Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

ARRI: 16mm film is 3K, 35mm film is 6K...

L

laguun

Banned
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
1,732
Reaction score
0
Points
0
... the former 35mm market leader seems to continue to miss the translation...

Some quotes from their new pro-film brochure...
"if there were a true 4K resolution camera on the market today"
"the most popular phrase today seems to be “HD.” One would think that the
“H” in HD stands for “Hype.”"

http://www.arri.de/infodown/cam/broch/2008 03-25a 4K+ Technology Brochure.pdf

And they claims 3K resolution for 16mm film. IIRC >90% of the 35mm DI work of all A-budgets of this decade has been done on 2K/1080p, seems no one of those folks who dont realize that 16mm should be processed at 3k cares about image quality.

It sadly seems Arri still doesnt realize that they will have to leave mechanical cameras as main 35mm product and need to bring better, cheaper and more digital 35mm cameras to the market than the D20.
*sigh*.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
AngusChandler said:
Having worked with 16mm in 1080p 4:4:4, I can't say they're wrong.

Details of the grain structure were not perfectly rendered.

Does that matter? It depends.

The fact remains, film is a very high quality medium with numerous proven workflows.
Click to expand...


Low asa 16mm grain certainly has 1080/2K+.

The main points however are
- that the usual cinema via filmprint->copy/copy doesnt even show 1080p,
- 2K is the standard DI process
- 2K is as well as the standard delivery in digital and in mechanical,
- Arri cant competete with red by claiming that 35mm mechanical *could* be processed at 6k, but only with better and cheaper digital camera systems.

Arri has to embrace the opportunity of digital - holding on to film wont bring back the 5000+ 35mm camera customers which they lost to red so far. They need to offer alternatives to the red one, scarlet and epic, not theoretical pseudo-explanation why these camera arent good enough.
 
I wonder how much more steadier they have to make the gate transport system of the marvelous 435 to cope with 6K? I can`t believe that image steadiness is no issue at such a high resolution...
 
I highly doubt that 35mm is 6K.

If it is, then why was Dark Knight's 35mm anamorphic IP scanned at 4K for the DMR to IMAX 70mm?
 
Tom said:
I highly doubt that 35mm is 6K.

If it is, then why was Dark Knight's 35mm anamorphic IP scanned at 4K for the DMR to IMAX 70mm?
Click to expand...

Newer scanners have been able to scan above 4k.

Why did Dark Knight only scan 4k? Easiest answer is that it costs more. Only the people in the know, has the real answer.
 
kalone said:
I wonder how much more steadier they have to make the gate transport system of the marvelous 435 to cope with 6K? I can`t believe that image steadiness is no issue at such a high resolution...
Click to expand...

6k would be in the scanning stage on their scanners, not the camera.
 
On the whole, the Arri paper is superb. They gave me a copy at NAB and it is well worth a read.

The key thing though, is that higher resolution film scans don't so much bring in more real detail, but they do allow for less aliasing in the final result, and for better digital preservation of the grain structure, even if it doesn't lead to more detail.

Graeme
 
laguun said:
Low asa 16mm grain certainly has 1080/2K+.

The main points however are
- that the usual cinema via filmprint->copy/copy doesnt even show 1080p,
- 2K is the standard DI process
- 2K is as well as the standard delivery in digital and in mechanical,
- Arri cant competete with red by claiming that 35mm mechanical *could* be processed at 6k, but only with better and cheaper digital camera systems.

Arri has to embrace the opportunity of digital - holding on to film wont bring back the 5000+ 35mm camera customers which they lost to red so far. They need to offer alternatives to the red one, scarlet and epic, not theoretical pseudo-explanation why these camera arent good enough.
Click to expand...

Standards change or evolve eventually.

2k has been a standard for so long because it was possible to get work done in a timely manner.

Working in 4k is less of a burden now. It may not be the standard but it's not as difficult as it once was.

I figure Arri offering something for those who plan to support film workflows in the future. Even if there is less celluloid being shot, there are plenty of films that could need restoration or higher than HD transfers for remastering purposes.

I don't see Arri avoiding digital. I seen some nice images from the D-21.

What do you mean by "holding on to film wont bring back the 5000+ 35mm camera customers which they lost to red so far"

Are you saying that all Red owners were potential 35mm customers?
 
laguun said:
Arri has to embrace the opportunity of digital - holding on to film wont bring back the 5000+ 35mm camera customers which they lost to red so far. They need to offer alternatives to the red one, scarlet and epic, not theoretical pseudo-explanation why these camera arent good enough.
Click to expand...

Hi,

Arri has a waiting list as well as RED, currently both are selling all the cameras they can make, soon Red will be able to make more than they can sell unless orders pick up to 500+ new cameras a month.
Zeiss + Cooke lensesare also strong sellers with waiting lists.

Stephen
 
Thomas Mathai said:
Newer scanners have been able to scan above 4k.

Why did Dark Knight only scan 4k? Easiest answer is that it costs more. Only the people in the know, has the real answer.
Click to expand...

You think the Dark Knight producers were trying to save money on the scanning??

BTW, speaking of Arri, what is the cost of the D21 vs Red One or Epic?
 
Tom said:
You think the Dark Knight producers were trying to save money on the scanning??

BTW, speaking of Arri, what is the cost of the D21 vs Red One or Epic?
Click to expand...

Of course, all producers want to save money. Even with $100-200 million budgets, keeping track of spending is important.

It could have been that 4k was fine, and they didn't even think about 6k.
 
Thomas, I find it highly, highly unlikely that the decision to scan at 4K rather than 6K was done to save a few bucks on the Dark Knight.

Mark, the scanning you are mentioning, I think, was done for the 15/65mm stuff.

"To bring scenes shot in 35mm to Imax screens, where images are projected in 1.43:1, DKP 70mm scanned the 35mm interpositive at 4K, and an Imax team in Toronto applied digital DMR (Digital Remastering) processing to degrain and sharpen the images. The process stayed at 4K until the images were filmed out onto 65mm back at Keighley’s facility and combined with the Imax material for print. “The final Imax print combined the 4K DMR filmout, 5.6K and 8K Imax filmouts, and 18K contact prints from the Imax negative,” says Keighley."

http://www.ascmag.com/magazine_dynamic/July2008/TheDarkKnight/page5.php
Click to expand...

Also...

http://www.studiodaily.com/main/searchlist/9677.html
 
Stephen Williams said:
Hi,

Arri has a waiting list as well as RED, currently both are selling all the cameras they can make, soon Red will be able to make more than they can sell unless orders pick up to 500+ new cameras a month.
Click to expand...
Very true.

But Reds marketshare in the 35mm realm is *much* higher than Arris, and Arri will never be able to change this unless they can offer an competing product to the Red One.

The D21 certainly isnt such a product - its has bee made a niche camera by the red one and i am afraid Arri wont be able to sell more of this model in a year than what Red sells in a month, or even week.

The 235 & 416 are really nice cameras, but they are mechanical, and will therefore never be able to find so much use and so many buyers as the red one by design.

What Arri *really* needs is to have an alternative to red one and scarlet, and, luckily for red, they still dont realize that.

When i was talking to not-to-low ranking Arri folks at recent tradeshows, red was *the* topic. Their reaction was pretty much: "red isnt competition for us, thats a different segment". Then question i asked "So, as 35mm, PL mount, now became Reds Segment, what is Arris segment then?" remained unanswered, and thats what arri really needs to change, in my humble opinion, as soon as possible.

Free whitepapers explaining why "film is better" and why "cinemas should be 6K+" wont change anything. Products as the red one however do.




Zeiss + Cooke lensesare also strong sellers with waiting lists.

Stephen[/QUOTE]
 
Tom said:
Thomas, I find it highly, highly unlikely that the decision to scan at 4K rather than 6K was done to save a few bucks on the Dark Knight.

Mark, the scanning you are mentioning, I think, was done for the 15/65mm stuff.



Also...

http://www.studiodaily.com/main/searchlist/9677.html
Click to expand...


From my experience, cost is always an issue. The last thing studio execs want is to have a film budget get away from them.

Since I have no idea what is involved in the IMAX DMR process, I can't even say if 6k is even an option.
 
I can guarantee you one thing: cost was not the reason for choosing a 4K scan over a 6K for The Dark Knight.

Now, I have no idea if there might be other, DMR-related reasons for scanning 35mm at 4K rather than 6K. Perhaps it has something to do with the de-graining process? I don't know.
 
Even as production moves to digital, I think film will still be used as a long term archival medium for high value projects. It is the only photographic medium with a proven track record for this.
 
I have worked very closely with ARRI on the Kurosawa restoration project and we have done number of tests on the ARRISCAN. It is a marvelous machine and it has 3K optical resolution. It achieves 6K optical by offsetting the sensor by half-pixel in all four directions - therefore the 6K scan takes 4x as long as the 3K scan. The ARRISCAN can automatically downscale the 3K to 2K and the 6K to 4K to avoid aliasing and further improve the sharpness (well pointed out by Graeme), as rarely anyone actually wants to work with the 6K (or 3K) scans. Most SW tools will restrict You to 4K anyhow... I have some of the original 6K scanned images, both from Kurosawa's original negative and master negative if anyone wants to see the film detail at these resolutions...

Just send me a PM...

:) Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top