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 :)

Please help us all understand Alexa's high points.

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rob Ruffo

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Messages
2,493
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Montreal
Ok, so this is is not an invitation to Sanjin to express his love for Red. No offense to a dedicated forum user, but I think we know how you feel about this.

This is... Well yesterday a DP I do respect paid amazing amounts of money to rent an Alexa - no prores module yet so it means he will be shooting with a science project-like tethered affair - to shoot an ad.

I asked him why, and he really did not have a good answer 'Arri understands filmmaking" was all he said. To me this has no useful meaning at all.

So, other than brand, and other than a workflow (when the prores module will appear) that some claim is easier than dragging and dropping clips into a Premiere Pro CS5 timeline (not sure what could be easier than that really, but anyway...), or just using a Red Rocket to realtime transfer to whatever you like (again...) or even easier just hooking up a Nanoflash to off-cam clip playback in 1080p (Not ideal, but neither is Prores - it's far from a true raw format).

I'm not trying to be nasty here, I just want to understand what the real selling points are. Does it have better color? Does it really have more dynamic range? How much more?

In other words there must be some real, valid technical reason to pay so much more for this cam. I mean, the DPs I know are far from stupid, but this one still just doesn't get it, and would love to get a straight answer. If I get a good one I might rent it for projects that would need its specific tech advantages.

"To each his own", "they're both great cameras" (in which case, why ever chose the more expensive one?) or "horses for courses" is not useful information either. I would humbly request that people not say that in this thread. I fail to see how such statements help anyone make an informed technical decision about gear.
 
At ProVideo Coalition: My Love Affair with Alexa by Art Adams (who, I believe, owns two RED One cameras)

My dream HD camera records footage with log-encoded gamma to ProRes for a fast, easy and accessible post workflow and cost-effective color grading. It has the simplest control interface ever. It sees in the dark. And it’s built by a company whose gear I learned to trust early in my career when I started out as a camera assistant. The company is ARRI, and the camera is Alexa.
Click to expand...

This got lost in the carnage that was the No More Red Drives thread, but it still applies: people seem to love the LogC 12-bit ProRes 4444 option of the ARRI Alexa. I know RED hasn't committed to doing a similar Epic module, so why not ask AJA to do one? They've already got the tech in the Ki Pro, so it seems like a natural fit. Also, didn't one of the main guys at RED come from AJA? Or am I mis-remembering...
 
Rob Ruffo said:
Ok, so this is is not an invitation to Sanjin to express his love for Red. No offense to a dedicated forum user, but I think we know how you feel about this.

This is... Well yesterday a DP I do respect paid amazing amounts of money to rent an Alexa - no prores module yet so it means he will be shooting with a science project-like tethered affair - to shoot an ad.

I asked him why, and he really did not have a good answer 'Arri understands filmmaking" was all he said. To me this has no useful meaning at all.

So, other than brand, and other than a workflow (when the prores module will appear) that some claim is easier than dragging and dropping clips into a Premiere Pro CS5 timeline (not sure what could be easier than that really, but anyway...), or just using a Red Rocket to realtime transfer to whatever you like (again...) or even easier just hooking up a Nanoflash to off-cam clip playback in 1080p (Not ideal, but neither is Prores - it's far from a true raw format).

I'm not trying to be nasty here, I just want to understand what the real selling points are. Does it have better color? Does it really have more dynamic range? How much more?

In other words there must be some real, valid technical reason to pay so much more for this cam. I mean, the DPs I know are far from stupid, but this one still just doesn't get it, and would love to get a straight answer. If I get a good one I might rent it for projects that would need its specific tech advantages.

"To each his own", "they're both great cameras" (in which case, why ever chose the more expensive one?) or "horses for courses" is not useful information either. I would humbly request that people not say that in this thread. I fail to see how such statements help anyone make an informed technical decision about gear.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, Rob, I pretty much feel the same way.
 
Rob Ruffo said:
So, other than brand, and other than workflow
Click to expand...

That's kind of cheating, isn't it? I mean, those *are* legitimate reasons.

At this point, RED MX and Alexa are more or less "equivalent", so the choice is more like choosing Kodak vs. Fugi film stocks. From what I'm hearing, people find the Alexa comfortable to shoot, simple, and they really, *really*, REALLY like the look that you can get without much work.

It's hard (if not impossible) to get the same look out of the RED MX today, even though it is RAW. I believe that is due to the Redcode compression, not the sensor. We'll know for sure when we can try out the lossless 2.5:1 compression in the Epic, which is what I personally intend to shoot with 100% of the time. I *know* how wavelets work, and what they throw away, and it *does* matter. The ARRI Alexa can work with uncompressed data when doing the LogC 12-bit ProRes 422 conversion and that is likely where the image quality advantage is coming from today.

