Surprisingly poor sample video of the F3 - update- was cell phone video, not F3

I'm confused , the title of the thread now says it was actually a a cell phone that he was comparing not the F3, Is that true? I don't remember that being the original title of the thread, but I didn't see anything about this in the later posts. What's up.
 
Fohdeesha said:
Yaeh, that video is clearly from his cell phone, showing the rainstorm that canceled their f3 shoot
Click to expand...

The rain didn't cancel the shoot. It slowed us down a little.

The test is still in progress. I'm waiting for Deluxe to finish the film-out and the DCP of all 6 cameras I tested. I have a preview of the Alexa version right here. http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2011/03/19/available-light-test-nearly-there/

You guys aren't very patient. Its he most recent post there that explains where I'm up to.

JB
 
As an update to this thread, anyone interested in seeing the results for themselves on the big screen and sign up for a look here.

Of course, It's in Melbourne. And maybe Sydney later.

jb
 
wish the screening could come to the states! loved the alexa short you have posted up already. are you going to be posting the full comparison online?

side question, are the pushed blacks on the alexa short a creative choice, or a result of a color grade meant for film out/ DCP and that's how it looks like on a computer?
 
tom.wong said:
wish the screening could come to the states! loved the alexa short you have posted up already. are you going to be posting the full comparison online?

side question, are the pushed blacks on the alexa short a creative choice, or a result of a color grade meant for film out/ DCP and that's how it looks like on a computer?
Click to expand...


Hi Tom.

Yes I'm planning to post all the clips online. I really designed the test with a cinema screening in mind.

The Alexa footage is a straight transfer from the DI grade and as such wasn't corrected for 709 / WEB. When you say pushed blacks do you mean crushed ? In which case no. We went for contrast. At night blacks should be black BUT if there's detail there we tried to retain it. (like the cobblestones on the ground behind Jane in the opening scene.....)

jb
 
Pushed as in very light on the blacks in fact. Just curiosity, not criticism, but if it was graded for projection, the film emultion lut might be throwing off what the web stream looks like. Def a lot of detail in the shadows though. Alexa has truly phenomenal DR. also with the f3 did u manage to do offboard recording? A great deal ia lost on the internal codec, so Im hoping you gave the camera a fighting chance. :)


Truly great work, look forward to the full thing.
 
tom.wong said:
Pushed as in very light on the blacks in fact. Just curiosity, not criticism, but if it was graded for projection, the film emultion lut might be throwing off what the web stream looks like. Def a lot of detail in the shadows though. Alexa has truly phenomenal DR. also with the f3 did u manage to do offboard recording? A great deal ia lost on the internal codec, so Im hoping you gave the camera a fighting chance. :)


Truly great work, look forward to the full thing.
Click to expand...

Thanks...


Re the blacks, yes this is the grade as it goes through the Dulxe film out process...it hasn't been corrected for other screening environments...

All formats were onboard recording. (as ive already mentioned earlier in this thread) That was kind of a *rule* I came up with. Same with the 1D. I don't really like other extra things hanging off the camera. We were shooting with the cameras in a very stripped down way and that logic says to me to shoot them as is. That's the fair thing to do....I had 6 cameras and the only crew was me, a loader, a data wrangler and a gaffer (who was mainly holding some poly). We shot 6 locations. At different ends of the city. Over 8 hours. With 6 cameras...and no permission... It had to be as simple and as guerilla as possible...

As I've mentioned as well the F3 was probably the biggest disappointment of all the cameras.

jb
 
Last edited:
John Brawley said:
All formats were onboard recording.
Click to expand...

Thanks for doing it and I can't wait to see the results, but I don't think anyone planning on film out is going to use the onboard recording when an external recorder is so cheap and easy. Adding a Ki Pro Mini or Nano still won't bring it up to a fraction of the cost of an Alexa.

It should be interesting though. I do realize how difficult it is to do side by side comparisons.
 
Duke M. said:
Thanks for doing it and I can't wait to see the results, but I don't think anyone planning on film out is going to use the onboard recording when an external recorder is so cheap and easy. Adding a Ki Pro Mini or Nano still won't bring it up to a fraction of the cost of an Alexa.

It should be interesting though. I do realize how difficult it is to do side by side comparisons.
Click to expand...

