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 Alexa and Mysterium-X...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Martin Stevens said:
I have read the M. Bravin response to the WB Arriraw question, but I still feel
that the question has not been answered. Is it YES, or NO?

Does Arriraw have the WB baked in? Yes, or no?

Perhaps I am missing something?

Oh, and I love Arri.
Click to expand...

I read it as it is baked in and is not meta data. And the explanation make sense to me why they chose to go that route, regardless of the technical considerations. There will be a lot of curious people coming from film that have not explored digital too much. The closer the method matches film, for some of those people, that transition will be easier.
 
Martin Stevens said:
I have read the M. Bravin response to the WB Arriraw question, but I still feel
that the question has not been answered. Is it YES, or NO?

Does Arriraw have the WB baked in? Yes, or no?

Perhaps I am missing something?

Oh, and I love Arri.
Click to expand...

The response is:
“There will be more information about the technique with ALEXA when the camera is out”
If Michael could elaborate on this subject he would. He is just working there, he is not the owner.

http://www.arridigital.com/Bravin

Arri is not and never was a company open to its own equipment users. (old school)
 
I think the safer guess is that camera white balance setting does not affect the recorded raw values, but is also a LUT/matrix operation in post. If ISO is a LUT, then not doing the same for WB is odd.

I queried a FWSE, and it suggested that ARRIRAW D21 files need 'Matrix and exposure LUTs to get white balanced and correctly saturated pictures'. To me, but Graeme please correct me, that sounds rather RAW.

Michael... we'd really like to know!
 
Andrew said:
Arri is not and never was a company open to its own equipment users. (old school)
Click to expand...

No company with any sanity is going to reveal all information about its intellectual property, especially if that represents a lot of the life blood of the company. That's why you won't likely see detailed explanations as to exactly what Arri is doing, just as you're not going to see an open source version of ProRes, or detailed roadmaps as to how to reverse engineer Redcode. Or how to build a Mysterium X sensor. And that has nothing to do with new or old schools. I understand and don't necessarily disagree that Red has been pretty forthcoming on a number of things, but don't mistake accessibility for openness. Accessibility means answering questions and is healthy for a company. Openness means giving away the store, which is not.
 
Pascal Scheffers said:
I think the safer guess is that camera white balance setting does not affect the recorded raw values, but is also a LUT/matrix operation in post. If ISO is a LUT, then not doing the same for WB is odd.

I queried a FWSE, and it suggested that ARRIRAW D21 files need 'Matrix and exposure LUTs to get white balanced and correctly saturated pictures'. To me, but Graeme please correct me, that sounds rather RAW.

Michael... we'd really like to know!
Click to expand...

WB is usually a vector of the form {r, g, b} where by convention g = 1.0 and red and blue are gained to make the output r=g=b for white. The following operation is the matrix (typically 3x3) which transforms from camera colours to accurate colours for the intended output space. Finally a LUT will do gamma.

Even if wb is done before recording, the matrix and lut will still be needed to be done in post. If the recording is not linear light, a LUT will also be necessary before matrix to ensure that the data is linear light before the matrix is applied.

Actual practical cameras and image processing systems are a bit more complex than that, but that's the basics you'll find in any textbook on the subject. I'd recommend Alan Robert's Circles Of Confusion for further reading.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
I'd recommend Alan Robert's Circles Of Confusion for further reading.

Graeme
Click to expand...


:smilielol5:
Thats the perfect name for this thread

Graeme,

Your post are incredible and enlightening ..
 
My goal is to reduce confusion! That's why I post here. Alan's book is highly recommended though, and at the very least shows what a nuanced subject camera design is. There are so many competing variables, that you have to be very subtle how you go about things.

Graeme
 
Thank you Jarred. Thank you Jarred. Thank you Jarred!

I don't think people say that enough.

And thank you Jim for having the vision to get Jarred in your team!

RED's "face", and REDuser itself, rock! Hard-core.

Now to all members of this community... lets be nice to Arri and their employees as they scramble a bit to switch gears. They earned that.

Even if you are like me, and you think that there is no comparison between the future Alexa and Epic systems based on what has been published, dumping on Arri is NOT going to make your investment in RED tools more accepted by producers and clients. This sort of sandbox attitude is NOT going to make you more $$$! So, wake up haters. That is your tail you are stepping on.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
My goal is to reduce confusion! That's why I post here. Alan's book is highly recommended though, and at the very least shows what a nuanced subject camera design is. There are so many competing variables, that you have to be very subtle how you go about things.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Paraphrasing you: "With a set of well defined terms we can communicate more effectively and achieve more, with the same amount of energy."
 
Or putting it another way, an educated customer is a happier customer, is a more creative person. I was an educator long before I became involved in this project, and I'm continuing to be so.

Graeme
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
Thank you Jarred. Thank you Jarred. Thank you Jarred!

I don't think people say that enough.

And thank you Jim for having the vision to get Jarred in your team!

RED's "face", and REDuser itself, rock! Hard-core.

Now to all members of this community... lets be nice to Arri and their employees as they scramble a bit to switch gears. They earned that.

Even if you are like me, and you think that there is no comparison between the future Alexa and Epic systems based on what has been published, dumping on Arri is NOT going to make your investment in RED tools more accepted by producers and clients. This sort of sandbox attitude is NOT going to make you more $$$! So, wake up haters. That is your tail you are stepping on.
Click to expand...

