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 :)

4K Cameras Approved by Netflix

Šabović Adis;1739320 said:
Is this Netflix thing some kind of "stock footage" re-seller?
Click to expand...
Netflix' production budget for 2017 is $6 BILLION DOLLARS, which is as much or more than any Hollywood studio or any American TV network.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/17/netf...in-2017-makes-it-one-of-the-top-spenders.html

They are a huge, huge, major player in content creation right now. This is why I think their specs will have a big effect on the industry, particularly production and post. They're the opposite of stock footage: Netflix is a very high-end film and TV studio, with features in the $20M-$50M price range and TV series at least $3M-$5M per episode, which is as much or more than all the majors.

Hrvoje Simic said:
FS7 is neither noisy nor has issues with highlights. Likely a case of misuse.
XAVC-H leaves a lot to be desired though.
Click to expand...
It's fair to say different people see different things. I can only tell you it's more of a struggle for me to pull usable pictures out of the FS7 than it is (say) the F55 or any recent Red footage.

On the other hand: I disliked the Canon C300 for a long time, and then I ran into a DP who used it for a project and every frame was a Rembrandt. He knew exactly where the camera's week points were, and managed to expose it absolutely perfectly. So... as always, great DPs can get great pictures out of damn near anything.
 
Interesting not to see the scarlet W on there, though I bet they would approve it if asked and possible a scarlet dragon
 
Marc Wielage said:
Netflix' production budget for 2017 is $6 BILLION DOLLARS, which is as much or more than any Hollywood studio or any American TV network.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/17/netf...in-2017-makes-it-one-of-the-top-spenders.html

They are a huge, huge, major player in content creation right now. This is why I think their specs will have a big effect on the industry, particularly production and post. They're the opposite of stock footage: Netflix is a very high-end film and TV studio, with features in the $20M-$50M price range and TV series at least $3M-$5M per episode, which is as much or more than all the majors.
Click to expand...

Hm...what confuses me is that they state footage specs they accept - like they wouldn't produce them themselves.

Gotta be that language barrier thing again...:confused1:
 
Id imagine this updated list is causing quite a stir, given that Blackmagic has made the list while the Alexa had been removed. It makes complete sense, but still rather surprising.

I also find it amusing that Red's product line is so convoluted that even Netflix is confused. Lol
 
Nathan DuMoulin said:
Id imagine this updated list is causing quite a stir, given that Blackmagic has made the list while the Alexa had been removed. It makes complete sense, but still rather surprising.

I also find it amusing that Red's product line is so convoluted that even Netflix is confused. Lol
Click to expand...

Quote of the Day.
 
You are more than welcome with Netflix to fund your own blockbuster with an iPhone or using an Arri Alexa and license it to Netflix. They will fund their own content to the provided 4k spec.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
They're selling 4k video to customers. It's a question of honesty in not upsampling.
Click to expand...

Honesty in a state of fixation on quantity over quality. Clearly visible with approving 4K h.264 codecs and dismissing 12 Bit 3K Prores or Arriraw. Because quantity is easier to present as a competitive advantage.

So what ends up as approved is macro block based compression with "papery" feeling and fake looking textures and what is dismissed looks clean and organic, more "filmic" and does much better in post. And the final imagery gets more deteriorated by compression for home delivery.
 
Why blackmagic and not Raven - I don't see any specific reference to minimum sensor dimensions - they are both 4.5k right?
Wouldn't compression ratio at capture be important? capturing at 18:1 and shipping as pro res might yield a large bit rate of lower quality
Oversampling should be a major consideration - so for example Hasselblad H6D-100C oversamples by a factor of 3 when it captures 4K whereas some cameras don't oversample at all (Leica 007). Isn't that important for image quality? Not touting either MF camera BTW just neutral example.

I suspect Audio has its own detailed specification and they are just talking about what is delivered 'out of camera' otherwise those 2 channels probably map to an encoded bit stream wrapping Atmos or other multi-channel.

The comment about glass is very good also - maybe it could be minimum lp/mm by sensor photosite size - but that is probably way over the level the spec is expected to be used for.

I am surprised no one has commented about no look in camera - isn't that what might happen when recording to pro res?
 
I think it's more of an approved list. It doesn't mean other camera's or work flows are not good enough, they just haven't been approved (yet) by Netflix.

Most camera's on the list that can produce true 4k sharpness in RGB are Red (sensor) based, the other one is Arri65 and maybe Sony F65.
 
I doubt anyone shooting Alexa65 or F65 will have issues with QC at Netflix, or anywhere else. We can criticize the specifics of their rubric, but I'm actually stoked that Netflix is paying attention to technical standards. Perhaps the tech titans have a clearer perspective on the pace of change than the studios and recognize that by authoring new content at higher quality it becomes a longer tail asset - assuming it's interesting to begin with ;-)

Cheers - #19
 
4K delivery on VOD is about three things in my view.

1) Market separation - 4K is not available on Broadcast, it is not reliably available theatrically, the amount of original theatrical content delivered in 4K by studios is very low. It is not highly available on 4K Blu ray yet. Stipulating 4K origination for original content ensures that Netflix as a home of original content is markedly different from other outlets, which makes them more attractive to a sizable audience of people who have 4K tvs.

2) More efficient compression. Compression techniques are more efficient from higher res sources, both delivering at 4K and at lower resolutions. Netflix encodes something like 20+ different versions of each movie and distributes those across CDN's all over the world. Ensuring the best quality for the bandwidth is important. The number one issue that gets worsened by traditional down compression is aliasing. If everything is originated at 4K, then you ensure a technical quality of supply.

3) Market Perception - irrespective of actual quality insisting on 4K origination creates a market perception among both audiences and content creators that Netflix cares about the quality of imagery. Netflix's biggest successes and failures to date have all been based on how they cater to users and enable high end creators. Netflix can't afford to be compared to Youtube Red or Amazon or any other offering - their global market dominance is dependent entirely on being the defacto VOD supplier. As their library access to movies has shrunk to decrease (mostly unneeded) costs, the perception that their original content is the highest quality is vital.

The truth is the first two of those things are very worthy things worth investing in, the third is a little bogus as you could just have stringent QC standards but it's easier to advertise all that with a number.
 
Josh Wilkinson said:
Interesting not to see the scarlet W on there, though I bet they would approve it if asked and possible a scarlet dragon
Click to expand...

Mike Finegan said:
Why blackmagic and not Raven
Click to expand...

They need to be more clear, but I interpreted the chart as: all Dragon and Helium cameras that shoot 6:1 (at 4K+).
If that's the case, I'm not sure why they listed "Weapon" in addition to that. It just causes confusion and leads you to wonder why other bodies aren't listed. Most people outside of reduser misuse the terms for RED bodies and sensors, so I wouldn't be surprised.
 
I wonder if the C200 will be added to the list (assuming you only use the RAW recording). Disheartening that my MX sensor didn't make the cut...
 
Recording Format:
• Minimum of 16-bit Linear or 10-bit Log processing

• Bitrate of at least 240 Mbps (at 23.98/24 fps) recording

Click to expand...


IMF must be generated from a final uncompressed Video Master (i.e. DPX, EXR, or TIFF) and not from a compressed file (i.e. ProRes, DNX).
Click to expand...


So...no 12 bit 444 Prores and DNxHR but long GOP h.264 is fine.




:)
 
Hrvoje Simic said:
So...no 12 bit 444 Prores and DNxHR but long GOP h.264 is fine.
Click to expand...

Really, Hrvoje. If you want to punch holes in this, go ahead, I can't stop you. But what I would say is sit down and try to write a spec that everyone likes. It can't be done. Netflix, to their great credit, is constantly testing new cameras, new codecs, new lenses, and everything else. As both a production studio (they really are that today) and one of the most major distributors, they are very, very aware of all of these things. As a leading technology company, they look at everything in this business in a fundamentally different way than literally everyone else in the industry. As an example, they don't look at archival storage in terms of which LTO format they should use. They look at it as an issue of how quickly they can get every asset into cloud storage and how to best manage that. There is no other entertainment industry entity that does that.

Their "approved cameras" have that designation because they have been thoroughly tested and found to pass their stringent requirements in terms of color fidelity, resolution retention, generational performance, and data robustness. Some of those cameras are on the list because they have proven themselves on existing and past projects (the Canon C300 Mk II, for instance, has been used for the last 2 seasons of "Grace and Frankie" with excellent results). I really wish people here would understand how thorough companies like Netflix are when they put together specs like this. They don't just sit around and say "have you seen this camera? It's pretty good, so let's put it on our list." It doesn't work that way. And it's equally as silly to sit here and debate why something people here happen to own isn't included, and something they don't think is as good is, because a) it's not your choice, and b) Netflix has done their homework whether you think they have or not. Accept it and move on.
 
I think I have posted this before, but having met and shot for many Netflix projects they have this mandate because the TV manufacturers got screwed on 3D displays. They were promised content and got very little. So in exchange for 4K displays Netflix and I believe Amazon promised them true 4K content. It is as simple as that. Alexa is a good camera but alas needs to be their Alexa 65 sensor to make muster.

This is very non subjective. Simple math.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top