PDA

View Full Version : Shane Hurlbut: C300 VS Alexa



Simon Shasha
04-06-2012, 02:52 PM
LINK: http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2012/04/dueling-canon-c300-and-arri-alexa/

PappasArts
04-06-2012, 03:14 PM
C300 and Alexa Comparison on Game of Thrones Promo

Watch in 1080p.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pneu6CDBFUk


Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS

gonzo_entertainment
04-06-2012, 03:16 PM
Very nice indeed. haven't seen then up for rental locally yet, but I may try one out for a weekend when they show up.

mcgeedigital
04-06-2012, 03:21 PM
C300 and Alexa Comparison on Game of Thrones Promo

Watch in 1080p.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pneu6CDBFUk


Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS

Sorry, but that Alexa footage could have been graded MUCH better.

cowpunk52
04-06-2012, 03:23 PM
Sorry, but that Alexa footage could have been graded MUCH better.

Personally, I feel the same about the C300 footage! But, you know what they say about opinions, right? ;)

PappasArts
04-06-2012, 03:35 PM
Sorry, but that Alexa footage could have been graded MUCH better.

That's possibly the creative look they went for, not necessarily an error or bad grading. The Alexa's got better DR, skin tones and roll off to name a few. Actors faces look great on Alexa. Of course the filter package was different on these, so that needs to be considered as well. Price aside from a rental POV, Alexa has a stunning image as does the C300- it's a fine camera, just out of it's class up against Alexa in many areas not just image.



Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS

Kholi
04-06-2012, 03:43 PM
Seeing the C300 up against Alexa like that makes it look really bad.

Nowhere near the same quality... what happened to the baby Alexa claims? =[

cowpunk52
04-06-2012, 04:05 PM
Seeing the C300 up against Alexa like that makes it look really bad.

Nowhere near the same quality... what happened to the baby Alexa claims? =[

Are you kidding? You do understand that there is a massive price difference between the two cameras, right? And, just judging from what I see in this test, there's no reason why a C300 couldn't cut in quite well as a b-cam to the Alexa. Of course, I'm not the only one who thinks so since the camera has been routinely used as a second cam to Alexa's since they've been out.

I've personally seen it used that way on a few occasions, but you could always just ask Ron Howard (https://twitter.com/#!/RealRonHoward/status/182539211516280832)

Kholi
04-06-2012, 04:27 PM
Are you kidding? You do understand that there is a massive price difference between the two cameras, right? And, just judging from what I see in this test, there's no reason why a C300 couldn't cut in quite well as a b-cam to the Alexa. Of course, I'm not the only one who thinks so since the camera has been routinely used as a second cam to Alexa's since they've been out.

I've personally seen it used that way on a few occasions, but you could always just ask Ron Howard (https://twitter.com/#!/RealRonHoward/status/182539211516280832)

Wait, what!? How much does Alexa cost?!?!?!

But now that I'm no longer kidding, it is a comparison video. One that was done objectively. I don't see the baby Alexa claim from this test, and it looks bad up against the camera. I was personally expecting it to be slightly better than what's represented.

Not even sure why the Ron Howard link was necessary. But, I had no idea who he was before you posted that, so I learned something new.

cowpunk52
04-06-2012, 04:31 PM
Nice job editing your post quickly after that passive aggressive comment (something to the effect of "why do people need famous filmmakers to validate their purchases"). Now I understand why people complain about you as a moderator.

cowpunk52
04-06-2012, 04:33 PM
Not even sure why the Ron Howard link was necessary.

The point was to illustrate and give a real-world example that large Alexa productions do, in fact, currently use the C300 as a b-cam. It's fair that you think it looks terrible next to an Arri, but many many professionals actually don't, and that's what I was showing.

Kholi
04-06-2012, 04:37 PM
The point was to illustrate and give a real-world example that large Alexa productions do, in fact, currently use the C300 as a b-cam. It's fair that you think it looks terrible next to an Arri, but many many professionals actually don't, and that's what I was showing.

No, it's not fair. Because, once again, by stating what I saw my case was jumped and the comment inflated beyond anything more than just an opinion.


Nice job editing your post quickly after that passive aggressive comment (something to the effect of "why do people need famous filmmakers to validate their purchases"). Now I understand why people complain about you as a moderator.