Which haters you talking about? Arri Haters Red Haters? :violin:
 
David Mullen ASC said:
I'm more interested in what the market will look like a year from now when both products are out there and being used regularly.
Click to expand...

I agree entirely. It's getting very exciting and very interesting with many options about to come to fruition. ALEXA already has the lead as she will be 'hitting the shelves' sooner than EPIC, ARRI also command a respect and deserved reputation for extremely high quality design and workmanship that will serve them very very well for sales and demand on the market without even having shipped the camera or even having a finished camera out there for independent scrutiny.
EPIC promises to be everything the RED One isn't and more. It certainly has better specs and offers much better value for money which is why they have sold so many units of the 'One' and have certainly gained a strong foothold in the industry for such a young company. But they are still building that reputation and have obstacles to overcome.
Both EPIC and ALEXA will produce beautiful images and i am sure both will definitely have places in the market and both look as though they will be setting the benchmark for everyone else to look up to and chase down. Only in the coming year or so are we going to see what ends up being a preferred option if the choice is between the two and both shoot equally stunning imagery, ARRI's awesome reputation, reliability and quality or RED's specs, choices for variety and flexibility. Either way, i don't think it will be that long now until the question will be asked...so why are we shooting film? What are the pro's over shooting these latest generation of digital?
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
+1 I am pretty sure we all love your passion SJ, but as of late I would think you could represent this community a bit better. You might not be trying to, but you are coming across as crass, at least to me, only as of late, only on this subject.

I can totally understand voicing the true color of your concerns... But we got your point. The only thing that it may be achieving now is a bad name, for you, and for the unsuspecting first-time RedUser reader.

I think you are just passionate, and perhaps made too big of an investment into that sweet expresso maker of yours :) but others might drop in and only read key words like Alexa, and all the fancy names you've been coming up with.

Not trying to tell you how to talk, I wouldn't dream of doing that! Just trying to make you're how it has been registering on the other side, at least mine.
Click to expand...

I agree that the tone is wrongfully a bit... Overwrought. I concede that I get overwrought too sometimes.

However, I would love to understand, in simple terms, what user benefit the Alexa offers over a Red with MX, let alone an Epic, other than Prores recording. Does it have better color? Does it somehow handle highlight falloff better or differently? I'm not being sarcastic, I really want to know, and I've yet to hear straight answers from Arri or anyone.

So far all I hear is "Arri has a long history" and "horses for courses". These statements have no tangible meaning.

I could sell you a Snickers bar for $80, and when you asked me why the high price I could say "Well, it's aimed at a different market than Snickers bars sold for $1." Even though it tastes no better.

Someone please tell me why the $80 Snickers bar tastes better, or even different, from the $1 Snickers down the street. (I don't mean to disparige either camera by comparing it to cheap chocolate - the analogy was chosen merely for its simplicity. If you like, replace "Snickers" with "Chanel Dress".) There must be some advantages, I wish someone would talk about these in a clear manner.
 
This 80K number is exagerated for the ALEXA.

http://finance.yahoo.com/currency-c...=USD&submit=Convert#from=EUR;to=USD;amt=50000

It's like 63K in USD.

People need to relax and the price point comparison between ARRI (anything) and other products is getting redundant.

IE: Comparing camera's, is like comparing ARRI glass or ARRI FF to competitors, ARRI is always more expensive and they would not apologize for that. People pay for quality (or perceived quality)

Anyone might consider anything from a lens to a Follow focus expensive.

I don't see DP's on here saying that ARRI glass is two expensive compared to an RPP set.

ARRI has a reputation for building quality film equipment and customers have paid full price for some of the finest gear used in motion pictures.

Any price comparrison until the products (EPIC and ALEXA) are in the open marketplace are mute because in my opinion price is more than a featues comparrison.

David
 
there is a difference between a mechanic ff and a 80k digital cam which will be outdated in 36 months after release.

edit: same goes for reds mx sensor with monstro on the horizont.
hope arri has a sensor upgrade program

at the end murphys law reaches the camera world.
 
Mike Gross said:
I'm still bummed that they did not go for high resolution to compete with red one MX or Epic. Whyyyyyy?! .... Sigh. Very frustrating that Arri isn't competing on all fronts.
Click to expand...

Resolution is not everything. I think 2K resolution is fine for current theatrical demands for acceptable image quality. Any further increase comes with diminishing returns. And, don't forget in a movie-watching experience sound is very important. People are more forgiving in glitches in image quality than sound quality IMHO, as verified by several psycho-acoustic studies we had done in the past. A major part of my experience in a theater is to enjoy good sound quality. I personally am not even thinking about 2K/4K resolution at that time.

Joofa
 
Rob Ruffo said:
Someone please tell me why the $80 Snickers bar tastes better, or even different, from the $1 Snickers down the street. (I don't mean to disparige either camera by comparing it to cheap chocolate - the analogy was chosen merely for its simplicity. If you like, replace "Snickers" with "Chanel Dress".) There must be some advantages, I wish someone would talk about these in a clear manner.
Click to expand...

Well, neither camera is currently available to the public, nor have they been fully finished yet. Once they're out in the field you can count on many comparative tests being done. What you're asking is "why is this restaurant priced higher than that one", without having dined at either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top