ARRI ALEXA LF - 4k, FullFrame announced

[Sabovic Adis]

Once You called me this:

, son?

Now let's if I progressed. :biggrin5:

In your initial post, you did not make it clear that when you typed "You" you were talking about me specifically and not the general, editorial "you" - which I now see you capitalized both times then and a bunch of times in your last post, I guess as a way to make that distinction.

I wasn't talking about You, I was talking to You. As I am right now. :biggrin5:

That's not really a standard way of stressing emphasis in writing and I just thought you had a problem with capitalization. I read your "You" as translating to "one." People capitalize all types of stuff that doesn't seem to need it. You could've been clearer in that regard, but whatever.

:emote_headwall:

Ok. You win. :rofl:

See above, which is the only reason I mentioned other DPs.

I will: :biggrin5:

This is the part of your argument where I think you're trying to be philosophical about the look of film. I see people asking the questions you are more often in relation to something being called "cinematic" looking.

Oh, now it's "cinematic"?! And what this "people" has to do with my question to You?

I think people are trying too hard to sound deep when they ask what that term means as well, because I think it refers to a style of lighting and scope and a whole host of there things that, when absent, make the image look less like the well-made feature films and TV we're used to seeing.

What people, dude? Ther's only You and me...:rofl:

Now, since you're asking that question of the look of film, I find it a little odd because different film stocks of different formulations and from different manufacturers still work by the same basic process and will share characteristics across the different incarnations, but I've already described what I mean.

That applies to digital as well, and since we're talking about different manufacturers, namely RED and ARRI in particular, so let's talk about different film looks - in particular.
What film look of what film in particular did You have in mind when You said "film look"? :biggrin:

(more music talk)

Asking me about the film look is similar to if I say that when I plug my electric guitar straight into my audio interface, it doesn't have that amp sound and then you ask me,"What is the amp sound? To which amp are you referring? Are you talking tube or sold state?," all to suggest that the sound doesn't really exist.

It's the fucking sound you get when you plug an electric guitar into an amp, the changes and enhancements to the sound the amp makes, which will be different for every guitar and amp, and the sound coming out of the amp, traveling through the air and reaching your ears while also being influenced by the room acoustics.

Do You even know what You are talking about now...cuz I know exactly....:rofl:

Me, at the "gutar" in 80's:

in 90's:

You really think it does not make any difference what amp You use?

Beacause it does:

:rofl:

Despite all those variables, there's a characteristic sound that's consistent across the countless permutations that says,"Hey, how ya doin'? I'm the amp sound." For me, it's the same with the look of film.

Peace out! :ihih:

 

[Sabovic Adis]

LOL - every flag, every light, every butterfly and probably every bit of set design makes a bigger difference, than what camera you use - it's called PHOTOGRAPHY for a reason, and it happens in front of the camera - no corner cutting here.

+1

My man...:yesnod:

 

[Phil Holland]

No it's not. Red has its place, and a really solid one, but just not a relevance in the cinema and TV world like Arri has.

Relevance is an interesting word, and Arri has been around to generate that brand and loyalty for many decades. I used to be closer to that fire too.

But if you're looking at things like the top 10 grossing feature films of 2017 you'll find RED, Arri, and Kodak all in there (and animation too!). Each medium sometimes used exclusively, often on those big shoots however they are using multiple capture mediums. I personally can't read into to much of what "TV" is using as it's so very much workflow based rather than even aesthetics or creative choices for the vast majority of that. Occasionally discerning creators will be doing something specific, new, or different and I think that's why we've seen so much interest whatever is happening in digital streaming over say standard broadcast because the workflows are new or potentially different than something you're pushing out every 5-15 days per episode. Hell, the vast majority of TV outside of narrative aren't these cameras at all. The ProRes workflow in particular has been highly appealing over the years and that's what's much more interesting from a cost, time, value, and data perspective in the narrative TV world. Even if you have the option to shoot something like ARRIRAW or REDCODE RAW and don't, it always fascinates me as to why, which is mostly budget or deadline related.

From a general perspective, many union and ASC cinematographers don't like to have any sort of brand favoritism, though most have some sort of preferred workflow. Deakins is a great example as he's famously said that he'd shoot on a cell phone if asked to, but he's certainly an Arri guy and those are for his own reasons which run rather deep. And whatever your POV or preference that's not to judge him (or anybody) by, but rather look at his work and see if you like it. *Spoiler, he's one of my favorite DPs and it has nothing to do with what he's shooting with, but more of how he's shooting with the added plus of him giving me solid advice a few times over the years.

Any DP worth their salt will choose the right tool to get the job done. You'll find the ecosystem today to be broad, vast, and well accepted in most places for many workflows.

I think if you look closer, much closer, the fact that RED started about 10-12 years ago and has made it's way onto some of the biggest productions being made you can clearly see the brand, camera system, and image quality is well respected. In fact more so in US driven narrative than Canon, Panasonic, and Sony even. Think about what it's taken to be part of the conversation and a respected option in the top 3 motion picture mediums and for a while now.

And just a side note, this is why much of my POV on different systems come down to mostly technical and occasionally creative subjects. For instance right now I'm involved in a few email chains because RED resolves a 4K+ image in Super 35mm and the Alexa LF does not and the people I'm talking with have several million dollars in glass that they are wondering about and how to proceed into the future. They also have investments primarily in RED and Arri if you're curious with a few other cameras in there.

Grabbing lunch. Shooting later.

 

[M Most]

Lastly, many in the film industry, like myself, dislike the skull/military/sectarian, in no means humble marketing/brand approach pretty much. This may feed some heavy-metal appreciating young male well, and a silent majority of red-users are standing this since years (WTF call a camera Weapon?), but for sure is scaring many potential customers away. Either way, Red's marketing is polarising, Arri's not.

Excellent point. Many of the people in the company and on RedUser just don't seem to see that this approach is counterproductive with many, if not most, of the people in the established end of the industry. Or they don't care.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Christopher,

No argument from me and I agree with what you say but I do wonder if Arri are still the DR kings? I would love to see and maybe somebody has done it but I suspect the Monstro chip could challenge Alexa on dynamic range? When I tested the Weapon Dragon I felt Alexa just won by a nose. I'm tempted to setup another test but its so much work and the hate mail is such a disincentive.

*Ideally you would need to test an Alexa LF against a Monstro

It's not really about the number of stops, it's how those stops are handled. Alexa maps those stops much different to a Red sensor. The closest we've got is by using high contrast very soft rolloff on IPP2, but the curve is still different and looks much nicer on the Alexa, especially in the dark parts of the image.

 

[Phil Holland]

Lastly, many in the film industry, like myself, dislike the skull/military/sectarian, in no means humble marketing/brand approach pretty much. This may feed some heavy-metal appreciating young male well, and a silent majority of red-users are standing this since years (WTF call a camera Weapon?), but for sure is scaring many potential customers away. Either way, Red's marketing is polarising, Arri's not.

Excellent point. Many of the people in the company and on RedUser just don't seem to see that this approach is counterproductive with many, if not most, of the people in the established end of the industry. Or they don't care.

That POV is fine. If their bold marketing and naming conventions freak you out enough to not use a camera (or any product), then to each their own.

We did have lens turrets decades ago, but I guess shooting people with your turret didn't raise the same level of concern. Always fun having a bazooka on set or hell, "shooting" people in general.

Interestingly enough, at least from my perspective on various projects, this is why so many people call for the RED Dragon, RED Helium, RED Monstro and leave the body name out of the equation. On set I hear get the Dragon or whatever more often than not.

Don't think Epic or Scarlet really suffered from it, though Scarlet is in line and style of an Alexa-ish style name. Raven I have no real idea. Purely, since DSMC2 and what Weapon actually is was a nod to it being the "secret Weapon" as it does a bit more than the DSMC1 counterparts.

Much of RED is tactical themed for better or worse. There's some who are apparently bothered by it, but I would say most don't care.

