Should I invest in the RED scarlet?

A

AllanBourne

Me and my buddies(fresh outta film school -_-) Are starting our own little production company. We're going to need equipment, with the arrival of the Scarlet and the new Cannon camera. Does it make sense at this point to buy any other DSLR?

Yes, I'll be pulling out a loan for at least half of this(7k) possibly the full 15k. I don't think it's a bad invesment but then again most times I think with my heart and not my head.

Can I get some feedback guys?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Hey man!

When I hear the term invest, I think of lenses or sound equipment first. ...stuff that will be usable for years well beyond the time the camera is "outdated" due to ultra HD or whatever comes along. You can spend thousands on lenses alone, but can use them 20+ years from now. Similar deal with microphones / sound equipment.

Part of me wants to suggest a RED, as it's technically "affordable" (relative to cameras with similar capabilities... and keeping in mind you're talking about a production company) and supposedly has built-in scalability. Plus it lacks the severe rolling shutter and moire/line-doubling issues which we DSLR users (I shoot on a 7D and t2i) work around/overlook as a tradeoff for benefits like shallow depth-of-field without the use of a DOF adapter, etc.

What about getting good standard-mount lenses (that you know will work on a RED in the future) but starting out on a DSLR? Just a thought.

Hope some of this helps!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hey man, thanks for the advice. I really don't want to jump the gun on this one and bite the bullet. The thing is that it isn't just me, it's a couple of us. So the other guandys will take care of the sound equipment and other stuff.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Camera isn't everything, but if you're new and trying to get new clients then the name RED surely helps. The kit is $14k, but you still need tons of other stuff, tripod, lenses, etc. that $14k includes one 64gb card which I'm pretty sure only holds 30 minutes of footage. If you're budget is $15k, you can't afford a shooting Scarlet with accessories.

Though again, you can charge a lot more per day or hour with that camera than a 5D. If you have a good reel and can get the work.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Don't do it. Most likely it won't be turnkey, it'll be beta, that's how the RED ONE was initially.
Don't buy gear, get a phone line, biz cards, get SEO'd, network yourselves.
Tell clients you shoot 35mm, RED, Betacam, Alexa. Rent it if you need it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
wheatgrinder said:
Dont buy a camera, buy a business plan. :)
Click to expand...

dlevanchuk said:
Amen
Click to expand...

Why are you starting a production company? Are you making your own films, or are you going to be servicing clients? There is a HUGE difference, and those differences will dictate how you spend your money. Besides the differences in money-for-equipment allocation you also need to allocate funds for either your shoots or for your business marketing. And, if you're starting a business, you'll need financial advice (an accountant) and legal advice (an attorney) not to mention a few additional dollars for things like setting up your LLC and basic business amenities.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I agree, the more important question is, “What is your business
plan?”

You need to run some realistic numbers.

How often will you shoot?
How often will you shoot for pay?
Is your “little production company” a business - meaning you will
be (different than hope to someday) generate income? Or will you
be making videos for the experience and fun of it for a while?
You should amortize the investment over the projects you can
realistically expect to be hired for. If that’s four or five over the next
year it might be better to rent (and charge the rental to the client)
than to spend $15,000.

Before you completely dismiss renting - run the numbers. If you get
five paying jobs in the next year charge the client the actual rate plus
5% you will have money in the bank. If you do not charge the rental
because you own the camera you will lose money. If you do charge the
rental you will not pay back the camera in one year.

So what is your realistic business plan? And I don’t mean what do you
plan/hope will happen. Is there a need in your area for the business you
and your film school buddies are putting together? Will you get paying
clients within a few months?

If you just want to own a camera and think that will make you more
competitive - run the numbers. Do they add up to profit, loss or break
even.

Who will be paying the monthy payments on the camera? You, personally?
You and your buddies? Do you have an official, legal company? Will the
company own the camera or will you, personally, own it?

Of course by “production company” you could mean narrative movie production.
That brings up an entirely different set of questions. In most cases it’s far,
far better to rent than to own. If you will be making several short films and
music videos a month do you really need a $15,000 camera?

However, if you just want to own a camera and are willing to take on the loan
payments then go for it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
FrankLad said:
Hey man!

