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 :)

Why commercials are shot only on REDs and Alexas

D

Diego Gagliardi

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2017
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
LA/OC
Website
diegogagliardi.com
I have a question,

RED and Arri are predominantly used on both features and commercials. In fact, all commercial shoots I've been on have used RED Epics and Alexas. Why aren't commercials shot on Canon C300 mkiis, C500s, Sony FS7s, etc. I love RED's color science and looks so cinematic, other cameras don't have this look, is this why? Been wondering for years.
 
I think for commercials, a lot has to do with the freedom to be artistic and stylize with slow motion and VFX. So the high frame rate and high resolution of RED cameras help for that. Along with the small camera body that you can set up quickly and put anywhere.
 
I can't think of a better digital camera for commercials than a RED. Even the EPIC - old tech now - would be a better tool than anything else outside of RED's product line. I'm amazed that people use anything else.
 
Commercials are shot on the camera that will provide the best image and the most options. They are usually higher budget so the cost is less of a concern. I use RED for these reasons, I've also used a go pro, and I've seen the Mark Toia is selling a set of A7's he used on a spot because they were the best camera.
 
A lot of it has to do with comfort level as well. Everyone gets familiar with what kind of image they can get from a particular camera. But there are a myriad of reasons why a camera might be chosen for a particular technical reason too. REDs are often chosen because of resolution, especially with VFX heavy commercials. Frame rates are another one but honestly, if it's a heavy amount of high speed, especially anything over 90fps, Phantom is often in the conversation as well. And other cameras are definitely used. C300/C500 get some play. A7 series gets some play as well as F55/F65. I'm sure some commercials are being shot on Panasonic Varicam35. And some still shoot on film.

But, yes I would say a high percentage of the $50K+ commercials gets shot on RED or Alexa.
 
As Steve said, a lot of it has to do with familiarity. You generally have a shorter prep time on commercials compared to a feature so having a camera that most 1st AC's are very familiar with helps. I'd say the Alexa family are used more often on commercials in LA, but of course a good number of Red cameras get used as well.
 
its 50/50 for me, i own both cause some clients like RED and others like ARRI MINI. Sony is another company that stays busy too. The mini is killing it right now on commercials and my RED is killing it on music videos
 
Especially in TVC world with short turnarounds workflow is an issue and many production companies like to stay with what they know and what they are comfortable with. I have had great results with the Sony F55 and I am sure the Varicam would also perform well but I am rarely asked to use these cameras. Generally Arri and Red are chosen because they have a good reputation for performance with proven and familiar post paths.
 
Thanks for the answers, I am in a situation where I don't know whether to invest in a Red Scarlet-W because an EPIC seems so out of my affordability. I absolutely love REDs and for the price of the ScarletW seems so affordable compared to the mini at such higher prices. I am starting out and nobody will give me a chance in shooting a commercial as a young DP so I want to get my own RED package and shoot my own stuff. It's a tough place to be I suppose.

I just don't see the Canon C300 mkii a strong enough image for broadcast commercials, IMO, the DR of the C300 mkii does not even come close to the RED/Alexa and it looks like video to me. Anyone else think this?
 
Diego Gagliardi said:
Thanks for the answers, I am in a situation where I don't know whether to invest in a Red Scarlet-W because an EPIC seems so out of my affordability. I absolutely love REDs and for the price of the ScarletW seems so affordable compared to the mini at such higher prices. I am starting out and nobody will give me a chance in shooting a commercial as a young DP so I want to get my own RED package and shoot my own stuff. It's a tough place to be I suppose.

I just don't see the Canon C300 mkii a strong enough image for broadcast commercials, IMO, the DR of the C300 mkii does not even come close to the RED/Alexa and it looks like video to me. Anyone else think this?
Click to expand...

I have both an Epic-W and a C300 II, and while I really love the C300 for its ease-of-use and simplicity, the Red is definitely better suited to commercial and more cinematic work. I typically only use the C300 for doc, corporate, or low-budget music video work (all of which is a great match for that little guy).

Honestly, if I were in your shoes, I would probably get the Raven. I know it has some limitations compared to the Scarlet-W, but if you're just starting out in your career, I would advise that you minimize the impact of gear purchases on your wallet. An unused camera is more a liability than a blessing, and in my experience, because the camera is only a small element in what it takes to make good work, it typically gets used less than you might guess when you're making the purchase. I'm just speaking from personal experience here.
 
Diego, I would recommend you analyze a few things before making any investments.

