MX vs Alexa

[Blair S. Paulsen]

It will be interesting to see how people feel about Epic and Alexa in 6 months when both systems should be reasonably mature.

On the subject of resolution metrics for large screen presentations it is my belief that in the absence of a comparative sample most viewers are easily satisfied by the sheer magnitude of such a big image. My example: I don't know if it was the theater or the abysmal quality of the release print but when I saw Inception it looked quite soft. I daresay I was one of a handful of people who noticed, let alone cared. That said,

IMHO the only way to get even the more quality minded theater-goers to appreciate the difference between a "standard" film print in circulation and a 4K digital projection of a 4K DCP is to split that huge screen in half and show them both side by side. Until then, I fear only people like us will know or care. Just sayin'

FWIW I think 4K resolution is far more compelling than 3D, so what do I know :coolgleamA:

Cheers - #19

 

[mike ogden]

Is 1080p/2K enough for deliverables? Today, yes, for most purposes. But the idea that your camera should shoot at the same resolution as your highest quality final deliverable format is precisely the sort of traditional industry thinking that Arri is still embracing (this is how video cameras have always historically worked; they've been built around the deliverable formats of the day), but Red has moved beyond.

Because of course Arri haven't a clue what they're doing...

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Because of course Arri haven't a clue what they're doing...

It's mostly that they don't have 4k sensor still ready and right now they try to

sell you a sort of fake...and some people don't care about it at all

even if they know much better what I'm talking about.

Also Arri claimed that Alexa is a sensor upgradeable digital camera(!!!???).

 

[Tim Morten]

Because of course Arri haven't a clue what they're doing...

I don't think Sanjin is saying Arri doesn't know what they are doing: he's pointing out that it is literature from Arri themselves which makes the case for 4k.

They just changed their tune when it came time to market a 2k product...

- Tim

 

[Gunleik Groven]

There is some difference in the technology needed to scan a neg in a controlled and lab-like environment, and the technology needed to record an image in the wild. Just to mention one thing, you will know what is the highest level of light that will enter the sensor...

Thus: the absolute DR is given AND there's actually no motion to scan.

 

[Anson Fogel]

I may get flamed into next week for this - if you want to vehemently argue with me you can PM me -

If comparing Alexa and MX (EPIC does not exist yet) - it seems perfectly reasonable to include non-familiar usability and reliability, and in both cases, the larger community would tend towards Arri.

Now, let me explain myself - I am a happy red mx owner/operator. As a red "expert" give or take, I have few problems with my kit, however, most DP's making decisions out there are not red experts.

Usability - a non red familiar DP will likely expect, and be rewarded with, a more consistent and initially easier to use product with an Alexa vs. an MX. When renting a 2nd MX, even I have to worry about what firmware is running, what accessories come with it and are they the same as MY accessories, etc etc - this is a hangover from red's rollout process that one assumes is resolved with EPIC, but is still a very real issue with the current body, whether perceived or factual - it exists as a notable factor in any red MX v Alexa decision for those outside this community.

Reliability - again, a hangover from the process of the RED rollout thus far, but an objective, agnostic outside DP will often assume that comparing Arri's history, compared to RED's history, suggests that an Alexa is less likely to have problems. Read that again - I am not saying that a current RMX is less reliable than an Alexa. I realize an Alexa is not proven as such. However, based on this history, I too would conclude that an Alexa is likely to be pretty bombproof.

I think these factors are important in the larger marketplace.

 

[Tim Morten]

I may get flamed into next week for this - if you want to vehemently argue with me you can PM me -

If comparing Alexa and MX (EPIC does not exist yet) - it seems perfectly reasonable to include non-familiar usability and reliability, and in both cases, the larger community would tend towards Arri.

Arri has a great reputation for reliability. Alexa, not so much, from what I've heard.

Digital is a brave new world... be careful of your preconceptions.

Cheers,
Tim

 

[Lucas Wilson]

Always must read again and again

PART III : THE PRODUCTION CHAIN: DOES 4K LOOK BETTER THAN 2K ?
etc., etc.

The part that was BS was wanting to blow up an HD image to 4K before doing a film-out. That's just wacky.

As for all the other stuff - I know the science of it pretty well and have read ad nauseum texts like the ones you posted. Which is why I said, "I have seen..." and "I believe..." I am talking about my personal experience/observation.

Even in the material you posted, at the very end is this small quote...

"The 4K image on the right hand side displays more visible details and appears to be sharper than the 2K image on the left.
Although, viewed in a projection, the differences may be less noticeable."

