JPNola
Veteran
Ah, so you were stills-born. Say no more. That explains everything.
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)
Alexa LF
- Thread starter roxics
- Start date
Ah, so you were stills-born. Say no more. That explains everything.
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)
CharlesPapert
Director of Photography
When we started making the transition from 35mm film to 35mm sized sensor digital, the AC's I was working with were trying out various techniques to adapt to this new world. These were some of the top guys in the field and they had honed their skills using their wiles and experience to judge distance, hard and soft measuring tape, sonar measuring tools (Cinetape, Panatape) and now they were exploring working off a monitor as well. One thing I heard then was that the digital sensor seemed "thinner" than film, i.e. more demanding of critical focus even given the exact same lenses and image size they had been working with on 35mm. All of the arguments I've heard over the intervening decade about pulling off a monitor being reactionary and thus delayed were long ago allayed for me, as I could see that focus was being held more consistently than it ever had been in the film era.
Today, it's a rare thing when we get a buzz in a take, and almost always because of an actor making an unexpected movement and catching the AC off guard. Granted, I'm usually shooting around a T3.2 spherical, which is a long way from T1.8 full frame. I have no doubt that my AC's would have a much less comfortable time of it with the LF and Signature lenses, but they'd rise to the occasion because they'd have to.
There is a place for autofocus and focus assist systems. A horse galloping towards the lens at 300mm is going to challenge any focus puller to nail the first time (and you'll get only so many takes with the horse so the pressure is on). That's a small percentage of typical shooting. Closeups of an actor leaning in for emphasis is a daily occurence and an adept focus puller will instinctively know how to read body language enough to where they should be able to repeatedly land this shot in acceptable focus.
I believe it is the DP's responsibility to balance the desire for super-shallow shots against the demands of the shooting schedule. Doing 15 takes of a closeup because you have less than an inch of depth (and have to decide which eye to even go for since you can't hold both) is tough on the actor and ultimately may not serve the cause. Good chance a soft take will be used in the edit due to performance. Wouldn't it have been better to give up a little shallowness and just get the shot? That's my philosophy, at least.
Sam, I believe that Arri designs their systems for the professional/high-end market and assumes that they will be used by highly skilled crews. The idea that it is impractical or even irresponsible for them not to include an AF system along with fast lenses and large sensor doesn't really jive with this. Beautiful work will be done with this combo without the need for AF.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Clearly lovely work will be done - but if one shot the same work with today's Alexa and upscaled it quite likely they would be visually very similar in terms of resolution and equally poor if you wanted for some reason to upscale a small portion of the image. Shooting with canon raw af on would probably deliver more resolution (if you care!)
Of course introducing a new lens mount is a major deal with a 30 year life maybe so one needs to think way ahead especially in today's world
I was only really making a side point - overall the camera looks great
Of course introducing a new lens mount is a major deal with a 30 year life maybe so one needs to think way ahead especially in today's world
I was only really making a side point - overall the camera looks great
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Ah, so you were stills-born. Say no more. That explains everything.
Ooofa!
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Ah, so you were stills-born. Say no more. That explains everything.
Yep it means I've been shooting 6k raw 16 bit 645 sensor since 2005 while you were in SD interlaced nothing/everything sharp world or at maximum shooting half size 35 film and hence I understand the challenges of working such an exacting medium a decade better than the average Dp
Last edited:
AF following eye has been done long time ago and brain can express itself through eye movement.
As it is with all 'new, modern, advanced, revolutionary...' things, sooner or later they end up in (Canon Camera) museum:
Canon UC-X2Hi (or ES5000 in America or MB-E2 for Japanese market)
Can we revisit the AF topic (but not in Alexa LF thread)?
I've heard about this long time ago. Good find. Now just solve the brain reading part and we can get back to it...;-)
As I said, brain controls eye, what else do you need?
If your only tool is hammer, you use it for everything. The same thing is with focus. What else is needed from the brain?
http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/9511/eye_camcorder/
If your only tool is hammer, you use it for everything. The same thing is with focus. What else is needed from the brain?
http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/9511/eye_camcorder/
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Charles is a sensible man - maybe he is shooting 50mm s35 at 80 inches f3.2 on a camera system that resolves about 3k.
His pullers have 10 inches of dof to keep the subject acceptably sharp.
Now let's play with the LF - well with twice the sensor size he picks a 100mm lens to sustain FOV, but his camera system has higher resolution so let's add 30% to the lens length to account for the smaller COC acceptable at the new resolution and let's get that sexy look by shooting at 1.8.
Now his focus puller has a dandy .8 inches to work within. Perfect.
I'm sure some can dispute the math so for kindness let's call it 2 inches.
His pullers have 10 inches of dof to keep the subject acceptably sharp.
Now let's play with the LF - well with twice the sensor size he picks a 100mm lens to sustain FOV, but his camera system has higher resolution so let's add 30% to the lens length to account for the smaller COC acceptable at the new resolution and let's get that sexy look by shooting at 1.8.