1. Where are you at as a DP? You mention just starting out, but maybe you just mean professionally. How confident are you with your cinematography skills at this moment?
2. What is your market like? Is it saturated? Is it highly competitive?
3. What will you do for lighting and grip? This is a highly underestimated part of the process. RED and Alexa are great cameras but they really need light. I think this is a shock for some who get these cameras expecting they will make magic by turning them on. Not saying that's the case with you, just saying it's good to know that these cameras really only shine when you light them really well. So, if you are just starting out, I would carefully consider how you plan to light, whether it's working with gaffers you know or maybe you already have your own gear and can learn/experiment with that.

If you must own versus rent, I would look at getting into a camera you can afford. Even if that is a Scarlet MX at the beginning. Or a Raven/Scarlet W if that investment is not too risky. Let the work shine, and then you will start getting bigger jobs that will allow for the upgrade to even better camera technology.

Just my .02
 
Steve Sherrick said:
I think this is a shock for some who get these cameras expecting they will make magic by turning them on. Not saying that's the case with you, just saying it's good to know that these cameras really only shine when you light them really well.
Click to expand...

I love what Steve said, and I just want to emphasize that ALL cameras only shine when you light them really well. You would be better served shooting on a 5D with a well-lit scene than shooting on a Weapon with no thought for lighting.

Lighting well doesn't always mean using a full lighting package or anything. You can light scenes with available light; it's just a lot more difficult. Whatever way you make it work, just remember that it's the light that makes things look good, not the camera.
 
Diego Gagliardi said:
I have a question,

RED and Arri are predominantly used on both features and commercials. In fact, all commercial shoots I've been on have used RED Epics and Alexas. Why aren't commercials shot on Canon C300 mkiis, C500s, Sony FS7s, etc. I love RED's color science and looks so cinematic, other cameras don't have this look, is this why? Been wondering for years.
Click to expand...

Alexa has the look closest to 35mm, Red has the best camera for post production options, meaning, more resolution, easy RAW file handling and so on. The other cameras are good, but why use them? Most commercials (high end) are shot by cinematographers working in high end cinema where Alexa and Red dominates, so it's nothing strange they use the same on commercials. My thought is that the other cameras just aren't good enough in comparison. I know the Sonys are good, but I dunno, maybe people feel they are too clinically clean or something. The biggest thing is dynamic range and that's where Red and Arri shines the most.

That said, I know commercials shot on other cameras, even BlackMagics, but mostly they're in a mid-range budget.
 
I own a decent lighting system, but I can rent lights if the job requires more. I thank you Steve for your advice, much appreciate it. I agree with you, lighting a scene no matter the camera can make or break the look. I guess what I see so often with people using the other cameras, Sony/C300/etc is that the lighting plain sucks or there lack of lighting. What I see is the Art Direction in lower budget commercials or promos is not there and they always shoot people on bare walls or light spills everywhere and just looks like crap. I've been experimenting with my lights at home, at work, with friends for a while now and feel confident I can light decently. You're right about having gaffers/friends that will work with you, I guess I don't have anyone, I've done it by myself, which is so hard to do. I wouldn't mind getting a RAVEN but I heard they are not available anymore so I was looking at the Scarlet-W. Right now I shoot with Blackmagic URSA Mini 4.6K and Canon C100 mkii as well as GH4. But I hate that the Canon has NO color, it dies while grading, can't really push much and having only 1080p is limiting. I work mostly on digital content but starting to work more on broadcast and where I would like to head towards, but happy to continue online digital to get my training. I"m attending ASC Masterclass next month hoping to gain much knowledge in lighting and learning from ASC cinematographers.

I shot this with my C100mkii
https://vimeo.com/190508451

But want to play with the big boys, tired of finishing 9th and 10th all the time, hope you understand what I mean.
 
Diego Gagliardi said:
Right now I shoot with Blackmagic URSA Mini 4.6K and Canon C100 mkii as well as GH4. But I hate that the Canon has NO color, it dies while grading, can't really push much and having only 1080p is limiting.
Click to expand...
I have had good luck with clients shooting on the C100, but only when it's carefully exposed and well-lit. Generally, there's enough range to get where I need to go in Resolve, but the 8-bit limitation is the biggest problem. The camera also clips too early for me. The C300 Mark II is workable in 10-bit mode.
 
When you can afford to rent a $300k G&E package, you can afford to rent a $100k camera package. Heck, both are way cheaper than the crew's time, let alone the talent's.

That's all it boils down to from my perspective. Higher end is better and in the long run it saves money starting with better rather than paying to fix things down the line. The result's not gonna be that different with that much talent involved unless you need one particular feature or another, slow motion or something. That doesn't mean higher end is better for smaller productions, of course. I'd never want to shoot ENG with an Alexa (maybe an Amira).

You can create exceptional footage with a dSLR. When the 7D first came out, it was pretty popular on national ads because it was fast to use and good enough. The Red still took 90 seconds or more to boot and was a huge pain in post and film was even slower. There are plenty of C300s used in big ads, but I have to admit that it does not hold up in post like Red or Arri. I would still rather have 20 days of shooting with a C300 and a small crew than a day of shooting with an Alexa and a big one (depends on the project).

Now that Alexas are basically free to rent and every production company owns at least one.... there are not so many 7Ds. Doesn't mean you can't do more with less. Just means that when the crew's time costs a lot more than gear, you're gonna splurge on gear to save time and money.

Time is the secret weapon that lone gun productions have on their side. Well, lone gun productions and Kubrick. :) Minimum crew, minimum gear, maximum time is the indie recipe to beat the big time. Because time is the one thing you can afford and they can't.

That said, the Alexa and current-gen Red really are quite good.
 
The cost difference per day between using one camera body or another is quite slim in relation to the total production cost. The production cost is also quite slim compared to the broadcasting costs for a commercial. So saving on the camera while shooting does not make much sense when commercials are usually shot in very few shooting days.

As the team gathers for such short time, as sometimes only for just one intense day. Producers, DP´s and those involved strive to avoid mishaps by sticking to standards / things that everyone knows how it works.

But sure, there are commercials shot on RED, phantom, Varicam, black magic etc. But when renting gear it does not make much difference in the total. 90% of the commercials I work on use alexas as main camera I would love to see more red but simply I think the camera is a bit too complex to fit into those scenarios the team simply are afraid of it.
 
Björn Benckert said:
The cost difference per day between using one camera body or another is quite slim in relation to the total production cost. The production cost is also quite slim compared to the broadcasting costs for a commercial. So saving on the camera while shooting does not make much sense when commercials are usually shot in very few shooting days.

As the team gathers for such short time, as sometimes only for just one intense day. Producers, DP´s and those involved strive to avoid mishaps by sticking to standards / things that everyone knows how it works.

But sure, there are commercials shot on RED, phantom, Varicam, black magic etc. But when renting gear it does not make much difference in the total. 90% of the commercials I work on use alexas as main camera I would love to see more red but simply I think the camera is a bit too complex to fit into those scenarios the team simply are afraid of it.
Click to expand...

This seems just about spot on. I believe the CW is budget $250k/day just for production on a national ad. And that's not even the high end, not remotely. So if an Alexa is $600/day and a GH4 is $150/day that difference isn't even gas money. The cost of the camera is irrelevant, so why not pick the best.

One question: I understand your enthusiasm for Red's technical achievements, but do you find it slows you down in post, particularly in comp, when you're working in 8k or even 4k? I assume your deliverables are still strictly 1080p. Does Flame handle 8k or even 4k in real time?

On the lower end (After Effects, to be honest...) 4k is more than 4 times slower than 2k and noise reduction and 2D/3D crashes constantly. Lower end servers cannot handle 4k and files need to be transcoded from DPX to ProRes and stored locally and even then even playback isn't real time. The turnover in ads is fast... super super fast... tv, too. Have you found with Flame you don't have to worry about the increased horsepower or do your clients give you 2k/1080p plates to work from?

Not trying to start a flame war, just curious. ProRes seems to be the main reason the Alexa gets all the love. I mean you get tv series shooting 422 rather than 444 just to save money on storage space, plus the convenience is just great.
 
Björn Benckert said:
I would love to see more red but simply I think the camera is a bit too complex to fit into those scenarios the team simply are afraid of it.
Click to expand...

My general observation is that many people just don't use Red because they don't care to learn. I find it a bit arrogant to hear Red bashings from professionals who never cared to learn that tool. I've been involved with productions where the cinematographer had to be convinced and where I've been consulting just to convince the cinematographer, because he might have had a bad trip back with Red One built 15. In my opinion there are too many arrogant professionals who trash-talk anything they haven't used just to keep using what they are using. I've yet heard any good reason for why Alexa is so dominant within Swedish films and commercials. So far I've only seen people use Alexa either because they are used to it, because someone told them it's "best" or because they have this extreme opinion that anything else isn't as "god-like" as the Alexa is. There's a fan-boyism all over it that's extremely tiresome. Even if I'm very much into using Red more than Alexa, I've been doing a lot of Alexa projects as well because I love that camera for all the strengths it have over Red, but it's not better, it's just another camera giving another result and different options. However, the "reasons" why more people use Alexa instead of other cameras has so far been very unconvincing as professional standpoints.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top