Ernesto Mantaras

I imagine that you have to think of any big production as part of a very well established camera ecosystem. The camera, lens, whether you use film or video etc can not be isolated choices. Arri, which has been around since the silent era, very purposely made the Alexa so that it can be interchanged with (film-based) Arricams almost without notice - all the bits of gear that make it work (gears, flags, matte boxes) are widely availabe and second nature to a practised camera crew. 
 
You can find crews around the world that will know how to work such standard 35mm-like gear. While RED has made tremendous progress, its layout, unique setup, and the depth of support by rental houses are just not as well established. While very technically adept directors like Fincher and Jackson might prefer a RED and enjoy fidling with it and pushing the camera system to its limits, most directors have enough on their hands and want as little drama as possible from the camera dept.

See it as a bonus, It's like getting anamorphic flares for free!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Andrew.  Always look forward to your blogs especially ones on the future.
 
Overall I get the gist that 4k is going to give us better image quality compared to what we can currently get on pro/consumer cameras.  However, consider the fact that plenty of big budget films being shot digitally right now and until next year on the Alexa will still be doing so at 2.8k.  I know it maybe dated now, but even Hugo in 3D was shot in 1080p.     Most DPs who choose the 2.8k Alexa over 4k RED say it was the resulting image quality that made them go with Alexa even after upscaling it for 4k projection.  
 
Help me out here because I'm at a loss as to why if it's not an issue for big budget films then is it a concern for us.  Shouldn't we be pushing for a cheaper, reliable, feature filled camera that does it any any decent resolution but gives us amazing image quality?  I think we all agree resolution is just one aspect of image quality and how DPs are choosing their cameras in hollywood proves that point.   I just hope we're not giving up on pushing camera manufacturers to truly gives us image quality + features, which is not easy to put a marketing term to, as opposed to "4K" that in reality doesn't even mean anything to those with limitless budgets.    Thanks in advance to any replies.

I had been a projectionist for a long time (now this profession has died), and from 2000 on I had also been a digital projectionist. Until 2011, when automation finally killed the job, I used to compare my own stuff to the DCPs, side by side on the big screens, in the last two years also as DCPs, when easyDCP and openDCP became available. The largest screen was 78 feet x 32 feet (that's for scope, for 16:9 the width then was 58 feet).
 
First thing I noticed is that resolution doesn't influence sharpness to the expected degree. And it also doesn't influence subjective quality very much. In fact, an upscaled SD DVD ( anamorph pixels with scope-crop, really the worst way to treat a video) could be shown to a big audience, and (back then) nobody complained, the class-A hardware scalers made it look good. I know this is hard to believe, but we once had a festival with student films, ranging from DVD, BD to genuine DCP (a Red!), and the one best looking was a masterfully graded HVX200 short, played from SD DVD.
 
On the other hand, there was a way to know instantaneously what was film and what was video: Colors. 

 
I know this comparison is only 8-bit, but I have to find a way to describe aesthetic subtleties here. With a camera like the GH2 ("Musgo"), for example, one would be well advised to fill the frame with detail, textures (resolution, that's the GH2s strength) and not with skies and other big areas of glorious colors.
 
Right now we grade for 8-bit, so 12-bit raw is *just* a bigger palette for grading. Color depth seems to add a new dimension to our video. It's fun to tear the, er, bloom off the images and to dive through the colors. Would it stand against an Alexa? I can't tell, really, but I'm convinced it would do better than many others.
 
I can't wait to see a DCP with the 12-bit preserved in my old cinema.

I guess you never edited intra footage from the GH2. I've found it a breeze to edit when I shot with Driftwood's Sedna or similar intra patches, unlike with long-GOP files.

The first 4K images are rolling off the 4K production camera, shot by Grant Petty himself no less. I'm hugely impressed with the image. It breaks new ground for resolution for an accessibly priced movie camera.

The download is absolutely huge at 9GB. If you just want a glance at what's on offer, you're in luck because I'm going to guide you through the images now and do a bit of grading...

Read the full article here

No but last time I checked, the 64GB KomputerBay card cost $120 and the Alexa with Codex cost $80,000. Take your pick!

Would love to see that too. Even just a little test... Andrew, pleeeease? :)

Ghost In The Shell is ace!
 
This is a great combo for this camera, and to top it off it's modern and can be bought now, you don't have to scour eBay for odd rare little lenses!

So Andrew, you watch much Ghost in the Shell  :)

I don't use the multiplier on the F-stop when it comes to speaking about low light ability. F1.8 is F1.8! And it is easier just to take it as given that with a smaller sensor you won't get as shallow depth of field as you will on full frame.
 
Crop factors are only useful in terms of describing the field of view. Everyone in the DSLR video world thinks in terms of full frame. A 28 is a wide, etc.
 
People in the movie industry don't think like that, they go in terms of Super 35mm and a 18mm is wide on a movie camera.

What's being projected is (mostly) CG, it's just not done through post production techniques.  The system knowing the position and orientation of the robotic arm at all times relative to the camera POV (like how the realtime line of scrimmage and yards-to-go lines are created for live sporting event broadcast) makes the orientation of projection surfaces easier to derive compared to having to track them in post. 
 
You could, additionally, sync a second motion controlled camera to photograph a completely different live scene, instead of using pre-rendered or on-the-fly CGI, to project onto the surfaces.  After 5th Element we built a system within Houdini to interface to the Digital Domain motion-control stage that allowed animators to design physically accurate moves for motion control miniatures rather than the screen-based methodology that was standard to the industry that often introduced "skating" and other kinds of motion or performance artifacts that have plagued flying miniatures for decades (though miniatures were phased out shortly afterwards so it was a neat proof of concept that never really got used).  This adds a projection component to that sort of realtime telemetry and view-dependent spacial awareness.
 
I didn't see specific info on the website or VIMEO but I'm wondering if the projector is on-axis with the composite camera via beam splitter or if they're pre-distorting the projection so that the projector can be fixed, up out of frame and not attached to the composite camera.  
 
It's neat looking, however it's done.

That's nothing, Star Wars was shot on VHS-C
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN8QCL8B8sU

Video to check out.
 
http://vimeo.com/71071523

Here is a good blog post that talks about this: http://admiringlight.com/blog/full-frame-equivalence-and-why-it-doesnt-matter/

I must take exception with the statement, "The problem is, F2.8 on Micro Four Thirds is equivalent to about F5.6 on full frame in terms of depth of field control and low light performance, so the 12-35mm F2.8 and Canon 24-70mm F2.8 is not really a like-for-like comparison, and a 24-70mm F5.6 for full frame would be much smaller than the Canon 24-70mm F2.8."  Yes, in depth of field control.  No, in low light performance.  F2.8 is F2.8 on any sensor, Period, end of discussion.   Some sensors do have more sensitivity to light.
 
http://frugalfilmmakers.com/2013/08/11/21st-century-camera/

I noticed the presence -albeit slightly- of aliasing in the corners of the blocks.
Oh well, I guess we can't have everything...

Hey Andrew, they are in fact Chinese saying: The Next Generation of Sony Xperia - Honami smartphone equips with a 20MPs Exmor R camera (plus a 2.2MP front facing camera) and it's going to support 4K video recording @ 4000x2000 resolution.
 
There is also another additional leaked photo showing that the rear camera is in fact "20.7MP, 1/2.3 inch sensor with a big G indicating that it's a G lens".

Thanks for the update
bought it too!

Nice!
I remember watching the trailer, the first 5 minutes and reading about it here a year ago: http://www.eoshd.com/content/8549/watch-the-first-five-minutes-of-gh2-feature-film-musgo-warning-nsfw
 
I love the look of it, will try to watch it soon. Thanks for the heads up!

Axel, I was talking about the BMCC, not the pocket camera in response to Kays.
 
As for the Pocket Camera, In the test footage we got yesterday, there was a huge difference in brightness between the highlights and the shadows. As I mentioned earlier, it's almost as if it was intentionally done that way. Even with film type DR you would have trouble not clipping or crushing, no?
 
I doubt JB has a ton of experience with the camera and I doubt he is using a monitor with a waveform, so some hit and miss is forgivable. 
 
This is ironic, more than a year ago i was getting flamed on this site for smack talking Brawley's handling of the BMCC. 

This is how Panasonic presentered it. The sensor tech is derived from the GH2/G6 but improved. I'm not sure if they meant it performs better than the GH3 by placing it higher on the graph. I don't think it does. The Sony sensor in the GH3 is quite a bit better than the Panasonic one if you measure the raw image quality.
 
I'm getting a GX7 test sample tomorrow so I'll check things out and set it up next to the G6. I expect similair video performance, but this binning talk is interesting.

I have never read such an ill conceived comparison as that Snapsort one.
 
60D has built in auto-focus motor? No Snapsort... try the Nikon equivalent.
 
They list flip out screen on 60D an advantage over GH3, whilst both have them.
 
"Great battery life" on 60D applies to stills only with the LCD turned off. GH3 has the better battery life for video and live-view shooting.
 
They say the 60D has faster autofocus. Ha. Try AF in video / live-view on that vs GH3. I'll think you'll find it is 5 seconds worth of hunting around vs 0.2sec.
 
Another gem... 60D has apparently "much more lenses available". Nope. The GH3 has more if you count adapters. The mount is much more flexible and can take more lenses.
 
Then under GH3 advantages they claim 60D has no image stabilisation. WTF? Never heard of Canon IS lenses?
 
They list 18 advantages to the GH3 and only 9 for the 60D and claim the GH3 has better image quality and more dynamic range, but yet rate the 60D at 89 and the GH3 at 49 and claim the 60D wins.
 
This is what happens when you get reviewers plucking stats from the internet without having ever touched a camera.
 
So yeah... Panasonic have their work cut out it seems. Half the world are this ignorant as well.

ebay ! - doh!
 
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ebay
 
 
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/MC-VOLNA-3-V-80mm-F2-8-lens-for-salut-S-old-Kiev-88-camera-BIOMETAR-copy-1982-/310685707573?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item48564fad35
 
 
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Volna-3-80mm-f-2-8-prime-lens-medium-format-for-Kiev-60-bundle-hood-filters-/110986661939?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item19d7521033
 
 
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/VOLNA-3-f2-8-80mm-RUSSIAN-LENS-MF-forSALUT-C-KIEV-88-EXELLENT-2-macro-ring-/330933754547?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item4d0d305ab3

I have the Nikon > Micro Four Thirds Speed Booster now and have been testing it for a few days, so check back for a review next week. Lovely with the Samyang 85mm F1.4 on the GH3. The adapter also has a built in aperture control ring for Nikon G lenses which works very well, though would be nice to see a declicked version.