ARRI Alexa joins RED to kill celluloid in 2010

Otis Grapsas said:
The Scarlet 2/3" should end up at about 10,000 euro for a reasonable configuration so there is interest in the low end of the market. The "brain" prices are obviously designed to appeal to those with even lower budget even though they can't afford the complete camera. That was the point of the original 3k for $3k marketing IMHO. Getting the video enthusiasts to consider the camera and start dreaming about it for a couple of years. When you spend so much time discussing, researching, posting, following news, updates, releases etc, you can easily reach deeper into your pocket for 2x or 3x your original budget. The product becomes familiar and you have to have it:)
Click to expand...

Yea Otis you sum it exactly how it is. Except I dont have that 2x or 3x budget and at least I really dont want to pay so much, so maybe I will end only with Scarlet fixed lens or with some future type od DSLR where I can rather put money in good glass than in expensive accessories.
 
Just got home from the Arri event. The Alexa is a HUGE winner.

Imo it spanks RED left and right. Some highlights:

The design is modular like the epic, so pieces can be exchanged in the future as upgrades are made.

Can record native pro res HQ to SxS cards for instant ingenstion/editing into Final Cut. They shot interviews at the beginning of the event and had it cut and projected by the end of their presentation.

Baseline ASA of 800....this thing is unreal in low light. Arri had lots of footage on hand from different shooters over the last two weeks.

The digital viewfinder made me forget it wasnt optical (the optical one wasnt there) Big, bright, and crystal clear.

Arri debuted two new zooms designed with fuji 18-80 and 24-250...I looked at the 18-80...gorgeous.

This camera has the potential to be a game changer.
 
Otis Grapsas said:
I would say 150 units is closer to reality. But 40 units on rental houses could probably cover demand, kill the commercial future of the camera and make the whole project a financial failure. The camera will typically be used with rental lenses so the rental houses will be all over it. The >50K euro market (body price) is a very small and very dangerous niche.
Click to expand...

50K is very cheap for an Arri. That makes an Arri more affordable than they've ever been. There would be plenty of professional DOP's that would be happy to buy an Arri but would be RED averse. And an optical viewfinder is of great interest to me.

jb
 
200909-10dcsbrochuretitleresize.jpg


ENGADGET said:
It's taken three years, but one of the big boys may finally have an answer to the RED ONE camera -- the device that took the cinema world by storm in 2007 as the first affordable digital movie cam with a 35mm, full-frame sensor, 4k resolution, and rugged good looks. Venerable camera-maker ARRI has finally revealed both the full specs for its upcoming ALEXA digital camera and reconfirms Hollywood's propensity for over-capitalization. Regarding the specs, you can color us impressed. The ALEXA is something of a follow up to the ARRIFLEX D-21, the company's first foray into digital cams, but besides writing data in 0s and 1s the two cameras share little in common. ARRI is positioning the ALEXA to compete directly with the RED ONE (and forthcoming EPIC and SCARLET cameras), so you can expect a price point in the sub-$60k range. Besides the low price tag (for a professional movie camera), a few newly-announced features may have indie-shooters on a budget thinking hard about picking up an ALEXA for their next bit-crafted, cinematic yarn. We'll break it down for you after the break.

When you're shooting incredibly hi-res video with a camera like the RED ONE, you end up with extremely large and processing-heavy files that take a certain amount of finessing to play nice with your editing software. This post-processing can be taxing on both time and resources, both of which cost money and can break a production on a budget. The ALEXA allows you to record compressed 1080p footage in Apple's native ProRes 444 and ProRes 422 (HQ) QuickTime format to readily available SxS cards, which can be instantly ingested and edited in Final Cut with no transcoding necessary. What's more, the camera has the ability to dual record to a compressed format and to its higher-res, 2k ARRIRAW counterpart at the same time, allowing you to rapidly edit in the field and bring the big, high quality footage online later.

The ALEXA also boasts a super 35 CMOS Bayer sensor promising 13.5 stops of dynamic range and plenty of that buttery, out-of-focus shallow depth of field that you'd expect from a major motion picture camera. ARRI's also promises a host of expansion accessories for the camera, from storage modules and advanced recorders, to HD viewfinders and an exchangeable lens mount so you can use your DSLR lenses in addition to the big-time PL-mount movie lenses.

With some name directors in the field with this camera right now, we should be seeing plenty of footage in the very near future. RED has had a three-year head start in the space, but the movie industry is notoriously hard-headed about gear and we wouldn't be surprised to see even more films shot digitally now that there's a digicam with the word ARRI stamped on the side.

Chad Mumm is our video producer at Engadget, producing and directing The Engadget Show and filming shorter-form stuff when we need it.
Click to expand...
 
The Sarlacc said:
Can record native pro res HQ to SxS cards for instant ingenstion/editing into Final Cut.
Click to expand...

So it can do on board practically what a nanoflash does, but to record RAW you still need an external recorder that costs a bajillion dollars. How does that beat Red?

The Sarlacc said:
Baseline ASA of 800....this thing is unreal in low light. Arri had lots of footage on hand from different shooters over the last two weeks.
Click to expand...

Definitely cool that Arri's there too, but just wanted to note that this is on par with Red.
 
According to all I've seen, both Red One MX and Arri Alexa produce fantastic 13.5 stop images. However, the Red, fully kitted, would be less than half the price. Also, double the resolution.

I think a little Ben Franklin pro and con sheet would suffice to make the Arri look a little sparse next to the current Red one MX, let alone the upcoming Epic (yes it's not a product, but arguably neither is Alexa yet.)

Arri seems to be going after the died in the wool film types, the old-school AD's and DOPs and directors who dislike Red because it's dislodging their beloved film. Arri has their name and familiarity with their primes on their side.

The same thing happened with NLE's: the stalwart Kem / flatbed editors would never deign to push buttons to edit. Avid came along and really ticked those guys with their new technology and upstart attitude, in a similar way to Red. But the producers liked what they saw in Avid (it gave them way more control), and those Kem guys learned it or they were gone. Now, flatbeds are basically only in museums. And they were still very common as late as 1999 or so.

A company called Lightworks (who?) came along, appealing to film editors with a more film-like interface, trying to get the old-school Kem guys onboard. Suffice it to say, they weren't very successful. Looks to me like Arri is trying to do the same thing, and with a surprisingly similar timeline to the way NLE went.

Once the digital technology matches film (and film IS technology, it's a photochemical sensor, nothing more), it makes even less sense to keep using it than a Kem or flatbed. It'll be phased out faster than snipping and glueing film ever was.

And like Avid, the new digital cinema won't try to replicate film editing in an effort to appease the old guard. It's new technology, will require a completely different way of working, and maybe, differerent people to work it. Hopefully the current artists on the camera side will remember what the heck happened to their film-slicing counterparts.
 
steventimothy said:
Looks to me like Arri is trying to do the same thing, and with a surprisingly similar timeline to the way NLE went.
Click to expand...

Then, I don't want to smoke whatever youre on to come to that theory.

Arri is appealing to a different market than Red. Though I'm willing to bet a decked out Epic wont be too shy of the of the Arri. Arri is targeting the same market they have always sought, the higher end of the spectrum.

Red has made a camera from nothing. They are to be commended on pulling what resources they had and entering a market with prior experience in the field. They through a stone and made a splash.

Arri...has how many years on their side? how much experience and how many brilliant minds working for them? Not to mention the resources.

I'm not a Red hater but I never drank their kool aid either. Those who did defend the Red to apple fan boy-like proportions. After hearing and seeing the presentation made by Arri, who has always known how to an unveiling, I love their system. The proof is in their footage and in their design.

Now, its a wait to see what Panavision has been working on so quietly for the last year or so. They have been more tight lipped about it than any of their previous designs.

Fact of the matter I won't buy a camera. A production will rent the gear I need. And pending the budget and the needs, I will choose the camera system best suited. But as of now. Arri would be my first choice hands down.
 
The Sarlacc said:
Arri...has how many years on their side? how much experience and how many brilliant minds working for them? Not to mention the resources.
Click to expand...

I would say Red do things the old way, they search for good engineering and hire it. So they have constant access to it, for improvements and future development. And total control of imaging. Good old fashioned enterpreneurship.

On the other hand Arri sometimes do things the new way or should I say the cheap way. See Metacamera project (Metadata Enhanced Digital Camera with Universal Format for Multiple Broadcast, D-Film and E-Cinema Applications) using academic labour from university of Padova and involving Arri, UPP, Fraunhofer and Snell and Wilcox. It had a published budget of only 1.4 million. Arri effectively outsourced everything that had to do with image quality, all processing, etc. Even the first samples of the Arri digital camera were identical to the samples in the PHD thesis of a Padova student.

Just because Arri has been in the market for decades, doesn't mean the engineering is superior to Red, especially when we are discussing digital products. The metacamera project image development which I believe was the Arri digital camera image development, used a demosaicking algorithm I was also interested in licensing but rejected after testing, due to artifacting in the shadows and an overall artificial look. I wrote my processing from scratch and Red do the same and I respect them for that.
 
The Sarlacc said:
Then, I don't want to smoke whatever youre on to come to that theory.

Arri is appealing to a different market than Red. Though I'm willing to bet a decked out Epic wont be too shy of the of the Arri. Arri is targeting the same market they have always sought, the higher end of the spectrum.

Red has made a camera from nothing. They are to be commended on pulling what resources they had and entering a market with prior experience in the field. They through a stone and made a splash.

Arri...has how many years on their side? how much experience and how many brilliant minds working for them? Not to mention the resources.