I'm looking at a cinema environment. That can also include a DCP as well as the print which cost far less than 35mm print. I'm screening both. I could have also recorded RAW for the Alexa instead of prores QT. I'd also argue an AF100 with an off-board recorder would be half the price again of an F3. Or a GH2 with a Ninja....where do you draw the line ?

It's what *I* chose to test with what I could get my hands on at the time the way I like to shoot. I'm sure plenty of other will test for what they want to see. I was more interested in not only the end results on the screen, but the *workability* of the camera in the field and it's workflow.

jb
 
I understand that and I sincerely appreciate the effort. I do think the results will tell us something. Its just that we all know that the codec and recording format will be the limiting factor, which should be on par with, or a little better than, an EX1 but with DOF control. That shouldn't be too bad as anyone that gets their EX1 dialed in knows.

Your point about an AF100 with a Nano being a fraction of the cost of an F3 is well taken, and that would be the way to extract the maximum out of an AF100 since its limited to 8bit out. But that also reinforces my point.

I can't wait to see you results as that will give us a baseline comparison.

To fully see what we can get out of the F3 we're going to need the s-log and something like the Gemini recorder, both of which won't be available until this summer. That's when I'd like to see a Alexa with RAW side by side comparison.

Keep up the good work. All tests tell us something.
 
Last edited:
This really should have been a separate thread so that people see it.

Very nicely done and very informative. The 16mm was obvious because of the noise. The Red footage was obvious too because it was a little sharper.

The F3 footage I also guessed correctly because of the lack of noise. This is going to look even better graded with 10 bit 4.2.2, much less say 4.4.4.

I thought the 35mm film was the Alexa, which is great for the Alexa.

The 1D footage had crushed blacks and off colors, which unfortunately isn't unusual for a DSLR.
 
16mm doesnt have noise. I like it because it is different and feels more like a story is being told from within it.

Every kid on the corner now has a DSLR short film with someone walking around a city at night with shallow focus and lighting from ambient sources... that, now, looks cheap and boring to me instead of cutting-edge or interesting.

I may shoot my next city night short at 200asa to force some more creativity!
 
Last edited:
I had a look before knowing cameras and noted this:

A: Fine colours
B: Slightly crushed blacks, noise, lower DR
C: Nice, slightly odd colours, a bit to low black
D: Slightly odd colours
E: Low black, clipping, hard
F: Odd colours, crushed blacks, clipping and rolling shutter!
 
Cinesin said:
16mm doesnt have noise. I like it because it is different and feels more like a story is being told from within it.
Click to expand...

I suppose you're making a finer point about the difference between grain and noise, but they're too close for me personally to make a distinction. And the 16 has plenty of whichever you want to call it. And no wonder, in some of the shots it looks like it was 2-3 stops under.

I get your comment about the accessibility of Canons has devalued some things we hold near and dear, but I can't romanticize film just because of it. Even the 35 has more noise or grain in it that would limit what I could do in color correction, although of course it holds up beautifully compared to the digital formats. Give it enough light and would surpass.

I will be called a heretic, but I think the Alexa has already surpassed what film is capable of. My eyes, my hands on the wheels of the DaVinci watching formats shine and buckle under unreasonable gains and gamma curves, the Alexa looks better to me, and the F3 is damn close to that benchmark.
 
Last edited:
Nate Weaver said:
I suppose you're making a finer point about the difference between grain and noise, but they're too close for me personally to make a distinction. And the 16 has plenty of whichever you want to call it. And no wonder, in some of the shots it looks like it was 2-3 stops under.

I get your comment about the accessibility of Canons has devalued some things we hold near and dear, but I can't romanticize film just because of it. Even the 35 has more noise or grain in it that would limit what I could do in color correction, although of course it holds up beautifully compared to the digital formats. Give it enough light and would surpass.

I will be called a heretic, but I think the Alexa has already surpassed what film is capable of. My eyes, my hands on the wheels of the DaVinci watching formats shine and buckle under unreasonable gains and gamma curves, the Alexa looks better to me,
Click to expand...

not heresy. simple truths. arri just needs a 4k camera that performs just as well as the Alexa, and it will be a complete film replacement. A lot of people are considering Epic to already be there. I'm indifferent, as long as it looks awesome :)
 
I only guessed the Red correctly from the sharpness and cause its the only high-end camera I get to experience. I failed with the others. I thought the Alexa was a dslr and the 35mm was the alexa and the 16mm was a d90 :D. nice comparison for sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top