Image credit: Benni Diez at Reduser.net forums
For the last couple weeks, Jim Jannard of RED Camera has been teasing everybody on the REDuser forums with vague promises and outrageous claims of revolutionizing the industry. Skepticism would be the natural response, but after the original RED One camera turned the industry on its head in 2007, people learned that the company said what they meant and made what they said. Early adopters knew they were getting in the ground floor of something that would not only change the industry but likely completely metamorphose once things got underway. As it turns out, they were right, and RED’s announcement today represents the ideal of the RED camera system made reality. What does today’s bombshell mean for the hi-def video industry, and what does it mean for you and me?
Unprecedented
Let’s make one thing absolutely clear: these cameras represent much more than a black eye for Sony, Panavision, and any other player in the digital cinema game. To be honest, they already had a black eye from the RED One, and the original announcement of the Epic and Scarlet gave them a fat lip and a bloody nose as well. The announcement of this completely modular, low-cost, incredibly high-performance camera and accessory suite is nothing short of a knockout punch, a hardware haymaker which even some big names may not be able to withstand. This is not conjecture, it is as close to a statement of fact as can be made before the actual cameras are tested against the competition. The stated costs, capabilities, and resolutions of the RED sensor set and accessory/lens selection utterly outgun everything else on the market by a huge margin.
I’m not an insider on the subject of digital cinematography, but the difference at least in resolution should be plain enough to anyone who can count. These new sensors do not simply outstrip those in digital cinema competitors, which are still working to create a 4K camera to match RED’s, but also stack up against the most high-end medium format still cameras. Leaf’s newest and most advanced sensor, for instance, is 56mm wide, twice as wide as the RED One sensor but exactly the size of the second-largest Monstro sensor. That means that under the right conditions, a RED setup using a Monstro 645 will be shooting the equivalent of a medium-format digital photo from a $40,000 DSLR — fifty times a second. And this is to Redcode Raw, which has excellent color depth and dynamic range as well. The difference between that and capable but far more expensive cameras like the Genesis and Origin (from Panavision and Arri/Dalsa, respectively) is insane — and remember, we’re not even talking about the biggest sensor RED has. The absurd 28K Monstro 617 (not available until 2010, but we’ve seen how RED keeps their promises) will entail an aspect ratio wider than the ridiculous 2.76:1 used for films like Ben-Hur, which honestly seems a bit much; how left-to-right data pulling will work on a sensor that wide is something baffling even the experts.
Price and performance
The most frequent criticism of the RED system is the pricing scheme: sure, you could buy the “brain” or central unit for $17,500, but once lenses, rails, tripod heads, and everything else were taken into account, you’re looking at at least $60-70k for a real cinema setup. True that! But why don’t you try to price a comparable setup for its competitors? I think you’ll find that many of these cameras actually cannot be bought by a prospective cinematographer, and renting one costs at least $3-4k per day. Being able to buy a 6000-pixel-wide sensor for $12,000 and outfit it for another $40,000 is, in this business, an unprecedented bargain (if you don’t count RED One). It’s also worth mentioning that these increases aren’t comparable to the megapixel differences between, say, point-and-shoots and DSLRs. This is a change in order of magnitude, not an incremental improvement.
Many will ask, what is the purpose of such an insane resolution? Well, that’s a whole discussion in itself, but the world is increasing in resolution all over the place: 2K and 4K projectors will likely be standard in a few years and source video will have to be double that for producing special effects and so on. Right now the size and bitrate of the footage prevents easy direct editing, and this announcement exacerbates that issue, but filmmakers have dealt with that for a long time and they’ll deal with it now. More pixels is better these days, and this is a lot more pixels.
Let us not forget
And what of current RED users? Their prized, and still extremely well-specced RED Ones have just been completely obsoleted. Are they getting left out in the cold? I asked my friend, cinematographer Michael Ragen and owner of RED One #343. After assessing the announcement’s effect on the industry as “they shattered the hopes and dreams of every other camera maker in the world,” he mentions that as a RED One owner, the most enticing deal is for him to trade in his camera for $17,500 off of any Epic “brain.” That means that his camera has had zero depreciation, except for any accessories which may be incompatible with the new system, something which I don’t think has been determined yet. There are other deals: he qualifies for reduced pricing on a Scarlet body or new sensor as well.
Apart from the revolutionary nature of the sensors RED is putting out, the entire modular hardware suite they’ve created is absolutely stunning. As you can see in their announcement, you can practically stick a lens on a brain and you’ve got a working Scarlet shooting 3K, or you can put together dozens of custom parts to have a weather-sealed, multiple-lens monster setup with more rails than Amtrak. As a cinematographer this has to be exciting, as, like putting together your own PC, you only buy the parts you need or want. The compatibility with Nikon, Camera, PL, Mamiya, Alpa mounts and more means your lens selection is essentially unlimited.
But what does it mean for Joe the Plumber? (sorry)
I know what you’re asking: is there anything for you and me, the poor consumers and enthusiasts who don’t feel like taking out a loan to get the best gear out there? Well, the lowest-end device available appears to be the Scarlet all-in-one, the price for which isn’t available, but which we can safely guesstimate at somewhere between $3500 and $4000. That’s not exactly home video material, and of course 3K Redcode footage isn’t exactly iMovie material either. We may see something accessible come down the line, but the fact is RED was never meant to be a consumer camera company — even the Scarlet has always been intended as a professional camera, for handheld shots, small mounts, and so on. Unfortunately, that makes you and me into mere spectators of this momentous event — except for the fact that I may get to play with one later.
It should also be mentioned that the RED setups don’t serve every purpose; for example, they will only shoot up to 120fps, or far less for the larger sensors. This means that other digital cinema cameras like the PhantomHD will remain indispensable, so Panavision isn’t entirely rained out, and of course although the RED may have out-sensored Canon, Nikon, and even Hasselblad’s DSLRs, those cameras still have a far better form factor and infrastructure for still shots, so they’re not going anywhere either.
Damn
There’s a lot left unsaid, but this post is already far longer than it probably needed to be, so I’ll leave the rest of the commentary and discussion to those who know better (7500 reading the forum this very second). Let me restate, though, that this announcement really does live up to the hype that preceded it. RED already had the digital cinema industry sweating, and now every camera maker in the world will, trust me, be calling emergency meetings to determine the feasibility of even trying to compete. It’s a wonderful time to be in the business folks, with history being made as we watch. And somehow I doubt this is the last RED has to offer.
Update: Jannard has posted a clarification: the Scarlet system will be more restricted format-wise (video and audio) than the RED One and Epic. The Epic will be less restricted than the RED One. I guess something had to go to fit the Scarlet into a smaller package.
I have absolutely no idea what you were talking about, but I want one.
My first (and pretty much only) experience with this RED thing is this awesome video, where even on the web you can tell the difference: http://www.vimeo.com/1340684
Thank you for that….filmmaking like that makes my day.
New to the video thing, huh Devin? Let me break it down for you:
A 35mm sensor alone “MAY” ship next winter for $12,000 in a plastic case. Wow!
The new Canon 5D with the same sensor size ships in a week for $2,699, is made out of metal, and is a complete camera.
Batteries, LCD screen, and a little hole to look through before you push the button are included!
As for larger sensors: sorry, but if I’m going to drop $45k on a chunk of wafer it’s going to say Hasselblad on it and snap onto a real camera, not some hunk of plastic with 24 point logos in the Robotron font.
Seriously, their industrial design really sucks.
I’ll leave it to someone else to correct this poor guy.
Ah, here we go, I was looking for this:
http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/repng.png
see the little box in the corner? That’s how large of an image a 5D shoots. If you can imagine a box one “step” bigger than that entire picture, that’s the size of the image the basic RED sensor captures. Are you beginning to see the difference? I don’t mean to sound sarcastic, but you’re really talking about something completely different with the 5D (an excellent camera).
I was talking sensor size not output resolution. Note that you linked to a 621×393 pixel image, so apparently super-high resolution isn’t the end-all of effective visual communication.
Yes, the RED can stream a lot of data quickly. With the 35mm full frame sensor, the Canon shoots at full res (the biggest box in your pic) in bursts at 3.1fps in full RAW. RED can do it continuously in a “compressed RAW” (lossy) mode at 30fps. It’s cool and it is high tech but … still in awe? Really?
As for industrial design, check out the Hasselblad or Leica websites. Taste varies, but plastic shells and embosssed logos in a $12,000 component is usually not cool.
@meanguy:
“The new Canon 5D with the same sensor size ships in a week for $2,699, is made out of metal, and is a complete camera.”
But I wouldn’t shoot high-def video with it. Nor would I use a RED camera to shoot still pictures.
hey meanguy. are you aware that red doesn’t make plastic shit. those are going to be aluminum bodies.
Uh…..Devin, I don’t mean to be sarcastic either, but that chart is SO wrong. I don’t know who put it together, but the 5D pixel dimensions are bigger than HD. Someone MAY have been confusing sensor size with pixel dimensions.
HD - 1920×1080
5D - 4368 x 2912
Red One - 4520 x 2540
the 5D shoots video at 1920×1080, guys. The full resolution is for stills only.
Redcode raw is a lossless compression format, meanguy. The RED also shoots at 120fps at the 5D’s resolution. Again, the RED is also metal. I’m beginning to think you’re trolling, you thing you!
Actually, there isn’t anything wrong with the chart other then the fact that no one has read it correctly yet. I would be willing to bet that this chart was created long before the Canon 5D MkII was even announced. The smallest box in the lower right id NOT labeled “5D” but rather “SD” as in Standard Definition.
Nerds
“Nerd”
Prosumer
You are kidding - This company is ‘Oakley’. Industrial design is what they do.
The company *was* Oakley. Jim Jannard sold it after making a mint in the sunglasses realm and decided to conquer cameras next.
I wonder what would happen if Jim and the Steve had a love child?
Now if only they’d make a cell phone….
These cameras are nuts, and also on my Christmas list I just sent to Santa.
Congrats to Jim and Jarred and the Red Team. You guys walk the talk and make filmmakers and photographers fantasies real.
Bye Bye Nikon D90 and Canon…hello Scarlet.
“I’m not an insider on the subject of digital cinematography…”
You don’t need to tell us, it’s pretty obvious. This RED gear makes for great stories on gadget blogs that cover prosumer gear, but YouTube and Vimeo clips don’t tell the whole story. I’ve seen samples of the 4K footage that comes from the RED cameras (a demo clip of the space shuttle taking off) and the highlights are completely clipped with no out of range color data for recovering any detail in those areas. And, the footage was incredibly soft when zoomed in at 100%. I couldn’t believe that people were actually considering this a viable alternative to the existing digital cinema cameras on the market.
The companies that everyone thinks RED is going to knock off the map aren’t going anywhere. (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Thompson etc.) They have years of experience when it comes to processing the data coming off their sensors, and have finely tweaked their bayer interpolation algorithms and software to ensure the photos or footage coming from their gear looks crisp. Now there’s no reason RED won’t get there someday as well, but it will take some time. I’m afraid they haven’t discovered some miracle solution around these problems that no one else knows about. Of course the easy way to produce crisp 4K or 6K footage is to shoot at a considerably higher res than you need and resize it down… Hmmm… Suddenly that 28K monster sensor makes sense…
Oh, and have you priced that ‘affordable’ HD camera RED sells? Once you add all the necessary RED accessories you need like LCD displays, lenses etc. you’ll be spending far more than the $18,000 or so they’re asking for just the body. Don’t believe me? Check out this post on Prolost: http://prolost.blogspot.com/2007/05/should-you-buy-red-one.html
Overall I’m actually glad that the established film, video and photography companies have another competitor to shake things up, but I’m tired of people on these gadget blogs hanging on every 3D render and nugget of PR that RED releases.
If you read the article, you’d find that I too have worked with RED footage and I found it to be incredibly sharp. I’m thinking you saw some pretty poor sample footage! Clipped highlights are entirely the camera operator’s fault - there are live histograms to consult for that kind of thing, and if you’re not consulting one… why are you shooting on a RED? As for softness, I would just guess that your sample footage was poorly focused, as I have never seen cause to complain of softness in the image that wasn’t the fault of the person shooting. After all the plane of focus can be perhaps a millimeter thick depending on your aperture (we were shooting crabs at night in macro wide open and it couldn’t get more than a single eye in focus).
