TomTheDP

Yeah I know what you mean. My fiance is a Production Designer and has done projects where the Art Budget is 30k and that doesn't include her personal rate. When I DP the pay is upfront. DP is usually the highest paid person on the project. The director is usually taking money on the back end with whoever is producing. DP'ing at this level isn't great pay, though it is paying my bills at the moment. These are like 5-7 day shoots. I am in talks with a producer to DP/Direct/Write a film in the 30k budget range (already written) and splitting the profit 50/50 on the back end. That is where the money is made. Obviously making money on the back end is a risk, but I have seen the money from previous projects and the risk for me is only my time. Making 2-3 times what you have spent is a big win in my book.

Cropping isn't the worst thing, but yeah open gate on the S1H is a better option for 2x anamorphic lenses.

We've seen Canon intentionally gimp their own cameras, putting in inferior hardware that would cause overheating. I personally doubt it is an issue of can't. Of course we now have the XH2S, with a sony sensor(maybe?) that is doing a 14 bit readout. The shadow retention on that camera is quite impressive especially for a S35 sensor, which I assume has a lot to do with the 14 bit readout. Performance was gimped by fuji's weird Xtrans filter and bad processing. Most things come down to money but I also see a lot of incompetency with these camera companies, which is also probably stemming from a lack of budget in R&D. The camera market is pretty dead. In terms of marketing I don't know, I don't work for these companies. I am just making guesses. I have used lower end cameras for a long time. Recently in 2022 and this year I have had the chance to shoot on RED and ARRI for several feature film projects. I was of the opinion that it is a waste of money and time to shoot with these cameras for the most part. I don't hold that opinion anymore. At the end of several of my projects last year I was questioning the merit of using a heavier, older cinema camera vs something much lighter and quicker to use. Once I started coloring the projects I changed my mind. The EPIC Dragon and Alexa EV are both pretty old tech as well. I am excited to possibly shoot with the RED monstro or LF soon. Am I focusing on things that don't matter? Maybe? I am not a director, the story is not my realm. My job is the image which is achieved through the camera and lighting. Everything in my line of work is arbitrary to some degree. It is art. It's choosing between using a frost or white diffusion. Does the audience care? What is too much and what is too little? I don't know. Small things that add up. It's an obsessive job but that is part of the fun, at least to me. Anyways I am hopeful to see something with 14 bit readout on the market soon that is in the affordable range. Rooting for Panasonic.

I've worked on 5 films in the last couple years that were in this budget range, non of them are out yet though. I DM'ed you some stills from the last one that I DP'ed. These are all Tubi films. Check out McGraw Ave Season 2 on Tubi, that was done by one of the production companies I've worked with, and one of my good friends DP'ed it.

The Alexa does a 14 bit readout. RED does 16 bit. The Alexa uses 12 bit log both in RAW and ProRes. RED uses 16 bit linear. If you look up the difference between linear and log you’ll get it. All RED cameras, ARRI, and Sony Venice do either 14 bit or 16 bit readout. All prosumer cameras like the S1, Sony FX cameras, Canon’s entire lineup do either a 12 bit readout or 10 bit readout. This is why these cameras 12 bit raw performs poorly compared to ARRIs 10 bit, as even when recording 422, ARRI is doing a 14 bit readout. Of course the unique ARRI sensor and color science/processing makes a big difference too. As someone who’s job it is to give the best picture possible I have shot engaging projects with the S1 and in post have been disappointed in the image. This is what I am saying. I have used a wide variety of cameras on narrative shorts and features. I avoid shooting with low end options unless it’s forced by the budget. It just makes my job harder. The Komodo is great but it is a cheap sensor being used. If you like side by side tests I’ve done them, Komodo vs Alexa. The Komodo’s lack of dynamic range is apparent and the color science/skin tones are noticeably different. This is when shooting with natural light. The Komodo simply can’t hold onto the highlights. Blind tests are great for YouTube content but they don’t offer much practical info for using a camera on production. I do think there is a practical limitation on what is good enough. ARRI is that limitation. 14 bit readout into a 12 bit log, 4k resolution, and about 14 stops of dynamic range. The Alexa 35 goes to 17 stops of dynamic range, a bit overkill but I can see how it would be helpful sometimes. They stuck with 4k resolution and a 14 bit readout. That seems to give you what you’d need in post production. Which has definitely been my practical experience. I am specifically talking narrative use on production. If one is just shooting their own content it definitely doesn’t matter much. I definitely don’t recommend everyone go pick up an ARRI or RED camera. But for people who do what I do, I usually would. This industry is very niche though and I’m in my own little small niche within it.

I do, I just like to complain about IQ, during my restless nights

Blind tests aren't of much use. The zakuto blind tests says that a GH1 and 35mm film are equal. So why didn't camera development stop there? It would indicate 10 bit log, 4k, high bitrate, and anything beyond 8 stops of dynamic range, doesn't really matter. Cameras aren't developed or sold on blind tests. I don't think any professional is choosing a camera based on blind tests either. They have certainly offered no use to me. You can argue IQ has nothing to do with making a pleasing looking image. That is definitely true in many ways. But it has nothing to do with marketing. You can say that marketing is all bullshit. I'd agree with that. 8k is useless for 99% of people yet it is a great buzzword for marketing. You are saying though that 14 bit recording is useless and blind tests somehow prove this. If you are simply trying to say that 14 bit isn't marketable, that could be true. I am not a marketing specialist. But camera companies don't use blind tests to market or else they would all be out of business. In my experience when you actually use a camera on production and work with it through post, then you see a difference. There isn't really much debate there. Can a film look good that isn't shot on a cinema camera? Yes of course. But cameras like ARRI and RED are industry favored by pretty much any DP you would ask. To me DP's are usually the last people to fall for marketing hype. These people see images constantly from production all the way to the finished product. ARRI isn't favored because of internet blind tests, they are favored because they actually make production and post workflow much easier. I'd love it if my S1 could give me the same image as an Alexa. But from my experience it just doesn't. If you want a good test of a camera shoot 100 different scenes in all different scenarios, time restraints, lighting conditions, different sized crews, and then color correct and grade all of the shots and scenes. Do that with 5 different cameras and than compare them all. Well that couldn't be put in a little 5 minute youtube video. Stuff that is actually helpful can't be compressed into a little youtube video. Experience gotten from months of shooting and in post gives one a good idea of what matters. Anyways 14 bit plus capture, even if it is just the readout is the way forward to better IQ imo. The Alexa shooting in 422 is still using a 14 bit readout. That is partially why it looks way better than cameras that are shooting 12 bit linear raw, which is a marketing scam. 12 bit linear raw really doesn't give you any more information to work with than a good 10 bit ALL-I. The advantage is it sometimes gets around the horrid internal processing many cameras do to their 10 bit options for some reason. But it also often reveals how shitty consumer sensors are in the shadows, bad colored noise and banding that is normally hidden by heavy noise reduction. The Alexa has a 14 bit readout regardless of if you shoot 422 or 444 or RAW. Anyways I am just expressing my disappointment in camera development. I would extend that disappointment to the high end cameras as well. RED is partially to blame in my opinion. They pushed the whole high resolution band wagon that consumer cameras jumped on. 10 years later and the best camera in the world the Alexa 35 only shoots 4k, while RED releases cameras for 1/2 what they did their previous line-up, with sensors that can't even match ARRI's 5 year old cameras. 13 years ago the Alexa came onto the market, the camera that replaced film essentially. 13 years later it's still the best sensor on the market, only surpassed by ARRI's own Alexa 35. It's unfortunate resolution got put on the forefront of development instead of color depth, which also leads to increased dynamic range. Am I saying the 5D MK3 is the pinnacle of image quality? No I am not. But it was capable of giving you a high bitrate 14 bit 1080p image. That was 11 years ago. Why can't we have 14 bit RAW 3K-4K in a small prosumer camera 11 years later. We get the same releases with a MK2 slapped onto it, with micro improvements. Very annoying. Now you can tell me these are first world problems and I will gladly agree. I am in between projects right now and don't have any kids, so I have the time. And if this forum is not the place to vent about the BS that camera companies do than maybe I am just very confused.

I wouldn't say slim, the Magic Lantern community was pretty large. People went through the trouble of making a hack and dealing with the insecurities of using it. People still use it to this day. 10 bit and 12 bit RAW are selling points, so I am not sure why 14 bit wouldn't be. Side by side comparisons aren't particularly useful imo. Compile hours and hours of footage from a project, being able to compare tons of different lighting scenarios and real practical limitations. Do that with an Iphone and than any of the 10 bit SLR's on the market and you'll quickly see the difference in post. Same goes jumping from a prosumer 10 bit image to any actual cinema camera. That is my opinion obviously from my personal experience.

12 bit log has a similar amount of info as 14 bit linear raw. But yeah the image definitely looks very nice regardless.

I mean I probably wouldn't shoot with a Classic if my only concern was audience perception. How is monitoring with the 5D MK3? Really considering it honestly.

I honestly would go with the FX30 over the FX3. The A7S3/FX3 have too much image processing which ruin the internal 10 bit recordings. Shooting external RAW bypasses this but its an annoying workaround that doesn't offer much benefit aside from bypassing the ugly internal processing. Used the FX30 recently on a short, which included low light scenes and it looked great. Film grain was added in post but the original recordings were pretty clean.

How does Panasonic have a perfect IQ processing formula and than mess it up upon every new release? lol

Yeah it is plenty bright. I would say SmallHD is less reflective and more color accurate but you pay a premium for them. Atomos is the 2nd best in my opinion.

Yeah a lot of companies have offers like this. Seems like a solid option if you have a good enough credit score to get accepted. Just applied for RED's program for the V-Raptor. Though I think I am going to decide against it. Don't need to spend more money on gear right now.

I like my Shinobi monitors. They have low noise fan settings.

I mean you could just buy 10 DSLR's and have them on stand by and spend way less.

I would definitely be considering it if it is a 14 bit readout. That would be very unique. 12.5 stops with the texture of 8k raw would be very nice. Still a heck of a lot pricier than my Sigma FP, but for a good reason.

Yeah that would be sweet, at a lower price point. Never going to happen though.

DR is pretty simple. Check CineD or Gerald Undone. Most cameras have dynamic range results between those two sources. For Color I usually rely on a lot of different sources from youtube, forums(including this one), people I know, colorists opinions, and just my own perception from reviewing footage. I think the FX30 is kind of ignored on here because it is a boring camera. It doesn't push past any boundaries. It was also very late incoming. An APSC Sony camera that could do 10 bit and 4k 120p was rumored for a long time. The XH2S has much more interesting capabilities and specs. That said the Sony FX30 is very capable and does what it does well. I personally think the IQ looks and feels better than the FX3. It just isn't a super exciting release.

This chart mentions NR. Is it just talking about the NR that comes from downsampling 8k to 4k? or is it adding noise reduction in davinci or other program.? If it is adding NR in post that means the actual dynamic range is about 12 stops. The Panasonic S1 has more without NR. 12 stops still isn't bad. The 8k Sony venice gets 12.8 stops when downsampling 8k to 4k in post. The RED raptor is getting 12.5 stops. So 12 isn't bad. The stills you posted do look fantastic though. Would be awesome if it was a 14 bit readout, though it seems like they would advertise that.

If it is 14 bit it should be identical to 14 bit RAW photos. Does the RAW video and photos have the same dynamic range? 12.5 stops with noise reduction isn't the greatest.

The C70 doesn't have SDI unfortunately.

Hollywood can make a movie that appeals to a wide general audience without hitting as much of a niche. If you don't have a huge marketing budget you aren't going to be able to do that. You have to find a niche. It is really that simple. I guess that is the same story for any small business. For me it has been Detroit films on the streaming service Tubi. Only working as a cinematographer but I am about to direct/produce one and see some of the back end. Will be interesting.

To me winning at an Oscar is more politics than talent. Sure your film won't get nominated if it is crap but it also won't get nominated just because it is really good. The people that care on a $5 mil budget indie like Nomadland are the producers, director, and DP. None of which want to be seen working with anything besides a camera that costs over 30k

I work on mostly low budget feature films in the 30k realm. They can actually be incredibly profitable if you know what you are doing.