I'm not a Red hater but I never drank their kool aid either. Those who did defend the Red to apple fan boy-like proportions. After hearing and seeing the presentation made by Arri, who has always known how to an unveiling, I love their system. The proof is in their footage and in their design.

Now, its a wait to see what Panavision has been working on so quietly for the last year or so. They have been more tight lipped about it than any of their previous designs.

Fact of the matter I won't buy a camera. A production will rent the gear I need. And pending the budget and the needs, I will choose the camera system best suited. But as of now. Arri would be my first choice hands down.
Click to expand...

OK but, still, there is no direct information to tell me why this is better than Red with MX, or Epic, which cost far less. I don't shoot ARRIS reputation, I shoot images.

In what ways are the images coming out of this ARRI better than those coming out of Red + MX? Do they have more dynamic range? Less noise? Anything? These are my questions. There might be really good answers to these questions, but I've yet to hear them.

Price and performance are two different things, to say that a camera is aimed at a "higher market" does not mean it has better performance.
 
I think Arri's only claim to fame is that they tried to give it a "look" and "feel" more similar to film cameras than Red in an effort to supply a comfort level to the old guard. (I think their only feature advantage, the ProRes option, has kind of been mooted by Red's recent efforts with Epic.)

That's what Lightworks tried to do initially, have a "cutting room" metaphor with their interface, to help the non-technically-oriented film guys. (Now they're a free app. )

I think while Red's finishing off their Epic, they should have a concurrent side project which includes technical luddites, to help develop a completely systematic workflow that will increase the comfort level of all the players in the market. I think that's the only area where they're weak: the communication and workflow side.
 
I suspect the appeal of ARRI's name plus the greatly simplified workflow and global network of dealers/service centers will put Alexa onto the purchase and rental wishlists of a lot of professional DPs. Much salivation was generated for this camera at NAB. RED's a great value and it's incredible what they've accomplished in just a few short years but the playing field just got majorly leveled here and that's a fact even Jim Jannard admits to.

Noah
 
I think for a lot a guys the name Arri is a kind of insurance.

If you get crappy pictures out of a Red, it´s easy to blame the camera (at least when the responsible person does not know squad about camera tech).

If the same happens on an Arri you are on the safe site.
Bad pictures out of an ARRI? Naaaah..

I saw that since years, when people try to substitute low creativity and low craftsmanship by using the "right" brands.

" I know it looks bad, but hey we used an ARRI, what else could we do?"

Frank
 
Postmaster said:
I saw that since years, when people try to substitute low creativity and low craftsmanship by using the "right" brands.
Click to expand...
Yeah, "no one ever got fired for buying IBM". Arri has that in spades. That's why Red should develop a book for workflow that's bulletproof.
 
I think it's partially an image problem for RED. Since their defacto motto is now "Everything is subject to change, you can count on it", it conveys an image of undependability. Reputations are made around things like this.
 
Their motto is Rendering Obsolescence Obsolete. The subject to change is there so people don't plan a shoot in 6 months and think they will have a Scarlet by then. Part of the problem is that their camera development is shared with everyone and when problems arise dates get pushed back. The alternative would be to not know anything then one day, BOOM Epic is shipping. I prefer the former.
 
yoclay said:
I think it's partially an image problem for RED. Since their defacto motto is now "Everything is subject to change, you can count on it", it conveys an image of undependability. Reputations are made around things like this.
Click to expand...

It does sell at least 20x more cameras vs the conservative approach though. A company would have problems surviving by selling cameras only to serious professionals that have been around for decades. It would be a tiny part of the small digital cinema camera market. The company itself would have to be small and extremely efficient. Dependability, the aesthetic of the output, the architect's approach to design, and little things like the size of the company logo on camera, generally become important later on in a cinematographer's life. But the mass of the market is easily manipulated by numbers, specs and cheap marketing in general. It would be lovely if your customers were talented, aspiring filmmakers and seasoned professionals, but what if it mostly consisted of kids who want to play cinematography because they got tired of their other toys? Would you forget about your serious customers if a different approach would expand your business by 1000%?
 
Code Rad said:
Their motto is Rendering Obsolescence Obsolete. The subject to change is there so people don't plan a shoot in 6 months and think they will have a Scarlet by then. Part of the problem is that their camera development is shared with everyone and when problems arise dates get pushed back. The alternative would be to not know anything then one day, BOOM Epic is shipping. I prefer the former.
Click to expand...

Obviously the motto "rendering obsolescence obsolete" doesn't seem to have much traction with anyone anymore. Otherwise why would they be putting their energy into building an Epic?

Frankly, I would say for most people their defacto motto at this point is more likely "everything is subject to change".

What happened to the Full Frame Scarlet for instance?

The only thing I can count on from RED at this point, is that I can't count on them.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top