bruceallen
Well-known member
Dear Panasonic
I asked about this before but never properly in its own thread... I figured this was the polite way to do it without polluting any other threads?
You sell 3D Plasma TVs. You sell 3D Projectors. You sell 3D Blu-Ray players, with bundles of Avatar. Would you mind selling us cameras that we can use to make those 3D films too?
3D cameras with fixed interocular spacing aren't flexible enough for the majority of narrative projects. What we need is something that we can make work with a mirror rig. Either that or please invent a very clever integrated variable-interocular lens system - but that would cost a lot and only be useful to 3D people.
Here's a thought: there is big overlap between a good 3D mirror rig camera and a good 2D indie filmmaker camera. So there should be a market for your camera beyond 3D. Everyone wins - 3D folks and 2D folks. Also, with mirror rigs: you get to sell us not one but two cameras per rig!
Everyone makes great mirror rig cameras... except for you and JVC.
Canon gets it: look at the C300.
RED gets it: look at the Epic.
Arri gets it: look at the Alexa-M.
Sony gets it: look at the F3 (although they messed up with the FS100 - it's small and light and would be a great 3D cam if it had Genlock), plus a host of more expensive cameras
Anyway, here's my recipe to beat them all in your next cam: please consider these features that are attractive to both 3D and 2D shooters (with 3D specific justifications in brackets):
- Above HD resolution (because of post-convergence, reframing, keystoning, etc we often lose 10% - 20% of the image, so we want to start with > HD resolution)
- 48fps/50fps/60fps (The Hobbit is 48fps, Avatar sequels are 60p, next-gen video console games will be 50p/60p stereo - it is the future and looks better. Plus you get to sell us more shiny high frame-rate stereo TVs and projectors)
- Small size and light weight (modular is fine a la Alexa-M... or just make it compact like C300)
- Good low-light performance (mirror rigs suck light and also you can't have razor-thin DOF so have to be a bit stopped down) and good latitude (clipped highlights look really bad in 3D)
- Minimal compression, or just the RAW feed of the sensor out as data out of an HD-SDI pipe (bandwidth of 2880x1620x12bit RAW = only 2.7 Gbps - and would go down a single HD-SDI 3G output)
- Lowest price possible (heck, we're going to be buying/renting TWO at least - probably more since we need backups, B cam, etc)
Add on these feature that are more targeted towards 3D folks (but mostly have uses in 2D as well):
- Genlock
- Either minimal CMOS skew, or the ability to reverse CMOS sensor scan direction (if one camera is inverted in the rig, we want the sensor to scan the other way)
- Camera linking function a la the F3 where you have a master camera and all of those settings (ISO, shutter angle etc) propagate to the slave camera.
- It would be awesome if there were some kind of fly-by-wire lens linking as well (one camera controls 2 lenses).
Personally, I'm okay with either 2/3", 4/3", S35 or FF35 sensor sizes. I would prefer a cinematic look, good low-light performance and good lens choices though - so that probably means 4/3", S35 or FF35. For 3D we won't be shooting much at T1.4 - but anyone who watches Hugo, The Hobbit, Spiderman, Prometheus, Tron, Pirates 4, Avatar (if you count the final composited frame) can see obvious shots where a little bit of DOF works fine. If you want to lecture me on why DOF in 3D is a bad thing... please just stop thinking of boring TV broadcasts (where the viewer's eye tends to wander) and start thinking about narrative films (where the audience's eye is being artfully led through the scene, and attention is being far more directed). No harm in at least giving filmmakers the option.
Please think about this when you make your successor to the AF100. Again: I think that most of the big features I asked for would be desired by your 2D filmmaker market as well. I don't think that Genlock costs that much to add in this day and age. It may have used to make sense to segregate product line pricing, but right now you're just losing out on the sales of not cameras... but pairs of cameras.
Thanks for listening!
Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
I asked about this before but never properly in its own thread... I figured this was the polite way to do it without polluting any other threads?
You sell 3D Plasma TVs. You sell 3D Projectors. You sell 3D Blu-Ray players, with bundles of Avatar. Would you mind selling us cameras that we can use to make those 3D films too?
3D cameras with fixed interocular spacing aren't flexible enough for the majority of narrative projects. What we need is something that we can make work with a mirror rig. Either that or please invent a very clever integrated variable-interocular lens system - but that would cost a lot and only be useful to 3D people.
Here's a thought: there is big overlap between a good 3D mirror rig camera and a good 2D indie filmmaker camera. So there should be a market for your camera beyond 3D. Everyone wins - 3D folks and 2D folks. Also, with mirror rigs: you get to sell us not one but two cameras per rig!
Everyone makes great mirror rig cameras... except for you and JVC.
Canon gets it: look at the C300.
RED gets it: look at the Epic.
Arri gets it: look at the Alexa-M.
Sony gets it: look at the F3 (although they messed up with the FS100 - it's small and light and would be a great 3D cam if it had Genlock), plus a host of more expensive cameras
Anyway, here's my recipe to beat them all in your next cam: please consider these features that are attractive to both 3D and 2D shooters (with 3D specific justifications in brackets):
- Above HD resolution (because of post-convergence, reframing, keystoning, etc we often lose 10% - 20% of the image, so we want to start with > HD resolution)
- 48fps/50fps/60fps (The Hobbit is 48fps, Avatar sequels are 60p, next-gen video console games will be 50p/60p stereo - it is the future and looks better. Plus you get to sell us more shiny high frame-rate stereo TVs and projectors)
- Small size and light weight (modular is fine a la Alexa-M... or just make it compact like C300)
- Good low-light performance (mirror rigs suck light and also you can't have razor-thin DOF so have to be a bit stopped down) and good latitude (clipped highlights look really bad in 3D)
- Minimal compression, or just the RAW feed of the sensor out as data out of an HD-SDI pipe (bandwidth of 2880x1620x12bit RAW = only 2.7 Gbps - and would go down a single HD-SDI 3G output)
- Lowest price possible (heck, we're going to be buying/renting TWO at least - probably more since we need backups, B cam, etc)
Add on these feature that are more targeted towards 3D folks (but mostly have uses in 2D as well):
- Genlock
- Either minimal CMOS skew, or the ability to reverse CMOS sensor scan direction (if one camera is inverted in the rig, we want the sensor to scan the other way)
- Camera linking function a la the F3 where you have a master camera and all of those settings (ISO, shutter angle etc) propagate to the slave camera.
- It would be awesome if there were some kind of fly-by-wire lens linking as well (one camera controls 2 lenses).
Personally, I'm okay with either 2/3", 4/3", S35 or FF35 sensor sizes. I would prefer a cinematic look, good low-light performance and good lens choices though - so that probably means 4/3", S35 or FF35. For 3D we won't be shooting much at T1.4 - but anyone who watches Hugo, The Hobbit, Spiderman, Prometheus, Tron, Pirates 4, Avatar (if you count the final composited frame) can see obvious shots where a little bit of DOF works fine. If you want to lecture me on why DOF in 3D is a bad thing... please just stop thinking of boring TV broadcasts (where the viewer's eye tends to wander) and start thinking about narrative films (where the audience's eye is being artfully led through the scene, and attention is being far more directed). No harm in at least giving filmmakers the option.
Please think about this when you make your successor to the AF100. Again: I think that most of the big features I asked for would be desired by your 2D filmmaker market as well. I don't think that Genlock costs that much to add in this day and age. It may have used to make sense to segregate product line pricing, but right now you're just losing out on the sales of not cameras... but pairs of cameras.
Thanks for listening!
Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
