New James Bond will not be EPIC. :(

[andrewhake]

He made it pretty clear on his site that he really just wants and optical viewfinder. Mechanical shutter seems interesting as well, but is this stuff necessary to shoot a nice movie?

With Anamorphics in mind, Alexa has 2880x2160 and Epic has 3296x2700. Epic has 3:1, and Alexa has 1:1 w/ codex. I'd go with a 4:3 Alexa only because of mechanical shutter. All of the rolling shutter scan lines and artifacts disappear. Red needs to confront this issue.

First, don't think it is even an issue anymore. Second, how would a rolling shutter be any better than an electronically scanned shutter technically? The sensor is still being exposed over time not all at once. I am curious really, what kept film cameras with their rolling shutter from having these "rolling shutter" artifacts. . .

So fucking backwards in my opinion, adding a bunch of mechanical parts that just aren't necessary anymore. Nostalgia has people moving backwards. Might as well have it run off of gasoline as well I am glad RED actually makes a stance here to be honest, lt ARRI keep working on their Rube Goldberg device.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

All it's about an Alexa advertising campaign.

Also Alexa is already beaten in the field of HD/2K world that right now belongs to new Canon C300 also known that has 2+ stops of DR in any available light shooting situation.

The newest digital sensors with cameras using super clean high ISO like a C300 (20.000 ISO) can see beyond the human eye where OVF is not so much of help to judge any picture IQ, focus, lights, etc,...

But the question is:

Does a professional digital photographer need an optical viewfinder to set up the lights?

And the answer is: NO !!!

Just because you acquire and "paint" your digital image mostly using digital tools...

 

[Francesco Bonomo]

So fucking backwards in my opinion, adding a bunch of mechanical parts that just aren't necessary anymore.

Clearly, for some people (i.e. a lot of camera operators) an OVF is still better than the best EVF available, and I don't think you can have an optical reflex system without a spinning mirror.

All it's about an Alexa advertising campaign.

Really....one of the world's best cinematographers, teaming up with one of the best directors , working together on a movie that belongs to a series loved by many audiences around the world, choose a camera for advertising reasons...you could be referring to the Hobbit, couldn't you? Of course not, you wouldn't dare, right?
Why is it so difficult to understand that in the real world professionals are far less biased when it comes to the tools they're comfortable with, and use whatever they feel it's right for the project or for the way they like to work?

Does a professional digital photographer need an optical viewfinder to set up the lights?
And the answer is: NO !!!
Just because you acquire and "paint" your digital image mostly using digital tools...

ROTFL

 

[Tim Lüdin]

Clearly, for some people (i.e. a lot of camera operators) an OVF is still better than the best EVF available, and I don't think you can have an optical reflex system without a spinning mirror.



Really....one of the world's best cinematographers, teaming up with one of the best directors , working together on a movie that belongs to a series loved by many audiences around the world, choose a camera for advertising reasons...you could be referring to the Hobbit, couldn't you? Of course not, you wouldn't dare, right?
Why is it so difficult to understand that in the real world professionals are far less biased when it comes to the tools they're comfortable with, and use whatever they feel it's right for the project or for the way they like to work?



ROTFL

Couldn't have said it better. Amen.

Tim

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Clearly, for some people (i.e. a lot of camera operators) an OVF is still better than the best EVF available, and I don't think you can have an optical reflex system without a spinning mirror.



Really....one of the world's best cinematographers, teaming up with one of the best directors , working together on a movie that belongs to a series loved by many audiences around the world, choose a camera for advertising reasons...you could be referring to the Hobbit, couldn't you? Of course not, you wouldn't dare, right?
Why is it so difficult to understand that in the real world professionals are far less biased when it comes to the tools they're comfortable with, and use whatever they feel it's right for the project or for the way they like to work?



ROTFL

Francesco, probably you supposed to be an Italian but talking like a somebody who often goes to McDonalds to eat that is not a sort of Italian doing things especially concerns to food choices.