Now his focus puller has a dandy .8 inches to work within. Perfect.
I'm sure some can dispute the math so for kindness let's call it 2 inches.
Last edited:
CharlesPapert
Director of Photography
But--that's apples to oranges. If and when I choose to shoot with faster lenses as I do from time to time (mostly commercials, occasionally on episodic) and we are in the T1.6 range, even on a S35 system that's substantially shallower. I have a good reason to shoot many projects at a slower stop, and that is to stay on zooms for working speed. We still get plenty of shallowness, and I'm more than comfortable creating interest via planes of lighting vs relying on turning the background into blobs for separation.
Flexbility in a camera system is great. I haven't had time to really absorb the different possibilities the LF presents in terms of image sizes, but it sure seems like you can opt for a sensor crop without giving up much ground. Having the option of the shallowness of full frame and the functionality of S35 is great!
Likewise--just because a prime opens to T1.8 doesn't mean you have to shoot at T1.8. Again: options.
One thing I'd like to see improve on the Arris is their native ISO. Having spent some time in the Varicam world, I miss the flexibility of the high ISO capability. Options again!
Flexbility in a camera system is great. I haven't had time to really absorb the different possibilities the LF presents in terms of image sizes, but it sure seems like you can opt for a sensor crop without giving up much ground. Having the option of the shallowness of full frame and the functionality of S35 is great!
Likewise--just because a prime opens to T1.8 doesn't mean you have to shoot at T1.8. Again: options.
One thing I'd like to see improve on the Arris is their native ISO. Having spent some time in the Varicam world, I miss the flexibility of the high ISO capability. Options again!
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Of course it apples and oranges which is why suggesting pullers can handle an apple is not relevant to if they can handle an orange. You need af for an orange - you just do.
That was my experience with the Hasselblad - it was so f-ing extreme to use that I got rid of it. Just like 85/1.4 glass - you buy it try it then sell it an go back to the 85/2 becaus wvther is no value in that extra stop you never use
That was my experience with the Hasselblad - it was so f-ing extreme to use that I got rid of it. Just like 85/1.4 glass - you buy it try it then sell it an go back to the 85/2 becaus wvther is no value in that extra stop you never use
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Charles. It is interesting you mention the Vari.
Arri seem in a hole - they seem to be doing this to get back in the episodic game like you shoot - and clearly that won't work - it's going to be a different and wonderful thing for slow considered work - like vista or Imax or in fact stills on a blad or Arca
Arri seem in a hole - they seem to be doing this to get back in the episodic game like you shoot - and clearly that won't work - it's going to be a different and wonderful thing for slow considered work - like vista or Imax or in fact stills on a blad or Arca
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
The higher resolution cancels that out. Of course if you are at a viewing distance where you can't see the resolution then it won't.
CharlesPapert
Director of Photography
OK well, just because I shoot mostly apples doesn't mean I don't occasionally shoot an orange. I know what focus pullers can do, and I've seen them do it for many years. An inch of focus? We've done it before and we'll do it again.
My old college buddy Gregor Tavenner did an incredible job pulling focus on those long shots on Birdman--I saw it at on the 80ft screen at the Cinerama dome and it was tack sharp under some ruthless conditions. And he did it all without using a monitor.
Grug
Veteran
Not sure I follow you there Sam. How would higher resolution cancel out the tighter noise pattern of the larger sensor?
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Well the image is a higher resolution so we assume we are going to be examining the image at that larger resolution and therefore when we do that examination we find the noise is exactly the same.
So project both images on an 8ft screen stand 10 foot away and yes the noise of the larger sensor is smaller
Project the larger image on a 16ft screen and examine the 16ft screen from 10 foot away and the noise is the same size as the lower resolution image projected on the 8ft screen - but yes the noise is a smaller portion of the image.
The whole 4k+ thing assumes we either have a fetish with walking up to large projections and examining them closely or doing huge crops in post for some reason*.
Otherwise there is little reason to shoot beyond 2k - which is why the current alexa looks fantastic in a big theatre from row five or back.
Yes if you are delivering 2k, or viewing from a position where 2k would be enough, and shoot with this sensor and downscale the image will indeed be less noisy and super sexy
---
*Here is spot I shot (for Unilever) .. the plan was to punch in digitally on the lid of the product, so we could do the pour while the camera was in motion moving from whole bottle to lid of bottle - the lid being the 'hero' of this shoot
It is shots like this where the rubber hits the road on focus, lenses LPI and high res capture free of compression artifacts.. the digital punch in from FS7 4k did not sustain the quality and we had to shoot the macro pour separately instead of the 'oner' that was the directors preferred option. Being let down by the FS7 and my rusty nikons was not a shock, but one would expect Arri to provide solutions that should work as described.. Im just pointing out why they might not.
https://vimeo.com/245719770
L1quiVid
I also work on occasion with Silicon Core who make displays that are exactly designed to be walked up to and examined in close detail http://silicon-core.com/innovation/
So project both images on an 8ft screen stand 10 foot away and yes the noise of the larger sensor is smaller
Project the larger image on a 16ft screen and examine the 16ft screen from 10 foot away and the noise is the same size as the lower resolution image projected on the 8ft screen - but yes the noise is a smaller portion of the image.