I also address the “affordable” thing pretty thoroughly. I estimate the cost of a RED setup at more than $50,000. And at that point it outperforms cameras that cost astronomically more - which coincidentally also require the accessories which you seem to think only RED cameras need! Do you think they shot Superman Returns handheld with a naked Genesis?
I also mention that Canon and Nikon aren’t going anywhere, as they do have the experience, the lenses, and the infrastructure to stay exactly where they are. Despite RED’s claims of dethroning them I’m skeptical - as I stated in the article. The new DSLRs’ video capabilities are limited; of course, they were never meant to compete with digital cinema cameras, just to work as essentially point-and-shoot HD camcorders.
Devin — any Bayer sensor isn’t full resolution. Zooming to 100% on any of them (Canon, Nikon or RED) all look like crap.
Many people shooting for HDTV (let alone “film”) use 3CCD cameras instead of Bayer sensors. See the BBC setup suggestions, etc.
There were problems with the hot mirror on the RED which is not uncommon with new manufacturers. Leica made the same goofy mistake.
There are RED sensor overload problems that go beyond “don’t clip the histogram.” Assume/hope they fixed it with the new gen of sensors.
One other clarification: Canon 5D mkII sensor is 24×36mm - 5616×3744 resolution. Equivalent RED FF25 sensor is 24×36 - 6000×4000.
Canon is shipping now, RED is “winter 2009.” Canon captures full RAW, RED captures a lossy RAW file that’s 11% of the size per frame (9:1 compression). Canon shoots 3.1fps but RED shoots 30fps — 10 times more.
See how it works?
I too am glad to see competition but nobody is taking a proper look at this stuff.
I think you’re again comparing apples to oranges. If you want to compare stills from each camera against each other that’s one thing, but comparing the still stats of the 5D against the motion stats of a Scarlet sensor is not productive. The 5D records to what amounts to 2K at 30fps, the Scarlet 2/3″ to 3K at 120fps, and image quality is not so degraded by the compression process as you seem to imply.
I disagree on the Bayer sensor, and many filmmakers do as well. Most of RED’s primary competition in digital cinema have filtered CCDs. Genesis, Origin, Phantom, etc - and does sharpness at 100% or color reproduction matter when shooting for HDTV when the stream is so hopelessly compressed in broadcast or recompression for discs? The Varicam certainly did its job on the BBC’s Planet Earth, but what difference could there possibly have been if they had shot with a Bayer filter?
Yes many cameras have problems with the IR filter, why does everyone think its just Red and Leica. The EX1 has problems and I believe originally the Phantom HD had no IR filtering (correct me if i’m wrong, i might be)
The footage I saw was some 4K material that was provided by RED to a software developer working on a decoding plugin. So I have to assume this is what they felt was ‘ideal’ material for someone to work with. And let’s just say the developer I spoke to has dealt with all types of footage before, from analog cineon and DPX materials, to digital film footage, and has even tinkered under the hood with Panasonic’s and Sony’s respective HD codecs. Like you, I’m far from a master on the subject, but I trust this person’s opinion. Not to mention what I saw with my own eyes.
And I would say even $50,000 is conservative when it comes to the true cost of a RED setup, but you’re right, it’s still far cheaper than the other digital cinema alternatives. I had hoped their pricing would scare RED’s competitors into dropping their prices, or producing more affordable pro-sumer gear, but I just haven’t seen the RED gear catching on as much as everyone believed it would. At least when it comes to those shooting larger than HD. So it seems the ‘big guys’ don’t have a reason to be scared just yet.
Like meanguy said, “nobody is taking a proper look at this stuff”, they just seem to be getting caught up in the hype.
They set up the camera for the space shuttle shoot right before taking off, using a prototype Canon mount I believe. For a camera to not clip those highlights, you would need to underexpose a bit. As I understand it they were rushed.