What I wanted to say that can be translated to moving images is exactly a mood or a sort of behavior from a creative side that killed Italian cinematography (Cinema Italiano) in the last 20 years.

For my point of view Italian cinematography (Cinema Italiano) is one of the best in the world and far better than many of recent Hollywood franchise crap movies.

But maybe that's just me...

Also I hope you would understand what I'm talking about.

 

[Francesco Bonomo]

Francesco, probably you supposed to be an Italian but talking like a somebody who often goes to McDonalds to eat that is not a sort of Italian doing things especially concerns to food choices.

What I wanted to say that can be translated to moving images is exactly a mood or a sort of behavior from a creative side that killed Italian cinematography (Cinema Italiano) in the last 20 years.

For my point of view Italian cinematography (Cinema Italiano) is one of the best in the world and far better than many of recent Hollywood franchise crap movies.

But maybe that's just me...

Also I hope you would understand what I'm talking about.

No, dear Sanjin, I'm sorry, but I have absolutely no idea about what you're talking about (and to reassure you, for the record, I haven't eaten at McDonald's in more than 10 years).
As for my opinion of Cinema Italiano, well, there are some good things and a lot of crap, like pretty much everywhere else.
Still I don't understand what you're referring to or how this has to do with Deakins, 007, or my reply to your post, but then again, I don't think this is the place to explain since it would definitely steer the thread into the off-topic territory, but I would obviously continue this conversation via PM if you want to explain it better to me.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

No, dear Sanjin, I'm sorry, but I have absolutely no idea about what you're talking about (and to reassure you, for the record, I haven't eaten at McDonald's in more than 10 years).
As for my opinion of Cinema Italiano, well, there are some good things and a lot of crap, like pretty much everywhere else.
Still I don't understand what you're referring to or how this has to do with Deakins, 007, or my reply to your post, but then again, I don't think this is the place to explain since it would definitely steer the thread into the off-topic territory, but I would obviously continue this conversation via PM if you want to explain it better to me.

Francesco, I agree and you can PM me or sent email sanjinjukic@yahoo.com

 

[Steve Marshall]

I agree, stick a ND1.2 on a SR3, and suddenly the world goes very dark But the Alexa Studio has a new viewfinder, so we'll see how bright that is, plus Arri is working for a "behind the glass" slot for filters (plus, there's this solution from Clairmont cameras, though I guess it'd be different for the Alexa Studio)

Yes, it's true with a strong ND you can't see anything through an optical viewfinder. But usually they'd switch to a 50D or 100D film stock, negating the need for strong NDs. I don't know how they combat it with a digital system.

 

[RivaiC]

I keep hearing people in this thread says how mechanical shutter would eliminates rolling shutter. You actually know or dont know that the shutter speed is independent regardless on whatever shutter speed that you set on, right ? The CMOS read and reset time has got nothing to do with shutter speed even it's electronic or mechanical. How do Alexa elimnates rolling shutter by using mechanical shutter while they are still stuck with CMOS liimation of read and reset time ? Perhaps there are things that i missed out from Alexa ?

Rivai

 

[Joel Wilkieson]

Francesco, probably you supposed to be an Italian but talking like a somebody who often goes to McDonalds to eat that is not a sort of Italian doing things especially concerns to food choices.

What I wanted to say that can be translated to moving images is exactly a mood or a sort of behavior from a creative side that killed Italian cinematography (Cinema Italiano) in the last 20 years.

For my point of view Italian cinematography (Cinema Italiano) is one of the best in the world and far better than many of recent Hollywood franchise crap movies.

But maybe that's just me...

Also I hope you would understand what I'm talking about.

I hope he does, because I definitely don't. Maybe if it was less judgeMental, or not so related to what you seem to perceive to be his identification that affects his everyday life and 'food choices', then, yeah..maybe.

