Arguments for Dragon over Arri Mini?

[Christoffer Glans]

Went through the all thread and didn't see anywhere the OP saying what he needs his camera for, to be honest unless he needs slow motion, I would go with Scarlet-W if going RED and invest all that money that is left into lenses and other gear (Oconnor tripod, Mattebox, wireless FF etc) that would last the life of 3 camera bodies or more.

Also have to say I somewhat agree that the two cameras do have different looks, but I wouldn't say one looks better then the other, it is in fact the same as film, sometimes you want the Kodak look, sometimes the Fuji. I really like the images coming from both RED and ARRI. And I do remember going to cinema many times and think I'm a film being shot on Fuji and it was actually Kodak and vice versa.

On a different note, I've recently been watching the second season of 'Better Call Saul' and honestly think it's the best looking TV series on TV right now, the images are beautiful, and without knowing I could never tell it was shot on RED or Alexa, all I could tell it looks amazing!

I also remember watching this short that was made by a friend of mine that was Oscar nominated, could you tell which camera? https://vimeo.com/48435290
When I spoke with my friend about it he was like: "for me it's all about how the image look, not about the camera" and that he just used the best tool he had for the job at that time with the limitations he had from the producers etc.

Couldn't agree more. To play the devils advocate a little, yes, there is a difference between the cameras. What I'm talking about in this thread is that there seem to be a "stop" for some at the starting point of a grade. Yes, there's a difference between redlogFILM and C-log and applying the same curve creates different looks on both cameras. But some seem to say that you have a hard time getting your "vision" alive through Red while the Alexa is easier, which I think isn't true. The colors are all there, more colors than our eyes can see, it's up to what you do with all that data that is important. Alexa is more a digital representation of how 35mm film captured the world, it's in some peoples mind a "standard" since they worked with 35mm for a long time and they might almost have seen more of the world through that than the with their eyes. However, Red Dragon feels more "real". I always feel that the starting point for Dragon material feels more like being "there" while the Alexa has a "photographic filter" on top of everything. Better Call Saul is an example of something that feels like a "window". There are no filters in that, you are "there".

So in essence I believe there are two types of photographers, those who like the "filter" and those who like the "window". I appreciate both, but as both you and I say, there's no "right" and I think that both cameras can deliver the vision you want. As for the OPs question I've maintained that it should be chosen based on the production side, not the "image" side. Both Weapon and Alexa will give phenomenal images, but they are very different in their operation. And as you say, it might be better to look at a Scarlet-W and get nice optics instead of 6K if high speed isn't a primary capture.

 

[Oron Cohen]

Couldn't agree more. To play the devils advocate a little, yes, there is a difference between the cameras. What I'm talking about in this thread is that there seem to be a "stop" for some at the starting point of a grade. Yes, there's a difference between redlogFILM and C-log and applying the same curve creates different looks on both cameras. But some seem to say that you have a hard time getting your "vision" alive through Red while the Alexa is easier, which I think isn't true. The colors are all there, more colors than our eyes can see, it's up to what you do with all that data that is important. Alexa is more a digital representation of how 35mm film captured the world, it's in some peoples mind a "standard" since they worked with 35mm for a long time and they might almost have seen more of the world through that than the with their eyes. However, Red Dragon feels more "real". I always feel that the starting point for Dragon material feels more like being "there" while the Alexa has a "photographic filter" on top of everything. Better Call Saul is an example of something that feels like a "window". There are no filters in that, you are "there".

So in essence I believe there are two types of photographers, those who like the "filter" and those who like the "window". I appreciate both, but as both you and I say, there's no "right" and I think that both cameras can deliver the vision you want. As for the OPs question I've maintained that it should be chosen based on the production side, not the "image" side. Both Weapon and Alexa will give phenomenal images, but they are very different in their operation. And as you say, it might be better to look at a Scarlet-W and get nice optics instead of 6K if high speed isn't a primary capture.

It's funny how different people have different perception about film :smiley: both me and another good director friend of mine shot 35mm and super16 and also shoot a LOT of kodak and fuji stills films mainly medium format and many times we preferred RED over Alexa footage while doing tests for projects, as we felt it looks more cinematic at times. it really depends on the project!

But personally I feel I do not want digital cameras to look like film, I prefer them to have their own look, and feel RED has more of character while ARRI are just trying to be film, and while it's defiantly needed sometimes and very important to have as a tool I do find it kinda well...boring...but I will agree it sometimes needed as not always you could shoot film.

I would also say the Alexa mini workflow is very efficient and build ND is so nice to have! so that's a very important consideration.

As for 'Better Call Saul' second season, I'll dare to say it looks as stunning as 'Breaking Bad' just without grain, somewhat like 65mm low ISO film, for us that do have experience with film, you do remember how much effort people put in the past to get the cleanest image out of film? now people complain that digital is too clean..lol...world is going in circles! Also, not all film have had same skin tones until the latest flat and ( and in my opinion somewhat boring) Kodak vision 3 films...different stocks used to have different character and skin tones and colours, luckily you still get some of it with still photography film. (Portra vs Ektar vs Velvia etc).

 

[Christoffer Glans]

The key to the cinematography in Better Call Saul is primarily three things. Locked cameras, HDR (you can actually see out of the windows) and deep focus.
There's few people today that really work with deep focus so it's nice to see it in episodic format.

 

[Tom Gleeson]

What seems to get forgotten in this discussion is the Dragon sensor it has one major advantage over the Arri chip and that's it's physical size. Arri has stuck with the S35 sensor but Red has chosen to explore larger sensor sizes. This alone is why I generally prefer shooting Red. The larger sensor means I have more control over the DOF and can go very shallow when I wish. Larger sensors also mean you are physically closer on any given lens (to maintain the same FOV as S35) so your photographed world has more perspective. Of course you can choose smaller cuts of the sensor if you want a S35 look or even change shot by shot and go 6K for wide lenses to create focus separation and 5K or even 4K for longer lenses so focus doesn't get too thin. It depends on the project and even the shot but I have the choice when using a Dragon sensor.

Without doubt Arri had a real advantage over the Red's MX chip but the Dragon chip has closed the gap considerably and the new DSP in the new generation cameras such as the Weapon can now easily match Arri's DR and colour science. This why I suspect sooner rather than later Arri will need to update their chip design if it wants to keep the crown

 

[Adrian Jebef]

The conversation loop is continuing when taking into account... what is a skin tone? If someone made a high quality 3D LUT to exactly map over Dragon colors to Alexa colors, what would that mean? Is it "better" or just... Alexa? And do you actually see a difference?

That's not how LUTs work. You can only manipulate what is recorded. Color includes saturation and luminance. No two cameras will "see" the same thing. Therefore no "High Quality 3D LUT" will be able to provide consistent color results across differing shooting environments. The idea that because raw, 8K, HDR, etc, etc means you have "all the information you need for Post" is simply false. Sometimes you don't. And a LUT won't be able to help. And neither will the best DI. Because sometimes your camera just couldn't capture everything that was there. Even if it was recording raw.

 

[Sabovic Adis]

Not everything, just 16.5+ stops; 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or 8K of everything! :biggrin:

 

[Christoffer Glans]

That's not how LUTs work. You can only manipulate what is recorded. Color includes saturation and luminance. No two cameras will "see" the same thing. Therefore no "High Quality 3D LUT" will be able to provide consistent color results across differing shooting environments. The idea that because raw, 8K, HDR, etc, etc means you have "all the information you need for Post" is simply false. Sometimes you don't. And a LUT won't be able to help. And neither will the best DI. Because sometimes your camera just couldn't capture everything that was there. Even if it was recording raw.

If there's a difference in color saturation at a specific luma point and you balance that specific location to better match what another camera is doing it will do so on that luma-value regardless of exposure. If midtones is the problem, those midtones will always be in one place of the spectrum. FilmConvert works in a similar way. You enter an input-color and gamma and it change all values to match what the equal would look like on different filmstocks. It does however have balancing controls for different whitebalance and exposure as well as the amount of change you want.

If you shoot the same thing with two cameras with a certain color science and gamma for both you can definitely map over those values to reflect better to what the other camera is doing. If you shoot a number of things to double and triple check those values and find a median for the changes you get as close as you get. The key is that the LUT needs to be applied to the same exact color science and gamma starting point, otherwise it won't work.

 

[Neil Dearman]

Well @Neil....

I am happy you are able to afford BOTH a Dragon and a Mini.... Unfortunately , most of us can only afford a RED as an Arri is WAAAY out most out of our Budget... otherwise, we'd have them both too .... #HumbleBragging

I made the choice to go the crazy scary playing both sides cause I wasn't a special butterfly, now and days having a RED doesn't wow people I NEEDED to stick out so after loosing about 3-4 jobs to the MINI I came to a conclusion if you have options you will make yourself a very RARE BUTTERFLY. If you want to succeed in this Industry you have to put your money where your mouth is... and thats what I did and very proud of where I am in my Career. At the age of 26 I sold every Action figure for my first DSLR...now just Turned 30 this week I have 2 REDs and a MINI and bunch of toys/gadgets that make my clients very happy!!! Not trying to brag I am just a Very Hard worker that puts everything I make back into what makes me work 7 days a week with little sleep but loving every second of it

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

There is one arguement which is almost guaranteed to work. If someone asks you why a project should be shot on RED instead of Arri, you just tell them, "Because it's 2016."

