kye

Well, I'd agree it's a stress test.... just not of the camera! I'm familiar with Agile in software development and if you're curious I'd recommend you have a read through the sections where the sensor and image processing heads talk about the various processes and the number of variables that go into them getting the best colour. IIRC there are literally dozens of variables (voltages and other electronic aspects) in running the sensor and they tried various combinations to try and optimise the image. I'm guessing that having two-week sprints is what allowed them to go down that path and still have the camera see the light of day - it might have been decades more if it was waterfall!

A simple curve in the highlights will do it, and if the curve requires too much contrast to be added to the highlights then you can augment it by desaturating the highlights a touch too, which is a great trick to blend over the areas where the channels are clipping at different points. Digital sensors all clip very very harshly, it's what the camera/NLE/colourist does after that that creates the rolloff.

I think someone mentioned this in passing earlier in the thread, but I thought I'd link it in case anyone was interested. The FD Times latest issue is 96 pages devoted purely to the Alexa 35 https://www.fdtimes.com/pdfs/free/115FDTimes-June2022-2.04-150.pdf One of the highlights I found was the ARRI head of sensor design demonstrating a new experimental firmware that reduces the weight of the camera for steadicam operators: But seriously folks.... it's a good read.

Are you talking about this one? I figured that I'd have to learn the false colour standard at some point, but seeing that and realising there is no standard, and that some of these are really very unintuitive, maybe I'd just make my own false-colour LUT and get what I need from that!

Highlight rolloff is created in post if you know how to colour grade.

Perhaps a side-note, but on the GH5 that tripod mode is excellent. Not only for completely eliminating motion (as it's designed) but also for doing heavily stabilised pans - It kind of feels like you're dragging the frame to one side, but the results really speak for themselves. If you're using stabilisation for hand-held work then it's worth trying that IBIS mode in whatever camera you have to see if this kind of behaviour is possible.

While I'm not about to buy, I'm also very interested in the quality of the 1080p on GH6. Double the thanks to anyone who shares this 🙂

Yeah, the FX6 is much smaller and the FX3 is really very small in cine camera territory. Even if it doesn't do RAW as Tom mentioned, for action sequences it's got to be very usable, especially considering that up until relatively recently GoPro footage was used in features... and let's just say there aren't any FX3 vs GoPro comparison videos because there'd be no point! Interesting that you draw the line between 'cinema' and not on the basis of RAW recording. I'm not suggesting some other line, I just hadn't thought about drawing it there, but I can see the logic. I think with the increasingly blurred lines between the categories of old, classifying things is becoming increasingly difficult and some definitions are so vague that they've been swallowed by hyperbole already.

The big fat answer is... it depends. One of the most significant factors is sharpening. All the A/B tests that people do leave the 1080p as-is and don't sharpen it to match the extra perceived sharpness of the higher resolution clip. I highly highly highly encourage everyone to do this comparison for themselves so they understand what it actually happening. Now, a better question is, can anyone tell when it's not a comparison and it's just what your film is shot on? I'd say no, considering that the lust for 4K cameras was quickly followed by a lust for diffusion filters to soften the "digital" look they created. .....and the best question is, does it matter to someone who is just watching and enjoying your content? To this I think the answer is quite obviously, no. Of course, the above is a "all else being equal" type of discussion, but all else isn't equal. When you're shooting or editing 1080p then you potentially have less hassles on-set with changing of memory cards, overheating of cameras, etc, meaning you can use the time you have to get one more take of a performance, or work in a way that's less interrupted. In post it either means you can use a cheaper editing setup or a highly spec'd setup will edit in a snappier way, making the tools nicer to use and you will literally create a better edit, and can have more layers of colour grading and more trackers etc so you can colour a bit nicer too. Not having to store such large files (camera media or SSD editing etc) means you can have more money to put into your film, which if you spend it on adding haze or renting a better lighting package or nicer production design will absolutely add to the quality of your output. There's no way in hell that the difference between appropriately sharpened 1080p and 4K can make anything like the improvement that will be made if you: get more/better takes have better production design make a nicer edit with nicer colour grading Resolution is hugely important if all you do is pixel-pee, but if you're interested in creativity it is a very low priority in making an enjoyable end product. (Standard disclaimer - resolution can matter more if your clients care about the spec, if you're doing VFX work like zoom in post by more than 40%, green screening, compositing, doing VR or AR, etc)

The think the other reason is that YT in 4K is far superior to YT in 1080p, but what people don't realise is that it has nothing to do with the resolution and is simply a factor of the bitrate instead. Mix 1080p footage with 4K on a 4K timeline and upload to YT in 4K and it's really quite difficult to be able to spot which clips are which resolution.

There are still some applications that need to go smaller still.... https://ymcinema.com/2022/05/16/meet-the-cockpit-lens-behind-top-gun-maverick/ I don't think you're getting 4 Alexa Mini bodies into the cockpit of a fighter jet, for example. Besides, the smaller they make the whole camera, the smaller they could make the detachable head, and therefore the smaller the places they could get it compared to the body.

Affordable anamorphics are really starting to arrive too, so it makes sense that this would be a new "standard" feature set for mirrorless cameras.

I have no idea what you mean.... They say "cameras are required to have capability to create more impressive and breathtaking expression" I want to create more impressive and breathtaking expression, I mean, don't we all? Finally a manufacturer has stopped using all these nouns all over their press releases and have started talking sense!

I have an enduring interest in tiny cameras with high image quality and every now and then I see a BTS with an odd compact camera in it, and it is often the head of the Venice mounted somewhere and connected by its umbilical cable. I would think it's too common a requirement, but it's not too uncommon either?

I'm guessing you have found people that you can socialise with during the week? I sometimes have breaks between contracts and found that basically everyone I knew was busy working Monday to Friday before 6pm, and were tired after that. I always suspected there was a parallel world of people who worked evenings and nights and weekends and they all just hung out with each other while the business-hours folks were all at work..

I saw that link, but (and I know this might make me sound a little crazy here....) I didn't think that manufacturers announced alliances by wearing t-shirts and posts on rumour sites. Yeah, I know, crazy talk. I guess if @MrSMW says "Panasonic and Leica made a joint announcement that they are 'furthering' their collaboration." then it must be true - regardless of the source!

This is an excellent question. I have been delving into things and I have come to three significant observations: Camera sensors are Linear measurement devices Normal cameras do not look anything like an Alexa - even when shooting RAW still images that aren't debayered and even well within their best operating area (low DR, base ISO, etc) The OLPF and spectral sensitivity of various cameras doesn't change much The problem with these three statements is that they can't all be correct without there being something else going on. The only way I know how to resolve this contradiction is if there is processing going on before the debayering in the ARRI cameras. I don't think the layout presents an enormous challenge for them to be able to put multiple sensors together like the LF does, but you might be right about it being a long wait. The 35 is named to match the 65, and the introduction of the 35 means that now they have cameras over 4K in all sensor sizes. Obviously the new 35 has greater dynamic range and colour depth than the ALEV3 cameras, but considering how much those already had, you could almost just think of the DR on the 35 like a special application camera (like super slow motion) where a production would just use one for those shots.

This seems like a good overview, and includes a few little sections to make sure social-media-bros now some of the basics...

Yeah, I've seen glimpses of that life and it doesn't look easy by any stretch of the imagination!

Link to the announcement?

I'm not sure that this applies for wedding videographers.... 🙂

I'd suggest that you also take into account resolution of the various platforms and what resolutions you'll want to deliver in. For example, it seems that snapchat might be the most extreme vertically: ...but if it only requires a very low resolution then you can get away with a wider sensor read-out and still oversample. Also take into account sensor resolution. An 8K 16:9 would give more resolution than a 4K 3:2. As is almost always the best advice - clearly define what it is that you want to end up with and then work backwards from there.

...and more chance of extra equipment getting stolen from set while everyone is busy doing things. I see posts on FB groups every so often listing serial numbers of items that got stolen so the group members can keep an eye out if they pop up for sale. Mostly someone asks how they got stolen and it's mostly out of the boot/trunk of locked cars, but the odd one disappears from set, unfortunately.