03:48:33 PM »
ReplyReply

"but the approach is very similar to how we all deal with Raw stills already"

There is one difference i dont 'get'

Where does one edit

chops/transitions/titles etc

My ideal workflow would be this..

Footage in to  Red Rawconverter

quick corrections and batch applications of looks

Output (maybe at 720)

Edit

Go back to RAW make really fine adjustments on the shots that did not land on the cutting room floor (somehow tagged)

maybe have layered versions 'C1 variants' (sky recovery - multiple WB across a frame)

Out put master at 4k 1080 or whatever

it seems a linear workflow would not work unless the red 'C1' has the full functionality of FCP or whatever NLE is used

S








« Last Edit: December 19, 2010, 03:51:33 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #15 on: December 19, 2010, 04:19:10 PM »
ReplyReply

I was initially processing out 1920x1080 ProRes files from Cine-X and then working in FCP.  Every time I wanted to adjust a file I would go back to Cine-X, make my adjustment, re-export, re-import in FCP and replace the original clip (PITA).  PremierPro, however, can work with the R3D's natively, even apply the adjustments available in Cine-X or reload data from RMD files if you rework the originals in Cine-X. 

I think I'm about to swap Apps as I'm going to be working on a short with a filmmaker friend and want to maintain a 4k workflow, which is a pain in FCP.  Plus the fact that CS5 PP can access my mountain of RAM!

Thankfully I have a subscription to Lynda.Com and PP isn't all that different from FCP.

Cheers,
CB
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2207


WWW
« Reply #16 on: December 19, 2010, 05:27:50 PM »
ReplyReply

So I was correct in the 'pitfall' now if you had wanted a 4k version of your FCP edit you would have really been in the ..

The PP workflow makes a little more sense referencing back to the Raws

I assume the capabilites are there in terms of keying different outputs of the same file

its mentioned here (actually using two DSLR files)

http://www.elskid.com/blog/combining-multiple-exposures-dynamic-range-tricks

Raw has completely changed my approch to stills , basically shoot knowing what can be created, the vid people dont seem to see it quite hte same way yet

S



Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #17 on: December 20, 2010, 03:28:50 AM »
ReplyReply

If you want to speed up your workflow for 4k files, or any motion files for that matter, look into 3cp.

http://3cp.gammadensity.com/home.html

It's about $1,400 but works real time, 10,000 times faster than RED Cine,  albiet with a slightly rasterized preview, but is perfect for quick color grading and dailies, also fast conversion out in any professional format.

You can add the Red rocket for full rez processing and previews and also set your color and tone, shoot to the computer, and have what comes out the look you desire.

Think of it as the c-1 or lightroom for motion.

Comes with a dongle per liscense.


BC
« Last Edit: December 20, 2010, 12:31:04 PM by bcooter » Logged
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #18 on: December 21, 2010, 07:36:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Cool, would love to hear what sort of workflow you settle into. I've been really disorganized about it and need to set up a regimen.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #19 on: December 21, 2010, 03:56:53 PM »
ReplyReply

But if I understand, (or not) the 3cp is not giving the advantage of native raw in editor like Premiere so in my understanding it is still keeping one more step?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad