Arri alexa:

P

PIMP

Well-known member
Hello group:

So I am about to possibly shoot my feature and the producer is pushing me to have it shot on red epic which he access to. Unfortunately I am not a fan of the red camera look and would prefer a different camera. I have seen a lot of things shot on the arri alexa/ and mini and would love to shoot with it. The issue is I have never shot with the camera and I am unfamiliar how to push it to get the best image. What worries me is I downloaded some test clips to do color grading on and for the life of me I am unable to make the images have the look of film as I have seen others do with the same camera. Since it is test clips i dont have the information about what lenses were used etc. The footage i have graded from the test clips looks very digital, what I hate about RED. I ve seen enough arri footage to know that this camera is capable of achieving some great looking film like images so i dont want to discount it. However it is going to be hard for me to talk the producer to go with a more expensive camera if i cant achieve better images then the RED. Shooting with expensive anamorphic lenses aside what is something i might be missing in getting a professional look out of the camera.

(Side note: I suggested we shoot with my sony f35 but uninformed people don't think its worthy since it doesn't shoot 4k.

thanks

O.R
 
Will they think the Alexa is worthy since it doesn't shoot 4K either?

As far as grading, maybe share a link to some of the test footage so some people here may take a look?
 
Did you light the scene you tested?...flat (no lighting) is flat on any camera...only way to really test it, is to test it with the lighting package you'll shoot with on the feature.
 
The sample footage seemed to be just testing the camera in a natural environment. There does not seem to be any movie lights anywhere
 
I would expect that people who are about to shoot a feature should have the budget to do a proper hands-on camera test before committing to use one camera or other...
 
If you can't make RED Epic footage look good, you won't be able to make Alexa footage look good, either.

Both are amazing cameras capable of shooting gorgeous, cinematic footage. And both cameras can shoot awful digital video. It really comes down to the cinematographer's skills and the colorist's talent.

My suggestion: Use the RED Epic and spend the extra money you saved on hiring a great colorist to make your footage really shine.
 
niki said:
If still undecided on digital camera route


Super 16mm film 4K scan perfect for cinema
Click to expand...

To be fair, if you've never shot film, I wouldn't recommend this route. S16 can look amazing but only if you really know what you are doing, know how to use a light meter, understand about pushing and pulling stocks, can afford to work with a top transfer house. A one light with S16 isn't going to look amazing, possibly just adequate. With film, If you don't know what you are doing, you could end up with no or unusable images. Personally I prefer the look of the Arri cameras over the RED but I have shot a few projects with the Epic Dragon and the REDs can make very nice images if you know how to light. I prefer Arri but I'd be fine with RED as my number 2. I used own an Arri SR-2 S16 package and I would be comfortable shooting film but it's a different look from the Arri or REDs as much as Arri and RED are thought of to be filmic. Film is filmic. Digital is digital although to my eye, the Arris come closest to film.
 
Arri cameras are simple to use. You just turn it on, point it, shoot, bring into editor, footage looks awesome without color grading, export file, done.

With Red you go to Red seminars to learn to use the camera, spend a lot of time on RedUser asking technical questions, then when it comes to the shoot, you hire a Red technician (who is also the 22 year old kid who the production rented the camera from, who's mom bought him the camera which he is renting out at $200 per day for a $30k package) to help guide you with the camera and in case anything goes wrong, have a backup on set in case one malfunctions or overheats, realize you don't have all the needed Red accesories and have to work around it, brag about the resolution you're shooting mediocre images at and also how much technical knowledge you have of the camera, light every scene to the T because it's the only way to make it look good, bring the footage into editor, hire a professional colorist and pay them the cost of an Arri Alexa, then a couple years later and your movie is done.


Are you using Arri LUTs on the LOG-C footage? The Amira automatically applies the LUT in post so my difficulty with grading Arri footage has always been, "Wow, it already looks amazing, how can I possibly grade it to look better?" Then again, I'm typically not trying to make it look like film. I imagine film plugins would help with that.

I recall my first movie I shot on Arri, being a bit skeptical, not having a chance to test the camera before the movie (because the movie was a camera test for a corporate shoot), watching the noisy and ugly LOG-C footage in VLC Player and getting worried, then bringing it into Premiere with the LUT automatically applied and thinking, "Well this just cost me $50k. I need to buy an Arri." Then I bought an Arri.
 
Last edited:
Applying a LUT is not grading. No wonder you're not happy with the footage. Learn how to grade properly and you'll see a huge difference. Plenty of YouTube videos will show you the right way. Avoid LUTs except for editorial or previewing in camera.
 
You'll get great results with either system but if the post path is unclear (colorist and post supervisor haven't been hired yet) I would protect myself and recommend ARRI.
Rent a calibrated 10 bit monitor. Don't be afraid to underexpose.
 
puredrifting said:
To be fair, if you've never shot film, I wouldn't recommend this route. S16 can look amazing but only if you really know what you are doing, know how to use a light meter, understand about pushing and pulling stocks, can afford to work with a top transfer house. A one light with S16 isn't going to look amazing, possibly just adequate. With film, If you don't know what you are doing, you could end up with no or unusable images. Personally I prefer the look of the Arri cameras over the RED but I have shot a few projects with the Epic Dragon and the REDs can make very nice images if you know how to light. I prefer Arri but I'd be fine with RED as my number 2. I used own an Arri SR-2 S16 package and I would be comfortable shooting film but it's a different look from the Arri or REDs as much as Arri and RED are thought of to be filmic. Film is filmic. Digital is digital although to my eye, the Arris come closest to film.
Click to expand...

+1
On this post but..

It’s worth it

Artistically and professionally

This is your career

Kodak adds punch too (like a name cast)

Good filming!
 
WHY is the producer pushing to shoot with a RED Epic? (and also WHICH Epic? Big difference between the MX and the Dragon!!!)

Is it because he can source it for free and that will save the production a lot of money? Well the same could be said about your Sony F35....
 
Many people use filters to take the edge off of the RED image. Either digital filters in post of glass filters during production. If you haven't already taken that into account, that might be the missing ingredient in your color grading.
 
Producers aren't really tech savvy. And to them 4k seems sexier hence more profitable i think.
 
In my experience, current Red cameras have much better color and require much less fiddling than they did a few years ago (also, we're more familiar with their quirks). Not as nice and simple as Arri cameras, but fine. OTOH, if you're not personally quite familiar with Red cameras and the quirks of various models and firmware, an Arri presents a lot fewer challenges to getting a great image first-time out.

Producers wanting specific cameras and resolutions (even when the work and "future proofing" don't require it) always reminds me of the old Xtra Normal animation.

"I want the one with more Gee Bees."

For the OP, see if you can shoot some tests with a Red Epic (and if the producer is pushing a specific unit, then with that camera) and an Arri. Doesn't need to be too elaborate, but should be content close to what you're going to need. And then have a good colorist do a grade the material from each camera. And then look at the results, and weigh the hassle vs quality ratio.

Yes, that's an additional expense. But compared to getting into production and having delays --or worse cruddy pictures-- it's worth it.
 
The Red Epic does not come even close to an Alexa in terms of dynamic range (11-12 stops vs 14-15), highlight roll-off or skin tones. The newer generation of Red cameras are far nicer and have their own look. Combined with the latest color science, I think Red has upped it's game. However, I do think that a lot depends on the look you are going for. Red cameras tend to be crisper due to the added resolution, however this can read as more video like depending on the way things are lit. Personally, I feel that the Alexa is a little more gentle in it's rendering and yes, more cinematic as a result. However, the image can be a bit muddy at times. So once again I think it's a question of how you deal with lighting. In terms of simplicity and durability, I don't think that there is any question that Arri wins hands down. However, outside of the mini, they are far heavier and a real beast in terms of portability, camera support, etc. (Not to mention being extremely power hungry).

If you are in controlled lighting situations, almost any camera will do the job these days. But a lot depends where your priorities are.
 
Alexa all the way. Rental houses are pricing XT packages very aggressively these days, as the Mini has gotten popular and the Alexa LF and 65 are the new Arris on the block. Every year No Film School lists the cameras used on the Oscar nominations- just look those up if under discussion.

But in truth all the current cameras (add Varicam, FF700, Red Helium, Venice) are amazing- it all lies in the hands of the user now. Post processing is a huge part of the process too- can't skimp on that.

On indie work it always seems to come down to budget. You have to look at everything- camera, glass, lighting package, DIT and post. Are you shooting ArriRAW or Prores? Big cost difference if on a budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top