Yes, the differences are MUCH less noticeable. If you had seen the same film-outs as I have for resolution tests on filmouts, I bet you might have a different opinion. And that's what it is... an opinion... based on a lot of personal experience.

I went and saw Inception awhile ago. It was a great theatre in LA that I usually really like the look of. I saw it the 3rd week it was out. I thought it was a friggin brilliant movie. But during the entire screening, I was thinking to myself, "Why is this so muddy and so dark?"

I realized why during the credits... 35mm acquisition + IP/IN + 35mm delivery + dozens of screenings of this particular release print..

In the past two years, this was one of the very few commercial releases I have watched on film. And it confirmed what I have believed for a long time... holy GOD, is digital projection and digital delivery a better way of seeing things.

And in the Digital Delivery world - yes, 2K vs. 4K acquisition I believe makes a big difference. Again, based on personal experience and a lot of screenings and tests I have been a part of. Which is why this whole discussion leads me back to... isn't a big part of the RED mission to help the world move *beyond* film deliverables??

Again - based on personal perception... : )

Lucas

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

I think Anson makes a fair point.

That said, the actual status of the Alexa in terms of availability and beta status on some elements makes it far less of a "let's grab one and shoot" today item than MXed R1s. To be fair it is certainly more accessible than Epics at the moment, but if the premise is "what can I shoot on today is all that's worth discussing" Alexa still has a ways to go. AFAIK there are less than 100 Alexas on the street at the moment and not all the recording options are available. If I have that wrong Michael Bravin is welcome to correct me...

Cheers - #19

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

:laugh: :bored: :leaving:

 

[CJ Roy]

I've had 5 shoot days in the past week. 3 of those on MX's and 2 on the Alexa.

I'm pretty blown away with the Alexa. All the record options were not there, so we ended up recording 444 LogC to an SRW1. But even with that hassle, it was still a pleasure to use.

The EVF is nice. Didn't strain your eye. Color temp shows up accurately. The controls on the EVF only control the EVF, like switching from Rec709 to LogC, etc.

The menus were incredibly easy and intuitive. No map required.

The fan on the camera is quiet. No heat issues for us.

We sent Rec709 to VTR/Village and kept the logC for us. I can't tell you how much easier that is to deal with.

But the most impressive was the image. The noise levels were really low in both daylight and tungsten. The highlight detail was pretty remarkable. With Red, I feel like I'm always fighting with the highlights. I didn't have that issue nearly as much with the Alexa. I'm looking forward to having them side by side for a personal test.

The camera did go down once during the 16hr two day shoot. The image went greenish-blue as the DP was lighting. The AC simply powered down, then powered back up. In 30 seconds, we were back up and running. Most people didn't notice.

The camera is just really easy to use. I think most crews feel that the Red is temperamental and high-maintenence and it interferes with accomplishing a job. The simplicity of the Alexa is a welcomed refreshing change for digital cinema crews. That alone, outside of the resolution wars, is going to get this camera a lot of work. AC's have the DP's ear the entire shoot. They're going to push the camera that gives them the least amount of heartache.

There may not be a lot out there now, but the ones that are are always rented out. If any of you haven't, please try to just check one out. It's a great step in the right direction.

Competition is a good thing.

my .02

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

I'm back here again but still a bit bored waiting for Jonnycom and Gunleik comparison tests.

It looks the same as they would test a Space Shuttle that is waiting for better weather to be launched into orbit :laugh:

In the meantime I took from my archive the two internet container sized clips shot on MX and Alexa.

MX is a famous night shot of Brooklyn Bridge in NYC by Offhollywood team and Alexa is Art Adams's shot of Oakland Bay Bridge in San Francisco.

Both were shot @ wide open (MX with Zeiss Master Prime T1.3) and Alexa with Zeiss Super Speed T1.3.

MX footage was processed at ISO 1600 and Alexa footage was shot at EI 800, and the shutter varied between 180 and 270 degrees.

This sort of comparison of course is not scientifically accurate and only has a purpose to give you an idea about a possible footage flexibility.

After I did my test and then concluded that advantage has RED-MX just because R3D RAW has more headroom in post than Alexa ProRes 422/4444.

If you want Alexa Arri RAW recording rig option than can blow your rental cost pretty high when you could ask yourself that maybe is better to shoot on film.

Especially if you need multi-cam shots (5-6 cameras) than a rental of several Alexa Arri RAW enabled recording rigs will cost you more or less the same as you would shoot on film.

Why?

RED-MX can shoot 4.K R3D (RAW data with visually lossless wavelet compression applied) on CF card for US$18.000 body.

That R3D RAW footage is so flexible that can be pushed or pulled in post easily to achieve many of your exposure demands (read more about that here>>>).

