Watched the HDR version on my iPad Pro and it looks awesome. As a color science dude I appreciate the HDR but having worked with HDR workflows I wouldn’t do every video in an HDR/SDR grade. Only the videos which would really benefit from it are worth it in my opinion but it’s your production 👍
I live and work in LA and am a colorist in post production. David was correct in terms of productions using Arri Raw vs Prores as their recording formats. Typically, higher end shows like Yellowjackets (Showtime) and Ted Lasso (AppleTV+) will shoot to Arri Raw for it's uncompressed goodness. I've also worked on scripted shows for CBS and although those productions are shooting on the Alexa, they tend to shoot to Prores4444 due to it's file size being smaller but you still get a very good amount of range to work with in post. Typically, higher end streaming shows and features shoot to Arri Raw and lower end/broadcast shows tend to shoot to Prores. One last thing I wanted to mention, David was also correct in terms of resolution not being the end-all be-all for choosing a camera. As a colorist, I'd prefer to color a project that was shot at 3.2K with an amazing sensor and color science vs a 12k blackmagic camera. Anything that was shot and displayed above 4k is almost indistinguishable to the human eye.
As a layperson it seems to me the advantage of higher resolution would be that you can crop more (since I imagine the final output resolution of the whole project is set in stone). But if you are already planning all your shots in detail before you film them that seems like a pretty useless advantage to have. Also as a hobby photographer, the amount you can push the sliders in post when using raw is night and day compared to compressed jpeg or even heic files.
No joke, the mean benefit of 8k tv’s is allowing for high pixel density screens while being extremely large. Basically allowing for large, and I do mean large, tv’s while having good picture quality. Larger 4k TV’s, or set resolution, have the same number of Pixels as smaller ones so the larger it is the easier it become to count the pixels. So 8k allows for insanely huge TVs to be made. And of course the TV size is one of the main ways to get a better experience with watching film. This is why perfect TV rooms for hobbyists use projectors. The 8k itself is basically pointless, even if you can theoretically tell the difference, at least slightly. This is also why there are no 8k monitors for computers, only two products were ever made and it was like 5 years ago, and they were not even that good.
@@urgay1992 correct. More resolution is great for cropping but also grain structure and noise. Arri has amazing dynamic range and grain structure to begin with so you can get away with up scaling lower resolution. The Ursa 12k has so much oversampling that noise is almost nonexistent when delivering 4k and exposed well. A professional cinematographer, crew, and colorist can make a $6000 Ursa 12k look just as good as anything shot on an Arri - all things being equal.
Agree, once worked on an Ad where the DP insisted on 8K so he could theoretically take two shots instead of one (one wide, one Close Up). It was a nightmare to finish
As a former ARRI employee and AC I finally got to watch the video and am a bit sad because of the inaccuracies. The main difference between the 35 and LF is the sensor size, the 35 being Super 35 and the LF being Large Format (aka bigger). They have different looks and feels to them. The LPL mount is a godsend for compatibility with their adapters. Don’t mind that alignment line, orient yourself on the notch in one of the lens lips; it has to be on the top right facing the camera. The codex being proprietary is obviously not perfect, but it ensures that the card can handle the transfer speeds and heat generated (I had lots of trouble with the old cFast cards). The 2 TB model can sustainably write up to 16Gbps. To have an idea, the 35 filming at full resolution in ARRIRAW can full up that 2TB storage in 56 minutes. Also reading speeds on that card are full thunderbolt 3 speeds, so 20 GB/s (happy data wrangler noises). Also yes, you can’t legally compress raw internally so arri does it while wrangling. B batteries are not only used because they lock in better (they actually function the same as gold mounts) but they are designed for a higher power output that the camera needs. V mount wouldn’t be able to keep up. But yeah, the camera is amazing, the image is beautiful, the compatibility with accessories is mind blowing, the people developing and building the cameras are passionate hard working. Props to Linus and David for the video and explanations, they’re not really used to classic or big budget productions where cameras like this are frequently used, but I am beyond happy for the shoutout :) maybe try a trinity soon! I (and my buddies at ARRI) would be happy to help and explain if the situation arises
Yeah this was a strange watch for me. This is what happens when a tech channel that has so much money they start talking about things they don't specialize in
@@Bayonet1809 haha fair enough. But it is because of the sensor area. A larger area allows for more light to reach the sensors, which makes the images pop more and feel more lifelike while also having a better low light performance. It also allows for a wider Field of view at the same focal length (it is „more zoomed out“). It also has more detail, especially in close up images. Another thing is the shallower depth of field, so you have a stronger separation between the object and the fore-/ and background. So you can imagine that the LF (or the 65, an even larger sensor) is used when you want to depict more intimacy and emotion from a person in a close-up, because of all the detail and separation from the background. Basically the LF is more “Cinematic” than the 35 and allows filmmakers to play and experiment with their image more. The 35 is better when you need more of a scene to be in focus and work in more standard productions. I hope this answers your question!
@@Bayonet1809 The sensor size plays a huge roll in the look and feel of a film. A larger sensor has a bigger depth of field than a smaller sensor. Lens equivalence is a thing - but even those equivalent lens' will look different because of this. Additionally the lens availability for the 35's sensor size is much much larger. Beyond that the 35's dynamic range is better than the LF's along with the color science. This video makes those things seem "less important" When in reality those are two of the most important things in a feature film. Will these things matter to a lot of people? probably not - but an equal amount of people it will matter to.
I mean, as long as the color delta-e is below 2.5 (probably on a non-frc 10 bit monitor) and you have more contrast than a TN panel, you're probably good to go. They're using an Asus monitor that's literally made to be a budget monitor, pretty sure the color gamut on that one is great too.
I propose ARRI send them one of those monitors, a bag of money, and some talking points, and in return ARRI let Alex and Linus watercool and Noctualise one of the cameras.
1. PL means Positive Lock, the 4 "cloves" on the lens are supposed to sit in the 4 loved slots. one of the cloves (almost always the to right one) has a cut out for a witness pin. if your are actually level, you will be able to lock in. the PL is never wrong. 2. you can add 'texture' burnt into the footage because it gives the director of photography more control over the final product. how many times did the director promise me something was gonna be done in post but was never done, now I'll mf burn it in so you can't take it out.
Let's not ignore that RED "lost" that lawsuit about compressed RAW to Nikon. Currently, Nikon has internal 8K 60 12bit compressed RAW in their Z8 and Z9 cameras.
It has about 14 stops of dynamic range. It's not as crazy as the Arri, but it also doesn't cost as much. Nikon is rumored to release a new log curve similar to Arri LogC4 that might change that.
@@cyano3d depends on your use case. I'm primarily a photographer that sometimes get calls for video projects to shoot alongside cameras like RED. According to the editors, the colors match up well. If you're primary a videographer, I'd say you have better options elsewhere unless you really want 8K 60. I've only used 8K twice, both for interviews where I was able to crop in and create solo shots while maintaining 4K resolution.
The reason for baked in texture and grain is to give power back to the cinematographers because very often the cinematographer has already moved on to his next show by the time the project is in post/coloring, and in this digital age they might not have the time or power to sit down in the finishing suite to decide on the look or the grain. It also helps to bake in the look during production so everyone gets used to it so it'll be less likely that the director changes his mind on the color/grain after months of editing. Sometimes the extreme flexibility from the newer digital sensors might not be a good thing to cinematographers because we are control freaks and we don't want too many cooks in the kitchen ;)
Also.. All the pro DP’s I worked with shoot for the final look if possible. This whole “shoot for post”, maximize dynamic range bullshit is something the nerds on the internet believe in. Shoot for the subject, and make it as good as possible, not for some graph.
Having worked at post-production companies for years (actually for Arri post-production also), I've never worked on a show, where the cinematographer was not involved in the color grading process.
This comment is spot on. I own a 35 but have to confess I’ve been a scared to dabble too far into the textures. However I have a project coming up where I feel it might be right and I can do some tests. I do not get as bogged down as others with constantly checking the false colour. I’ve learnt to shoot for my final look as when ever I’ve shot for safety that message rarely finds its way to the grader and you see shots how they were not intended. This even happens when you build a lut specifically. There’s still a tonne of range unless you’re doing night shoots
I work as a 1st AC. Mini LF and Alexa 35 are commonly used for all kinds of projects and even used together: corporate, commercial, music videos, movies. It often comes down to preference and lens compatibility to determine which is used. The audio in is primarily meant for a wireless scratch track from the sound person. The on camera audio will usually not be used. The Alexa 35 requires higher voltage batteries as opposed to standard gold and V mounts. They can use B mouny batteries or a higher voltage version of gold mount.
3:08 Uhm... as a sound guy. Yes you definitely would (and I have seen it done with this exact camera on a film set) use audio in. Sound will use a camera hop to send a stereo mix to the Arri for reference and to help editors. It's also another way to listen to what's happening especially if the director is also operating the camera. But definitely definitely audio in is used. it's not required, but it's standard practice for reference audio to have a camera hop mix sent to camera as a redundancy.
Absolutely. As a DP who shoots documentaries on my mini LF I've almost always got audio in when working with a recordist. Sure, there is always seperate recording but very rare not to have in camera as well.
I'm a 1st AC. On many of the shoots I work we just run timecode to the cameras and forgo any hops on camera, which is great. These newer Arri cameras and built in scratch mics unlike the older ones, which I think is the reason I'm typically not being asked to put the stupid A Box on it.
@@clermontflorida The problem is that the built in camera audio might sometimes be so different from what the sound guy is recording (because the camera is very far away in the shot). It's just a nice to have to get a mixed audio in to help with syncing just in case timecode breaks (it usually doesn't, but in the rare case that something fucks up, it's very nice to have).
Most of the time timecode + built in scratch is sufficient. I hate having to run a hop on camera because it's more crap that I have to deal with on the camera, and a lot of times sound people are not very near with their cables and don't provide their receivers with good mounting options. Sound people should have plates and threaded mounting points on their stuff if they except it to go on the camera body. I had to buy my own low profile 1/8" to XLR cable to avoid having bulky cables and connectors on camera, but I shouldn't have to do that. The sound person ought to have that stuff. @@eruannster
Great video! However I have a few technical notes🤓: -While new ARRI cameras are extremely expensive, there is a pretty big second hand market for ARRI cameras, since they have used the same sensor technology (ALEV III) on almost all of their digital cameras (the ALEXA 35 is the only exception). Used ARRI ALEXA cameras are available for less than 7000$. -Most productions I’ve worked on preferred recording in ProRes 4:4:4 rather than raw format. It’s a VISUALLY LOSSLESS codec and it's much more convenient than ARRIRAW. File sizes are much smaller and since you don’t have to debayer the footage it runs much more smoothly in editing. -When Linus points the camera at the diffused light source, the main reason he sees a lot of detail is due to much better optics which retain better contrast in the image and don’t flare. -Regarding the skin tones in the blind test: ARRI’s color science is known for compressing skin tone chroma values towards a pleasing color. While ARRI’s skin tones aren't necessarily realistic, they are much more pleasing and easier to work with in the grade.
Prores 4444 is NOT lossless. It might be *visually* lossless but that is not the same thing since you are still losing information that could help in post. Now whether that extra information is necessary is a different issue. (In fact debayering is by necessity a lossy process so any format that has gone through debayering is not lossless compared to raw sensor data.)
@@urgay1992ProRes 4444 is indeed not lossless, that’s why Apple came up with ProRes 4444XQ - also not lossless, but that’s where you can reasonable start talking about “virtually lossless”
All ProRes formats utilise lossy compression, it's comparable to high quality lossy compression with an image format like JXL, where ProRes is faster to decode but less space-efficient. ARRI footage had a green tint and other imperfections because it requires different color grading from the cameras they're used to, it is not the intended end result.
@@urgay1992 True. ProRes 4444 XQ is the best possible ProRes format, and that isn't lossless either, but it is very lightly compressed without being Stupid Large File Sizes like ArriRAW is. If you're not shooting something super advanced (green screens, StageCraft) and you're well exposed, it will be more than enough for the vast majority of cases.
@@urgay1992 You're right! I should have mentioned that ProRes (HQ and higher) is VISUALLY LOSSLESS and there is a loss of information. Thanks for the clarification.
2:09 Regarding the difference between 65mm/70mm film (IMAX or not): they’re the same thing. It’s referred to 70mm in regards to film projection, while 65mm is used in regards to shooting on film, as 5mm of the film area was used to record audio.
@@RandomTheories I think you might be right. It also uses a different number of perforations vs a normal 70mm if I’m not mistaken. Additionally you have panavision’s work with the ultra panavision 70mm with a crazy aspect ratio of anamorphic 2.76:1 Source: got family in the optics world and being in the cinematography world I know a bit about this stuff.
The Alexa 65 is based off the 65mm film format which pulls a 65mm wide strip of film vertically through the camera, when prints are made from this format an extra 5mm is added to the edge of the print film to allow more information to be stored for surround sound; this is the reason you can see movies in the theatre presented in 70mm. IMAX cameras use largely the same kind of 65mm wide film but they pull the film through the camera sideways which amounts to almost four times the area of the ALEXA 65's sensor. When IMAX is presented in film it will typically be advertised as IMAx 70mm or 15 Perf 70mm. In short the Alexa 65 is nominally 65mm wide and IMAX is nominally 65mm tall.
I’m a cinematographer. We can make almost anything look great with the right lighting and grading. Investing in skills matters more at the end of the day. For instance: the guy on the cabin steps with the sun in the background. I would definitely split my image into highs and lows to get more out of my sky and a little more out of my shadow foreground. Arri can do this really well because the dynamic range allows more pleasing correction once you split and grade the different luminance values on their own.
@@prismcollectionmusic only if it needs it. Sometimes you can just grade for the highlights and then use your curves to slightly bump the shadows. You can also create a new node (in Davinci), go to the HSL keyer, drag the “high” slider down until you just have shadows selected, add a glow effect to that node (with a tight radius) and blend in a little glow to raise the shadows a bit. Just be careful because on cheaper sensors the saturation gets wonky. Desaturating shadows can do wonders if done correctly. Really you want to light scenes correctly to begin with. A white bounce board works wonders in a scene like the one I’m talking about.
@@hendleyroadent2612 yeah I think subtle things like shadow saturation/hue really add up. Good tip with the bounce board too! I should definitely try the shadow select/glow thing as well, thanks!
Arri are cameras on easy mode. The DR, the UI, all of it is so simple to use and you don't have to worry about almost any given situation. I love them so much.
My first student film shooting on an Arri made me realise why professionals prefer them to say a Sony Vince or Red’s offering. Truly the most film comparable sensor on the market. That and the colour reproduction is second to none. Starting with Sony FS7 I didn’t appreciate the QoL features Arri focuses on until buying and shooting on a Arri Super 16 and their origins a film camera manufacturer really became apparent. Edit: Another under appreciated aspect of Arri cameras that many new cinematographers will gloss over when comparing Arri and Red is the UI. If Sony is the King of nested menus, Arri wants you to think you’re still shooting Kodak stock with a light meter and getting it developed the next day. It feels like shooting a film camera even the tactile controls on their older models. Almost identical between film and digital.
@@jonathanb.1625 I’m not going to lie, using a Mac for ingest and stuff, the workflow on Arri is a doll. The ProRes plays back great compared to Red’s raw BS. Plus theirs a thousand different flavours depending if your a one-man-band or a full fledged studio production. The interframe codec of ProRes is solid.
Basically arri’s does everything a film film camera does but while also being digital and it’s benefits compared to film. While Venice and red does not do as good in some things high quality film does best, but does the things digital does better and the best. Basically arri cameras is having your cake and eating it too, while the other two has some trade off, though all are truly amazing camera. Also you could throw arri out of a plane and it would still work.
If you want as close to film camera experiece as possible with consumer gear, you should go with Nikon cameras. Once you disable live preview features, it's pretty close to shooting Nikon F5 from year 1996. Of course, if you want video camera features, having a camera that's close to still film camera experience is a pretty poor choice.
I just Production Managed an Indie Film, and we shot most 97% of it on Alexa 35’s (Some utility shots were done on 16mm and Black Magic 6K Pro) and the footage is beautiful. Also, while the price is expensive, most people wouldn’t buy this. This is for rental houses, and if a DP or Camera Op is purchasing this, they’re charging a significant Kit Fee (essentially production paying a rental fee directly to the crew member).
@@MysteryMiiCertification is only for production security. If they are paying you to make the show, they want to know it will actually get made. If you sell them rights to publish the show, then this doesn't matter cause the risk is all on you. I've only ever been on netflix shows that are "made by them". They all used alexa except one with a Sony that proved to be a complete disaster. It may well have been the show that instigated this certification thing haha.
@@littleshopofrandom685 Even then, Netflix still has a lot of technical guidelines (which are actually publicly available) that their productions have to follow through every chain of production and post-production.
Notably features like timecode etc is for the workflows and not for the final output. Netflix certification is about “easy to work with in post and on set”
@@littleshopofrandom685Exactly. Also, Netflix certification means nothing for the end user bc the base (cheapest) subscription model is SD! It's unbelievable
As someone who works in film and has been a long watcher of LTT, it’s so fascinating to see the gear that I know so well crossover and be confused by someone with such a deep specialization in other technical products that are outside of his specialization. Lovely refresher on how niche some of our products and skill sets are in the film industry.
Likely a result of not setting up a correct ACES color workflow. The wider gamut, especially the red primary, means that your raw images will have LESS red, and so the range of saturation you can capture is wider. It's the same as how if you want to capture more highlight detail, you lower the exposure. Color gamut is a sort of inaccurate way to think about color, but the upshot of ACES is that you can use profiles to convert between the look of any cameras, making it easier to match footage. If you set everything up correctly, the color between the ARRI and the Sony (or many other cameras) would look nearly indistinguishable, and you would really have to crunch the exposure and gamma to find the differences between them.
@@spacepxl no ACES has nothing to do with that. The goal of ACES is not to magically match cameras (which it's definitely not doing). The goal of ACES is to bring everything into a universal color space rather than each manufacturer using their own color workflow. That way the images will react in a similar way to grading inputs. The IDTs used by ACES are provided by the manufacturers themselves. As per the tint difference, each manufacturer calibrate their sensors and color science for an intented look that is influenced by multiple factors including Cultural preferences. So the default Rec709 image coming out of a camera from a german company with a huge background in cinema is different from the one coming from a japanese company with a background mainly in TV. Anyway camera calibration is far from perfect. On long productions with 2+ cameras I always check for color temperature/tint discrepancies and even for cameras from the same manufacturer and same model (2 Mini LF for example) you still have differences: up to 500/600K and 3/4 Tint points.
@@Henry_XiePYZ the arri cameras usually have an overall green tint (like adding tint points directly in camera) not only in certain tones. If you watch the side by side it's quite easy to see, the Alexa is constantly, overall, greener.
About the audio in... 3:00 It is useful for monitoring audio (through a wireless receiver from the sound guy) to the Director's montitor. And so the Director's monitor can record the audio for playback on set.
Often the director will get a signal from the sound guy directly (though it depends! Sometimes they take the audio from the monitor). It's usually nice to have an audio signal going into the camera that goes into the monitors for scratch audio (for syncing in case timecode fails) but also as an audio track to record to monitors for compressed dailies that can be played back.
Impossible to do a blind test when you don't specify the color pipeline used. Did you use LUTs as IDTs? ACES? Davinci color magement? These all have way different interpretations of color. Also, it's not gonna be possible to distinguish cameras from eachother when you don't push the white balance super far off. Modern cameras all look nearly identical depending on the IDT / ODT used. Also, it doesn't even seem like you used grey cards in the shots. One is much greener than the other.
I love it when they get onto cameras. It's something I have zero interest in but it's just fun to see people who are passionate about something nerding out over it :D
They hired a bunch of real cinematographers and photography nuts in the beginning (Brandon). Those dudes are always super nerdy and excited about cameras, lenses, etc. so it's a good idea to bring one of them on to host/co-host when there's a camera to be discussed. I've never met a cinematographer who wasn't eager to talk your head off about camera gear and technique.
It's always interesting but please dont learn from these guys, this video is FULL of SOOOOOOO much wrong info that I'm surprised it was able to go through and get published. 😅 They were wrong about sensor size, resolution, film talk, Dynamic Range (Arri's is much different than Sony's) and wrong on how the industry is on these cameras. If you're interested I can make an entire list unto what was wrong if you truly want to know about Cinematography but please dont carry this misinformation with you.
classic ltt. waffling about cameras they have no experience with. just hitting talking points and making assumptions, Linus has lost all credibility after the component testing bullshit that he continues to lie about.