When I hear the term invest, I think of lenses or sound equipment first. ...stuff that will be usable for years well beyond the time the camera is "outdated" due to ultra HD or whatever comes along. You can spend thousands on lenses alone, but can use them 20+ years from now. Similar deal with microphones / sound equipment.

Part of me wants to suggest a RED, as it's technically "affordable" (relative to cameras with similar capabilities... and keeping in mind you're talking about a production company) and supposedly has built-in scalability. Plus it lacks the severe rolling shutter and moire/line-doubling issues which we DSLR users (I shoot on a 7D and t2i) work around/overlook as a tradeoff for benefits like shallow depth-of-field without the use of a DOF adapter, etc.

What about getting good standard-mount lenses (that you know will work on a RED in the future) but starting out on a DSLR? Just a thought.

Hope some of this helps!
Click to expand...

Damn, Well said, but what he said!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I disagree with about half of this.

Firstly, yes a business plan is most important.

But should professional video people own their own camera, yes.

There's this thing called practice that many filmmakers seem to just throw out the window. Imagine having a band, and saving money by renting a guitar for your lead guitarist only during hours when you actually have a gig. I'm sure if you ran the numbers that would be cheaper, but your guitarist would suck at his job because skill is something that takes time to build. The red is definitely not a point and shoot.

Red workflow is somewhat complicated, and I wouldn't advise anyone to go out promising pro results, and then start working with the camera for the first time the day of a paid shoot. It doesn't have any type of autopilot feature. If you want that, go for the Alexa.

Can you practice videography with a much cheaper camera, yes. Can you practice getting real results out of a Red on a 5d or TI, no. They don't use the same software, they have different sensor sizes and sensitivity, they require different processing on the post end.

I'd say business plan first, Scarlet second, and tell clients you can shoot on an epic and rent that when you actually need quality the Scarlet can't provide. The experience you get with the scarlet will transfer well over to the Epic. Renting can work for small self contained shoots, but having a full time production company that doesn't own any cameras you'll actually use on gigs is a recipe for QA disasters.

On Red themselves, they are hard to work with. They just are. They will give you incorrect or incomplete information on a constant basis. If you order a Scarlet now, I'd say you have no assurances whatsoever that you will receive it any time soon. You don't even want to know what I've gone through to get my Epic.

My advice is to put down a deposit on a Scarlet (fantastic camera that will teach you Red workflow) and buy a Sony F3 with S-log to use for the year long wait. Any time you aren't using the camera for a month, rent it out. Then someone can pay YOU 2 grand a week for an 18k camera in stead of the other way around. At the end of the year you might have the camera half paid for. Compare that to renting for all training and shooting days.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Sorry Nate, but you won't find many pro shooters that can only shoot on ONE model/brand with proficiency. Also wrong about maintaining skills on a DSLR. The hard part of cinematography is what is in FRONT of the camera, not the camera itself. How many times have we heard "It's not the tool..." etc. Any DSLR with manual controls should be more than enough to stay fresh and will probably end up sufficing for most projects.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Nate North said:
I disagree with about half of this.

Firstly, yes a business plan is most important.

But should professional video people own their own camera, yes.

There's this thing called practice that many filmmakers seem to just throw out the window. Imagine having a band, and saving money by renting a guitar for your lead guitarist only during hours when you actually have a gig. I'm sure if you ran the numbers that would be cheaper, but your guitarist would suck at his job because skill is something that takes time to build. The red is definitely not a point and shoot.

Red workflow is somewhat complicated, and I wouldn't advise anyone to go out promising pro results, and then start working with the camera for the first time the day of a paid shoot. It doesn't have any type of autopilot feature. If you want that, go for the Alexa.

Can you practice videography with a much cheaper camera, yes. Can you practice getting real results out of a Red on a 5d or TI, no. They don't use the same software, they have different sensor sizes and sensitivity, they require different processing on the post end.

I'd say business plan first, Scarlet second, and tell clients you can shoot on an epic and rent that when you actually need quality the Scarlet can't provide. The experience you get with the scarlet will transfer well over to the Epic. Renting can work for small self contained shoots, but having a full time production company that doesn't own any cameras you'll actually use on gigs is a recipe for QA disasters.