People complain because I don't agree and I openly state it. I corrected my post because I knew what was coming, and it still came. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I know plenty of people using the camera, never said it was a bad camera, just said it doesn't look like baby Alexa, which was a huge claim.

The camera test was put out for EVERYONE to see, and EVERYONE to form an opinion. There will be ones that some people agree with, ones that some people don't.

NeedCreative
04-06-2012, 04:40 PM
Kholi, that Alexa package is close to $100,000 not including a crew to run the thing. The C300 is $16,000 and can easily be handled by 1 or 2 people.

The image isn't close between them as much as it IS close, if that makes any sense. In detail levels especially, the C300 profile CUs looked quite amazing. I was a little disturbed by the purple blooming on the C300 shots when a white shirt was in frame, but I think a little color correction and/or exposing a bit lower could have solved that. I don't think they cared anyway, as the C300 wasn't used on those shots. "Baby Alexa" is pushing it (Alexa's highlight roll off and overall +2 stops of DR definitely give it an edge). But the C300 is definitely good enough to intercut with it as a B cam. They can be pretty close; it's just the Alexa will always have the edge. It better for 6x the cost.

Kholi
04-06-2012, 04:45 PM
Kholi, that Alexa package is close to $100,000 not including a crew to run the thing. The C300 is $16,000 and can easily be handled by 1 or 2 people.

Totally understand that. Absolutely. Shane posted a video comparison, that's all I commented on.



The image isn't close between them as much as it IS close, if that makes any sense. In detail levels especially, the C300 profile CUs looked quite amazing. I was a little disturbed by the purple blooming on the C300 shots when a white shirt was in frame, but I think a little color correction and/or exposing a bit lower could have solved that. I don't think they cared anyway, as the C300 wasn't used on those shots. "Baby Alexa" is pushing it (Alexa's highlight roll off and overall +2 stops of DR definitely give it an edge). But the C300 is definitely good enough to intercut with it as a B cam. They can be pretty close; it's just the Alexa will always have the edge. It better for 6x the cost.

And TOTALLY agree here. Couldn't say anything opposite this post, and you're saying what I'm thinking: baby Alexa is a stretch. When I hear Baby Alexa I immediately go "Oh, looks like Alexa good".

I've seen the color fringe/bloom before, and recently saw people commenting on a video that had it through and through. I thought it was from shooting wide open but suppose not. Have you been able to correct that out of footage?

Jester2138
04-06-2012, 04:46 PM
Now I understand why people complain about you as a moderator.

Who complains about Kholi as a moderator? That's silly, he's one of the best on here. With all due respect, you're the one attacking him for having a different opinion. Not vice versa.

Personally, I think this "test" did a horrible job on the Alexa. It was even out of focus on one shot! It was practically set-up to fail and still looks way better (as it should $$$$).

cowpunk52
04-06-2012, 05:08 PM
No, it's not fair. Because, once again, by stating what I saw my case was jumped and the comment inflated beyond anything more than just an opinion.

I apologize for making you feel that I was jumping on your case. Like you, when I have a strongly opposing opinion, I don't keep it to myself. When you come on a particular camera's thread and say "nope, looks like crap," you have to be ready for people to fire back, disagree, back up their own claims, and want to know how you back up yours.




People complain because I don't agree and I openly state it. I corrected my post because I knew what was coming, and it still came.

I don't think it's the differing opinion that will make people upset; it's a veiled insult like what you had posted, and you know very well that's exactly what that was. But at least you had the good nature to edit it out quickly.


Couldn't say anything opposite this post, and you're saying what I'm thinking: baby Alexa is a stretch. When I hear Baby Alexa I immediately go "Oh, looks like Alexa good".

Actually, I whole-heartedly agree with this. But I never thought that 'baby Alexa' actually meant just as good as the Alexa. To me, it always meant that it would be a great b-cam. Obviously not as good, but plenty acceptable as a cutaway or alternate angle acquisition camera. To me, if it were to actually 'look really bad,' then it wouldn't be an acceptable b-cam for professional use next to an Alexa, and that's what I had a differing opinion about.

cowpunk52
04-06-2012, 05:14 PM
Who complains about Kholi as a moderator?.
That was probably too harsh, and I put it in because I was a little butt-hurt at Kholi's original remark toward me about needing my purchase validated from successful filmmakers. I've noticed one or two other forum members that have expressed a little dissatisfaction on a couple of other threads, but I'm sure he could tell you more about them.


you're the one attacking him for having a different opinion. Not vice versa.