You need to look at some other examples to know what the camera is capable of. And newer ones, the firmware after Build 16 improved the camera tremendously.
the 5DII has a much larger photo site than the scarlet and outputs better video in low light currrently than the competition. Sensor size does not equal resolution.
I agree. Devin keeps bringing up the 120fps mode of the smaller sensor. Cool rig, but it doesn’t have the resolution or depth of field of the sensor we’re talking about here.
Everybody has decent sensor technology at 35mm full frame and everybody is capable of reading it at 30fps. Canon’s stuff is particularly good, the forthcoming Scarlet is unknown but presumed good. The question is what do you store off the sensor?
- The Scarlet “brain” has enough power to compress 9:1 RAW in real time
- The Canon has enough power to RAW convert, resample to 1920×1080 and compress that to H.264 in real time
At full resolution (5616×3744) the Canon stores 10x the data per frame but only shoots 1/10th the frame rate. Odd coincidence, no?
For all the talk of RED’s hardware, the differences between the Canon and Scarlet seem awful close to just being software/firmware-only to me.
I believe many of you are missing the point–the brilliance behind the red announcement is the “Obsolescence Obsolete” ideology and the adoption (evolution) of a modular system. RED has created a product that can conform to a user’s needs like no other camera has before and that’s why panavision and sony need to “dread the RED” :).
Is that a mike or a laser powered dildo on top of the camera?
devin,
are you suggesting that a single bayer chip is better than a 3chip system for color? (resolution aside)
Yes the Red’s 4k ends up really at about a 3.2k and it makes a fantastic 2k camera. With bayer you want to downsample.
There upcoming 5k cameras will make a very nice 4k, and the 9k 645 version will make a nice 8k for Imax. Footage can look a tiny bit soft at 100%, but it is meant to be downsampled. Also overly soft images can be attributed to a whacked out backfocus or just straight up focus error. In the past with Red there were some problems with super high detail scenes and the codec not holding up. I haven’t seen those problems in a while.
As far as defending Canon, did you look at there new prosumer cameras. Not so exciting.
Oh, of course not - splitting the beam is almost certainly the way to go, but with a big enough sensor and with a good enough image processor, a bayer can do just fine.
Devon drank the Koolaid.
There little here that matters beyond cine. These aren’t convergent products. Red hasn’t seemed to take the time to define markets.
What about low light performance? Flash? The less expensive models won’t have DOF control. Only the most expensive scarlet has good dof control.
Canon and Sony don’t lose sleep over red. It’s the other way around. Look at the 5DII we’ll that will be FOR SALE next week. What do you think Canon and Sony will have by 2010.
The 5dii will be great, for stills, thats it. If canon wants to improve the video in the future models, they will eclipse there video camera line, or they will have to converge. The only people that will use 5dii’s for filmmaking, are uber low budget doc guys and indie’s, until they realize it makes there work look like a day time drama.
Don’t get me wrong though, I don’t think many people will be using Scarlets for still shooting, the 645 Red however, could be a great studio still camera for fashion shoots and what not.
Also, FF35 is nice, but you can get damn shallow dof with an 85mm wide open at T1.3 on S35. So saying no dof control is a little bit of an exaggeration.
deadmike, I agree about the 5DII model specifically. I was making a point about where the larger industry is heading. Red released the first product into a niche that is too small to interest the large Japanese companies. Single large cmos for very high quality cinematic quality video is the future. It’s not something Red invented. They produced the red one and are announcing products ahead of the curve. In many ways how the 5DII does video is considerably more sophisticated than Red’s tech. The 5DII is not designed to shoot lower budget films. But Canon has done the hard part. Now red needs to get 4 or 5 stops faster, build large specialized IC, and put it all in a small package for several thousand dollars to match Canon.
So who’s the technology leader in the next generation of imaging? Red delayed the scarlet announcement and change the product focus to the more niche cine market because they saw what Canon has done.
I would rather buy red than canon, for several reasons. But some peoples extreme enthusiasm for red lacks critical thinking. In still photography the same thing happened four years ago with Foveon.