Alexa also can shoot ARRI RAW (.ari) at 2K on S.Two Digital Film Recorder or similar and that combo would cost you more than US$ 100.000.

With that amount of money would be better to get 35mm ARRI movie camera (or similar from any other brand) and shoot with the latest film stock available.

So these images below show us (maybe still inaccurate) how Alexa Log C ProRes footage can easily clip @ EI 800

and wide open aperture if you make any higher brightness/contrast adjustment in post.

Please correct me if I'm wrong here.

MX and Alexa @ night footage without any of brightness/contrast adjustment.

MX and Alexa @ night footage with a bit of higher pushed brightness/contrast adjustment.

Alexa clipping, advantage RED-MX because still not clipping and can be applied even more image adjustment at RAW file and also has much lower overall rental/production costs.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

You can't make any reasonable conclusions on clipping based on two different tests shot by other people of two different cameras that went through two different post paths. You also have no data on how bright the brightest objects in the frame are in each test, could be 5-stops over, could be 15-stops over for all you know. At minimum, you'd at least want to be comparing tests shot of the same subject matter at the same time, and even then, the variables could make a big difference in the results. But comparing these two tests and coming to some sort of conclusion on clipping or DR is just plain silly.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

David,

could be a bit silly but that is what we have available online and I also said already above that the comparison is not scientifically accurate at all.

Again to repeat it's about to get an idea.

If we could get RAW files of the test from both cameras then it will be easy for us to get right conclusion.

 

[mike ogden]

Does someone pay you to come up with this sxxt, Sanjin?

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Will do when I am done, untill then: Just Come on... -

Relax San, or rent the two, set them side by side and hit record... -

To compare the Alexa to a DSLR is just plain silly, though.

To compare R1 MX and Alexa is pretty relevant, as that is often the current practical choice.
But then one have to see if one can get the comparison right before one publish...

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

To compare the Alexa to a DSLR is just plain silly, though.

Shooting commercials, music song spots and documentaries with 5D and 7D for TV is today very well established standard worldwide.

To compare R1 MX and Alexa is pretty relevant, as that is often the current practical choice.

"If you want Alexa Arri RAW recording rig option than can blow your rental cost pretty high when you could ask yourself that maybe is better to shoot on film.

Especially if you need multi-cam shots (5-6 cameras) than a rental of several Alexa Arri RAW enabled recording rigs will cost you more or less the same as you would shoot on film.

Why?

RED-MX can shoot 4.K R3D (RAW data with visually lossless wavelet compression applied) on CF card for US$18.000 body.

That R3D RAW footage is so flexible that can be pushed or pulled in post easily to achieve many of your exposure demands (read more about that here>>>).

Alexa also can shoot ARRI RAW (.ari) at 2K on S.Two Digital Film Recorder or similar and that combo would cost you more than US$ 100.000.

With that amount of money would be better to get 35mm ARRI movie camera (or similar from any other brand) and shoot with the latest film stock available."

Link>>>

 

[Gunleik Groven]

You seem to have forgot the DTE option which lets you record 12-bit compressed logC.

Of course we have 12 bit RAW on the RED, but the question is what's in the signal.

Anyhow. I will be recording ArriRAW and to SR too, just for comparison, these things take some time, but if you seriously imply that prores 4444 logC is ANYTHING like the h.264 from the 7D/5D... you're off mark. Maybe I'll put up a 5D alongside, just for pure fun...

Ok. Back to the tests...

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Thanks Gunleik,

take your time and I'm waiting....

Would be very nice if could provide us to download

RED RAW R3D, ARRI RAW and ProRes 422/4444 files from Alexa as a short test samples

that we can play and see ourselves what is going on there...

 

[Rob Ruffo]

Just got back from screening Alexa vs. film in a DI suite. VERY impressive. Hard to tell the difference between the two; in fact on some shots Alexa looked better, certainly more noise free and clean. The colorist had no problem digging out detail from the digital footage in a similar way from the film scan.
The Hawk V-Lites looked terrific as well.
I don't know what else to say to those who would dismiss the Alexa... it's a fantastic tool, and another brush in the pallette as they say...
I love Red. But there ARE options in the world...
Cheers,
Harry

I think no one debates that Alexa is fantastic, what is relevant here though is in which specific ways is it BETTER than red Mx (not in general, but specific qualities/features). Otherwise, why pay more and carry around more weight?

I have questions like: How does Alexa look whne rated at 2000 iso? How about side by side of Red 2500 Iso agaisnt ALexa 2500 ISo, but both noise-reduced in post? Things like that