The whole 4k+ thing assumes we either have a fetish with walking up to large projections and examining them closely or doing huge crops in post for some reason*.
Otherwise there is little reason to shoot beyond 2k - which is why the current alexa looks fantastic in a big theatre from row five or back.
Yes if you are delivering 2k, or viewing from a position where 2k would be enough, and shoot with this sensor and downscale the image will indeed be less noisy and super sexy
---
*Here is spot I shot (for Unilever) .. the plan was to punch in digitally on the lid of the product, so we could do the pour while the camera was in motion moving from whole bottle to lid of bottle - the lid being the 'hero' of this shoot
It is shots like this where the rubber hits the road on focus, lenses LPI and high res capture free of compression artifacts.. the digital punch in from FS7 4k did not sustain the quality and we had to shoot the macro pour separately instead of the 'oner' that was the directors preferred option. Being let down by the FS7 and my rusty nikons was not a shock, but one would expect Arri to provide solutions that should work as described.. Im just pointing out why they might not.
https://vimeo.com/245719770
L1quiVid
I also work on occasion with Silicon Core who make displays that are exactly designed to be walked up to and examined in close detail http://silicon-core.com/innovation/
Last edited:
Samuel H
Major Contributor
It seems the image will be "just like an Alexa, but with more pixels". You can downsample and go back to the old resolution, and then you have a bit less noise. But if you want to keep the full resolution, then you'll probably want to keep the ISO at your old levels.
This should be more than enough. I mean, it's a 4k Alexa. People get used to being able to shoot at higher ISO or use AF or just have a smaller camera, but I think at the very top they got just what they wanted.
This should be more than enough. I mean, it's a 4k Alexa. People get used to being able to shoot at higher ISO or use AF or just have a smaller camera, but I think at the very top they got just what they wanted.
This is exactly what myself, and many other DoPs (such as 90% of HDSLR shooters) need to get better at! Using light to great the points of interest rather than just taking the easy path of isolating the object with ultra thin depth of field.
And Arri does it again, ladies and gentlemen, and in true Arri fashion, they do it correctly!
I just knew they would never stuff more pixels in the Alexa sensor and sell out to the cheap 4K fad the way other manufacturers did. They would never risk and lose the Alexa bread and butter, which is the look given by the larger photosites. I always thought their 4K camera would be something at least full frame. But they did even better. So they did it the right way. And have you noticed how they also got the whole line up right? This camera is not as much a replacement to the current Alexas as they are a complement. I'm not sure if they are stopping making the current ones, but even if they do this camera doesn't really kill the current range. It sits so above it that the current line can still live and breath. If it was Sony or Red they would have pissed off every current owner by just automatically obsoleting the current camera. To try to force people to upgrade. But not Arri. You can be sure this is not by accident either. They are Arri after all. The new camera, like the 65, having the exact same look as the current cameras effectively keep the current cameras relevant. For anything where true 4K is not needed and larger format is overkill or even an inconvenience, the current Alexas are still the right tool for the job. Brilliant! This is why Arri is Arri. Also look at how the camera looks basically the exact same as the Alexa. That's the sign of a company which knows what it wants and does. New cameras from other manufacturers basically always look different from the earlier ones. Almost like they are gambling and constantly trying to finally get it right.
Poor Sony. I thought they would finally catch a break with the Venice and they truly deserve a break. Since they seem to have put effort and tried to get it right. But the Alexa LF might just make the Venice another F65.
I just knew they would never stuff more pixels in the Alexa sensor and sell out to the cheap 4K fad the way other manufacturers did. They would never risk and lose the Alexa bread and butter, which is the look given by the larger photosites. I always thought their 4K camera would be something at least full frame. But they did even better. So they did it the right way. And have you noticed how they also got the whole line up right? This camera is not as much a replacement to the current Alexas as they are a complement. I'm not sure if they are stopping making the current ones, but even if they do this camera doesn't really kill the current range. It sits so above it that the current line can still live and breath. If it was Sony or Red they would have pissed off every current owner by just automatically obsoleting the current camera. To try to force people to upgrade. But not Arri. You can be sure this is not by accident either. They are Arri after all. The new camera, like the 65, having the exact same look as the current cameras effectively keep the current cameras relevant. For anything where true 4K is not needed and larger format is overkill or even an inconvenience, the current Alexas are still the right tool for the job. Brilliant! This is why Arri is Arri. Also look at how the camera looks basically the exact same as the Alexa. That's the sign of a company which knows what it wants and does. New cameras from other manufacturers basically always look different from the earlier ones. Almost like they are gambling and constantly trying to finally get it right.
Poor Sony. I thought they would finally catch a break with the Venice and they truly deserve a break. Since they seem to have put effort and tried to get it right. But the Alexa LF might just make the Venice another F65.