Ask Kholi about it, he's the one that changed his post.

Kholi
04-06-2012, 05:18 PM
I apologize if for making you feel that I was jumping on your case. Like you, when I have a strongly opposing opinion, I don't keep it to myself. When you come on a particular camera's thread and say "nope, looks like crap," you have to be ready for people to fire back, disagree, back up their own claims, and want to know how you back up yours.


Well, it was a versus thread. And, we all know how that goes.



I don't think it's the differing opinion that will make people upset; it's a veiled insult like what you had posted, and you know very well that's exactly what that was. But at least you had the good nature to edit it out quickly.

Well, the backlash came before I posted that (and edited it)...

I mean, of course I know how much an Alexa costs. You don't think that was blatantly insulting? LOL.

but the inquiry wasn't backhanded, it was genuine: every time a versus thread comes up, someone--without fail, needs to let everyone know that so and so is using the camera to do this or that. What's the point?

Just because one major director uses a Go Pro to capture his monumental scene doesn't mean much more than that's the choice he made. Is it done to invalidate other people's opinions on the boards? I'm sincerely confused as to why that matters or people do it.

That's why I posed the question, but the timing would've definitely left it to look like something else.

Either way, though.

PappasArts
04-06-2012, 05:25 PM
I have no problem with saying "Baby Alexa" ... The words alone say enough.

A baby is not an Adult ( that's obvious ). Yes it's a human, smaller in size, less capable as its adult counterparts- Not expected to compete at the same level as an adult, nor expected to do so. However they share similarities, like organs, hands, feet, eyeballs etc. Not a replacement for an adult. However a baby can coexist with adults......

That's what "Baby Alexa" means....


I've shot on both, and the two are awesome, and I don't for second mix them up as I know what I would be in store for from either one.


Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS

Kholi
04-06-2012, 05:27 PM
A baby is not an Adult ( that's obvious ). Yes it's a human, smaller in size, less capable as its adult counterparts- Not expected to compete at the same level as an adult, nor expected to do so. However they share similarities, like organs, hands, feet, eyeballs etc.


Your breakdown of a baby's components was horrific in my imagination, for some reason.

Do not want children, now.

Thanks Pappas. lol

cowpunk52
04-06-2012, 05:29 PM
I mean, of course I know how much an Alexa costs. You don't think that was blatantly insulting? LOL.
Fair enough. It's a fine line. I meant it as a rhetorical question and not as an insult, but I readily accept that it could easily be seen that way. Apologies.


but the inquiry wasn't backhanded, it was genuine: every time a versus thread comes up, someone--without fail, needs to let everyone know that so and so is using the camera to do this or that. What's the point?

Just because one major director uses a Go Pro to capture his monumental scene doesn't mean much more than that's the choice he made. Is it done to invalidate other people's opinions on the boards? I'm sincerely confused as to why that matters or people do it.

I don't think it's meant to invalidate someone else's opinion as much as it's meant to reinforce another opinion. If I can link to a photo taken from the set of "Rush," on which a lot of money is on the line and which is being shot on Alexa, and show that the C300 is being used as a b-cam, then it reinforces the notion that the C300 doesn't actually look terrible next to the Alexa. Because if it did, if people with the money thought that the C300 wasn't up to the task, why would they be putting that pile of cash on the line?

I guess semantically, by reinforcing one opinion, that automatically means you're trying to invalidate the opposing one, though. I mean, that's the whole point of debate, right?

PappasArts
04-06-2012, 05:33 PM
Your breakdown of a baby's components was horrific in my imagination, for some reason.

Do not want children, now.

Thanks Pappas. lol


Lol.... Sorry about that... :-D

Ian-T
04-06-2012, 05:47 PM
My thoughts.... I thought both did not look all that great. They both have good detail...but the oversharpened video look on the C300 always take me out. The skin tone on the Alexa looked decent....but a bit smoothed over in certain shots. I've seen many many Alexa footage (and that show is one of my current favorites) but these shots didn't do it any justice. I don't doubt that the C300 would be a good "B" cam....but in this example...if I were to nitpick....we could start with how the colors did not match between the two cameras (that was the very first thing that stuck out to me). And finally....


