Comments on: RED Scarlet Test Video With Three Hot Models In Lingerie.

By: Alec, @FlyingRadish

Alec, @FlyingRadish — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 23:44:00 +0000

Grade was a little severe to my eyes, insofar as it really crushed out the darks and went from flat to the other extreme. That said, not a bad test of the slow motion, though yes 60fps isn’t terribly impressive at 2k when the FS100 will yield roughly the same 1080p final product at a fraction of the cost, minus the lens multiplier effect.

From a practical standpoint what I actually take away from this test is that 1300W of light (minus hair) was needed to make basic exposure even at 1600 iso in a small room where all the walls acted as bounce (i.e. about as efficient a setting as you’ll get). So to hit 800 iso more comfortably you’d need twice as much light if I’m understanding lighting basics (which if I’m not correct me please). Moreover, wouldn’t you then need twice as much light as that to crank it to 1/240 @ 120fps? Roughly somewhere north of 4k worth of tungsten? That’s a sh!tload of light and while everyone knows (or should know by now) that the Scarlet is a camera that needs to be lit around, that’s a pretty interesting scenario and even more light than I expected. Definitely NOT C300 or DSLR levels of sensitivity.

By: Tony Segreto

Tony Segreto — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:32:00 +0000

Pretty cool. Excited to see what you guys are going to do when they enable 120fps =)

By: Casey

Casey — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:26:00 +0000

Over 25k worth of kit and it looks worse then skype video chat.

By: Jestus Seyeng

Jestus Seyeng — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 16:29:00 +0000

WHY does the image look so soft? Hello? This is supposed to be high resolution???
BTW, these girls are not hot… They are indeed pretty skanky looking.

No props? Where’s the pole?

By: Kenz Perez

Kenz Perez — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 01:46:00 +0000

Wow.. I just love the detailed shot.. I can now see their freckles!