Arri Alexa and Mysterium-X...

[Phil Jordan]

Does anyone know the answer to Graeme's question? I am curious to know if Arriraw does bake in WB because that would be a very bad thing to call it raw. Do they call the D21 files Arriraw?

 

[Tim Morten]

WTF? Anyone who says they are going to test the Alexa camera makes you sad?

Deakins makes beautiful images. He will pick a camera that delivers what he wants out of it, just as he picks film stocks and lenses for what they deliver. He trusts his eyes, and they are a great pair of eyes. It's not the end of the world if he decides to shoot something on the Alexa. I love his work, but that doesn't mean I shoot everything as he does on Arriflexes, Zeiss Master Primes, and Kodak stock with no diffusion filters. I sometimes shoot on Panaflexes, Primo primes, Fuji stock, and diffusion on the lens. So what? His choices don't negate my choices, nor yours. Shoot Red if you want to, let him shoot Alexa if he wants to, don't make this into some federal case against Deakins for going his own way.

If he hasn't shot Red yet, it's primarily because he hasn't had to shoot digital yet for anything -- all of his features have been shot on film. When the time comes to shoot something digitally, he will look at his options, shoot some tests, and trust his eyes. He's not going to be influenced by advertising or even specs on paper, he's going to trust his eyes.

David, read Deakins' quote from above:

I would use super 16 rather that the Red camera. I would probably use anything rather than the Red camera!

If Alexa makes images he likes better, of course we all have to respect that. However, my perception is that he is condemning Red as a brand, before having the opportunity to make an apples to apples comparison.

He is a better artist than I will ever be. But I do believe he's got some emotion about this subject unrelated to circumspect analysis. This is also peppered throughout his forum. Honestly, he seems to have a predilection against Red. Just my observation.

- Tim

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Red has improved over the past two years and I'm sure Deakins is responding to earlier tests that he's seen. But it also says something about his image priorities, that the dynamic range of film matters a lot to him.

 

[Tim Morten]

Red has improved over the past two years and I'm sure Deakins is responding to earlier tests that he's seen. But it also says something about his image priorities, that the dynamic range of film matters a lot to him.

Let's just say, I like your approach to all this better: you seem to take the time to develop a deep grasp of the facilitating technology (analog or digital), and you seem to have no favorites in the race. I really appreciate that, and really appreciate your generosity in sharing with all of us.

Best,
Tim

 

[Tim H.]

Let's just say, I like your approach to all this better: you seem to take the time to develop a deep grasp of the facilitating technology (analog or digital), and you seem to have no favorites in the race. I really appreciate that, and really appreciate your generosity in sharing with all of us.

Best,
Tim

What is wrong with Deakins approach? You think he is biased? Of course he is, he loves Film. Just like you are biased towards Red. You have never shot anything on an Epic yet you insist it is better - you are simply taking a few images from the web and some specs on paper and insisting he is crazy because he doesn't want to shoot on Red.

Roger has yet to see any digital camera produce images that his eyes feel are better than what he can get with Film. Now that might not be the case for everyone because some people might not be as talented when it comes to shooting a negative blind compared to looking at a somewhat finished image on a monitor. That takes serious talent and experience.

Roger has reached a level in his career where he doesn't have to compromise. If a project dictated that he shoot digital and he feels it won't produce an image worth shooting he will pass on the project. He has that luxury. Would I trust Roger and his eyes to tell me what looks good and what doesn't - you better believe it. Then again it's only opinion but in this case my opinion agrees with his.

As David said most of what you are reading about Rogers comments regarding Red are based on the early stuff from Red One. A lot has happened since then so he may change his mind one day, especially once he has a hands on experience with the Epic. Time will tell. Honestly I doubt he will even use the Alexa as long as he can keep shooting film. The only reason he will make the switch is if his eyes tell him something else looks better.

 

[Tim Morten]

What is wrong with Deakins approach? You think he is biased? Of course he is, he loves Film. Just like you are biased towards Red. You have never shot anything on an Epic yet you insist it is better - you are simply taking a few images from the web and some specs on paper and insisting he is crazy because he doesn't want to shoot on Red.

Roger has yet to see any digital camera produce images that his eyes feel are better than what he can get with Film. Now that might not be the case for everyone because some people might not be as talented when it comes to shooting a negative blind compared to looking at a somewhat finished image on a monitor. That takes serious talent and experience.

Roger has reached a level in his career where he doesn't have to compromise. If a project dictated that he shoot digital and he feels it won't produce an image worth shooting he will pass on the project. He has that luxury. Would I true Roger and his eyes to tell me what looks good and what doesn't - you better believe it. Then again it's only opinion but in this case my opinion agrees with his.

As David said most of what you are reading about Rogers comments regarding Red are based on the early stuff from Red One. A lot has happened since then so he may change his mind one day, especially once he has a hands on experience with the Epic. Time will tell. Honestly I doubt he will even use the Alexa as long as he can keep shooting film. The only reason he will make the switch is if his eyes tell him something else looks better.

I can't deny that I have a bias towards all the things that Epic does better on paper (resolution, price, modularity, FLUT™, etc). But if you read my posts, you'll see I acknowledge over and over that it will be all about the images these cameras produce, and that I look forward to having an opportunity to compare them. I haven't had that yet. As far as I know, neither has Roger.

Cheers,
Tim

 

[Tim H.]

I can't deny that I have a bias towards all the things that Epic does better on paper (resolution, price, modularity, FLUT™, etc). But if you read my posts, you'll see I acknowledge over and over that it will be all about the images these cameras produce, and that I look forward to having an opportunity to compare them.

Cheers,
Tim

Well that is an honest answer, I respect that.

Another thing we have to remember is that some of the seasoned and talented DP's out there have been doing something a certain way for a long time. They are comfortable shooting a certain way so to transition will take time and they will have to trust the new way as much as the old way.

Think about the trust you have to have in yourself and the format to deliver images that are academy award worthy on huge budget films where you have millions of dollars at stake. In this case Roger trusts what he knows about the camera, the film stock, light meter and his eyes to know what will end up on screen when the film is developed. Could most people say they have this confidence? There is no monitor to verify exposure, there is no histogram, etc. He has to point a light at something, take a meter reading and judge it all from there and yet he produces these stunning images that are some of the best I've seen.

So lets give him some time to transition from what he knows so well and can craft and manipulate like no other to something new that even in the best of hands doesn't always deliver a good image.

 

[Phil Jordan]

Apparently Arriraw isn't really raw after all?

From the ArriD21 manual, pg 131:

Data Mode
Data Mode delivers a single channel 12bit raw Bayer data image without compression. No image adjustment other than white balance is applied.

So WB is baked in? And as you can set "any" gains for white balance, they may even be burning in digital gain!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Phil, Thanks for that find. I wonder if Alexa is the same? I know people have criticized RED's REDRAW for not being RAW because it's compressed (even though Nikon have a lossy RAW compression option on their DSLRs) and RAW means keeping it in the sensor pattern and not burning in image processing. It's never been tied to compression - there has always been uncompressed RAW and compressed RAW as adjectives on RAW.

But burning in white balance? Anyone know of a DSLR do that? I know some of them burn in digital ISO gain, but white balance in RAW? I don't think that's RAW any more.

Graeme

 

[Grady Wilson]

That is correct Phil, ARRI RAW isn't anything like REDcode that gives the user flexibility in processing after acquisition. ARRI RAW is just the way they describe uncompressed.

Pretty silly and I am sure its going to be quite a shocker to those DPs that think they are shooting something they are not!

 

[Stephen Williams]

That is correct Phil, ARRI RAW isn't anything like REDcode that gives the user flexibility in processing after acquisition. ARRI RAW is just the way they describe uncompressed.

Pretty silly and I am sure its going to be quite a shocker to those DPs that think they are shooting something they are not!

Whatever Arri do or don't do, the D21 performed better than other Bayer chip cameras in the past, why don't we wait until Epic can be tested against the competition before writing off Arri & Film.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Phil, Thanks for that find. I wonder if Alexa is the same? I know people have criticized RED's REDRAW for not being RAW because it's compressed (even though Nikon have a lossy RAW compression option on their DSLRs) and RAW means keeping it in the sensor pattern and not burning in image processing. It's never been tied to compression - there has always been uncompressed RAW and compressed RAW as adjectives on RAW.