....what happened to homegirl's bleach blond hair? I mean...talk about being thrown a monkey's wrench. Geez!!! I'm gonna need some time to myself....the horror. :-P

Erik Naso
04-06-2012, 06:10 PM
Weird test video. The Alexa looked soft and off balance and the C300 was sharper and more balanced. I know better, but it's hard to say anything positive with this test. I have seen amazing footage from both cameras so this really didn't do justice to either. I'm sure it helped get some blog hits. :)

David G. Smith
04-06-2012, 06:25 PM
Wait a minute, what is the "Baby Alexa"? I am going to be a Noob and not do a Google search, but I thought there was there is the Alexa (Momma Alexa) and the Alexa Studio (Poppa Alexa)... so what is the Baby Alexa?

cowpunk52
04-06-2012, 06:43 PM
Wait a minute, what is the "Baby Alexa"? I am going to be a Noob and not do a Google search, but I thought there was there is the Alexa (Momma Alexa) and the Alexa Studio (Poppa Alexa)... so what is the Baby Alexa?

It's just a colloquial term that some people (or marketing team) dubbed on the C300.

PappasArts
04-06-2012, 06:55 PM
Wait a minute, what is the "Baby Alexa"? I am going to be a Noob and not do a Google search, but I thought there was there is the Alexa (Momma Alexa) and the Alexa Studio (Poppa Alexa)... so what is the Baby Alexa?


Wait tell you see Sister Alexa at NAB. :-)......

Amr Rahmy
04-06-2012, 08:52 PM
And TOTALLY agree here. Couldn't say anything opposite this post, and you're saying what I'm thinking: baby Alexa is a stretch. When I hear Baby Alexa I immediately go "Oh, looks like Alexa good".

isn't weird that even if a camera was exactly on par with the Alexa, you would still call it baby Alexa because of the price difference alone.

this may seem harsh(sad but true), it's not logical to assume someone would understand an opinion about a comparison, if you have to explain to him the difference between baby and adult.

Stephen Mick
04-06-2012, 09:56 PM
The topic here is Shane Hurlbut's test video. Let's keep it that way.

David G. Smith
04-06-2012, 10:14 PM
Wait tell you see Sister Alexa at NAB. :-)......

Ahh man, don't start that stuff.... I still have Red Band dreams about Arri SRIIIs !!!!

alpi69
04-07-2012, 02:08 AM
Get the thread back on track:
Alexa is the standard. And in these clips it looks worse than it is. But everyone who watches shows like GoT knows how it can look.
The C300 seems not to be in C-log mode. It has a blue tint and looks like sharpness is above -10, where it should be. Also they overexposed on the white shirts. The C 300 was C and D cam, so they probably haven't been bothered too much.

To me as a C300 owner it is just good to see this camera with its internal codec and without huge rig being considered as a B-Cam to the Alexa. Just look at the pictures how the rigs look.

Alexa is superior, the stills show there is a lot of leeway left for post. It is an extremely great camera. But the C300, softened down a bit looks good considering its price. And I rather rent a crane for the C300 than for the Alexa rig.

cowpunk52
04-07-2012, 02:22 PM
No wonder this video looks so bad! Just found this in the comments from Shane:

"I baked all this in and there was no color correction done. This was straight out of both cameras"

"The reason for the Cine 2 Gamma was the fact that this was a fast turnaround for HBO so minimal color correction was the best way to handle this. I shot the Alexa on rec. 709 and the Cine 2 seemed the closest."

Yep, he did shoot Rec.709, with Cine2 gamma - which has a very harsh rolloff, about a stop +/- less DR and default sharpness set to 0, which is far too high if you want a film-look. And then he complains that it looks too much like video!I shouldn't be surprised, though - Shane can do some beautiful cinematography, but after reading through his blog posts and comments, he seems to make a lot of odd choices and claims that seem so naive to me.

alpi69
04-07-2012, 02:45 PM
I didn't read that, but it explains exactly what I saw in the images.

PappasArts
04-07-2012, 05:22 PM
No wonder this video looks so bad! Just found this in the comments from Shane:

"I baked all this in and there was no color correction done. This was straight out of both cameras"





That makes sense now and sheds light on the subject. When I used the C300, it didn't look like that. Good find cowpunk.