I could have bought either, and I chose to go with a Stage 2 Epic. I'm confident that the IQ balance will tip back towards RED once the Epic ships, and I think that overall, the Epic will have a much bigger impact worldwide than the Alexa. There are markets (motion fashion photography comes to mind) where the Alexa won't even be a player. And don't even get me started on RED's plans with the Monstro sensors. I am unbelievably excited about shooting with the 645 Monstro sensor.
 
Hi Rob, re your quest, a noble one, but.... I would humbly suggest that people being smart and experienced and talented has little to do with their logic or objectivity or preference for familiarity or "name brand" or much else. It might have a bearing and it might not. Some people bring the qualities of objective analysis to the forefront, others overlook what doesn't fit their viewpoint.

Of course I don't know the particular qualities of your DP, but some very great DPs make decisions that have little to do with "real,valid technical" reasons.

On the other hand, if pressed to do so (and even when not) people invent and mythologize "valid reasons" every day in all arenas of life and defend them -- often times in the face of hard evidence to the contrary.

And to state the obvious: cinemaphotography is as much art as science and "looks" and feels appeal to various personalities.

Throw into this mix a lot of mythology about Red and the fact that the camera has evolved a great deal in a very compressed time frame since most of that mythology was established, and well, perhaps some DPs may simply feel more comfortable and protected by the Arri name and its well-earned reputation.

I'm very curious myself whether you'll get much truly useful information that isn't already out there in terms of technical specs and tests provided by Arri and Red and others. I think, when it comes to very high end technology tools, it's almost impossible to purge or separate the human element. Which is why you get your "horses for courses" which you want to avoid.
 
Rob Ruffo said:
[ARRI Alex ProRes isn't] easier than dragging and dropping [RED] clips into a Premiere Pro CS5 timeline
Click to expand...

FWIW The verdict on Adobe CS5 seems to be that it's just as buggy as CS4; I doubt editing pros are going to be switching from Avid or FCP in droves anytime soon. (I'm not sure how RED footage is doing with MC5; personally, that's what I hope to use (with DaVinci Resolve for grading), assuming it works reliably.)

Against that, Apple ProRes is here today and works reliably for most people, most of the time. ProRes is desirable to *a lot* of producers, as well as Avid and FCP users, and not having to transcode is pretty big for a large segment of customers. Transcoding is a pain, especially when a quick turn around time is required.

(Yeah, yeah, you said you thought workflow was a non-issue, but...it's a "good" technical reason that RED really doesn't have a response for yet.)

P.s. I agree with Rod Bradley, too. Once Alexa and RED are identical, technically-speaking, people will still choose ARRI for personal reasons and vague, artistic reasons. There's nothing wrong with that.
 
Ok i had 1 commercial this Week and One Feature beginning Next Week who decided against alexa because of the non working prores feature.
Anyway I am sure both productions/DOPs will shoot alexa as soon as this prores feature will be enabled.

But of course I wanted to know the reasons.
This were the answers:
Arris 800 ASA will match my lightmeter.
Alexas body is better designed for cinestyle work.
The assecoires ( cables/monitoring/storage) will work in extreme temperatures because these are made under the laws of the European union.

inmho red does offer this too. But that's me, a happy red owner. And I doubt that Arri will handle the camera software problems as easy as they tell. The OVF Variant is not available I was told, sometime in the future.
Hoping for epic here, hoping for happy ACs with Epic and their modules.
 
Well, now I'm confused. First you're talking about using uncompressed Alexa material and in the same sentence you're mentioning Prores. Prores is compressed lossy codec. RAW with wavelet copression is a better way to go, especially using loseless 2.5:1.
"Apple ProRes is here today and works reliably for most people, most of the time."
That's another statement, that I would have to disagree again. Prores is a mess, when it comes to gamma and video levels. It is such a mess, that D-Vision had to hire a PhD, just to figure out how reliably do a simple roundtrip for FilmMaster (yes, it's coming, despite FilmMaster running on Windows). Same goes for FilmLight with Kompressor. I wonder how Resolve deals with this problem. So, Prores is not that easy to do...
 
Here in Ger, the budgets are low, in my experience people doesn't want Alexa because of Arriraw, they assume having a box cabled to a cam will add pain to the shooting.
They hope for the pro res module,
But there is emmerich too, shooting Anonymous with an Alexa cabled to a box. But he could have shot the same movie with 35 mm too, if he wanted, so shooting with a big box attached to his cam shouldn't be a problem for him.
 
