Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Red Digital Cinema announces Scarlet X -- 4K resolution, $9750, Ships in 2 weeks

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 54 posts

Re: Red Digital Cinema announces Scarlet X -- 4K resolution, $9750, Ships in 2 weeks

#11

Post by davidjohnstone »

As desirable as the specs are, this comment on Canon Rumors balances things up:

"To those fawning after the Red...sure, it looks nice, but the poor color rendering, impossible proprietary workflow, and constantly-in-need-of-updates software make the camera a nightmare, imo, to use. Canon's footage has nicer skin tones than I've ever seen out of a Red. There's a reason so much tv is shot with the Alexa, rather than the red, and why dSLRs are used on ads--1080p with nice and standardized colors out of camera is much better for post. Red is cool, but what you get in terms of extra tech you pay for in having to figure out how to use it efficiently. Canon's cine camera does seem overpriced for what you get, though--in that no man's land the AF100 and F3 already inhabit except even more expensive..."

From http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,2059.msg410...

In other news, all these $10k-$20k cameras, zooms from $45k and primes for $7k make still photography look really cheap.

Re: Red Digital Cinema announces Scarlet X -- 4K resolution, $9750, Ships in 2 weeks

#12

Post by protomyth »

This announcement puts a tad bit of a damper on Canon's earlier in the day. Your cost for the Scarlet will be around $15k in shooting form. This is still cheaper than the new Canon. Canon uses cheaper media, but Scarlet has a better recording format.

Re: Red Digital Cinema announces Scarlet X -- 4K resolution, $9750, Ships in 2 weeks

#13

Post by protomyth »

davidjohnstone wrote: post #11

As desirable as the specs are, this comment on Canon Rumors balances things up: "To those fawning after the Red...sure, it looks nice, but the poor color rendering, impossible proprietary workflow, and constantly-in-need-of-updates software make the camera a nightmare, imo, to use. Canon's footage has nicer skin tones than I've ever seen out of a Red. There's a reason so much tv is shot with the Alexa, rather than th…

I think Canon Rumors is a little disingenuous (much like MacRumors). The workflow isn't that bad, and the skin tones look good with HDRx. Canon has some fun with formats, not giving a true RAW for video. Neither camera has the true killer feature for a lot of productions: on camera ProRes recording like the Alexa.

If Canon had come out with a camera with a good RAW format and on camera ProRes, then I would say Canon is the clear winner. As is, I think Red is a better value.

Re: Red Digital Cinema announces Scarlet X -- 4K resolution, $9750, Ships in 2 weeks

#14

Post by davidjohnstone »

protomyth wrote: post #13
davidjohnstone wrote: post #11

As desirable as the specs are, this comment on Canon Rumors balances things up: "To those fawning after the Red...sure, it looks nice, but the poor color rendering, impossible proprietary workflow, and constantly-in-need-of-updates software make the camera a nightmare, imo, to use. Canon's footage has nicer skin tones than I've ever seen out of a Red. There's a reason so much tv is shot with the Alexa, rather than th…

I think Canon Rumors is a little disingenuous (much like MacRumors). The workflow isn't that bad, and the skin tones look good with HDRx. Canon has some fun with formats, not giving a true RAW for video. Neither camera has the true killer feature for a lot of productions: on camera ProRes recording like the Alexa. If Canon had come out with a camera with a good RAW format and on camera ProRes, then I would say Canon…

I should clarify that the comment was by a forum member, not Canon Rumors themselves.

How much does a $10k price difference matter when you live in a world where lenses can cost >$40k?

Re: Red Digital Cinema announces Scarlet X -- 4K resolution, $9750, Ships in 2 weeks

#16

Post by jonknee »

nobody31 wrote: post #10
winestock wrote: post #5

I did a little searching and found that Panavision rents its Genesis line of digital cameras for $4,000 per day . Granted "no one pays book rate," and that price includes accessories, and the two cameras may not be equivalent. Nevertheless, why hasn't Panavision been disrupted a long time ago? Are their cameras really that good?

It's also part of crazy Hollywood acounting. The more you can charge against the film the better, that's why flops like Titanic and Empire strikes back still haven't made a profit You don't want the film company to actually own anything because then the people owed money might have something to go after

That only makes sense if you have a stake in Panavision. There are tons of film makers who don't have an interest in spending more money.

Re: Red Digital Cinema announces Scarlet X -- 4K resolution, $9750, Ships in 2 weeks

#17

Post by Aqua_Geek »

davidjohnstone wrote: post #11

As desirable as the specs are, this comment on Canon Rumors balances things up: "To those fawning after the Red...sure, it looks nice, but the poor color rendering, impossible proprietary workflow, and constantly-in-need-of-updates software make the camera a nightmare, imo, to use. Canon's footage has nicer skin tones than I've ever seen out of a Red. There's a reason so much tv is shot with the Alexa, rather than th…

> impossible proprietary workflow

Speaking from experience, the workflow isn't hard at all. Do you have to know what you're doing? Sure. But the same could be said for just about anything.

> [...] and why dSLRs are used on ads--1080p [...] out of camera is much better for post

Agreed. If your final delivery format is 1080p, it's a lot easier not to have to mess with transcoding.

Re: Red Digital Cinema announces Scarlet X -- 4K resolution, $9750, Ships in 2 weeks

#18

Post by protomyth »

davidjohnstone wrote: post #14
protomyth wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Canon Rumors is a little disingenuous (much like MacRumors). The workflow isn't that bad, and the skin tones look good with HDRx. Canon has some fun with formats, not giving a true RAW for video. Neither camera has the true killer feature for a lot of productions: on camera ProRes recording like the Alexa. If Canon had come out with a camera with a good RAW format and on camera ProRes, then I would say Canon…

I should clarify that the comment was by a forum member, not Canon Rumors themselves. How much does a $10k price difference matter when you live in a world where lenses can cost >$40k?

Not much, but both cameras can use the cheaper Canon lenses, and these cameras aren't the ones you are putting $40k lenses on unless you are renting. If you are buying the $40k lense you are buying an Epic, Alexa, or high end Sony. $15k for a complete Red rig is pretty good and can be used to do some serious work.

Re: Red Digital Cinema announces Scarlet X -- 4K resolution, $9750, Ships in 2 weeks

#20

Post by Aqua_Geek »

wmf wrote: post #6
winestock wrote: post #5

I did a little searching and found that Panavision rents its Genesis line of digital cameras for $4,000 per day . Granted "no one pays book rate," and that price includes accessories, and the two cameras may not be equivalent. Nevertheless, why hasn't Panavision been disrupted a long time ago? Are their cameras really that good?

In some sense the Genesis and its ilk were already disrupted by the Red One, although I question how price-sensitive this market is. Does Peter Jackson care about the difference between $4K per day and $400 per day?

I think there are a number of tiers in the market.

Peter Jackson probably doesn't care about the difference in price, but there are a number of student and indie directors/producers who certainly feel the difference between $4k/day and $400/day.

Post reply on HN