Pappas
http://PAPPASARTS.WORDPRESS.COM
http://TWITTER.COM/PAPPASARTS

jambredz
04-07-2012, 05:23 PM
talk about lighting overkill (in the BTS pics)

Jusgorilla
04-08-2012, 08:01 AM
imho its best to compare apples with apples. Although its a stroke to C300's ego to even be compared to a camera almost 6 x the price, the test was hardly scientific or even a bloom non scientific. Cine gamma 2 with extra sharpening and hard highlight clipping is a sure way to get a "video" look and blow out the shirt, C-Log was not used therefore not all the DR was achieved. The Alexa actually looked very soft most of the time, and even slightly out of focus (and we all know that's not usually the case with properly handled shots)

imho this test does injustice to both cameras, and who knows what the intention really was, to put this side by side comparison out there. its silly. Those that have a C300 know its a huge step up from the dslr's, and those that own an Alexa know its a step up from the C300 (1080P 120 fps, 10bit 4:4:4, 2 stops extra DR) but for 6 x the price? is it worth it for indie film makers? maybe for rental houses, but for not for indies. Thats 600% extra cost for maybe 16% more DR.

Up from the dslrs, one can truly say we have gained more latitude, true color/sharpness/resolution, 4:2:2 and even a bloody good 720P 60fps

hgf4
04-09-2012, 08:58 PM
If you read the comments I get the feeling Shane was not overly impressed by the C300.

Enrique Pacheco, I completely agree. The camera is a video camera. The 5D is inherently cinematic like the Alexa. Period

cowpunk52
04-09-2012, 09:48 PM
If you read the comments I get the feeling Shane was not overly impressed by the C300.

Which makes me think he's not really sure how to use it. It's little quotes like that that leave me scratching my head. Of course, to each their own.

hgf4
04-09-2012, 10:32 PM
Which makes me think he's not really sure how to use it. It's little quotes like that that leave me scratching my head. Of course, to each their own.
You could be right. I think Shane really knows his stuff but he hasn't had much time with the camera. But do you think he could be right, that footage from the 5D will inherently look more cinematic?

Cosimo Bullo
04-10-2012, 12:47 AM
"But do you think he could be right, that footage from the 5D will inherently look more cinematic?"

No.

alpi69
04-10-2012, 01:24 AM
You could be right. I think Shane really knows his stuff but he hasn't had much time with the camera. But do you think he could be right, that footage from the 5D will inherently look more cinematic?

Haha....if cinematic is soft, west-coast-hiphip-contrast and tough to keep in focus...then yes. Otherwise...nope.

Shane Hurlbut used the Cine2 setting to compare the C300 to the Alexa...that tells me he doesīt really understand the Canon Cinegamma yet. He shot an ad that was screaming for a video look and maybe thatīs when he used Cine2. For the Alexa contest he should have used different settings.

And yes the C300 is used like a videocamera. It is awesome in its ergonomics and menus. But the images can be adjusted in camera to your needs. Unlike the 5D which has one look and thatīs it.I have seen C300 material where I would have sworn it was 5D (on youtube). But once you see it in real HD you will from now on spot the 5D as the "soft, slightly out of focus" shots.

Amr Rahmy
04-10-2012, 02:01 AM
when did soft mean film, or detailed and sharp mean video. did you watch any broadcast shows before hd times. did you watch film on dvd or bluray as opposed to whatever you can get on tv.



SPOILER ALERT

i think i watched an episode or two(maybe more) of game of throne before tuning out(weird that i don't like any of the current sword & sorcery or sword & sandals fantasy shows).
maybe it was too drawn out. sometimes it's better to watch a season back to back, did it have a slow start? what episode does the kid fall from a high place after being pushed?

END OF SPOILER

Mike McNeese
04-10-2012, 07:09 AM
IMHO, comparing a C300 to an Alexa is a very legitimate test. Do I understand the difference in price? Yes. And I don't care. I'm not buying either of these cameras. I've got 7 days of C300 rental under my belt. Realistically, if I have the need and the budget to rent an Alexa, I'm doing it. So this is a very viable test for me to judge the camera that I have been using to one that I will be very likely to use in the future.

Technology is changing too fast for me to own a "nice" cine camera. C300's have been getting into the hands of purchasers just within the last month or so, and we are already talking about the next better camera that comes in at half the cost. Renting gives me the flexibility to have ANY camera I want for any given shoot. Remember, there is no best camera - just the best one for a given situation. We just shot something with an iPhone because we needed footage that looked like it was shot with an iPhone. In that situation, the iPhone was better than the Alexa. I own an AF100 and a 7D and those are plenty for the day-to-day little projects that I do. I've become accustomed to renting, and unedited comparison tests like these are very valuable to me.

maarek
04-10-2012, 07:37 AM
...just said it doesn't look like baby Alexa, which was a huge claim.

What's so huge about that claim? It's a baby GH2 is it?

That was quite a lame comparison video. Since when do you just set both cameras at completely different looks and settings and fire away? Shouldn't these professional people know why certain cameras look a certain way with certain settings?

I could do an Epic vs GH2 test like that. Oh wait. Those have been done.

maranfilms
04-10-2012, 09:58 AM
Your breakdown of a baby's components was horrific in my imagination, for some reason.

Do not want children, now.

Thanks Pappas. lol

HUH, You mean your gonna turn down the opportunity to have your car washed, house cleaned, lawn mowed. And not to mention the pluses of having a live in film crew. Kholi, your looking at it all wrong. Kids can be great if you utilize them correctly. :)

Kholi
04-10-2012, 10:03 AM
HUH, You mean your gonna turn down the opportunity to have your car washed, house cleaned, lawn mowed. And not to mention the pluses of having a live in film crew. Kholi, your looking at it all wrong. Kids can be great if you utilize them correctly. :)

Lol... I was just thinking about this last night: parents won't let their kids play with knives but they have no problems allowing them to operate a lawnmower.

Just teach them how to push a dolly instead. XD



Shane Hurlbut used the Cine2 setting to compare the C300 to the Alexa...that tells me he doesīt really understand the Canon Cinegamma yet. He shot an ad that was screaming for a video look and maybe thatīs when he used Cine2. For the Alexa contest he should have used different settings.


Alpi, question: is c-log the only way to shoot C300? If not, which is the setting you use to hand off to a client that won't. E grading much if at all? Like interviews for example.

maranfilms
04-10-2012, 10:16 AM
Lol... I was just thinking about this last night: parents won't let their kids play with knives but they have no problems allowing them to operate a lawnmower.



HAHA, I know, so true.

alpi69
04-10-2012, 10:27 AM
Lol... I was just thinking about this last night: parents won't let their kids play with knives but they have no problems allowing them to operate a lawnmower.

Just teach them how to push a dolly instead. XD



Alpi, question: is c-log the only way to shoot C300? If not, which is the setting you use to hand off to a client that won't. E grading much if at all? Like interviews for example.

If it should intercut with Alexa I would probably use either Cine1 and drop the master pedestal or tweak the EoS Standard which has a nice highlight rendition

Kholi
04-10-2012, 10:43 AM
If it should intercut with Alexa I would probably use either Cine1 and drop the master pedestal or tweak the EoS Standard which has a nice highlight rendition

Alright. The same guy that had his C300 fried hadn't figured it out yet, to both of us it seemed like the camera just wanted to be kept in the cinema mode deal (forgot the name of it), good info to have though.

Thanks.

qazwsx
04-10-2012, 10:53 AM
Far from perfect, but here's an attempt to match the Canon to the Alexa footage:


http://vimeo.com/39912906

alpi69
04-10-2012, 11:04 AM
Alright. The same guy that had his C300 fried hadn't figured it out yet, to both of us it seemed like the camera just wanted to be kept in the cinema mode deal (forgot the name of it), good info to have though.

Thanks.

Huh, not at all. I am also using C-Log right now, but it is not ideal for all shoots.
I am just working on my own Cine-Settings for post-production.

If you want to deliver without much post-work there are tons of options. Think HVX B-Press, Cine-V, Cine-D, HD NORM. Now add the EOS Standard to the mix which looks terrible (pretty much like a 5D in Standard mode), but it can be toned down a bit and then looks like 5D in Neutral mode. But it still will look like a baked in look. So Cine-1 is probably the more flexible setting. But I only had a few real working days with the cam and am still trying settings out.