10 year Career Camera Assistant here, The Alexa 35 is the best camera I've ever worked with. It's lens options, framerate options, dynamic range, control protocols (Arri ECS ecosystem), Mounting options and accessories and Viewfinder are Industry Leading in every regard. Another thing to note is that ARRI supports their cameras for many years after. They released a software update for the Alexa classic 11 years after release. Even if a camera is superseded, it still receives updates. Something that I really wish you guys touched on more that is specific to what you guys shoot is how the combination of Dynamic range and Colour Gamut presents a much more true to life representation of highly saturated LEDS (RGB). That was the dead giveaway for how I picked 3/3 in the ARRI vs Sony shootout
Agreed. m4/3 more than enough for 4k video. While larger cameras/sensors have slightly better DR but if you have good lighting (which lowers the required DR), shooting with these expensive hardware is overkill.
No one is more humble in their humble brag than me, but I did get 3 out of 4 on the A-B tests. 1. Sony saturation on the color chart gave it away. Arri's default colors are muted. 2. The highlight rolloff on Andy's face gave away the Arri for me (and I was getting nervous when David and Linus called it so confidently the other way). Arri has great highlight rolloff on overexposed skin. I think this is what people pick up on when they say 'film like response' to Alexas, because it occurs when shooting with strong backlights. Alexas handle it very well. 3. Got the 2nd color chart wrong. I recognized the test mismatched white balances, but went for the first because of skin tone and the highlights looked marginally better on the RGB in the background, suggesting better dynamic range. 4. Got this one right, because the red was clearly overexposed, and Arri's highlight headroom allowed it to remain pure red (not clipping), while the Sony erroneously rendered it towards pink and white (clipping). The one I got wrong does demonstrate the most important lesson. Capturing 'correctly' on set matters more than the actual gear used. If you can't shoot raw, get the right white balance. Even if you are shooting raw, make sure to get a good exposure to capture the detail you need. You maximize flexibility in post. Great gear poorly utilized will still look like crap.
HDR Feedback: After the first few seconds of watching, I felt something was off about the image. I thought the blacks seemed a bit richer and the colors popped a little more. I chalked it up to you guys most likely shooting on an Arri. I didn't notice this was an HDR video until the Arri vs Sony testing. I just wanted to make sure I was in 4K, and then I saw it..... BAM... HDR! This feels like VERY tame HDR compared to most of what's out there on RUclips. I like it. It looks good. There are 2 channels that I just don't watch anymore since I got my MacBook Pro. Almost every HDR video on RUclips gets eye-searingly bright to the point it's just too fatiguing to watch. This just looks great. This gets me excited for the future of HDR.
I noticed it was HDR right away since it was so dark compared to SDR content on my phone haha. (Not a complaint about the video, just a sign of my phone having a really bad HDR implementation)
The first few seconds of the video are mastered such that they're unnecessarily bright. On some devices it manifests as exactly that, on some as darkening of that segment, on others - makes no difference. The rest of the video is very well done overall.
fun fact - the EVF-1 port (on the front, above the sensor) supports cables up to 5 meters. The EVF-2 port (operator-right at the top) supports up to 10 meter cables! edit - 4:08 - you'd power the transmitter, motors for the lens rings and any kind of distance-calculator (LR2, cinetape, whatever). Can also power a heated EVF :) 6:44 - it's worse than that... ALL the power ports have the key lines pointing at like a 330 degree angle - pointing towards the camera body. infuriating!
I work as a London based onset Livegrade DIT , all the HETV production I have worked on for the last few years have been either Arri Alexa Mini LF to Sony Venice, always RAW the thing is Red as a company have the patent on compressed RAW somehow Sony convinced Red that their liner 16bit RAW called XOCN is a codec ( it's not it is RAW ) so that has 3 compression levels LT, ST and XT. For Arri we use something called Codex Device manager which is Mac only and this in conjunction with Pomfort Silver Stack or Yoyotta compresses the file as the Codex Mini Mag is backed up to multiple RAID drives with Hash 64 checksum verification, during this process device manage enables something called HDE compression which will lossesly compress the Arri RAW to a .mxf around 50% smaller then the RAW file the camera records but again this is Mac OS only which is why all DIT's and Data Mangers use Mac based rigs never Windows. For HDR content the Venice and XOCN is preferred as there is an easier SD & HDR colour pipline using ACES colour management in DaVinci as XOCN is 16bit linear RAW there is no log curver and mastering to both HDR and SDR is easier, where 13bit Arri RAW is not linea but encoded as Arri LogC4 so there are more transfer functions involved. The smaller data footprint and easier post HDR SDR colour pipline of XOCN from the Venice, Venice 2 and Burarno is a big part of why the Venice was used for Avitar 2, Top Gun Maveric, MI 8 over the Alexa Mini LF. All those cameras use large format sensors and need lenses that cover those larger sensors, the 2 advantages the Alex 35 brings to the table are a smaller Super 35 sensor meaning a greater selection of vintage super 35 cine lenses and the a claimed 17.5 stop dynamic range compared to 14 stops for the Venice and ALEXA Mini LF but asmentioned to reduce the data footprint from the 35 you need to download footage using Silverstack or Yoyotta on Mac Studio with Codex device manger installed and HDE encoding turned on the backed up Arri RAW files will be compress by 50%
I think one of the things that wasn't super highlighted, was that it isn't that pro cine cams are marginally better(still better IO), but that prosumer cameras have gotten so much better ever since the 5d mk2 changed the market.
Man just in the last 5-6 year “proconsumer” cameras have gotten like ten times better. Instead of being like half the quality of a arri they are now like 80-90% the quality of a arri while being a tenth of the cost, and more convenient bell and whistles.
@@AL-lh2htI mean it depends on what you mean by “bells and whistles”. There’s a reason 95 percent of sets use ARRI products. They just work. I’ve worked on sets where we’ve used prosumer cameras as b and c cams and the amount of issues we run into are unbelievable. ARRI products work perfectly and don’t break. That’s something invaluable on a set where time is money.
I vote no for all HDR. RUclips HDR ends up much darker than HDR in Disney+ and Prime video for me. It’s far too dim considering the frequency of that rare moment when you see the benefits of HDR in an LTT video.
The Alexa 65 isn't 65mm, the horizontal aperture is only 54mm wide. The name is an ode to standard 5 perf 65mm film where the usable horizontal aperture is only around 53mm. 15 perf 65mm film (IMAX) has a horizontal aperture of 70mm.
I am a fan of cinema and although I will never make my own films... I love seeing a glimpse into the shooting side via videos like this. Keep up the great work, LTT.
One of these cameras is designed to be solo operated in a documenting environment and the other is meant to be crewed with all sorts of I/Os on a major expensive project. It's not just about form, it's also about function.
Yet another instance of you guys not knowing what the hell you're talking about. The 35 and the LF differ in sensor size. The 35 is what it says it is - Super35 format, works with cinema lesnes from the film era which were designed for Super35 of various perf counts. The LF is literally the "large format." Different lenses since they have to cover a bigger sensor. You see older Panavision and Todd-AO lenses adapted to the format. Think of it like the difference between the Arriflex 535 line and Arriflex 765 line. They are vastly different tools intended for distinct use cases. And IMAX negatives are not 70mm, they are 65mm. IMAX and 5/70mm distribution prints are 70mm gauge, but the negatives that run through the camera are 65mm. The *ONLY* format to ever use a 70mm negative was Sovscope 70, which was a reverse engineering of the Todd-AO process (Mitchell 65mm cameras) adjusted so that their print stocks and negatives could share a film base (it made it cheaper to do for the small initial volume). IMAX uses a 65mm negative running horizontally, which is 3x as wide as a 5/65 negative is tall. It is then printed to 70mm film, and there will be blank area wasted on either edge near the sprocket holes. This dates back to the Todd-AO and Panavision eras when 5/70mm release prints had 6-track magnetic sound on the film, where 2 tracks would be bonded to the film inboard of the sprocket holes, one strip on either side of the picture area. Modern 5/70mm prints use a DTS timecode to sync sound to the film, and that is printed outboard of the sprocketholes, while IMAX simply uses an initial timesync on projector start, and no timecode to keep sync during a showing.
Its funny I work as a VFX artist and use a lot of ARRI footage as plates, the main goal of most of my comp shots is to make the image look as imperfect as possible. lens dirt, lens flares, chromatic aberration, grain, noise, lens distortion. its so funny to me that we shoot with these amazing cameras only to dirty up the image in post. it just gives that subtle hint of realism though especially when working with CG.
Having worked on quite a few bigger budget projects (films, Netflix series, etc) the main reasons why these types of cameras cost so much are: 1) Rock solid performance. These cameras will not stop working in the field and can take a decent amount of abuse. I'm not saying to toss them off a roof, but they don't overheat, make a ton of noise, can handle being whipped around quickly on different rigs, etc. Plus, they have properly locking connections (lomo, bnc, etc) to make sure it never loses connection. Add in the specialty features that you need for high end productions (especially for tricky VFX work) and you have a highly reliable, albeit, extremely niche camera. 2) The volume of product they move is relatively small. Basics of economics state that you can either recoup the cost of R&D for product design by selling a ton of the widget at a low cost or selling only a few of the widget at a high cost. The size of the market that these cameras exist in is extremely small when compared to all of the cameras in the world (Apple and Google having the largest market share currently due to smart phones).
The arri is consistently more greenish in its reds, the sony is more blueish in its reds. I also preferred the Sony in more than one, but I can assure you once you start editing you will love what comes out of that arri sensor (no experience, that's just logic if Arri is worth their brand :D).
This video just told me people just have a lot of "preconception" in their heads about image and will absolutely choose one over another simply because of a name and perceived value. But thats just human haha. Arri probably have better UX though.
I love learning more about how cameras work - as a software engineer I already know a lot of computer stuff, but seeing this new area of tech reminds me of when I was first getting into computers
THANK YOU! As a filmmaker, I miss the camera content. (The RED stuff you all did is what brought me here.) So good to see this. I would love to play around for a couple days with that gear.
I also want to chime in about film grain: It's not just about putting an Instagram filter over your footage to make it look "artsy." Actual celluloid film had a grain structure that meant very fine details would smoothly transition into the background noise that gave a pleasing look to videos. That grain helped details look better. Digital sensors have a different type of noise that can look a bit "digital," and it works against the fine details in an image because it's not as consistent. The texture of the digital noise isn't as smooth. Therefore, adding a bit of simulated film grain helps ease those details into a more pleasing look. When done properly, this gives details a better feeling. When done improperly, it looks very cringy. I came across this when I was doing astrophotography timelapses and was playing around with AI noise removal in Lightroom. That feature is incredible, and I thought, "let's get rid of all the noise, finally I'll have clean timelapses!" But the noise removal cranked up to 100 actually felt a bit weird because the "texture" of the image details felt all smooth. And not in a good way. When I added a touch of grain back into the image, it blended the details of the shot back together in a way that felt much more cohesive. I will admit, adding noise back in after taking it all out was a weird feeling, but after that experience, I began to see why people would want to be discerning about the type of grain that their videos had.
When I was learning color grading I used some of the footage on the ARRI website and it was so nice to play around with crating dramatic lighting using the range of exposure avaliable. I wish I could use ARRI fottage more often haha
Being a 25 year member of IATSE as a 2nd Ac then an A1st AC shooting hundreds of big shows its about glass. Lenses are king. The arri system just works. When your onset and the camera has an issue you have hundreds if people and gear standing around costing money. I've spent thousands and thousands of hours standing next to various versions of Alexa bodies and they just work. Some shows use the Sony Venice some red.. I've used them all. Arri is the best. Do not take any risks using any other systems..
@@TimTYT Go and have a look at the testing process that those cameras go through if you doubt it. There are also many examples of crazy things Alexa cameras have gone through and survived.
In the late '90's I worked as an opto-mechanical engineer for IMAX Digital here in Vancouver designing laser film recorders, film scanners and digital projectors. Cinematic 70mm needs to carry sound so it is 65mm wide by 5 perfect high giving it an aspect ratio of 0.95:1 (2:2.1). IMAX carries the sound on a separate 35mm film and the image is 15 perfs wide by 70m high making an aspect ratio of 1.43:1. Significantly wider. Arri uses ONSemi sensors not their own. Nice sensors, LMI3D uses them in most of their products.
They know exactly who they sent it too, yes Linus would poke around but Linus also opens up the big wallet if his camera guys say "I want" 🤣 RIP LMG Accountants
ARRI cameras are the absolute standard in UK TV Production and beyond. With the addition of Sony's VENICE line up holding a strong hold to a large portion also. Alexa 35 now has higher frame rate filming at higher resolutions also - previously limited by it's resolution when shooting higher framerates.
That bit about “never crush or blow the highlights, let the editors do that” Fuck that! Nail it in camera, every time. Set your look in camera, EVERY time. Your editor should be throwing on a rec709 lut and cutting. Your colorist will accentuate the look you set in camera along with your input as the cinematographer and the director’s input.
9:40 I have NEVER been so close to a heart attack from watching an LTT video as when Linus decides to shake an Arri in frustration like that. Adrenaline spiked for real.
First off, lol. But they’re being serious. Netflix has a bunch of technical guidelines that their productions pretty much HAVE to follow, and one of those guidelines is what cameras can be used.
That dual gain sensor is such a game-changer. But its the combination of dynamic range, colour accuracy and highlight recovery and rollover makes this the gold standard of cinema cameras... and the price reflects. I remember an interview Potato Jet did with a guy from Arri who said that in most cameras, you are just choosing what to compromise on and with Arri, it looks like they decided to compromise on costs instead.
I really like how David is natural on camera and balanced, and sensible in his opinions. Linus, put him in front and let him teach us about cameras, from entry level to professional ones. ❤
It was so funny guessing each image correctly. I use the fx6 almost every day for work. It's a wonderful camera, but it has a magenta shift in the skintones, no doubt. Makes matching an fx3 a little hairy. love this video!!
David mentions the latitude and that's 100% the reason for a cinema camera. Almost any camera can give you cinema quality with controlled studio lighting with all of the setting dialed in correctly. You want a cinema camera to save you thousands in reshoot/shooting delays because you don't have time to triple check everything in the heat of production.
That and reliability, I hear that arri’s are like tanks. Famous story of one being in a fire and still working after… It’s funny how much of film making is really just project management, and you can’t have one component fail because it impacts like potentially hundreds of people and costs a massive amount of money.
Insane. That video was in the studio during the last LTX, and we are getting a video now. That gives a perspective on long a project might take until it gets to be published
I don't know if it's the camera, HDR, lighting, or editing, but I immediately noticed how much better this video looks compared to other LTT/short circuit ones.
About the grain: not only what you mentioned, but it is also a way for DPs that maybe wouldn't be included in the color correction (thinking about tv ads) to force their hand on the grain selection and strenght.
David is always fun to watch. love his dino earring. Was hoping that Linus would show the internals of the ssd. Would have made for another Jinnitech RED fiasco lol
As a DP, it's actually really cool to see an arri camera from the perspective of a tech enthusiast/reviewer... But holy shit am I sweating watching Linus handle these cameras
The ‘alignment mark’ is not meant to align the lens to the mount. The Signature Prime family of lenses have a unique rear magnetic filter holder. That white witness mark is for alignment of said rear filter ring. The indexing pin top right at the 1:30 o’clock position is more than enough for alignment with PL (Positive Lock) and LPL lenses.
on my pc and phone the HDR looks amazing, but on my macbook the video looked awful. was incredibly dark and flat in color. if you guys could upload both that would be amazing for people who dont have HDR displays and we could swap between the two but i know that would be a big workload. also a weird thing i just tried but on my non HDR monitors that i have on my PC the video still looks similar to the one with HDR. not sure whats going on with my macbook then
Are you all even serious asking if you should get an Arri Alexa35!!??!!? You picked the camera up and just started shooting with it capturing some gorgeous footage…. Look, if you’ve got the workflow hardware, the storage space for the larger files and has stuff to shoot…the sheer joy of working with such fantastic looking footage is worth its weight in gold!!!!
If you use HDR in the future, please make sure to not put white wall screenshots inbetween dim footage with alot of black. I've been flashbanged HARD! Watching this in a dark room.
At first I didn't understand the point of artificially adding camera noise back into the footage.....but then, you just gotta think about it like digital still cameras; People add film grain back into images all the time in Lightroom etc, and you know what? It can look great. So I honestly see the justification here too
It's in HDR. Either your device doesn't support it and you're experiencing bad tone mapping, or you're used to having your display at high brightness and the overall reduced brightness in HDR is tripping you up (darker spots look darker in HDR than SDR on cranked brightness). For me, it's the second one
It's so funny to watch these as an professional in this field. You would absolutely use audio in. 2 reasons: When you're playing back from a VTR setup, it's way more reliable to have the audio coming through the BNC, and 2, it helps the editor sync audio, sometimes the Timecode isnt exact or maybe someone didn't slate. Having the audio embedded adds another layer of security.
![Coheed and Cambria - Searching for Tomorrow [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hDsYGLbmadg/mqdefault.jpg)
For the full experience, make sure to watch this video in HDR!
What do you think, should we switch to ARRI cameras and film everything in HDR? 👀
HDR looks amazing on my macbook pro, i definitely support this
Watched the HDR version on my iPad Pro and it looks awesome. As a color science dude I appreciate the HDR but having worked with HDR workflows I wouldn’t do every video in an HDR/SDR grade. Only the videos which would really benefit from it are worth it in my opinion but it’s your production 👍
I consume videos and RUclips on my phone most of the time. Hdr serves no benefit and degrades the experience
Awww man now i have to find a device, where RUclips gives me the Option to watch in HDR
Don't switch to arri but do film in hdr
I live and work in LA and am a colorist in post production. David was correct in terms of productions using Arri Raw vs Prores as their recording formats. Typically, higher end shows like Yellowjackets (Showtime) and Ted Lasso (AppleTV+) will shoot to Arri Raw for it's uncompressed goodness. I've also worked on scripted shows for CBS and although those productions are shooting on the Alexa, they tend to shoot to Prores4444 due to it's file size being smaller but you still get a very good amount of range to work with in post. Typically, higher end streaming shows and features shoot to Arri Raw and lower end/broadcast shows tend to shoot to Prores.
One last thing I wanted to mention, David was also correct in terms of resolution not being the end-all be-all for choosing a camera. As a colorist, I'd prefer to color a project that was shot at 3.2K with an amazing sensor and color science vs a 12k blackmagic camera. Anything that was shot and displayed above 4k is almost indistinguishable to the human eye.
As a layperson it seems to me the advantage of higher resolution would be that you can crop more (since I imagine the final output resolution of the whole project is set in stone). But if you are already planning all your shots in detail before you film them that seems like a pretty useless advantage to have. Also as a hobby photographer, the amount you can push the sliders in post when using raw is night and day compared to compressed jpeg or even heic files.
No joke, the mean benefit of 8k tv’s is allowing for high pixel density screens while being extremely large.
Basically allowing for large, and I do mean large, tv’s while having good picture quality.
Larger 4k TV’s, or set resolution, have the same number of Pixels as smaller ones so the larger it is the easier it become to count the pixels. So 8k allows for insanely huge TVs to be made. And of course the TV size is one of the main ways to get a better experience with watching film. This is why perfect TV rooms for hobbyists use projectors.
The 8k itself is basically pointless, even if you can theoretically tell the difference, at least slightly.
This is also why there are no 8k monitors for computers, only two products were ever made and it was like 5 years ago, and they were not even that good.
@@urgay1992 correct. More resolution is great for cropping but also grain structure and noise. Arri has amazing dynamic range and grain structure to begin with so you can get away with up scaling lower resolution. The Ursa 12k has so much oversampling that noise is almost nonexistent when delivering 4k and exposed well. A professional cinematographer, crew, and colorist can make a $6000 Ursa 12k look just as good as anything shot on an Arri - all things being equal.
Agree, once worked on an Ad where the DP insisted on 8K so he could theoretically take two shots instead of one (one wide, one Close Up). It was a nightmare to finish
@@xelaander8429 you can do a 300 style zoom in shot with the Ursa 12k if you have a high end lens.
As a former ARRI employee and AC I finally got to watch the video and am a bit sad because of the inaccuracies.
The main difference between the 35 and LF is the sensor size, the 35 being Super 35 and the LF being Large Format (aka bigger). They have different looks and feels to them.
The LPL mount is a godsend for compatibility with their adapters. Don’t mind that alignment line, orient yourself on the notch in one of the lens lips; it has to be on the top right facing the camera.
The codex being proprietary is obviously not perfect, but it ensures that the card can handle the transfer speeds and heat generated (I had lots of trouble with the old cFast cards). The 2 TB model can sustainably write up to 16Gbps. To have an idea, the 35 filming at full resolution in ARRIRAW can full up that 2TB storage in 56 minutes. Also reading speeds on that card are full thunderbolt 3 speeds, so 20 GB/s (happy data wrangler noises). Also yes, you can’t legally compress raw internally so arri does it while wrangling. B batteries are not only used because they lock in better (they actually function the same as gold mounts) but they are designed for a higher power output that the camera needs. V mount wouldn’t be able to keep up.
But yeah, the camera is amazing, the image is beautiful, the compatibility with accessories is mind blowing, the people developing and building the cameras are passionate hard working. Props to Linus and David for the video and explanations, they’re not really used to classic or big budget productions where cameras like this are frequently used, but I am beyond happy for the shoutout :) maybe try a trinity soon! I (and my buddies at ARRI) would be happy to help and explain if the situation arises
Thank you.
Yeah this was a strange watch for me. This is what happens when a tech channel that has so much money they start talking about things they don't specialize in
What causes the "different looks and feels..." of the 35 and LF? And please don't say the larger sensor, as lens equivalence is a thing.
@@Bayonet1809 haha fair enough. But it is because of the sensor area. A larger area allows for more light to reach the sensors, which makes the images pop more and feel more lifelike while also having a better low light performance. It also allows for a wider Field of view at the same focal length (it is „more zoomed out“). It also has more detail, especially in close up images. Another thing is the shallower depth of field, so you have a stronger separation between the object and the fore-/ and background. So you can imagine that the LF (or the 65, an even larger sensor) is used when you want to depict more intimacy and emotion from a person in a close-up, because of all the detail and separation from the background. Basically the LF is more “Cinematic” than the 35 and allows filmmakers to play and experiment with their image more. The 35 is better when you need more of a scene to be in focus and work in more standard productions.
I hope this answers your question!
@@Bayonet1809 The sensor size plays a huge roll in the look and feel of a film. A larger sensor has a bigger depth of field than a smaller sensor. Lens equivalence is a thing - but even those equivalent lens' will look different because of this. Additionally the lens availability for the 35's sensor size is much much larger.
Beyond that the 35's dynamic range is better than the LF's along with the color science. This video makes those things seem "less important" When in reality those are two of the most important things in a feature film.
Will these things matter to a lot of people? probably not - but an equal amount of people it will matter to.
ARRI probably should've loaned you guys one of those $30,000 cinema-grade reference monitors for comparing your footage on.
should've loaned me one as well to watch this footage
Flanders? IS not that one of the standard brands in the high-end? I went for a cheap Osee monitor as I am poor lol
I mean, as long as the color delta-e is below 2.5 (probably on a non-frc 10 bit monitor) and you have more contrast than a TN panel, you're probably good to go. They're using an Asus monitor that's literally made to be a budget monitor, pretty sure the color gamut on that one is great too.
They were using an Asus ProArt display. Those are designed for color work.
I propose ARRI send them one of those monitors, a bag of money, and some talking points, and in return ARRI let Alex and Linus watercool and Noctualise one of the cameras.
1. PL means Positive Lock, the 4 "cloves" on the lens are supposed to sit in the 4 loved slots. one of the cloves (almost always the to right one) has a cut out for a witness pin. if your are actually level, you will be able to lock in. the PL is never wrong.
2. you can add 'texture' burnt into the footage because it gives the director of photography more control over the final product. how many times did the director promise me something was gonna be done in post but was never done, now I'll mf burn it in so you can't take it out.
lol love it. I think your argument is the only real reason to have pipeline film grain. There is literally zero reason that couldn't be done in post.
Let's not ignore that RED "lost" that lawsuit about compressed RAW to Nikon. Currently, Nikon has internal 8K 60 12bit compressed RAW in their Z8 and Z9 cameras.
Holy i wish my camera did too
It has about 14 stops of dynamic range. It's not as crazy as the Arri, but it also doesn't cost as much. Nikon is rumored to release a new log curve similar to Arri LogC4 that might change that.
@@SooksVI honestly i thought nikon is not worth buying but maybe i was just hating for no reason
@@cyano3d depends on your use case. I'm primarily a photographer that sometimes get calls for video projects to shoot alongside cameras like RED. According to the editors, the colors match up well. If you're primary a videographer, I'd say you have better options elsewhere unless you really want 8K 60. I've only used 8K twice, both for interviews where I was able to crop in and create solo shots while maintaining 4K resolution.
@@SooksVI i am very satisfied with ny x-t5 rn though i need to get into video making am just unable to get started
The reason for baked in texture and grain is to give power back to the cinematographers because very often the cinematographer has already moved on to his next show by the time the project is in post/coloring, and in this digital age they might not have the time or power to sit down in the finishing suite to decide on the look or the grain. It also helps to bake in the look during production so everyone gets used to it so it'll be less likely that the director changes his mind on the color/grain after months of editing. Sometimes the extreme flexibility from the newer digital sensors might not be a good thing to cinematographers because we are control freaks and we don't want too many cooks in the kitchen ;)
Man even DP’s have to play politics.
Also.. All the pro DP’s I worked with shoot for the final look if possible. This whole “shoot for post”, maximize dynamic range bullshit is something the nerds on the internet believe in. Shoot for the subject, and make it as good as possible, not for some graph.
Having worked at post-production companies for years (actually for Arri post-production also), I've never worked on a show, where the cinematographer was not involved in the color grading process.
This comment is spot on. I own a 35 but have to confess I’ve been a scared to dabble too far into the textures. However I have a project coming up where I feel it might be right and I can do some tests.
I do not get as bogged down as others with constantly checking the false colour. I’ve learnt to shoot for my final look as when ever I’ve shot for safety that message rarely finds its way to the grader and you see shots how they were not intended. This even happens when you build a lut specifically. There’s still a tonne of range unless you’re doing night shoots
yeah exactly @@r25limousine
David is such a good host, especially when talking about cinematography!
Something creepy about him.
I actually "discovered" him in this one, amazing
@@saratov99lol, he's turned down the "creepy" actually now
Could you explain how he comes across as creepy?. He just seems like a normal ish dude to me.@@saratov99
i would love to get more content on cinematography
I work as a 1st AC. Mini LF and Alexa 35 are commonly used for all kinds of projects and even used together: corporate, commercial, music videos, movies. It often comes down to preference and lens compatibility to determine which is used.
The audio in is primarily meant for a wireless scratch track from the sound person. The on camera audio will usually not be used.
The Alexa 35 requires higher voltage batteries as opposed to standard gold and V mounts. They can use B mouny batteries or a higher voltage version of gold mount.
3:08 Uhm... as a sound guy. Yes you definitely would (and I have seen it done with this exact camera on a film set) use audio in. Sound will use a camera hop to send a stereo mix to the Arri for reference and to help editors. It's also another way to listen to what's happening especially if the director is also operating the camera. But definitely definitely audio in is used. it's not required, but it's standard practice for reference audio to have a camera hop mix sent to camera as a redundancy.
Absolutely. As a DP who shoots documentaries on my mini LF I've almost always got audio in when working with a recordist. Sure, there is always seperate recording but very rare not to have in camera as well.
I'm a 1st AC. On many of the shoots I work we just run timecode to the cameras and forgo any hops on camera, which is great. These newer Arri cameras and built in scratch mics unlike the older ones, which I think is the reason I'm typically not being asked to put the stupid A Box on it.
@@clermontflorida The problem is that the built in camera audio might sometimes be so different from what the sound guy is recording (because the camera is very far away in the shot). It's just a nice to have to get a mixed audio in to help with syncing just in case timecode breaks (it usually doesn't, but in the rare case that something fucks up, it's very nice to have).
Most of the time timecode + built in scratch is sufficient. I hate having to run a hop on camera because it's more crap that I have to deal with on the camera, and a lot of times sound people are not very near with their cables and don't provide their receivers with good mounting options. Sound people should have plates and threaded mounting points on their stuff if they except it to go on the camera body. I had to buy my own low profile 1/8" to XLR cable to avoid having bulky cables and connectors on camera, but I shouldn't have to do that. The sound person ought to have that stuff. @@eruannster
Thank you! I was waiting for this comment! Tentacles ftw.
Great video! However I have a few technical notes🤓:
-While new ARRI cameras are extremely expensive, there is a pretty big second hand market for ARRI cameras, since they have used the same sensor technology (ALEV III) on almost all of their digital cameras (the ALEXA 35 is the only exception). Used ARRI ALEXA cameras are available for less than 7000$.
-Most productions I’ve worked on preferred recording in ProRes 4:4:4 rather than raw format. It’s a VISUALLY LOSSLESS codec and it's much more convenient than ARRIRAW. File sizes are much smaller and since you don’t have to debayer the footage it runs much more smoothly in editing.
-When Linus points the camera at the diffused light source, the main reason he sees a lot of detail is due to much better optics which retain better contrast in the image and don’t flare.
-Regarding the skin tones in the blind test: ARRI’s color science is known for compressing skin tone chroma values towards a pleasing color. While ARRI’s skin tones aren't necessarily realistic, they are much more pleasing and easier to work with in the grade.
Prores 4444 is NOT lossless. It might be *visually* lossless but that is not the same thing since you are still losing information that could help in post. Now whether that extra information is necessary is a different issue. (In fact debayering is by necessity a lossy process so any format that has gone through debayering is not lossless compared to raw sensor data.)
@@urgay1992ProRes 4444 is indeed not lossless, that’s why Apple came up with ProRes 4444XQ - also not lossless, but that’s where you can reasonable start talking about “virtually lossless”
All ProRes formats utilise lossy compression, it's comparable to high quality lossy compression with an image format like JXL, where ProRes is faster to decode but less space-efficient.
ARRI footage had a green tint and other imperfections because it requires different color grading from the cameras they're used to, it is not the intended end result.
@@urgay1992 True. ProRes 4444 XQ is the best possible ProRes format, and that isn't lossless either, but it is very lightly compressed without being Stupid Large File Sizes like ArriRAW is. If you're not shooting something super advanced (green screens, StageCraft) and you're well exposed, it will be more than enough for the vast majority of cases.
@@urgay1992 You're right! I should have mentioned that ProRes (HQ and higher) is VISUALLY LOSSLESS and there is a loss of information. Thanks for the clarification.
2:09 Regarding the difference between 65mm/70mm film (IMAX or not): they’re the same thing. It’s referred to 70mm in regards to film projection, while 65mm is used in regards to shooting on film, as 5mm of the film area was used to record audio.
Exactly and even then resolution is product of both the sensor and the lens which can really make peoples heads hurt.
not on the IMAX 70mm, there is no audio track on IMAX film
@@RandomTheoriesThat’s projection. Shooting with IMAX film is still referred to as 65mm film because in the past, they still needed to record audio.
@@RandomTheories I think you might be right. It also uses a different number of perforations vs a normal 70mm if I’m not mistaken. Additionally you have panavision’s work with the ultra panavision 70mm with a crazy aspect ratio of anamorphic 2.76:1
Source: got family in the optics world and being in the cinematography world I know a bit about this stuff.
@@MysteryMii for the recording yes, you are correct
The Alexa 65 is based off the 65mm film format which pulls a 65mm wide strip of film vertically through the camera, when prints are made from this format an extra 5mm is added to the edge of the print film to allow more information to be stored for surround sound; this is the reason you can see movies in the theatre presented in 70mm. IMAX cameras use largely the same kind of 65mm wide film but they pull the film through the camera sideways which amounts to almost four times the area of the ALEXA 65's sensor. When IMAX is presented in film it will typically be advertised as IMAx 70mm or 15 Perf 70mm. In short the Alexa 65 is nominally 65mm wide and IMAX is nominally 65mm tall.
I’m a cinematographer. We can make almost anything look great with the right lighting and grading. Investing in skills matters more at the end of the day. For instance: the guy on the cabin steps with the sun in the background. I would definitely split my image into highs and lows to get more out of my sky and a little more out of my shadow foreground. Arri can do this really well because the dynamic range allows more pleasing correction once you split and grade the different luminance values on their own.
That's so interesting! Do you use that technique often? Sometimes my highlights just look too thin with a standard grade...
@@prismcollectionmusic only if it needs it. Sometimes you can just grade for the highlights and then use your curves to slightly bump the shadows. You can also create a new node (in Davinci), go to the HSL keyer, drag the “high” slider down until you just have shadows selected, add a glow effect to that node (with a tight radius) and blend in a little glow to raise the shadows a bit. Just be careful because on cheaper sensors the saturation gets wonky. Desaturating shadows can do wonders if done correctly. Really you want to light scenes correctly to begin with. A white bounce board works wonders in a scene like the one I’m talking about.
@@hendleyroadent2612 yeah I think subtle things like shadow saturation/hue really add up. Good tip with the bounce board too! I should definitely try the shadow select/glow thing as well, thanks!
Are you talking pseudo dual iso?
@@complexity5545more like pseudo hdr but subtle
Arri are cameras on easy mode. The DR, the UI, all of it is so simple to use and you don't have to worry about almost any given situation. I love them so much.
My first student film shooting on an Arri made me realise why professionals prefer them to say a Sony Vince or Red’s offering. Truly the most film comparable sensor on the market. That and the colour reproduction is second to none.
Starting with Sony FS7 I didn’t appreciate the QoL features Arri focuses on until buying and shooting on a Arri Super 16 and their origins a film camera manufacturer really became apparent.
Edit: Another under appreciated aspect of Arri cameras that many new cinematographers will gloss over when comparing Arri and Red is the UI. If Sony is the King of nested menus, Arri wants you to think you’re still shooting Kodak stock with a light meter and getting it developed the next day.
It feels like shooting a film camera even the tactile controls on their older models. Almost identical between film and digital.
Did you convince me to buy an Arri, which is completely out of my budget and useless since I'm a pro-photographer not videographer?
Ofc you did
@@jonathanb.1625 I’m not going to lie, using a Mac for ingest and stuff, the workflow on Arri is a doll. The ProRes plays back great compared to Red’s raw BS. Plus theirs a thousand different flavours depending if your a one-man-band or a full fledged studio production. The interframe codec of ProRes is solid.
Basically arri’s does everything a film film camera does but while also being digital and it’s benefits compared to film. While Venice and red does not do as good in some things high quality film does best, but does the things digital does better and the best.
Basically arri cameras is having your cake and eating it too, while the other two has some trade off, though all are truly amazing camera.
Also you could throw arri out of a plane and it would still work.
If you want as close to film camera experiece as possible with consumer gear, you should go with Nikon cameras. Once you disable live preview features, it's pretty close to shooting Nikon F5 from year 1996.
Of course, if you want video camera features, having a camera that's close to still film camera experience is a pretty poor choice.
@@MikkoRantalainen nikon colors are the closest to arri in still photography
I just Production Managed an Indie Film, and we shot most 97% of it on Alexa 35’s (Some utility shots were done on 16mm and Black Magic 6K Pro) and the footage is beautiful. Also, while the price is expensive, most people wouldn’t buy this. This is for rental houses, and if a DP or Camera Op is purchasing this, they’re charging a significant Kit Fee (essentially production paying a rental fee directly to the crew member).
Unless you are making a movie FOR Netflix, certification doesn't matter. If they want your movie, they will buy it.
Yes, but series also falls under that certification.
@@MysteryMiiCertification is only for production security. If they are paying you to make the show, they want to know it will actually get made. If you sell them rights to publish the show, then this doesn't matter cause the risk is all on you. I've only ever been on netflix shows that are "made by them". They all used alexa except one with a Sony that proved to be a complete disaster. It may well have been the show that instigated this certification thing haha.
@@littleshopofrandom685 Even then, Netflix still has a lot of technical guidelines (which are actually publicly available) that their productions have to follow through every chain of production and post-production.
Notably features like timecode etc is for the workflows and not for the final output. Netflix certification is about “easy to work with in post and on set”
@@littleshopofrandom685Exactly. Also, Netflix certification means nothing for the end user bc the base (cheapest) subscription model is SD! It's unbelievable
As someone who works in film and has been a long watcher of LTT, it’s so fascinating to see the gear that I know so well crossover and be confused by someone with such a deep specialization in other technical products that are outside of his specialization. Lovely refresher on how niche some of our products and skill sets are in the film industry.
I felt the same when I learned Linus knows the functional bare minimum about Linux
To easily identify an arri camera when comparing footage, they tend to have a bit of a green tint before any correction. You can see it in the video.
Is it a similar sort of tint to what a lot of Sony cameras have, or less pronounced?
That’s funny because Sony also has a green tint especially in rendering skin tone… Honestly when I saw the green tint I immediately though it was Sony
Likely a result of not setting up a correct ACES color workflow. The wider gamut, especially the red primary, means that your raw images will have LESS red, and so the range of saturation you can capture is wider. It's the same as how if you want to capture more highlight detail, you lower the exposure. Color gamut is a sort of inaccurate way to think about color, but the upshot of ACES is that you can use profiles to convert between the look of any cameras, making it easier to match footage. If you set everything up correctly, the color between the ARRI and the Sony (or many other cameras) would look nearly indistinguishable, and you would really have to crunch the exposure and gamma to find the differences between them.
@@spacepxl no ACES has nothing to do with that. The goal of ACES is not to magically match cameras (which it's definitely not doing). The goal of ACES is to bring everything into a universal color space rather than each manufacturer using their own color workflow. That way the images will react in a similar way to grading inputs. The IDTs used by ACES are provided by the manufacturers themselves.
As per the tint difference, each manufacturer calibrate their sensors and color science for an intented look that is influenced by multiple factors including Cultural preferences. So the default Rec709 image coming out of a camera from a german company with a huge background in cinema is different from the one coming from a japanese company with a background mainly in TV.
Anyway camera calibration is far from perfect. On long productions with 2+ cameras I always check for color temperature/tint discrepancies and even for cameras from the same manufacturer and same model (2 Mini LF for example) you still have differences: up to 500/600K and 3/4 Tint points.
@@Henry_XiePYZ the arri cameras usually have an overall green tint (like adding tint points directly in camera) not only in certain tones. If you watch the side by side it's quite easy to see, the Alexa is constantly, overall, greener.
About the audio in... 3:00 It is useful for monitoring audio (through a wireless receiver from the sound guy) to the Director's montitor.
And so the Director's monitor can record the audio for playback on set.
Often the director will get a signal from the sound guy directly (though it depends! Sometimes they take the audio from the monitor). It's usually nice to have an audio signal going into the camera that goes into the monitors for scratch audio (for syncing in case timecode fails) but also as an audio track to record to monitors for compressed dailies that can be played back.
Impossible to do a blind test when you don't specify the color pipeline used. Did you use LUTs as IDTs? ACES? Davinci color magement? These all have way different interpretations of color.
Also, it's not gonna be possible to distinguish cameras from eachother when you don't push the white balance super far off. Modern cameras all look nearly identical depending on the IDT / ODT used. Also, it doesn't even seem like you used grey cards in the shots. One is much greener than the other.
I agree about everything you said about the pipeline but the green shift is a common attribute of ARRI color science, even if the WB is set correctly.
@@Dodosimchthis. managed to guess every one perfectly by trying to spot the typical ARRI greenshift
I love it when they get onto cameras. It's something I have zero interest in but it's just fun to see people who are passionate about something nerding out over it :D
They hired a bunch of real cinematographers and photography nuts in the beginning (Brandon). Those dudes are always super nerdy and excited about cameras, lenses, etc. so it's a good idea to bring one of them on to host/co-host when there's a camera to be discussed. I've never met a cinematographer who wasn't eager to talk your head off about camera gear and technique.
same, I basically had no clue what they were talking about but it was interesting and fun. Doubled my knowledge of cinematography from this video lmao
It's always interesting but please dont learn from these guys, this video is FULL of SOOOOOOO much wrong info that I'm surprised it was able to go through and get published. 😅 They were wrong about sensor size, resolution, film talk, Dynamic Range (Arri's is much different than Sony's) and wrong on how the industry is on these cameras.
If you're interested I can make an entire list unto what was wrong if you truly want to know about Cinematography but please dont carry this misinformation with you.
@CallMeRabbitzUSVI relax, noone watching this video will ever use an Arri camera. It's a great video from a channel we love, not a tutorial.
I barely ever comment, but this is the classic LTT I love. Super chill, basic explanations, but very informative. Production quality was on point.
classic ltt. waffling about cameras they have no experience with. just hitting talking points and making assumptions, Linus has lost all credibility after the component testing bullshit that he continues to lie about.
lmao why so salty dude @@maxwalsh234
@maxwalsh234 then why are you here, go away
2:10 small correction, but the film used in IMAX cameras is 65mm, whereas IMAX print film is 70mm.
a true Imax camera also uses 3 times the surface area vs the Alexa 65. true Imax film is 15 perf, the Alexa 65 is roughly 5 perf
10 year Career Camera Assistant here,
The Alexa 35 is the best camera I've ever worked with. It's lens options, framerate options, dynamic range, control protocols (Arri ECS ecosystem), Mounting options and accessories and Viewfinder are Industry Leading in every regard.
Another thing to note is that ARRI supports their cameras for many years after. They released a software update for the Alexa classic 11 years after release. Even if a camera is superseded, it still receives updates.
Something that I really wish you guys touched on more that is specific to what you guys shoot is how the combination of Dynamic range and Colour Gamut presents a much more true to life representation of highly saturated LEDS (RGB). That was the dead giveaway for how I picked 3/3 in the ARRI vs Sony shootout
Linus could film everything for this channel on a GH5 and nobody would be able to tell any difference.
Lmao it's a studio after all. But the colors would be so different atleast from the camera till edited
Yes but, post production is why they shoot on higher end cameras.
GH5's are great tho 😅 just.. have somebody do the focus pulling.
Agreed. m4/3 more than enough for 4k video. While larger cameras/sensors have slightly better DR but if you have good lighting (which lowers the required DR), shooting with these expensive hardware is overkill.
Compare ltt videos in a good 4k TV to other channels or ltt old videos, the difference is extremely noticeable.
No one is more humble in their humble brag than me, but I did get 3 out of 4 on the A-B tests.
1. Sony saturation on the color chart gave it away. Arri's default colors are muted.
2. The highlight rolloff on Andy's face gave away the Arri for me (and I was getting nervous when David and Linus called it so confidently the other way). Arri has great highlight rolloff on overexposed skin. I think this is what people pick up on when they say 'film like response' to Alexas, because it occurs when shooting with strong backlights. Alexas handle it very well.
3. Got the 2nd color chart wrong. I recognized the test mismatched white balances, but went for the first because of skin tone and the highlights looked marginally better on the RGB in the background, suggesting better dynamic range.
4. Got this one right, because the red was clearly overexposed, and Arri's highlight headroom allowed it to remain pure red (not clipping), while the Sony erroneously rendered it towards pink and white (clipping).
The one I got wrong does demonstrate the most important lesson. Capturing 'correctly' on set matters more than the actual gear used. If you can't shoot raw, get the right white balance. Even if you are shooting raw, make sure to get a good exposure to capture the detail you need. You maximize flexibility in post. Great gear poorly utilized will still look like crap.
HDR Feedback: After the first few seconds of watching, I felt something was off about the image. I thought the blacks seemed a bit richer and the colors popped a little more. I chalked it up to you guys most likely shooting on an Arri. I didn't notice this was an HDR video until the Arri vs Sony testing. I just wanted to make sure I was in 4K, and then I saw it..... BAM... HDR!
This feels like VERY tame HDR compared to most of what's out there on RUclips. I like it. It looks good. There are 2 channels that I just don't watch anymore since I got my MacBook Pro. Almost every HDR video on RUclips gets eye-searingly bright to the point it's just too fatiguing to watch. This just looks great. This gets me excited for the future of HDR.
I noticed it was HDR right away since it was so dark compared to SDR content on my phone haha. (Not a complaint about the video, just a sign of my phone having a really bad HDR implementation)
HDR isn’t meant to be super bright and over saturated almost the opposite. So yeah I guessed it as well
The first few seconds of the video are mastered such that they're unnecessarily bright. On some devices it manifests as exactly that, on some as darkening of that segment, on others - makes no difference. The rest of the video is very well done overall.
fun fact - the EVF-1 port (on the front, above the sensor) supports cables up to 5 meters. The EVF-2 port (operator-right at the top) supports up to 10 meter cables!
edit - 4:08 - you'd power the transmitter, motors for the lens rings and any kind of distance-calculator (LR2, cinetape, whatever). Can also power a heated EVF :)
6:44 - it's worse than that... ALL the power ports have the key lines pointing at like a 330 degree angle - pointing towards the camera body. infuriating!
I work as a London based onset Livegrade DIT , all the HETV production I have worked on for the last few years have been either Arri Alexa Mini LF to Sony Venice, always RAW the thing is Red as a company have the patent on compressed RAW somehow Sony convinced Red that their liner 16bit RAW called XOCN is a codec ( it's not it is RAW ) so that has 3 compression levels LT, ST and XT. For Arri we use something called Codex Device manager which is Mac only and this in conjunction with Pomfort Silver Stack or Yoyotta compresses the file as the Codex Mini Mag is backed up to multiple RAID drives with Hash 64 checksum verification, during this process device manage enables something called HDE compression which will lossesly compress the Arri RAW to a .mxf around 50% smaller then the RAW file the camera records but again this is Mac OS only which is why all DIT's and Data Mangers use Mac based rigs never Windows. For HDR content the Venice and XOCN is preferred as there is an easier SD & HDR colour pipline using ACES colour management in DaVinci as XOCN is 16bit linear RAW there is no log curver and mastering to both HDR and SDR is easier, where 13bit Arri RAW is not linea but encoded as Arri LogC4 so there are more transfer functions involved. The smaller data footprint and easier post HDR SDR colour pipline of XOCN from the Venice, Venice 2 and Burarno is a big part of why the Venice was used for Avitar 2, Top Gun Maveric, MI 8 over the Alexa Mini LF. All those cameras use large format sensors and need lenses that cover those larger sensors, the 2 advantages the Alex 35 brings to the table are a smaller Super 35 sensor meaning a greater selection of vintage super 35 cine lenses and the a claimed 17.5 stop dynamic range compared to 14 stops for the Venice and ALEXA Mini LF but asmentioned to reduce the data footprint from the 35 you need to download footage using Silverstack or Yoyotta on Mac Studio with Codex device manger installed and HDE encoding turned on the backed up Arri RAW files will be compress by 50%
I think one of the things that wasn't super highlighted, was that it isn't that pro cine cams are marginally better(still better IO), but that prosumer cameras have gotten so much better ever since the 5d mk2 changed the market.
Man just in the last 5-6 year “proconsumer” cameras have gotten like ten times better. Instead of being like half the quality of a arri they are now like 80-90% the quality of a arri while being a tenth of the cost, and more convenient bell and whistles.
@@AL-lh2htI mean it depends on what you mean by “bells and whistles”. There’s a reason 95 percent of sets use ARRI products. They just work. I’ve worked on sets where we’ve used prosumer cameras as b and c cams and the amount of issues we run into are unbelievable. ARRI products work perfectly and don’t break. That’s something invaluable on a set where time is money.
I vote no for all HDR. RUclips HDR ends up much darker than HDR in Disney+ and Prime video for me. It’s far too dim considering the frequency of that rare moment when you see the benefits of HDR in an LTT video.
The Alexa 65 isn't 65mm, the horizontal aperture is only 54mm wide. The name is an ode to standard 5 perf 65mm film where the usable horizontal aperture is only around 53mm. 15 perf 65mm film (IMAX) has a horizontal aperture of 70mm.
I think it's a reference to the "6.5K" resolution as well.
11:09 Linus almost drops the drive and then looks if David noticed it
I am a fan of cinema and although I will never make my own films... I love seeing a glimpse into the shooting side via videos like this. Keep up the great work, LTT.
One of these cameras is designed to be solo operated in a documenting environment and the other is meant to be crewed with all sorts of I/Os on a major expensive project. It's not just about form, it's also about function.
Yet another instance of you guys not knowing what the hell you're talking about. The 35 and the LF differ in sensor size. The 35 is what it says it is - Super35 format, works with cinema lesnes from the film era which were designed for Super35 of various perf counts. The LF is literally the "large format." Different lenses since they have to cover a bigger sensor. You see older Panavision and Todd-AO lenses adapted to the format. Think of it like the difference between the Arriflex 535 line and Arriflex 765 line. They are vastly different tools intended for distinct use cases.
And IMAX negatives are not 70mm, they are 65mm. IMAX and 5/70mm distribution prints are 70mm gauge, but the negatives that run through the camera are 65mm. The *ONLY* format to ever use a 70mm negative was Sovscope 70, which was a reverse engineering of the Todd-AO process (Mitchell 65mm cameras) adjusted so that their print stocks and negatives could share a film base (it made it cheaper to do for the small initial volume). IMAX uses a 65mm negative running horizontally, which is 3x as wide as a 5/65 negative is tall. It is then printed to 70mm film, and there will be blank area wasted on either edge near the sprocket holes. This dates back to the Todd-AO and Panavision eras when 5/70mm release prints had 6-track magnetic sound on the film, where 2 tracks would be bonded to the film inboard of the sprocket holes, one strip on either side of the picture area. Modern 5/70mm prints use a DTS timecode to sync sound to the film, and that is printed outboard of the sprocketholes, while IMAX simply uses an initial timesync on projector start, and no timecode to keep sync during a showing.
First, use breaks. And second, never write long speeches. Nobody will read them.
Loved this please do more of these with David!
Yes, and please let David speak without interrupting him every 1.4 seconds.
David the groomer?
Seeing someone struggling with PL mount for the first time is a nostalgic experience
Arris image, especially the skintones are always just slightly more green-ish. which, in my opinion, looks very pleasing.
Linus immediately starting to swipe at 13:29 and getting flustered at 13:34 when the swiping does something is hilarious
Its funny I work as a VFX artist and use a lot of ARRI footage as plates, the main goal of most of my comp shots is to make the image look as imperfect as possible. lens dirt, lens flares, chromatic aberration, grain, noise, lens distortion. its so funny to me that we shoot with these amazing cameras only to dirty up the image in post. it just gives that subtle hint of realism though especially when working with CG.
It depends on your goal. But isn't it ironic?
This was about as useful and accurate as watching Roger Deakins discussing graphics cards.
Tbh I kinda would like to see that 😂
Hahaha
100% bang on - Amazing comment hahaha , image how beautiful the Deakins GPU B roll would be though :D
I know, right? I cringed a little when Linus was dissing 24fps for film.
Thanks for the HDR video loved the quality of production.
Having worked on quite a few bigger budget projects (films, Netflix series, etc) the main reasons why these types of cameras cost so much are:
1) Rock solid performance. These cameras will not stop working in the field and can take a decent amount of abuse. I'm not saying to toss them off a roof, but they don't overheat, make a ton of noise, can handle being whipped around quickly on different rigs, etc. Plus, they have properly locking connections (lomo, bnc, etc) to make sure it never loses connection. Add in the specialty features that you need for high end productions (especially for tricky VFX work) and you have a highly reliable, albeit, extremely niche camera.
2) The volume of product they move is relatively small. Basics of economics state that you can either recoup the cost of R&D for product design by selling a ton of the widget at a low cost or selling only a few of the widget at a high cost. The size of the market that these cameras exist in is extremely small when compared to all of the cameras in the world (Apple and Google having the largest market share currently due to smart phones).
The arri is consistently more greenish in its reds, the sony is more blueish in its reds. I also preferred the Sony in more than one, but I can assure you once you start editing you will love what comes out of that arri sensor (no experience, that's just logic if Arri is worth their brand :D).
This video just told me people just have a lot of "preconception" in their heads about image and will absolutely choose one over another simply because of a name and perceived value. But thats just human haha. Arri probably have better UX though.
I love learning more about how cameras work - as a software engineer I already know a lot of computer stuff, but seeing this new area of tech reminds me of when I was first getting into computers
THANK YOU! As a filmmaker, I miss the camera content. (The RED stuff you all did is what brought me here.) So good to see this. I would love to play around for a couple days with that gear.
I also want to chime in about film grain:
It's not just about putting an Instagram filter over your footage to make it look "artsy." Actual celluloid film had a grain structure that meant very fine details would smoothly transition into the background noise that gave a pleasing look to videos. That grain helped details look better. Digital sensors have a different type of noise that can look a bit "digital," and it works against the fine details in an image because it's not as consistent. The texture of the digital noise isn't as smooth. Therefore, adding a bit of simulated film grain helps ease those details into a more pleasing look. When done properly, this gives details a better feeling. When done improperly, it looks very cringy.
I came across this when I was doing astrophotography timelapses and was playing around with AI noise removal in Lightroom. That feature is incredible, and I thought, "let's get rid of all the noise, finally I'll have clean timelapses!" But the noise removal cranked up to 100 actually felt a bit weird because the "texture" of the image details felt all smooth. And not in a good way. When I added a touch of grain back into the image, it blended the details of the shot back together in a way that felt much more cohesive. I will admit, adding noise back in after taking it all out was a weird feeling, but after that experience, I began to see why people would want to be discerning about the type of grain that their videos had.
When I was learning color grading I used some of the footage on the ARRI website and it was so nice to play around with crating dramatic lighting using the range of exposure avaliable. I wish I could use ARRI fottage more often haha
Being a 25 year member of IATSE as a 2nd Ac then an A1st AC shooting hundreds of big shows its about glass. Lenses are king. The arri system just works. When your onset and the camera has an issue you have hundreds if people and gear standing around costing money. I've spent thousands and thousands of hours standing next to various versions of Alexa bodies and they just work. Some shows use the Sony Venice some red.. I've used them all. Arri is the best. Do not take any risks using any other systems..
How is Linus even allowed to touch this cameras with his record of dropping things… I had heart attacks everytime he lifted them….😂
Because now he has the money to fix it
Those Alexa cameras are built like tanks, they can take a drop.
you noticed how much David acted any time linus touched or lifted it,
The probably can't though.@@CraigBickerstaff
@@TimTYT Go and have a look at the testing process that those cameras go through if you doubt it. There are also many examples of crazy things Alexa cameras have gone through and survived.
In the late '90's I worked as an opto-mechanical engineer for IMAX Digital here in Vancouver designing laser film recorders, film scanners and digital projectors.
Cinematic 70mm needs to carry sound so it is 65mm wide by 5 perfect high giving it an aspect ratio of 0.95:1 (2:2.1).
IMAX carries the sound on a separate 35mm film and the image is 15 perfs wide by 70m high making an aspect ratio of 1.43:1. Significantly wider.
Arri uses ONSemi sensors not their own. Nice sensors, LMI3D uses them in most of their products.
They know exactly who they sent it too, yes Linus would poke around but Linus also opens up the big wallet if his camera guys say "I want" 🤣 RIP LMG Accountants
I absolutely LOVE seeing David talk about cameras and his experience with artistic application! More!
parts of me died every time Linus picked up the $100,000 camera
ARRI cameras are the absolute standard in UK TV Production and beyond. With the addition of Sony's VENICE line up holding a strong hold to a large portion also. Alexa 35 now has higher frame rate filming at higher resolutions also - previously limited by it's resolution when shooting higher framerates.
My cellphone doesn't display this video properly. It looks super dark, very low contrast
Yeah even on my sony xperia 1
That bit about “never crush or blow the highlights, let the editors do that” Fuck that!
Nail it in camera, every time. Set your look in camera, EVERY time. Your editor should be throwing on a rec709 lut and cutting. Your colorist will accentuate the look you set in camera along with your input as the cinematographer and the director’s input.
Alr so what I learned is don’t buy a cinema camera as a freelancer 💀
9:40 I have NEVER been so close to a heart attack from watching an LTT video as when Linus decides to shake an Arri in frustration like that. Adrenaline spiked for real.
"Netflix Certified" you mean the platform which compresses every movie down to a blocky mess?
First off, lol. But they’re being serious. Netflix has a bunch of technical guidelines that their productions pretty much HAVE to follow, and one of those guidelines is what cameras can be used.
@@MysteryMii I mean that's great and all, but I would rather have them use higher bandwidth encoding for their streams :D
That dual gain sensor is such a game-changer. But its the combination of dynamic range, colour accuracy and highlight recovery and rollover makes this the gold standard of cinema cameras... and the price reflects. I remember an interview Potato Jet did with a guy from Arri who said that in most cameras, you are just choosing what to compromise on and with Arri, it looks like they decided to compromise on costs instead.
I really like how David is natural on camera and balanced, and sensible in his opinions. Linus, put him in front and let him teach us about cameras, from entry level to professional ones. ❤
12:43 They are not writable, the write protection on the disk is turned on.
No way 😮
1 year after “we out of space on storage server” 😂
It was so funny guessing each image correctly. I use the fx6 almost every day for work. It's a wonderful camera, but it has a magenta shift in the skintones, no doubt. Makes matching an fx3 a little hairy. love this video!!
David mentions the latitude and that's 100% the reason for a cinema camera. Almost any camera can give you cinema quality with controlled studio lighting with all of the setting dialed in correctly. You want a cinema camera to save you thousands in reshoot/shooting delays because you don't have time to triple check everything in the heat of production.
That and reliability, I hear that arri’s are like tanks. Famous story of one being in a fire and still working after…
It’s funny how much of film making is really just project management, and you can’t have one component fail because it impacts like potentially hundreds of people and costs a massive amount of money.
Yes we use Pro-Res for most things. Yes we also use the audio in for wireless scratch plus timecode.
Insane. That video was in the studio during the last LTX, and we are getting a video now. That gives a perspective on long a project might take until it gets to be published
I don't know if it's the camera, HDR, lighting, or editing, but I immediately noticed how much better this video looks compared to other LTT/short circuit ones.
All of the above.
is it just me or is there something weird with the color grading in this video. like it’s more saturated with a higher black point
Was a very fun video that seemed quite relaxed at the same time. Also as always David is a joy on screen/to listen to.
Yay for HDR! Immediately noticeable on my 16" macbook pro and looks great.
About the grain: not only what you mentioned, but it is also a way for DPs that maybe wouldn't be included in the color correction (thinking about tv ads) to force their hand on the grain selection and strenght.
Ironically, I feel like the color grading on this episode is off.
David is such a professional. I love hearing him talk about the camera in such details.
Well, you might want to rethink that since he was wrong on soooooo many things here, And I mean a TON of things here. He is Semi-Pro at best
David is always fun to watch. love his dino earring. Was hoping that Linus would show the internals of the ssd. Would have made for another Jinnitech RED fiasco lol
Imagine Linus as a 1st AC. Dropping shit ALL DAY LONG.
Was able to guess every test correctly. That's a super nice camera. Give David his toy.
As a DP, it's actually really cool to see an arri camera from the perspective of a tech enthusiast/reviewer... But holy shit am I sweating watching Linus handle these cameras
As a Senior Compositor Artist, no camera color looks like Arri, best of the best
We need more HDR videos from you guys, that little snippet of the demo looks absolutely gorgeous.
It’s been a while since I’ve seen an LTT HDR video 😮
Edit: it looks flipping amazing on my iPhone 13 Pro 🎉
Wow, watching this on a Pixel 7 Pro and a Galaxy S23U back to back is wild.
why is this video so dark?
Have you tried Turing up your brightness
The ‘alignment mark’ is not meant to align the lens to the mount.
The Signature Prime family of lenses have a unique rear magnetic filter holder. That white witness mark is for alignment of said rear filter ring.
The indexing pin top right at the 1:30 o’clock position is more than enough for alignment with PL (Positive Lock) and LPL lenses.
on my pc and phone the HDR looks amazing, but on my macbook the video looked awful. was incredibly dark and flat in color. if you guys could upload both that would be amazing for people who dont have HDR displays and we could swap between the two but i know that would be a big workload. also a weird thing i just tried but on my non HDR monitors that i have on my PC the video still looks similar to the one with HDR. not sure whats going on with my macbook then
Are you all even serious asking if you should get an Arri Alexa35!!??!!? You picked the camera up and just started shooting with it capturing some gorgeous footage…. Look, if you’ve got the workflow hardware, the storage space for the larger files and has stuff to shoot…the sheer joy of working with such fantastic looking footage is worth its weight in gold!!!!
Why is this video so dark??
The ARRI ALEXAs are my favourite types of cameras to work with; it always makes footage look so much better compared to other cameras.
Ooooh, this video looks amazing in HDR! You gotta buy it 😂
If you use HDR in the future, please make sure to not put white wall screenshots inbetween dim footage with alot of black.
I've been flashbanged HARD! Watching this in a dark room.
“It doesn’t even zoom” - says only someone who doesn’t do any cinematography.
At first I didn't understand the point of artificially adding camera noise back into the footage.....but then, you just gotta think about it like digital still cameras; People add film grain back into images all the time in Lightroom etc, and you know what? It can look great. So I honestly see the justification here too
Is it just me or does the video look underexposed 😅
Me too
It's in HDR. Either your device doesn't support it and you're experiencing bad tone mapping, or you're used to having your display at high brightness and the overall reduced brightness in HDR is tripping you up (darker spots look darker in HDR than SDR on cranked brightness). For me, it's the second one
It's so funny to watch these as an professional in this field. You would absolutely use audio in. 2 reasons: When you're playing back from a VTR setup, it's way more reliable to have the audio coming through the BNC, and 2, it helps the editor sync audio, sometimes the Timecode isnt exact or maybe someone didn't slate. Having the audio embedded adds another layer of security.
The audio in isn't necessarily for a shotgun mic, in commercials, it is usually a wireless audio hop.
Dude.. you make youtub videos.
9:40 "Hihi I'm shaking a 70k camera!"
9:42 "Oh F*, I'm shaking a 70k camera..."