Either way, I'm certain RED has heard the feedback on the Weapon name in particular as that was pretty well worn ground around the time of the announcement.


If the skull bothers you however, I have a million and one things to say about that, but I also have a skull on my main logo for many years and much of it has everything to do artists and what the skull represents to so many over the years. If you've studied anatomy for 5 seconds or attempted to learn to draw in anything close to a traditional way, this is a well accepted and common "object" that often provides more introspective thought once you stare at them enough.

 

[Eric Lange]

That POV is fine. If their bold marketing and naming conventions freak you out enough to not use a camera (or any product), then to each their own.

We did have lens turrets decades ago, but I guess shooting people with your turret didn't raise the same level of concern. Always fun having a bazooka on set or hell, "shooting" people in general.

Interestingly enough, at least from my perspective on various projects, this is why so many people call for the RED Dragon, RED Helium, RED Monstro and leave the body name out of the equation. On set I hear get the Dragon or whatever more often than not.

Don't think Epic or Scarlet really suffered from it, though Scarlet is in line and style of an Alexa-ish style name. Raven I have no real idea. Purely, since DSMC2 and what Weapon actually is was a nod to it being the "secret Weapon" as it does a bit more than the DSMC1 counterparts.

Much of RED is tactical themed for better or worse. There's some who are apparently bothered by it, but I would say most don't care.

Either way, I'm certain RED has heard the feedback on the Weapon name in particular as that was pretty well worn ground around the time of the announcement.


If the skull bothers you however, I have a million and one things to say about that, but I also have a skull on my main logo for many years and much of it has everything to do artists and what the skull represents to so many over the years. If you've studied anatomy for 5 seconds or attempted to learn to draw in anything close to a traditional way, this is a well accepted and common "object" that often provides more introspective thought once you stare at them enough.

I'm goin to stick my neck out on this one with the risk of it being totally cut off.

In Germany/Austria it's hard not to associate the skull with the German Wehrmacht and particularly and wrongly associated with the SS; here's the skull motif used on an ss officer's cap. http://cdn.iofferphoto.com/img/item...s-general-officers-visor-cap-1930-35-7082.jpg

The skull symbol / skull and cross bones has been used by the German army since way before WW I ... https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lmlfk5LqqN1qjkcuso1_500.jpg

^^^Many such fun and outlandish pictures of General August Von Mackensen can be found... http://ww1blog.osborneink.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/mackensenhat.jpg

But there is a good reason why you will never in million years see a "skull" motif on a German camera and definitely not on an ARRI, especially on a camera called 'Weapon".

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So you can take a black Sharpie and cover over the white lines... If that helps. I think of it as "Where do brains live...? " Answer... "A skull". What does a skull do...? It protects "Brains"... I KNOW that's a huge rationalization lol.

 

[Brian Boyer]

Wow. I gotta say. You go all out. I mean, that's a full-blown production. Before, I thought you were just trolling me but then you went down memory lane and I knew you were for real.

That's a lot of trouble to go through to ask nonsense questions I've already answered and argue a point I never made, but I applaud the effort, nonetheless. My hat is off to your vim and your vigor.

If you applied as much attention to detail in your reading comprehension as you do to your smiley game, we'd have this settled. Also, for a camera forum, I would've taken better pictures, but that's just me.

Lastly, your wit isn't as acerbic as you think. I get the feeling you believe all of this is what passes for effectively shutting me down, but the hits just aren't landing. I'm trying to help you out here. It's bad. Just argue your points without all of the cheesy fanfare.

Now, to the business at hand.

Now let's if I progressed.

WTF?

I wasn't talking about You, I was talking to You. As I am right now.

I said it seemed as if you were talking to me about people in general. But, if you want to play the semantics game, that's fine.

Oh, now it's "cinematic"?! And what this "people" has to do with my question to You?

What people, dude? Ther's only You and me...

What I think can't be influenced or informed by what I've observed or learned directly from other people? I can never mention anyone else when expressing my own thoughts to use as a point of reference?

I can't use metaphors or analogies that draw on the collective wisdom of the global community to make my points? You are ridiculous.

That applies to digital as well, and since we're talking about different manufacturers, namely RED and ARRI in particular, so let's talk about different film looks - in particular.
What film look of what film in particular did You have in mind when You said "film look"?

I know you think there's some larger truth behind this question but it has been asked and answered. If you can't accept the answer, you must not fully understand the question you're asking.

Do You even know what You are talking about now...cuz I know exactly.

You really think it does not make any difference what amp You use?

Beacause it does:

I never said it didn't matter which amp is used.

What I said was no matter what electric guitar and amp combo is used, it's going to sound like a guitar playing through an amp versus the dry and lackluster sound of plugging straight into an audio interface (without the help of plugins like the ones you pictured) or DI box run into a mixer channel strip.

That shit is as true as you believed yourself to be a JEM shredding, metal god Steve Vai himself would've been proud of back when you took that picture.

 

[Zeb B]

@Šabović
Did you mic this? That is going to sound like shit Mate. Mic needs to move about 12" up the neck or you're just going to hear muddy boom boom mush ;-)

 

[Phil Holland]

I'm goin to stick my neck out

Luckily you are of the mindset of understanding other sides to the symbolism.

Vanitas - Pieter Claesz, 1630.

 

[Audy Erel]

I'm goin to stick my neck out on this one with the risk of it being totally cut off.

In Germany/Austria it's hard not to associate the skull with the German Wehrmacht and particularly and wrongly associated with the SS; here's the skull motif used on an ss officer's cap. http://cdn.iofferphoto.com/img/item...s-general-officers-visor-cap-1930-35-7082.jpg

The skull symbol / skull and cross bones has been used by the German army since way before WW I ... https://78.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lmlfk5LqqN1qjkcuso1_500.jpg

^^^Many such fun and outlandish pictures of General August Von Mackensen can be found... http://ww1blog.osborneink.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/mackensenhat.jpg

But there is a good reason why you will never in million years see a "skull" motif on a German camera and definitely not on an ARRI, especially on a camera called 'Weapon".
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

So you can take a black Sharpie and cover over the white lines... If that helps. I think of it as "Where do brains live...? " Answer... "A skull". What does a skull do...? It protects "Brains"... I KNOW that's a huge rationalization lol.

The "Apple Store" version of RED Raven Kit doesn't have any skull logo on it.. https://store.storeimages.cdn-apple....5,0,0&iccEmbed=0&layer=comp&.v=1501534299325 A big RED logo instead of a skull! Playing on the safe side eh Apple?

 

[Eric Lange]

The "Apple Store" version of RED Raven Kit doesn't have any skull logo on it.. https://store.storeimages.cdn-apple....5,0,0&iccEmbed=0&layer=comp&.v=1501534299325 A big RED logo instead of a skull! Playing on the safe side eh Apple?

That's interesting I didn't know that.

I see many "skull" variants on the back of pick-up trucks but I don't know what they all mean lol. There's one that looks like a cross between a jelly fish/skull very elongated but don't know what it means. http://ep.yimg.com/ay/stylinonline/punisher-long-skull-tank-top-7.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/05/b4/70/...b9d4af--daredevil-punisher-punisher-skull.jpg

I'm not up on the "Punisher"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punisher

The red skull logo also makes me think of Star Wars Storm Troopers/RED Camera, but the Storm Trooper idea is still based on the Sturmabteilung and other such influences on Lucas for the pretty much fascistic style of the "Bad guys". Lots of people dress up as "Storm Troopers" at various Star Wars conventions and the like. Kind of a "Sticky" taxonomy/typology. Ohh well. World War I "Stormtrooper" disambiguation for "Shock troops" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormtrooper

 

[Eric Lange]

Luckily you are of the mindset of understanding other sides to the symbolism.