But burning in white balance? Anyone know of a DSLR do that? I know some of them burn in digital ISO gain, but white balance in RAW? I don't think that's RAW any more.

Graeme

It didn't say burned in it said "applied". Not sure if there is a difference, but isn't that basically what Jim has said we should do as our first step in processing with Redcine-X? i.e. set a white balance point then do any additional steps?

Not trying to cause trouble just trying to understand.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

From the description in the manual, it does imply burned in.

Applying white balance gains in camera, before recording will lead to loss of precision in the data, and clipping if a +ve gain is applied. This is undesirable.

In the REDs, any setting of white balance is just metadata (just like how white balance is done on a DSLR in RAW). In post you can keep that value or choose any new value, and because it's a pretty major decision on how the footage is developed, we suggest it be the first thing you set - again, similar to how you'd work on a DSLR raw file in post. Because the math for white balance is done at a very high precision along with all the RAW development math, it means we can avoid magnification of earlier rounding errors and deliver better precision output - and give you the option to change your mind as much as you want. In other words, it just plain makes more sense for RAW to not have white balance burned into it.

Graeme

 

[Michael Hastings]

However, my perception is that he is condemning Red as a brand ....

- Tim

Remember, to the rest of the world - as of today - RED is one camera: the REDONE.

M-X and soon-to-come Epic is changing that but many professionals evaluate on the basis of the here and now.

From the description in the manual, it does imply burned in.

So how much does that affect the ability to do significant adjustments?

I'm not suggesting that it is a good thing, just trying to figure out how much of a problem, if essentially we are normally going to set that on our first step with our RED footage anyway, and presumably we would have a pretty good idea of what that is when we shoot it as you would when you set it on the Alexa.

Again, I have already ordered my stage 2 epic-x, I just like to know that when I discuss my camera choices vs. other possibilities I am speaking from a fairly secure knowledge base.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

So how much does that affect the ability to do significant adjustments?

Any fractional gain leads to precision errors. They don't limit range of adjustment, just image quality, especially because the next step is matrix, and that will magnify any noise or precision errors.

Any positive gain will lead to loosing top end image data. That loss is not retrievable and would limit the highlight handling on significant adjustments.

Graeme

 

[Jannard]

Remember, to the rest of the world - as of today - RED is one camera: the REDONE.

M-X and soon-to-come Epic is changing that but many professionals evaluate on the basis of the here and now.

RED ONE M-X is in the here and now...

Jim

 

[Tom Lowe]

They claim "images are sharper and cleaner than other cameras that claim 4K+ resolution." and that "Provides super sharp, alias-free images through over sampling" - so I think it's time to see zone plates on those claims.

Yeah. Let's see those zone plates. Bravin, are you game?

 

[Tom Lowe]

WTF? Anyone who says they are going to test the Alexa camera makes you sad?

I agree with David. It's this type of nonsense that gives Reduser a bad name. This person is "sad" because one of the top cinematographers in the history of cinema is going to test out a new digital cinema camera??? WTF.

What a lot of people here fail to understand is that for top cinematographers, dynamic range is a huge, huge, HUGE priority. So of course there is interest in Alexa, since it's major claim is film-level DR. Also, a lot of top DPs had major problems with Red One in the early days. These people legitimately went through nightmares with Red One and felt burned. Several guys I know personally went to hell and back on early Red features. This is why many of them will say negative things about Red. The trick is, to get the new cameras into their hands and have those cameras work well. That is precisely why Jim is taking his time with the release of DSMC. He wants to get it right, so guys like Deakins can embrace Epic.

 

[Michael Hastings]

RED ONE M-X is in the here and now...

Jim

Point well taken. i really was just affirming that we Redusers don't need to be overly concerned that some of the big names haven't jumped on board yet - we just need to give them some time. Even if they stick to film because they can I'm pretty sure the attitude will change.

Graeme thanks for the in depth info.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Much better to talk cameras rather than users. People have many reasons for using or not using particular cameras, and in the end, there is no right choice for everyone, just your right choice for you. Important thing is that you enjoy making images!

Graeme