Quoting Roger Deakins:

"The Arri specs on the Alexa seem totally honest and accurate. I was testing the camera yesterday and I found it the first (and right now the only) digital camera to produce an image with the resolution and range as one captured on film."

there has to be a reason.
 
But they are comparing themselve to a 3 Year old Beta Camera:)
Guess there i̇s a reason David "Mr. I Know more about Equipment than every dude on my Set" fincher uses epic.
 
jake blackstone said:
Well, now I'm confused. First you're talking about using uncompressed Alexa material and in the same sentence you're mentioning Prores. Prores is compressed lossy codec. RAW with wavelet copression is a better way to go, especially using loseless 2.5:1.
Click to expand...

Sure, I can explain myself better.

Suppose, as a producer, you want to use LogC 12-bit ProRes 4444-encoded footage as your intermediate "master". With the Alexa, that footage will be created from an uncompressed RAW format, in camera, with no transcode. With RED One MX today, you can only create a ProRes file from an *already* heavily-compressed master (with a wavelet codec); you can't create your ProRes 4444 master from the original uncompressed RAW footage. Once Epic ships, you'll have the option to do that with RED footage as well, using the 2.5:1 lossless wavelet encoding.

My hypothesis is this: RED footage today is basically somewhat less than great in rendering detail and highlights in skin tones. Everything else (to my eyes) looks great when properly graded. Skin tones could be better. Knowing how wavelet compression works, the compression is hurting the skin tones worse because the colors themselves are in such a narrow band and dynamic range. The compression itself can't "compress the skin less"; that's just not how it works, so valuable detail is being lost there. Skin is a *bitch* to record properly, period. It's just hard. Not only is skin a very complex material, it's also something that humans are *really* good at recognizing. I think with Epic's 2.5:1 lossless capture, RED's MX sensor will be able to capture gorgeous skin, easily as good as the Alexa.

jake blackstone said:
"Apple ProRes is here today and works reliably for most people, most of the time."
That's another statement, that I would have to disagree again. Prores is a mess, when it comes to gamma and video levels. It is such a mess, that D-Vision had to hire a PhD, just to figure out how reliably do a simple roundtrip for FilmMaster (yes, it's coming, despite FilmMaster running on Windows). Same goes for FilmLight with Kompressor. I wonder how Resolve deals with this problem. So, Prores is not that easy to do...
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you, but that's not the perception of producers (and they are the ones dictating this in many, if not most, cases). I've written about the problems with ProRes elsewhere, specifically the gamma issue you mentioned. That's more of a QuickTime problem; the codec itself is solid.
 
I had a brief look at Alexa a couple of weeks ago and one thing that particularly struck me was the legendary Arri build quality, precision and forethought you'd expect from fine German engineering. It's beautifully made with attention to detail. All attachment points, the base plate, bridge, the handle, view finder mount and integration of accessories...are superb.
 
Pawel Achtel said:
I had a brief look at Alexa a couple of weeks ago and one thing that particularly struck me was the legendary Arri build quality, precision and forethought you'd expect from fine German engineering. It's beautifully made with attention to detail. All attachment points, the base plate, bridge, the handle, view finder mount and integration of accessories...are superb.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Arri listened. Will RED?
 
Jamie Metzger said:
Arri listened. Will RED?
Click to expand...

I think so. The two companies are clearly the leaders and leapfrogging each other in a fast-paced race. I'm expecting the Epic will attempt to match Alexa's mechanical build quality and engineering and Arri will come with a 4k+ upgrade to Alexa soon after that.
 
Erich Ocean said:
I've written about the problems with ProRes elsewhere, specifically the gamma issue you mentioned. That's more of a QuickTime problem; the codec itself is solid.
Click to expand...

It's like saying, the car is great, who cares, that the engine is from lawnmower:-)
 
jake blackstone said:
It's like saying, the car is great, who cares, that the engine is from lawnmower:-)
Click to expand...

QuickTime needs to die. It's so far past it's expiration date. It's funny, because it's basically the *only* technology still around from the pre-Mac OS X days. You could tell that project went off into the weeds 12 years ago; they used to brag at WWDC about how many "new APIs" were in each revision. I think that's how they paid programmers in that division. The net result? Huge amounts of technical debt and a complete inability to upgrade QuickTime for 64-bit.

QuickTime is definitely Apple's own, home-grown version of Adobe Flash. I'm sure it pisses Steve off to no end. :-)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top