I’m not sure how you can say “In many ways how the 5DII does video is considerably more sophisticated than Red’s tech.”
They are not sampling all the photosites the achieve the 1080p. Also, h.264 is a distribution codec, not an editing one.
24p is not a niche. It is a huge oversight of Canon to not acknowledge that.
What would you say Canon envisions people shooting with their 5d in video mode?
“I’m not an insider on the subject of digital cinematography”
OBVIOUSLY. You have swallowed the Red Kool-Aid. You completely missed the #1 fact. Which is that the Red makes crappy cameras.
You don’t see Daryn Okada saying anything about Red. Instead you get a quote from Michael Ragen, I assume it’s the only Michael Ragen listed on IMDB.com? The one with no professional experience.
It doesn’t matter what Red claims the resolution is, it also doesn’t matter what they charge for it. The images that come out of the Red 4K Camera, are far below a Panasonic HPX3000 or a Sony F900. Those cameras are considered workhorses of the industry. 35mm depth of field, does not mean better dynamic range or ACTUAL resolution.
Most professionals cinematographer RARELY (if ever) buy $40-50K+ cameras, for many good reasons. You obviously don’t know anything about REAL working cinematographers.
Your post makes you sound like a shill. You would be wise to fact check with professionals who know what’s is REALLY real before embarrassing yourself with posts like this.
Digital Yuri
Um, the images that come out of a Red are far superior to an F900.
And I think we are all quite aware that 35mm dof does not mean better dynamic range or resolution. If you were to say “The F23 has superior dynamic range than a Red One, I would agree.” So anyhow, which company do you work for, Sony or Panasonic. I have talked to a number of DP’s, that are not biased towards Red, who have rented HPX3000’s and said they never would again.
There are a lot of big name DP’s using this camera if you aren’t aware. Ever heard of Lubezki. Sure you have.
And if you just want to be a little bitch on the big old internet that’s fine. I don’t shoot 100 million dollar movies. I shoot music videos. Sue me. You are clearly a moron.
Scarlett FF35 has a max rate of 30fps. Redcode RAW has 9:1 or 12:1 compression ratio. Not trolling.
Yeah, the FF35 does 30fps at 6K - but you were comparing the 5D, which shoots 3.1fps at 1080p. The Scarlet 2/3″ shoots 120 at 3K which is significantly more than that.
Redcode isn’t actually lossless, that’s true - but it’s very close, whatever the compression ratio is, which depends more on the image.
We’re really talking apples and oranges here.
Compression does not equal lossey. The RedCode Raw Codec is a wavelet based and lossless codec.
And it is the 2/3′ sensor (120 fps) that is much closer to the 5D’s video resolution than the FF35 (though neither are a direct match).
wrong. The 5D shoots 12.8 megapixels at 3fps. The 5DII, which you seem to be referencing shoots 1080P at 30fps, not 3.1. The scarlet 2/3″ is a much smaller sensor capturing a tiny fraction of the total photons of the 5DII. While resolution may be higher on the RED, the 5DII sensor size (specifically the pixel size) makes low light performance very impressive. The 1080P video out of a 5DII should outperform the scarlet in low light performance based on its total capture area and it is doing it now, not 2 years in the future.
I’d like to clarify - I was referring to the box labelled “1080p” since I thought everyone would know what I was talking about. The chart’s old, it’s just a handy reference for RED-related resolutions.
I didn’t even think about the SD looking like 5D, that’s pretty funny.
Oops, haha, I’m retarded… I meant 3.1fps at its full resolution, around 5K equivalent. Plus the Scarlets comprise the smallest sensors of the RED lineup - there are plenty bigger sensors…
But why are we even comparing a still camera with a motion camera?!
the 5Dii may out perform the Scarlet 2/3 in lowlight, but it will also in looking like a Soap Opera, as well as having far more compression artifacts.
Close. REDCODE IS wavelet based but it is also lossy. Read their FAQ: they offer it in lossy (REDCODE 28) and a less-lossy version (REDCODE 36) “beneficial for high detail or complex scenes.” If it weren’t lossy, they wouldn’t be able to throw away 89 or 92% of the data respectively.