Netflix Originals camera requirements

I believe Art Adams has written a few articles on how Arri handles(limits) color saturation differently than most other manufacturers, which results in a much more "filmic" image.
 
Run&Gun said:
I believe Art Adams has written a few articles on how Arri handles(limits) color saturation differently than most other manufacturers, which results in a much more "filmic" image.
Click to expand...

Sony ships the LC709A LUTs that do exactly the same thing in camera and in post.
 
David W. Jones said:
I'm guessing you didn't realize I leased an Alexa before I purchased the F65.
Click to expand...

A very typical DVXUser reply, how can anyone know what another person has or hasn't rented or owned? You renting or owning a particular kit doesn't mean you know how to point the thing effectively nor does it mean your replies are to be taken as read.

So we've established you don't understand what you're talking about because if you did you wouldn't have written what you did instead you would've explained why the LC709A LUT doesn't desaturate like the Alexa's 709 LUT which is the point I was making.
 
For the most part I always try to be helpful in my posts. The reason my posts are very short at the moment is because I am in the middle of a Source Connect ADR session and had just enough time to post a one liner while timecode sync was being established and files were being transferred. But you know what. Now I could care less what you think about my abilities or the lack there of.

You have a great day Nirv.
 
David W. Jones said:
The reason my posts are very short at the moment is because I am in the middle of a Source Connect ADR session and had just enough time to post a one liner while timecode sync was being established and files were being transferred. But you know what. Now I could care less what you think about my abilities or the lack there of.

You have a great day Nirv.
Click to expand...

No, you tried to mug someone off on a forum and then come the big I am.

Something we agree on, the feeling is mutual.
 
DLD said:
The idea is the same - set the minimum standard that is more likely to protect the archiving into the future. It is wholly arbitrary and selective but such is the nature of the beast. As the camera technology leaps forward, what was the top of the pops half a decade ago is down among the dregs of the pile now. And half a decade from now, the Netflix list may barely resemble the list from 2017. That's how it goes and there's no reason to fight these trends.

PS. B&W footage can be colorized, as has been the case with a few "I love Lucy" and "The Dick van Dyck Show" episodes, but that's an unneeded fuss.

That's right. Compares apples to apples, at least.
Click to expand...

I didn't compare the Alexa. I know it is a 3.2k Bayer. But it has nothing to do with it. I was merely saying they specifically asked for true 4K nut accept cameras which are not true 4K. Dismiss it as semantics if you wish. But rules should be accurate and transparent. Especially in a company that size. According to their rules, they would have to disqualify the Alexa, FS7, F55 etc and only accept Alexa 6, F65 etc.

Good HD will always look great on good 4K screens. Only when or if we switch to 16K the comparison so SD will hold any water. 4K is not different enough.
 
TheDingo said:
DP Andrij Parekh Shoots Netflix’s “13 Reasons Why” with VariCam 35s




DP Bobby Shore Shoots Netflix’s “Anne with an E” with VariCam 35 cameras
Click to expand...

What does that prove? Or do you really think a DP would come forward and say he wishes he had used another camera? It would be the same as saying he thinks the show doesn't look as nice as it could. It's a PR disaster.

I read a very telling article on American Cinematographer the other day. They were covering a TV show which shot on Sony cameras and went on to explain that because the show was made by Sony it meant using Sony cameras. The DP said he had never used the cameras but when he tested the cameras he was not unhappy with them. These were his words. Notice he didn't say he loved it or anything. He basically said he didn't hate it. I was actually surprised he didn't use a more PC comment, like at least saying he quite liked it. It wouldn't be the same as saying he loved it but at least not so obvious. I guess he is a big enough name or just don't care.

Now, I'm not saying the DPs above didn't truly love the Varicam. I'm just saying that these type of quotes prove nothing. Because they would never say they would prefer to work with another camera even if they did. So pointing to this quotes is pointless. It will always be praise. They want to be hired again. Which is what makes the comment from the DP in the AC article even more telling.

Besides I'm pretty sure some people would indeed prefer some other camera over the Alexa. It's perfectly possible. Why not? I'm not saying it isn't. Preference is a personal thing. It would just not be the majority as the current numbers tell us.
 
abreu-canedo said:
That said, Strattos came into the thread on page 3, quoting Mitch and stating the that he thought Mitch's assessment was wrong...and/or meant that Netflix was stupid for putting out these guidelines...if I understand correctly.
Click to expand...
Indeed you did not understand correctly. I never called anybody stupid. I never used that word. I tried making my point as eloquently as possible without crossing any vulgar lines. Matter of fact I just searched the thread for the word "stupid". Before this post it only showed up twice in the thread. Once by you and once by another poster.
 
Mitch Gross said:
One can light and expose appropriately to deal with poor highlight rolloff. You can't light your way to higher resolution.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry Mitch. But I had the impression you worked as a DP before? If so, how can you say that? The way you expose does not control the way your camera rolls the highlights. You can protect for the highlights, sure. But that doesn't make the camera roll the highlights nicely or more nicely. It only avoids that the camera has to touch the highlights at all. This is not the same as rolling the highlights nicely. This does not give you the same nice look of rolling the highlights nicely. This does not make it as easy to work with the camera as a camera which rolls the highlights nicely. If I'm missing something, please do tell.

As for not being able to light my way to higher resolution, I personally prefer a nice image than a sharp harsh one.
 
Mitch Gross said:
People are used to what they're used to and they don't like to change if they don't need to. I'm sure if they could many DPs would still be shooting film with 11 minute run times, grain and a comparatively low light sensitivity. Cartoni makes a fantastic heavy duty tripod head but most people in LA are so entrenched and used to the O'Connor 2575 that they'd never try the Cartoni even if it was handed to them for free. So yes, they are comfortable with Alexa and don't want to change. Not saying Alexa isn't a worthy camera obviously it is), but other cameras aren't given a chance because many DPs simply aren't interested in trying something different.It's one less thing for them to think about. And if they own that Alexa, one more rental they can charge.
Click to expand...

Of course many of them would still be shooting film with 11 minute run times, grain and a comparatively low light sensitivity, but way better color and color separation, unmatched skin tones and overall aesthetics. Are we going to make this a film vs digital thread now too?

Of course people will use what they know, if that works well. For you to sway them away you have to come out with something that works better. Much better. Otherwise why would people trade? The fact people haven't moved away from the Alexa and there are high budget movies using it right now as we speak just means nothing has beaten the Alexa yet. There are cameras that see more in the dark, there are cameras with more resolution. But none has beaten the whole package yet. If the Alexa had been fully beaten you can be sure they wold trade. But when you look at the new stuff and goes, meh, where is the reason to dump what you already trust?

I doubt very much any of the DPs shooting Alexa in high budget Hollywood movies are also renting their cameras to the production. And to me the high budget Hollywood movies are the benchmark. Because they can use anything on earth. Even 65mm film as Tarantino and Nolan are now using.
 
Mitch Gross said:
Right now no one feels the need to remaster Seinfeld in 4K, but I bet they're sure happy it was shot on film so that they could revisit the masters as needed. Ask the guys who have libraries of shows shot on video instead of film how well they're doing in syndication. How well does black & white content do in the marketplace compared to color from the same period and of the same caliber? You may say that the difference between formats is not nearly as great, but someone has to draw a line in the sand and this is where Netflix chose to do so after careful and congoing consideration. Does it make a big difference to audiences now? Maybe not. Will it make a bigger difference to audiences in the future? History shows yes.
Click to expand...

Again, can we stop comparing SD to HD as being the same as comparing HD to 4K? There are several articles, papers and tests which show the difference between SD and HD is way larger than the difference between HD and 4K. One can only tell the difference from HD to 4K if he pixel peeps. This is an old subject. I understand you have a 4K camera to sell now. But honestly, why insist in such an out of place comparison? Let's wait and see if shows shot on HD will start being rejected in the near future, instead of trying to predict the future based on apples to orange comparisons.
 
combatentropy said:
First of all, I doubt Sttratos thinks he will overturn Netflix's decision. There are other reasons to talk about the news than to think you can change it.

Second, I can think of three choices when confronted with a client demand that you disagree with. This applies not only to filmmakers but also to: plumbers, carpenters, graphic designers, composers, dentists, computer programmers, on and on. It is a situation that workers in all fields have had to deal with for thousands of years.

1. Just do it.
2. Refuse. Get fired.
3. Politely argue against it, as hard and as long as you can get away with. Depending on your relationship with the client, this may amount to:

a. A long debate over many months (in the case of a director, screenwriter, and producer on a theatrical movie)
b. 10-60 seconds of polite reasoning and gentle suggestions (in the case of the jobs of most people here)
c. Not at all. You can complain to your family or friends at home or your colleagues on a web forum
​


Obviously it takes some people skills, and if you misjudge how much you can argue, then it's the same result as flatly refusing: you get fired.

But always just exactly going with the first thing suggested by a nontechnical client will quickly lead to a shoddy result and personal hair loss.

I really want to know. Do you think people come here just to get simple answers to a simple questions, like "What's the battery life of the GH4?" People come here, knowingly or not, to build collegial friendships. And they do that by sharing experience. And just like any relationship, they feel better when someone validates their feelings ("I agree, that was a bad experience") or their thoughts ("There is something to your argument, and I see why you might have come to that conclusion.") even if you think it all stems from their own blunder.

I really think this thread would have ended or moved on long ago if y'all had just acknowledged the validity of his points, instead of blowing him off.

Even though I think 4K is utterly unnecessary and provably a waste of everyone's time and money, now and 100 years from now, I try to steer clear from calling names or coming down too hard.

On forums, I'm sure my words still sometimes sound harsher than they would if we were all sitting around face to face, talking at a cafe. But I try to ask questions and stick to measurable facts if I disagree with someone.


Click to expand...

This is it combatentropy. I have no idea why people would think it's only our business if we work or want to work for Netflix. Otherwise we should not comment. What a close minded way of seeing things. Rules like the Netflix rules set precedents. Remember when producers were refusing better cameras because they wanted a 5DMKII? Somebody start talking nonsense and it suddenly becomes confused with actual sense and adopted. See that Amazon seems to have adopted the same rules right after? Thankfully as far as I know Amazon changed their minds and no longer use the rules. So at the moment Netflix doesn't seem to have influenced anybody else. So maybe they will stay an isolated case. If so I couldn't care less.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top