 

[Francesco Bonomo]

Yes, it's true with a strong ND you can't see anything through an optical viewfinder. But usually they'd switch to a 50D or 100D film stock, negating the need for strong NDs. I don't know how they combat it with a digital system.

On the last two tv series I've worked on, both shot on S16mm (which is the norm here for television series), we only used Kodak Vision 3 7219 (500T) and 7213 (200T). We would go with the lower ASA stock for daylight scenes, and even if we didn't carry anything stronger that ND9, sometimes we used 85, ND6, and POLA filters at the same time (i.e. 8 ASA). The SR3 viewfinder is not the brightest available, but let's just say that a behind the lens filter slot would've been useful. And that was with 200 ASA stock! With the Alexa, in the same scenario, and without touching the ASA settings, we would've needed another ND6 along with those filters to get to 8 ASA (or ND1.2, 85 and POLA).
Considering that the Alexa sweet spot seems to be at 800 ASA, it only makes sense that Arri has planned a "behind the glass" filter slot for its OVF model (or another way to put a filter behind the spinning mirror), so if you're shooting daylight scenes you can leave the camera setting at 800 ASA (in order to have the maximum latidude and highlights protection), then put, say, a ND9 right on top of the sensor via the filter slot, hence lowering the camera to 100 ASA, and allow the camera operator to see perfectly through the viewfinder without a ton of glass in the matte box filter trays, leaving those for "lighter" NDs and other filters.

I hope he does, because I definitely don't. Maybe if it was less judgeMental, or not so related to what you seem to perceive to be his identification that affects his everyday life and 'food choices', then, yeah..maybe.

 

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

I keep hearing people in this thread says how mechanical shutter would eliminates rolling shutter. You actually know or dont know that the shutter speed is independent regardless on whatever shutter speed that you set on, right ? The CMOS read and reset time has got nothing to do with shutter speed even it's electronic or mechanical. How do Alexa elimnates rolling shutter by using mechanical shutter while they are still stuck with CMOS liimation of read and reset time ? Perhaps there are things that i missed out from Alexa ?

Rivai

Listen, I'm just repeating what it says on Arri's website, The F65 also incorporates a mechanical shutter to eliminate the rolling shutter artifact as well the explanation being "The Rotary shutter eliminates rolling shutter artifacts. The Rotary shutter takes the form of rotating blades and supports variable shutter angles (shutter speeds). With the Rotary shutter, the geometric integrity of on-screen objects is preserved. And flash banding is not an issue."
The only way to know for sure is to grab one of these cameras and a bunch of gear to test them with such as a flash, one of those wheels they used in the camera shoot out and the spinning thing with the lines drawn on them.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Listen, I'm just repeating what it says on Arri's website, The F65 also incorporates a mechanical shutter to eliminate the rolling shutter artifact as well the explanation being "The Rotary shutter eliminates rolling shutter artifacts. The Rotary shutter takes the form of rotating blades and supports variable shutter angles (shutter speeds). With the Rotary shutter, the geometric integrity of on-screen objects is preserved. And flash banding is not an issue."
The only way to know for sure is to grab one of these cameras and a bunch of gear to test them with such as a flash, one of those wheels they used in the camera shoot out and the spinning thing with the lines drawn on them.

I have a week-long date with an F65 as soon as they are released. I am not sure if I'll be able to post the comparisons here, but I will probably post them to my site...

This is def one of the issues I am curious about.

As an OT, have anyone seen what the Sony RAW application looks like?
"Inspired by" is a not to exaggarating word when seen side-by-side with an app most of us are pretty familiar with...

The F65 is a pretty big and feelingwise: flimsy/plasticky box, though, compared to cams I have become used to use...

And from the specs, I have been thinking that the F65 and the Epic are the "real" 3rd gen Digital Cinema Cameras. But using them will probably tell me more than the spec-sheets...

 

[Scott Crawley]

In the latest American Cinematographer is an interview with Deakins that concerns itself with digital tools, and why he prefers Alexa. He feels that it renders flesh tones in a more pleasant way. His relationship with Arri undoubtedly also plays a part.