On Red themselves, they are hard to work with. They just are. They will give you incorrect or incomplete information on a constant basis. If you order a Scarlet now, I'd say you have no assurances whatsoever that you will receive it any time soon. You don't even want to know what I've gone through to get my Epic.

My advice is to put down a deposit on a Scarlet (fantastic camera that will teach you Red workflow) and buy a Sony F3 with S-log to use for the year long wait. Any time you aren't using the camera for a month, rent it out. Then someone can pay YOU 2 grand a week for an 18k camera in stead of the other way around. At the end of the year you might have the camera half paid for. Compare that to renting for all training and shooting days.
Click to expand...

Thanks Mate!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
AllanBourne said:
Me and my buddies(fresh outta film school -_-) Are starting our own little production company. We're going to need equipment, with the arrival of the Scarlet and the new Cannon camera. Does it make sense at this point to buy any other DSLR?

Yes, I'll be pulling out a loan for at least half of this(7k) possibly the full 15k. I don't think it's a bad invesment but then again most times I think with my heart and not my head.

Can I get some feedback guys?
Click to expand...
I would say no, here's why ....
http://philipbloom.net/2011/11/20/scarlet/

buy a used RED MX complete kit
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
FrankLad said:
Hey man!

When I hear the term invest, I think of lenses or sound equipment first. ...stuff that will be usable for years well beyond the time the camera is "outdated" due to ultra HD or whatever comes along. You can spend thousands on lenses alone, but can use them 20+ years from now. Similar deal with microphones / sound equipment.

Part of me wants to suggest a RED, as it's technically "affordable" (relative to cameras with similar capabilities... and keeping in mind you're talking about a production company) and supposedly has built-in scalability. Plus it lacks the severe rolling shutter and moire/line-doubling issues which we DSLR users (I shoot on a 7D and t2i) work around/overlook as a tradeoff for benefits like shallow depth-of-field without the use of a DOF adapter, etc.

What about getting good standard-mount lenses (that you know will work on a RED in the future) but starting out on a DSLR? Just a thought.

Hope some of this helps!
Click to expand...

Damn, Well said, but what he said!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Indeeeeeed!

You need a business plan.
And therefor you have to do your math:
- what do you need to live?
- what taxes do you have to pay?
- how much interest do you have to pay?
- how much do you need to save for bad times?
- how much work will you get?
==> how much you have to charge

- how do you get your clients?
- what do you do when you don't have work?

Perhaps you should do a few projects with a rented camera first.
It builds your portfolio, network and reputation without a debt troubling you.
Than you can decide whether it's profittable to buy a scarlet (or C300 or F3).

Buying cool stuff is cool, but you need to monetize your investments quickly.
Especially in these financially troubled days.

BTW, you should start working now, but it may take some time before you get your scarlet when you order one.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It's definitely an investment. You could end up being a gun-for-hire...IF you have the skills to back up the rental. Unless of course you let people rent the equipment without you using it...just the hardware.

I think if you're just starting out, you may want to start with a DSLR. Great look, excellent bang for the buck, and easier to learn the hardware and learn your craft.

Shoot a few things on a DSLR if you're kicking ass and getting attention, upgrade to an epic or scarlett.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Nate North said:
There's this thing called practice that many filmmakers seem to just throw out the window.
Click to expand...
That’s an interesting perspective, Nate. I have never met a
filmmaker who throws that thing called practice out the window.
I have never seen any filmmaker here on indietalk dismiss practice
nor have I ever spoken to any filmmaker, ever, who doesn’t believe
that practice is essential.


Doesn’t the answer lay in what the “production company” is set up
to do?

Nate owns a high end camera and rents it out when he is not using
it. I run a production company that makes product for clients. So
we both have a different business model. I do own a camera because
in addition to my prodCo I am a camera operator for hire. I would
never rent out the camera I own - I charge a fee when I use it which
paid for it in 6 months. Since my prodCo does not own a camera I can
provide anything the client needs - 16mm, RED, 35mm, HDV, Alexa,
5d. That makes sense in MY business model. If a client wants to shoot
on the RED I rent the entire package and hire an experienced RED
crew. I don’t need to own one or even be an experienced RED technician
to provide exactly what my client wants.

What will your production company be shooting, Allan? What is your
business model?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top