Yes, it's sophistry, but you are merely fighting one form of sophistry with another.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

There is one arguement which is almost guaranteed to work. If someone asks you why a project should be shot on RED instead of Arri, you just tell them, "Because it's 2016."

Yes, it's sophistry, but you are merely fighting one form of sophistry with another.

Exactly, this is my point about producers being biased by internet "facts" that Arri is better. But I would add to the "why Red?" question with that you can edit directly when shooting Red and still have 4-6K material in RAW, Arri can't do that. Red is the "shoot > edit" camera now, not Arri. Having a quick workflow is a key factor for producers and telling them that they get the highest quality images while never having to wait for transcoding is a big deal breaking in my opinion.

...or you could just ask them back: "so... why Arri?" :tongue_smilie:

 

[Matt W.]

Doesn't it all boil down to money? A producer whose clients demand one camera buys that one. A producer whose clients want reliable 2k or 1080p prores with a locked down saturation curve (not better, but scaled logarithmically as regards lum vs sat to look the same when boosted at the expense of more highlight color recorded) and long history of reliability for such purposes shoots Alexa, as is ubiquitous for tv. Fincher, who wants 5k reframing from 6k extraction for 4k finish, clearly has a different choice (despite OLFP flaws prominent within Gone Girl that an Alexa would have mostly avoided–although to be fair current OLFPs seem to fix this, it's not an issue anymore).

They made the right choice and they know why they made it.

You know why you made your choice as regards what you want.

If you want to convince someone to feel the same way, tell them why you're so convinced. But also listen to why they're not.

If you don't know why, that's on you. Are you really relying on an internet forum to inform your company's decision? Do you go to the internet when you're sick and want a diagnosis, too? I wouldn't give any of this much thought, I'd give your observations more and known experts more, too. Do your research here, sure, but draw your conclusions on your own. And let your company do the same. There are workflows where the Alexa is cheaper. I also like its image, but it could boil down to either. And there's nothing wrong with that.

If you're shooting for Netflix, though... better look elsewhere. Even though I like the Alexa image, I'd recommend anything else in this case or in any case where resolution is paramount. And while I honestly didn't care for the MX that much... the Dragon with the latest tech seems right up there for 4k cameras as having the best image of the bunch, and not too expensive to use, either.

I used to work in sales for the biggest company in the US. Their first direction was to ask what people needed and tailor what they offered to that. An honest tactic, as these things go. And a good one as regarded customer satisfaction. We could all listen a little more and speak less.

What are your client's needs?

 

[shashbugu]

Exactly, this is my point about producers being biased by internet "facts" that Arri is better. But I would add to the "why Red?" question with that you can edit directly when shooting Red and still have 4-6K material in RAW, Arri can't do that. Red is the "shoot > edit" camera now, not Arri. Having a quick workflow is a key factor for producers and telling them that they get the highest quality images while never having to wait for transcoding is a big deal breaking in my opinion.

...or you could just ask them back: "so... why Arri?" :tongue_smilie:

Actually Arri Raw works just like R3D's in Premiere. You just open it up and start to edit. you can edit in 1/4 res and check your focus in full res.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

Do you go to the internet when you're sick and want a diagnosis, too?

A lot of people use the web to get physiological advice and it's at least as good as going to a doctor. In some cases it's better, as doctors only know (and only want to know) what they were trained with.

 

[Matt W.]

A lot of people use the web to get physiological advice and it's at least as good as going to a doctor. In some cases it's better, as doctors only know (and only want to know) what they were trained with.

A lot of people do a lot of things.

 

[Karim D. Ghantous]

A lot of people do a lot of things.

Yes, and they get things done, they get problems solved, they get valuable feedback, and they gain a bit more knowledge. We can all attest to that.

 

[Matt W.]

Yes, and they get things done, they get problems solved, they get valuable feedback, and they gain a bit more knowledge. We can all attest to that.

Yeah, it's up to you.

 

[Oron Cohen]

The key to the cinematography in Better Call Saul is primarily three things. Locked cameras, HDR (you can actually see out of the windows) and deep focus.
There's few people today that really work with deep focus so it's nice to see it in episodic format.

this if of course a bit off topic so let's just keep it short: I understand where you are coming from, but for me the key is the talented people who makes it and how and when they use it.

Would love to know where did you get the info they are using HDR? and I also the deep focus? I see all kind of shots there, but be interested to know if you had any kind of first hand info.

Thanks.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

this if of course a bit off topic so let's just keep it short: I understand where you are coming from, but for me the key is the talented people who makes it and how and when they use it.

Would love to know where did you get the info they are using HDR? and I also the deep focus? I see all kind of shots there, but be interested to know if you had any kind of first hand info.

Thanks.