C-Log is great when you want to be very flexible after the fact and when trying to match several C300s, of course.

alpi69
04-10-2012, 11:06 AM
Far from perfect, but here's an attempt to match the Canon to the Alexa footage:


http://vimeo.com/39912906

Great job. I tried a fast primary correction, but ended up with magenta in the skin tones, so you must have taken the effort for a secondary also. Thanks ;-)

qazwsx
04-10-2012, 02:33 PM
Great job. I tried a fast primary correction, but ended up with magenta in the skin tones, so you must have taken the effort for a secondary also. Thanks ;-)

Yeah, didn't spend too much time on it, but definitely a bit of secondary to shift the cyan/blue.

jambredz
04-10-2012, 02:51 PM
wow. that's a great match.

Everts
04-11-2012, 11:26 AM
From the youtube video I must say that to my eyes the C300 is slighty overexposed and the alexa skintones in this video look off. Plus why is it so soft I dont get it looks like the clarity has been taken down . In other words they dont look human in the alexa shots. Just my opinion.

alpi69
04-11-2012, 12:31 PM
IMO the final product will pretty much look like the C300 did in the first place minus the in-cam sharpening. They didnīt want to touch the C300 as C and D cam and only use it in an emergency. The laexa will be graded to look good and they will need to get the skin tones to where the C300 was already.

Overall a pretty bad example of a camera-comparison with different settings altogether.

qazwsx
04-11-2012, 12:50 PM
I definitely agree. The C300 skin tone is much better/accurate.

I would have gone the other way in my comparison, but the guys I had talked to about the videoo kept going on about how the C300 couldn't match the Alexa and it made me wanted to try and do it.

timbook2
04-11-2012, 02:15 PM
nice CC job qazwsx! Now I wonder: was the suit blue or green? will we ever find out? And will the new F700 make the suit look brown? :-)

TheDingo
04-11-2012, 03:40 PM
...It`s tough to get everything to match when working from the YouTube Flash video as your source. ( Using Sony Vegas Pro to color correct )

Full Resolution 1080 Version (https://docs.google.com/open?id=0Byy1CMO9Zfmrekw0dTN0QUlvcEk)

51708

redhouse
04-11-2012, 08:26 PM
I prefer the C300 image. How about grading the Alexa to look like the C300.

qazwsx
04-12-2012, 12:56 AM
http://vimeo.com/40206302

Alexa to C300 (the other way around) color matching test. Still lacking saturation on the skin. After the compression there wasn't much left to work with. Much easier to desaturate the C300.

TheDingo
04-12-2012, 11:54 AM
Full Resolution 1080 Version (https://docs.google.com/open?id=0Byy1CMO9ZfmrWllpYlVXakdlX2c)

51767

NeedCreative
04-29-2012, 01:32 PM
I've seen the color fringe/bloom before, and recently saw people commenting on a video that had it through and through. I thought it was from shooting wide open but suppose not. Have you been able to correct that out of footage?

I'm way late responding (been away) but I see towards the end of this thread someone was able to process it out.

Rick Burnett
04-29-2012, 02:56 PM
I am reminded of the test that Barry Green did on the AF100/FS100 where he actually attempted to make the camera results very similar, and they were, yet, when I shot with my AF100 and FS100, they were VERY different out of the camera no matter how much tuning I did. Knowing how close these cameras can shoot is dependent on a HUGE number of variables AND the skill of the color corrector.

The problem with these tests is that if you focus say on "skintone" you have NO clue what the settings in camera were. Even with the corrected shots, like Jamie Lannister's character, the face looked better on the C300 but the shirt had nicer detail and roll-off (white) on the Alexa. But, I am sure you could change settings and get VERY different results.

There are people who get a camera and expect that Canon/Arri have done all the work to get the best settings out of it. I've read countless threads of people who get a camera, shoot it, are disappointed with it, and then sell it. If time is money, honestly, I can't blame them if they don't have the time to spend trying out EVERY possible combination of settings to get the most out of it. I can tell you, this has been a constant battle with my FS100. Yet I've won that battle. Many of you with a C300 have probably won that battle. But, if you are renting and you have a day or so to familiarize yourself with the camera, that's not a lot of time to *work* through the details of getting the best out of it.

I've seen FANTASTIC footage out of the C300 from people, and I've seen absolute crap. But the hard part is, everyone wants someone else's tests to validate a camera for them and that just isn't going to happen. It doesn't matter what professional uses the camera if it doesn't do what you want. I actually laughed at the Ron Howard comment and not because it has anything to do with him, it's just, I find it ironic that sometimes people accept a professionals choice of cameras, yet, when Jackson or Cameron uses a Red Epic, I see people being dismissive. Heck, what about when the 5D was being used on sets?!? That doesn't seem to make a difference to many people either. Yet, it's fact, it's been used as a B-cam for things in professional productions. People are comfortable with different results from cameras, it's just a fact of life.

So back to the topic of these videos that are now pulled, you have to look at them in light of who was testing them and for what. Hey, if he doesn't like the C300, that's his choice. Maybe something about how it shoots isn't sitting with him well. Maybe having to "learn" how the camera works doesn't interest him. If the Alexa interface works more along the lines to how someone with film might get their results, maybe that's part of the cost, and part of the strength in it as a camera as well. Just like people who don't want to sharpen 5Dm3 footage in post, I can't argue with that.

But, with everything, if you REALLY want to know how these cameras shoot, you're gonna have to shoot them yourself and go through the settings yourself. It's the only way you are going to TRULY know how the cameras were set and what the results were like. Trust me, it's almost ALWAYS different from what you see because your needs, they will be different.

Menno Mennes
05-01-2012, 08:48 AM
In this topic everyone is talking about camera' s.
IMO its all about a good story, cast, crew and good equipment. The blockbuster Slumdog Millionaire is shot with a Silicon Imaging SI-2K Mini (2/3" CMOS) camera and won over 101 Awards such as 8 Academy Awards, among best cinematography…by Anthony Dod Mantle
Other prizes are 4 Golden Globes, 7 BAFTA’s, 3 British Independent Film Awards and a lot more!

We don’t make films for our colleagues, do we? The average viewer don’t ask the filmmakers which camera and lenses where used. They like the film or not...So I purchase the camera of my choice...

Best wishes!

Rick Burnett
05-01-2012, 09:32 AM
In this topic everyone is talking about camera' s.
IMO its all about a good story, cast, crew and good equipment. The blockbuster Slumdog Millionaire is shot with a Silicon Imaging SI-2K Mini (2/3" CMOS) camera and won over 101 Awards such as 8 Academy Awards, among best cinematography…by Anthony Dod Mantle
Other prizes are 4 Golden Globes, 7 BAFTA’s, 3 British Independent Film Awards and a lot more!

We don’t make films for our colleagues, do we? The average viewer don’t ask the filmmakers which camera and lenses where used. They like the film or not...So I purchase the camera of my choice...

Best wishes!

Well wouldn't "good equipment" be about camera? :) For me it comes down to a simple fact, I want a camera that *allows* me to focus on the cinematography more and not worry about how the equipment will perform. I don't want to have to think "Will that brick face moire? How about that hard light edge, will it alias?" These aren't questions of composition, because there are times when I want to shoot bricks, or have a high contrast edge. When your equipment begins to not be able to handle a wider range of circumstances, then you are left wasting time second guessing your vision due to an equipment limitation.

Not that this is anything new to anyone, film has many limitations.

Many of these tests push cameras in NOT where they shine the best to point this out. But, what people sometimes don't take into consideration is what they can live with an what others cannot.

Will the end product matter to the average person? Probably not, but it will matter to me and the pride I take in my work. As my father told me once:

"If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right."

And I live by this. Sure, story, cast, crew are all VERY important, but, those are irrelevant to a discussion about a camera and how it works.

Menno Mennes
05-01-2012, 10:35 AM
Many of these tests push cameras in NOT where they shine the best to point this out. But, what people sometimes don't take into consideration is what they can live with an what others cannot.

Will the end product matter to the average person? Probably not, but it will matter to me and the pride I take in my work. As my father told me once:

.

Hi Rick,

Shure, "the pride I take in my work" is also very important to me. I'm in the 'business' over 30 years now and I have always shot with the cameras and lenses of my
choise. I want also enjoy my footage. I've owned the USA CP16 camera, the Frech Eclair, the German Arri and the French AAton, which I like the most. The filmlenses of my choise where the Angenieux. The videocameras I owned are Philips LDK 14, Ikegami 79e (tube camera) Ikegami HLV 55 and till now the Ikegami HLV79W with Fujinon lenses. And now I want to shoot with a 'light weight' big sensor camera. So I have to test Sony FS 700 and a Canon C300. In any case my lenses of choise are the Angenieux Optimo rouge lenses 16-42 and 30-80. And I am curious about the new Zeiss high speed prime lenses... I am just like you a serious filmmaker, who loves its profession!

Cheers!