Vanitas - Pieter Claesz, 1630.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanitas


Quote:
"A vanitas is a symbolic work of art showing the transience of life, the futility of pleasure, and the certainty of death, often contrasting symbols of wealth and symbols of ephemerality and death. Best-known are vanitas still lifes, a common genre in Netherlandish art of the 16th and 17th centuries; they have also been created at other times and in other media and genres.[1]
Vanitas means 'futility' or 'worthlessness', that is, the pointlessness of earthly goods and pursuits, alluding to Ecclesiastes 1:2; 12:8 Vanitas vanitatum omnia vanitas, translated "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity" in the King James Bible."


I agree it's the ultimate "Gothic symbol" in it's original and romantic sense (not exactly like Ken Russell's "Gothic" ).

I have a number of skull drawing and paintings I had made still in my old dusty portfolio cases... One made from a skull I borrowed from the Oxford Archaeological unit; a 10th Century Viking skull we affectionately called Hagar... (don't get drunk with Hagar with flickering candle light as things seem to come alive ).

When I worked at the Ashmolean museum in Oxford (as a conservation intern) there were a number of very famous paintings that had skulls in them that I would pass by every day.

But universally the "Skull" as a symbol is pretty universally recognized as DEATH... So a camera that is called Weapon and has the universal symbol of death or communicating a fatal situation/lethal hazard.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Totenkopf

^^^^This is interesting that the "Totenkopf" literally death-head goes back at least 200 years.

Quote from wikki header here... "Totenkopf (i.e. skull, literally dead's head) is the German word for the skull and crossbones and death's head symbols. The Totenkopf symbol is an old international symbol for death, the defiance of death, danger, or the dead, as well as piracy. It consists usually of the human skull with or without the mandible and often includes two crossed long-bones (femurs), most often depicted with the crossbones being behind some part of the skull.
It is commonly associated with 19th- and 20th-century German military use."

But when I look at the RED skull... It's well designed and would love one day to see the development art-work for that or the variants there of, but I don't associate that skull design with anything in my portfolio or hanging at the Ashmolean or National gallery in London.

Interesting ; my real passion is design, especially industrial design; to me these are interesting and important issues.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


I think in this case the skull is used on the camera in a Terminator type way rather than a Vanitas type way YKWIM ... As it's style of execution leans to the former rather than the latter.

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

But universally the "Skull" as a symbol is pretty universally recognized as DEATH...

Nope. That is incorrect.

 

[Eric Lange]

Nope. That is incorrect.

Well maybe you can add to this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_skull_symbolism

there's a lot of associated argument with that Wikki talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Human_skull_symbolism

 

[David Peterson]

The more I think about it, the more ALF makes sense for Arri: Gives 4k+, gives FF35/VV, doesn't cannibalize the A65, doesn't cannibalize the Mini, puts 10year old used Classics in the hands of anyone who wants to jump in (cause you know they're dropping to sub-$5k come March), and puts XTs/SXTs in a strong used selling market... All with the same sensor/look/bullet-proof workflow/ease-of-use seasoned and beginner DOPs appreciate. It's so simple/quick/easy.

Yay! I really hope this happens. (the temptation might be overwhelming)

 

[Kyle Wright]

Ah, remember the good ol' days when this thread was discussing the new Arri camera? Now it's about death skulls and microphone placement for recording guitar.:boxing_smiley:

 

[Eric Lange]

Ah, remember the good ol' days when this thread was discussing the new Arri camera? Now it's about death skulls and microphone placement for recording guitar.:boxing_smiley:

Cuz there's no "Off Topic" section for the Off Topic section lol...

 

[David Peterson]

I am also guessing that Arri customers might wonder how many years it will be until Arri successfully get their next gen prototype out of the doors. If Arri release their next camera before 2020 - twould be a bit of a bitter pill for their existing owners (especially if there is no upgrade or trade in).

I'm guessing the next gen Arri sensor will for the first few years be S35 4K.

Thus Arri Alexa LF owners can at least feel happy about having a larger sensor than the next gen Arri

 

[Sabovic Adis]

@Šabović
Did you mic this? That is going to sound like shit Mate. Mic needs to move about 12" up the neck or you're just going to hear muddy boom boom mush ;-)

Nah, man, I've always had my dedicated soundman...:rofl:

But You're right about mic placement. :thumbsup: