A bit quiet in here. How many are still rocking the F35?
- Thread starter SJX
- Start date
Matter of preference really.
The default digital look was set by ARRI, and if you prefer a more green image, it’s looks “perfect out of the box”. If you slap on a simple F35 to X2 LUT it looks exactly the same, but with texture too the footage, and global shutter.
also, if are you shooting internally ProRes, the F35 goes toe to toe sharpness even with the Alexa Mini / Amira.
granted you can, and should shoot ARRI RAW, but the F35 in DPX is not as far behind as most people think, and properly exposed you can get 13.5 usable stops out of it.
C
NorBro
Major Contributor
I love the F35's image, but it's just not an ARRI, to me.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
Truer words have never been spoken. But it is interesting to read anyway.
My point is, only reason that Alexa became the de-facto digital look is because a lot of people shot on it. If the F35 would have “won” that war, we would be used to a very different image, that is less green.
But hey, it doesn’t really matter.
I still use the F35 professionally, it’s just harder to pitch.
C
NorBro
Major Contributor
The F35 came at the absolute best time possible, but it wasn't a war it was going to win.
It only had a couple of years to convince (and it did), but it was just buying time as everyone came from shooting film on ARRIs. Decision-makers trusted ARRI, executives, producers, studios had relationships...everyone knew about it and was waiting for a new ARRI digital cinema camera.
Both were heavy but you could quickly throw the Alexa on the shoulder and use it with its EVF and record ProRes 444 to small cards. The side panel is so nice to use, the handle, the connections, 120p, just a great camera.
___
And the green was only in the Classic and pretty much non-existent afterwards. Also easily corrected with tint.
I would have loved to see the F35 used more back then but I think the size, shape and how and what it recorded hurt it.
___
Today, there has never been a threat like the Venice I/II, but more and more movies will mostly be made on computers so I don't know if it matters anymore.
I could see an Amazon or a Google or a Tesla, etc. acquiring ARRI in the future if it ever went for sale.
It only had a couple of years to convince (and it did), but it was just buying time as everyone came from shooting film on ARRIs. Decision-makers trusted ARRI, executives, producers, studios had relationships...everyone knew about it and was waiting for a new ARRI digital cinema camera.
Both were heavy but you could quickly throw the Alexa on the shoulder and use it with its EVF and record ProRes 444 to small cards. The side panel is so nice to use, the handle, the connections, 120p, just a great camera.
___
And the green was only in the Classic and pretty much non-existent afterwards. Also easily corrected with tint.
I would have loved to see the F35 used more back then but I think the size, shape and how and what it recorded hurt it.
___
Today, there has never been a threat like the Venice I/II, but more and more movies will mostly be made on computers so I don't know if it matters anymore.
I could see an Amazon or a Google or a Tesla, etc. acquiring ARRI in the future if it ever went for sale.
And if you remember the idea was that Panavision was going to buy 300 Genesis cameras from Sony. They later reneged after they started taking delivery and changed the order down to only 100.
Originally Sony were going to wait much longer before they released the F35 to give Panavision a larger window of exclusivity. When PV dropped their order they brought the release of the F35 forward, I think by nearly 2 years.
So even earlier than scheduled, it didn't win because It's not a great camera compared to an Alexa. And I'm sick of hearing that film DP's know Arri so they mindlessly followed the brand. Even great Dp I've worked for is very technically literate and does liberal testing for the end result. Arri had better color science and better DR, better workflow. It LOOKED better for most DP's when they tested BOTH cameras. How is that mindlessly following a brand they knew from film.
It was also a power hungry pig of a camera with an interface designed by an engineer with a bewildering menu system. The EVF sucked compared to an Alexa too. All of those FUNCTIONAL things are important to a crew as well.
Venice 2 is great. A lot of DP's also love the Rialto, but if anyone remembers the Sony BVP-T70 link on the old Sony betacams it's not a new idea.
More like Black Magic will buy Arri. No way will big tech buy Arri. They might steal their color science engineers. We are such a small and tiny obscure part of the engineering world that uses sensors. Maybe astronomy and the military are the nearest, but tend to have a lot more money to spend.
Arri make a lot of their money from things other than cameras. Accessories like matte boxes. In the whole rest of the world EVERYONE uses WCU's and hate Preston. Lenses. Remote heads. Steadicam. And the big one...lighting...
No one cares if a Tesla reversing camera has cinematic mojo.
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
Maybe, but Google purchased Lytro years ago so it's always possible (Facebook was reportedly also considering it).
Companies like that buy stuff for rainy days...when they think the world is ready for the tech, like Lytro, or sometimes never ready and it doesn't go anywhere.
In ARRI's case, it's more about the IP and brand than the sensors, products.
___
On the related note, Kinefinity actually started in astronomy and ended up making a cinema camera (a bunch of them).
Companies like that buy stuff for rainy days...when they think the world is ready for the tech, like Lytro, or sometimes never ready and it doesn't go anywhere.
In ARRI's case, it's more about the IP and brand than the sensors, products.
___
On the related note, Kinefinity actually started in astronomy and ended up making a cinema camera (a bunch of them).
I think with Lyrto they were buying a key piece of IP that can be used in a lot of more general imaging applications. I don't think Arri have anything like that to make them worthwhile...
Yeah that and the military aside from us are the only ones using imaging sensors that actually care what it looks like. Most other imaging sensor users don't. We are such a small market. Astronomy is even smaller and more niche. Military is kind of on its own too....
I think it's fair to say the F35 was competitive in it's day for certain uses, but that was a day that was long ago....
NorBro
Major Contributor
I think the F55 pretty much looked the same, which ended up (obviously even just for the cost and the option to readily purchase it) being way more popular.
We used to obsess remarkably here for well over 10 years about every single detail in every new camera, but today it's such a different world as far as content and delivery and audience and washing and repeating almost instantly after an upload in a never ending rat race that I wouldn't even do it anymore even if new cameras were coming out every month.
Personally, I could grab almost any mirrorless and it would do the job.
We used to obsess remarkably here for well over 10 years about every single detail in every new camera, but today it's such a different world as far as content and delivery and audience and washing and repeating almost instantly after an upload in a never ending rat race that I wouldn't even do it anymore even if new cameras were coming out every month.
Personally, I could grab almost any mirrorless and it would do the job.
CharlesPapert
Director of Photography
That's not really the way I remember it. The paradigm wasn't Arri vs Sony, it was Arri vs Panavision. While indeed everyone had shot on an Arri at some point, the majority of high end shooting in the states was being done on Panavision cameras. When the Genesis and the D20 both arrived in 2005, more attention was paid to the Genesis by far. For one thing, it could be used self-contained, with the SRW deck mounted top or back just like a film mag, while the D20 needed to be cabled to an outboard recorder making it less "film-like" operationally, and the optical viewfinder path made it less sensitive. But overall, the feeling in the industry was that the Genesis looked better, and it was compatible with the legacy of Panavision lenses. I operated on a number of movies and TV shows shot on the Genesis for the next few years and only very occasionally worked with the D20. It just wasn't considered the player.
So, when the F35 came out in 2008, it was seen as a mildly upgraded Genesis that had PL mount capability and was a pretty fast success. Arri had introduced the D21 but, only the Arri stalwarts really seemed to care. The sense was that Arri was lagging behind in the digital camera game, that they were stubbornly sticking to the concept of film and not really putting their shoulder behind digital hard enough. I don't recall a scenario where the industry was "buying time" with the Sony/Panavision cameras while waiting for Arri to take over--it kind of felt like Arri was going to follow the Kodak route and fall away over time.
But, take over they did, when the Alexa emerged in 2010. Just like that, Arri was back in the game. Onboard file-based recording was what everyone had been waiting for, the massive cooling fins of the D20/21 were gone, the camera was (relatively) sleek and the images looked great. They had finally given up on the optical viewfinder which cut out weight and improved sensitivity (although the studio version was a short-lived offering that retained the viewfinder). This was the game-changer, and the Genesis and the F35 quickly fell out of favor against the Alexa. Instead of introducing a Genesis II, Panavision bought a ton of Alexas and converted the mounts to PV. It was really considered an amazing comeback for Arri! By the time Panavision emerged with the DXL, it didn't make much of a splash against the Alexa legacy, and Panavision is now a shadow of what it was 15 years ago.
Below, as I recently came across these: some pix from my first Genesis show, "Balls of Fury". This was somewhere around the 4th movie filmed on the Genesis. We talked a lot to the AC's and operators from the movies that had just wrapped with it like "Apocalypto" and after I learned that the tape deck could be remoted using dual link SDI cables, I opted to do so for all of the Steadicam work (since I'd have to be tethered with an SDI line anyway for monitoring purposes, I figured what's one more SDI vs 10 lbs of tape deck!? In the wide pic you can see the 2nd AC wearing a camping backpack with the SRW deck and adaptor module in it. Subsequently Panavision built an open frame backpack unit for people to do this more elegantly.
Here with 1st AC (and now president of Local 600) Baird Steptoe
And on the next movie, "Fired Up"
Last edited:
NorBro
Major Contributor
I think the other member slightly implied more of the thought of "ARRI vs. Sony" so the convo was about that which happened later in camera history when considering those two (and not Panavision), but nevertheless thank you for the history, Charles!
Per usual I think a lot of perspectives in life depend on age, experience, Internet-use, etc...yours is likely the real-world 'I'm working through this as it's happening' experience, while I had more modern, maybe sometimes perhaps unrealistic, expectations when learning/reading about some of that stuff back then and it felt like none of the tech was quite right and people were interested in what ARRI was going to do next.
Did the industry really think they were going to stick with film? Because that's shocking for me to believe (but maybe it's just 20/20 hindsight).
Per usual I think a lot of perspectives in life depend on age, experience, Internet-use, etc...yours is likely the real-world 'I'm working through this as it's happening' experience, while I had more modern, maybe sometimes perhaps unrealistic, expectations when learning/reading about some of that stuff back then and it felt like none of the tech was quite right and people were interested in what ARRI was going to do next.
Did the industry really think they were going to stick with film? Because that's shocking for me to believe (but maybe it's just 20/20 hindsight).
CharlesPapert
Director of Photography
Ack, sorry if I misunderstood the discussion. Wouldn't be the first time.
As far as film going away--nothing seemed inevitable until the Alexa emerged. Prior to that, the HD workflow was clunky and the cameras were good, but certainly not great. There was certainly a feeling as we went into the 2010's that film was still king, in workflow, in ergonomics, in results. There were so many factors to consider. Something that seems shocking today but was very much a concern back then was the perceived delicacy of recording to flash media. The studios and bond companies were very skittish about this camera negative made up of 1's and 0's, with no actual hard media involved. Remember that the Genesis and F35 recorded to HDCAM tape, which was considered acceptable. When we got the very first two SSD drives for the Genesis on "Fired Up", our loader had to play them out in real time on the truck back to the HDCAM tape deck, creating the "real" master. There was no downloading to shuttle drives happening then. Even once the Alexa arrived, there was still plenty of resistance to the internal media from the overlords. The episodic TV formula for the first few years (even with the Alexa) was to cable out to record on XDCAM decks, either recording internally as a backup, or not at all. What a crazy time!
It was pretty notable when Roger shot Skyfall on Alexa (but it is also worth noting that the subsequent two Bond films went back to shooting on film!). I can remember the exact moment when I gave over fully to digital, which was due to the film "Nebraska" in 2013. I admired Phedon Papamichael's black and white images very much and afterwards I remember thinking, we just can't achieve that look and texture digitally. Then I learned that it was Alexa with scanned film grain added, and I was like "check please". I myself haven't shot a frame of film since 2010, and I don't really think about it any more.
Last edited:
SJX
Veteran
I have been out of the game for a long while now. My F35 is in hibernation in its box and I haven't shot anything at all in well over a year on any camera. So I'm out of the loop. Is ARRI having problems or something? Is the Venice now the de facto camera as the Alexa used to be? BMD is still a thing with the starving low end? Is RED still competitive? Or your remark was more from the POV of the future because of what AI will inevitably do to this industry?
Mike Krumlauf
Award Winning Filmmaker
Great photos! Thanks for sharing.
Not all Genesis gone forever... I'm just slow to complete projects.
I am very excited to see what you will do with my old genesis.