Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 117
  1. Collapse Details
    #71
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,024
    Default
    Out of curiosity, why did you feel that a stabilized head was worth adding to your personal kit instead of renting?


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #72
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Auckland, New Zealand
    Posts
    2,066
    Default
    I agree, in pure dollar terms they're surely selling far far more lights than camera bodies! Let alone all their other accessories or services they get revenue from.
    Am a Sound Recordist in New Zealand: http://ironfilm.co.nz/sound/
    Follow my vlog and adventures in sound: https://www.youtube.com/c/SoundSpeeding


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #73
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by John Brawley View Post
    ... It goes on. I think cameras would be at best 20% of their total sales in dollar terms. They are high value items, but they make plenty of other things that sell at 5 or 6 figure prices in a lot more volume.

    JB
    Fair enough. My take is that, outside of the wealthy West, their cameras generate more revenues than lighting. The latter is a norm for the big budget Hollywood production but is far more sparse across the globe, where there's limited time and personnel to man elaborate sets.

    Of course, Vadim Perelman shot "Pepel" ("Ashes"), the most expensive TV miniseries at that time on the Russian TV, in 2013 on C100. But, by now, the lower tier markets switched to Alexa too.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Vancouver, BC (starting Feb 2021)
    Posts
    548
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DLD View Post
    Fair enough. My take is that, outside of the wealthy West, their cameras generate more revenues than lighting. The latter is a norm for the big budget Hollywood production but is far more sparse across the globe, where there's limited time and personnel to man elaborate sets.
    Bollywood is quite a bit bigger than Hollywood, and definitely has extensive lighting and grip + electric on its sets.

    Of course, Vadim Perelman shot "Pepel" ("Ashes"), the most expensive TV miniseries at that time on the Russian TV, in 2013 on C100. But, by now, the lower tier markets switched to Alexa too.
    I get the impression that most of those are rentals rather than sales. Arri's focus definitely seems to be more on rentals than on sales throughout its product line, and it's camera pricing model also reflects that. You don't see that many $100,000 cameras like Alexa and even Varicam Pure in the hands of owner/operators, no matter how popular they are on set, and with cameras as long-lived as Alexas, it's unlikely that rental houses have to buy them all that often.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #75
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,104
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by John Brawley View Post
    I think Arri would have a far greater proportion of their revenue coming NOT from cameras.

    Lighting for starters. Between Sky panels, M series HMI and now the Orbitals, Arri just totally dominate lighting. A three camera show like mine literally now has many hundreds of Arri lighting units. I have Sky panels into the high hundreds of units and with the M series of HMI's they are the very dominant in lighting use. My show has a few dozen of the M Series HMI's as well all the way up to a couple of Arri Max 18'Ks just for the location package.

    Matteboxes. For every camera they sell they must sell a dozen matteboxes alone...

    Then you look at follow focus....For some reason the Preston still persists in the US...go anywhere else on the planet and it's WCU4s....

    I Just bought an Arri SRH3 stabilised head. It's a lot more than a camera to buy.

    Trinity... Steadicam package.....More than cameras...

    It goes on. I think cameras would be at best 20% of their total sales in dollar terms. They are high value items, but they make plenty of other things that sell at 5 or 6 figure prices in a lot more volume.

    JB
    No Arri camera, but I have an Arri manual follow focus, two Arri matte boxes (the big one was easily ~$4K-$5K) and probably at least a dozen/dozen-and-a-half Arri lighting instruments.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #76
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by ahalpert View Post
    Out of curiosity, why did you feel that a stabilized head was worth adding to your personal kit instead of renting?
    1. In a pandemic world, sales / rentals of remote heads have gone through the roof (to socially distance actors from cameras). Means I always have access to one. It's been in use a lot already, and when not, it's sub hired out all the time.
    2. It's actually a great head that DOES NOT require a tech. I freakin hate the head tech / union position mentality. Nine times out of ten the head tech is sitting in a corner bored out of their brains. Can't stand it.
    3. It's a great way to keep wheels skills in practice.
    4. It's cheaper than a lot of other heads that perform to similar specs, but it's still tiny.

    This is actually my second remote head. I own an Ronin R2 and master wheels. Have hardly ever used it as a gimbal (I hate gimbal shots0 but it was used full time as a head on a remote crane for a whole season of a series. Worked very well. The Arri carries nearly 60 pounds so you can put an SXT with a 24-290 on it and the head is still a lot smaller than every other head out there. The Movie XL for example is an oversized pig.

    Being an Arri head with the new FOMA wireless, it also means your remote focus is transmitted with the remote head channels. Range of the focus / head commands (when using WCU's) is now upwards of a mile in almost any environment,. I heard in Vegas when they first tested it in open air they got to nearly 6 miles before it dropped....


    JB
    John Brawley ACS
    Cinematographer
    Los Angeles
    www.johnbrawley.com
    I also have a blog


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #77
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    5,104
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Tamerlin View Post
    Bollywood is quite a bit bigger than Hollywood, and definitely has extensive lighting and grip + electric on its sets.



    I get the impression that most of those are rentals rather than sales. Arri's focus definitely seems to be more on rentals than on sales throughout its product line, and it's camera pricing model also reflects that. You don't see that many $100,000 cameras like Alexa and even Varicam Pure in the hands of owner/operators, no matter how popular they are on set, and with cameras as long-lived as Alexas, it's unlikely that rental houses have to buy them all that often.
    I’m not trying to say it rivals or even comes close to the rental numbers, because it doesn’t, and maybe my perception is a little skewed by the market segment I mostly serve, but I think there are a lot more Arri(Alexa & Amira) owner/operators than people think or realize.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #78
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by DLD View Post
    Fair enough. My take is that, outside of the wealthy West, their cameras generate more revenues than lighting. The latter is a norm for the big budget Hollywood production but is far more sparse across the globe, where there's limited time and personnel to man elaborate sets.

    Of course, Vadim Perelman shot "Pepel" ("Ashes"), the most expensive TV miniseries at that time on the Russian TV, in 2013 on C100. But, by now, the lower tier markets switched to Alexa too.
    Oh cmon.

    I’ve worked in Australia, the UK, many parts of Asia, South America on big and very low budget shows.

    It’s not just some exclusive enclave in Hollywood. Those are universal truths. The scale changes perhaps. But it’s not just Hollywood centric. I’m fact I’d argue Arri are even more dominant in other non US markets.

    JB
    John Brawley ACS
    Cinematographer
    Los Angeles
    www.johnbrawley.com
    I also have a blog


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #79
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    290
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by John Brawley View Post
    Matteboxes. For every camera they sell they must sell a dozen matteboxes alone...
    My apologies if this is a stupid question, but why would they sell more matteboxes than cameras?


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #80
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by iain.bason View Post
    My apologies if this is a stupid question, but why would they sell more matteboxes than cameras?
    I see a lot of cameras that aren't made by Arri with matte boxes that ARE made by Arri.

    The LMB 15/25 is probably THE go to matte box, copied by many, but the defacto lightweight matte box and now kind of replaced by Arri with the LMB 4x5
    https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...5_pro_set.html

    No matter if it's a film camera, a RED, a Venice, a Blackmagic, a Panasonic....They all tend to wear an Arri. Most of the big and small camera rental companies use Arri matte boxes because they are built better for rental abuse and are more reliable to service and get spares for.

    JB
    John Brawley ACS
    Cinematographer
    Los Angeles
    www.johnbrawley.com
    I also have a blog


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 456789101112 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •