"Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" - Sony Venice 2 + FX3 - Why Not A1/Z8/V-Raptor?

[Zack Birlew]

Hey, everybody, just a little puzzled after reading that "Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" used the Sony Venice 2 for 8K production and then opted for the FX3 for lightweight camera work for things like the bicycle scenes in the town. The point of question is that if a lightweight camera was needed for those scenes, why not keep the production at 8K with something like the Sony A1 or even opt for a Nikon Z8/Z9 or even a RED V-Raptor? Granted, the V-Raptor X would have been ideal but since the film was made between 2023 and 2024 it probably wasn't out in time. Ever since we crossed from HD to 4K+, decisions like these seem to be made regularly these days with cross-resolution workflows rather than keeping resolutions the same across the board. While this isn't always apparent, one example where it stands out as a problem is "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" with the drop from 5K RED footage to HD GoPro footage in the river barrel scene.

I know the FX3 has made waves with "The Creator", but surely the Sony A1 in 8K wouldn't be considered a lesser option and the Nikon Z8/Z9 cameras making waves as well should have been up for consideration if 8K was the goal. So what is behind these decisions? Will we really need to wait for an FX camera with the A1's 8K sensor in order for it to be considered for production? Is there still a stigma with using mirrorless cameras on production? General thoughts?

 

[Dustin Schmidt]

Hey, everybody, just a little puzzled after reading that "Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" used the Sony Venice 2 for 8K production and then opted for the FX3 for lightweight camera work for things like the bicycle scenes in the town. The point of question is that if a lightweight camera was needed for those scenes, why not keep the production at 8K with something like the Sony A1 or even opt for a Nikon Z8/Z9 or even a RED V-Raptor? Granted, the V-Raptor X would have been ideal but since the film was made between 2023 and 2024 it probably wasn't out in time. Ever since we crossed from HD to 4K+, decisions like these seem to be made regularly these days with cross-resolution workflows rather than keeping resolutions the same across the board. While this isn't always apparent, one example where it stands out as a problem is "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" with the drop from 5K RED footage to HD GoPro footage in the river barrel scene.

I know the FX3 has made waves with "The Creator", but surely the Sony A1 in 8K wouldn't be considered a lesser option and the Nikon Z8/Z9 cameras making waves as well should have been up for consideration if 8K was the goal. So what is behind these decisions? Will we really need to wait for an FX camera with the A1's 8K sensor in order for it to be considered for production? Is there still a stigma with using mirrorless cameras on production? General thoughts?

I just got off a shoot where we used the Burano for our main camera and the FX3 for some specialty POV shots and a shot pushing through a backless oven. We used the FX3 because it was small enough to be rigged over the top of a pie coming out of the oven.

Could we have used something like a Komodo for the specialty shots? Probably. But the FX3 was "good enough". We're at the point where the quick one-off shot from perhaps a "lesser" camera can cut into a larger edit and it doesn't stand out the way it may have in the past.

 

[M Harvey]

Hey, everybody, just a little puzzled after reading that "Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" used the Sony Venice 2 for 8K production and then opted for the FX3 for lightweight camera work for things like the bicycle scenes in the town. The point of question is that if a lightweight camera was needed for those scenes, why not keep the production at 8K with something like the Sony A1 or even opt for a Nikon Z8/Z9 or even a RED V-Raptor? Granted, the V-Raptor X would have been ideal but since the film was made between 2023 and 2024 it probably wasn't out in time. Ever since we crossed from HD to 4K+, decisions like these seem to be made regularly these days with cross-resolution workflows rather than keeping resolutions the same across the board. While this isn't always apparent, one example where it stands out as a problem is "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" with the drop from 5K RED footage to HD GoPro footage in the river barrel scene.

I know the FX3 has made waves with "The Creator", but surely the Sony A1 in 8K wouldn't be considered a lesser option and the Nikon Z8/Z9 cameras making waves as well should have been up for consideration if 8K was the goal. So what is behind these decisions? Will we really need to wait for an FX camera with the A1's 8K sensor in order for it to be considered for production? Is there still a stigma with using mirrorless cameras on production? General thoughts?

I don’t know what went into the decision, but they very likely tested before making the choice.

Could be as simple as preferring to unify on a brand (with the assumption that color science is related). And I’d guess the FX3 is easy to rent and familiar to the camera dept that has to support it (vs the A1 or other options).

I doubt 8k was among the top 5 priorities for the choice, especially for these brief shots.

 

[robomartian]

"What's that big grey camera everyone is always using on set",
"The Sony Venice?"
"Yea whatever its called. We'll get that to start with."
"The original Venice or Venice 2?"
"Well just get whichever one is better. And we need a smaller version for those harder shots, what was that little camera everyone was talking about that they used for the Creator?"
"The Sony FX3"
"Oh yes put that on the list as well."
That probably sums up the conversation on the cameras.