Bad choice of words, I don't think it's HDR as the feature HDRx, since there's no visible artifacts associated with it. However they did it, by lighting up the interior more or filtered the windows, the images still have the HDR look, the one where nothing is burned out in highlights and both interior and exterior is visible as our eyes can see such an environment. Locked cameras is a nobrainer, they are... locked. As well as I read an interview about how they went from the last episode of Breaking Bad which was almost entirely locked off compared to the rest of that series which was hand held and kept that esthetic together with it's compositions. That it's deep focus is also there in the images. There are more wide-angles and compositions where the environment and all people are mostly always in focus. It's easy to see that they shot most of it closed down, wouldn't be surprised if they never went under T5.6.
Watching an entire series it isn't rocket science to analyze what type of storytelling style that show has, you just have to look at the images.

Actually Arri Raw works just like R3D's in Premiere. You just open it up and start to edit. you can edit in 1/4 res and check your focus in full res.

Not what I meant. Just because something works doesn't mean it works. I have edited two feature films and I would never ever touch either Arri-RAW or R3Ds as my editing material. Which then shows the problem with Arri right now, you need to transcode everything first. You had to do that with Red before, but with Weapon you now won't need to. The marketing of Arri Alexa earlier went under the "Shoot > Edit" phrase, which was true when working with 2K material in ProRes, but when people wanted more out the Arri, it wasn't that easy anymore. Same thing with Red.

Anyone who have edited a lot of projects with a lot of different formats will know that you don't edit RAW files directly, not even 4K files if the workflow demands fast turnarounds, fast offlines, complex sequences and so on. You need a massive amount of processing and hardware to be able to and there are very few people or studios that have that capacity. Only one I've heard of for editing like that is Light iron on the Gone Girl production, but as said, that was massive.

 

[Sabovic Adis]

Doesn't it all boil down to money?

Most of the time, yes. Relatively. Absolutely, no.

A producer whose clients demand one camera buys that one.

Producer produces. Clients got no idea.

A producer whose clients want reliable 2k or 1080p prores with a locked down saturation curve (not better, but scaled logarithmically as regards lum vs sat to look the same when boosted at the expense of more highlight color recorded) and long history of reliability for such purposes shoots Alexa, as is ubiquitous for tv.

Clients never say stuff like the bolded.

Fincher, who wants 5k reframing from 6k extraction for 4k finish, clearly has a different choice (despite OLFP flaws prominent within Gone Girl that an Alexa would have mostly avoided–although to be fair current OLFPs seem to fix this, it's not an issue anymore).

Fincher just wanted something differently looking, not how You put it.
(And it's OLPF, not OLFP)

They made the right choice and they know why they made it.

No, they don't.

You know why you made your choice as regards what you want.

Yes.

If you want to convince someone to feel the same way, tell them why you're so convinced. But also listen to why they're not.

That takes too much time.

If you don't know why, that's on you. Are you really relying on an internet forum to inform your company's decision? Do you go to the internet when you're sick and want a diagnosis, too?

First, You diagnose Yourself, then You go to internet...to confirm...

I wouldn't give any of this much thought, I'd give your observations more and known experts more, too. Do your research here, sure, but draw your conclusions on your own. And let your company do the same. There are workflows where the Alexa is cheaper. I also like its image, but it could boil down to either. And there's nothing wrong with that.

So, not really sure of either?!
Can we say RED = ARRI?

If you're shooting for Netflix, though... better look elsewhere.

If You're shooting for Netflix, make sure they give You all the equipment (and don't forget the payment, too!) necessary to do the work for Netflix! Otherwise, don't take the job!

Even though I like the Alexa image, I'd recommend anything else in this case or in any case where resolution is paramount.

Look above!

And while I honestly didn't care for the MX that much... the Dragon with the latest tech seems right up there for 4k cameras as having the best image of the bunch, and not too expensive to use, either.

Bravo! Me too.

I used to work in sales for the biggest company in the US. Their first direction was to ask what people needed and tailor what they offered to that. An honest tactic, as these things go. And a good one as regarded customer satisfaction. We could all listen a little more and speak less.

What are your client's needs?

Yes, client, what are Your clients needs?

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Fincher just wanted something differently looking, not how You put it.
(And it's OLPF, not OLFP)

No, he and they wanted Red because A) Red gave them flexibility to tailor cameras and tech to their needs (like the Carbon Red One), B) The resolution gave them the ability to do the advanced stabilization, reframing, split-editing without loosing resolution quality of the final master output. And C) Because they seem to prefer the look.

Fincher has never been into 35mm, he didn't like anamorphic and have always said it makes him feel limited. Not hard to guess what he thought about the Alexa essentially being a digital representation of 35mm at a low resolution capture.

References for this info can be found in numerous information about their productions.