 

[Stephen Gentle]

Really, you think the Alexa is not good enough? You think a camera designed by a company that's been designing camera's for almost 100 years is not good enough to shoot a Bond film on, especially when that camera is in the hands of a master of cinematography.

Well, actually, when you think about it ARRI have only been making digital cameras since 2005 and film scanners since 2003 - not that much longer than RED has been around. That's not to say that Arri hasn't built a good digital cinema camera, but their history before 2003 doesn't really make a lot of difference, given how digital sensors and digital image processing has almost nothing to do with film cameras (apart from maybe an SD video tap).

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Well, actually, when you think about it ARRI have only been making digital cameras since 2005 and film scanners since 2003 - not that much longer than RED has been around. That's not to say that Arri hasn't built a good digital cinema camera, but their history before 2003 doesn't really make a lot of difference, given how digital sensors and digital image processing has almost nothing to do with film cameras (apart from maybe an SD video tap).

Well, it does to some extent, because they have the reference for what is expected built in their gut, for both operatability and image.

Thing is that I think they thought of Alexa much more as a TV-drama/TV commercials/nature doco-cam than a cinema cam when they developed it. But then it got a much more and "other" market.
And I can see why they hang on to that development.

 

[Subhadip Sen]

Well, actually, when you think about it ARRI have only been making digital cameras since 2005 and film scanners since 2003 - not that much longer than RED has been around. That's not to say that Arri hasn't built a good digital cinema camera, but their history before 2003 doesn't really make a lot of difference, given how digital sensors and digital image processing has almost nothing to do with film cameras (apart from maybe an SD video tap).

Something Arri does offer is familiar ergonomics. I don't understand it myself, but veteran film camera operators seem to agree Alexa feels more like a film camera. Surely that has something to do with their vast experience in designing film cameras. It might not be a co-incidence that Deakins is one of the few modern Hollywood DPs who operates himself. I am sure many prefer Epic's forward looking form factor on the other hand. Whatever suits your requirements best.

 

[Dan Kanes]

@ Gunleik - what is the name of that Sony Utility? I want to get my hands on that for testing.

 

[Justin O'Neill]

I don't know if I agree with this. Yes, 35mm film theoretically has more resolution than the Alexa but the optics used for Dr. No were nowhere near as good as the ones we have today and film stocks have improved significantly since 1962. I happen to think that Skyfall will look sharper projected in 4K than a 4K scan of Dr. No. pumped through the same projector.

I would love to find a frame grab of a 4k film scan from an old 35mm movie so we can do an actual comparison. It's easy to talk numbers but a visual would go a long way towards clearing this up. I was arguing yesterday with a camera guy on Twitter yesterday who was convinced that the measured resolution of S35mm film was 50MP...

I know "Taxi" was scanned in 4k...I doubt there are any frames from that floating around though. I just have a hard time believing that 1080 will look just as good as a 4k scan of even old 35mm stock when projected at 4k on a 80 foot screen.

I agree that on a nice 60" plasma Alexa looks gorgeous...Game of Thrones is one of the best looking TV shows I've ever seen.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

@ Gunleik - what is the name of that Sony Utility? I want to get my hands on that for testing.

LOL
If I told you the name of 65-Cine Pro" I'd have to kill me, and then you...

Seriously, though
The demo was kinda weird and we were only allowed to see images and plans of what is to be, no real images or software...

there was a (largely unfunctional) proto there, standing there and feeding a image through SDI to a monitor.
Then there were screenshots from the software.

I have a lot of thoughts on the F65 and really look foreward to put it through its paces side-by side with Epic, but that is probably for some other place to think about.
Concept-wise, I think that it and the Epic are the first "real" 3rd gen digital cinema cameras.

And this is kinda a common platform for them, too:
http://mikemost.com/?p=235

Cheers
G