Cinematography : RB's April Challenge (day 17) by Geoff Hall

Geoff, I've used all of the cameras that you mentioned and they each have their strengths and weaknesses. In my opinion Blackmagic cameras are not particularly strong in low light conditions. They have nice dynamic range which is great when working in contrasty situations, but they get noisy at higher ISO's. Even the Arri Alexa (the most popular camera among high end DP's) is not great in very low light or ISO's higher than 1600. In my experience, the Canon C300 (Mark 1, 2) and many of the Sony models perform best with high ISO's. The very best low light camera in terms of dynamic range and high ISO with relatively low noise is the Sony A7S, A7S II because of the full frame sensor and design of the larger pixels. You can see many amazing examples on the A7S Group page on Vimeo. The downside to the A7S for many is the small DSLR form factor which needs lots of accessories to make it more "video" functional for professional users. Of course, the small form factor is also an advantage in some situations. When paired with an external recorder, you get a better data bit rate and 4:2:2 color subsampling. However it is still only 8 bit color. Another great alternative that is still relatively inexpensive is the Sony FS7. It has a decent form factor and it has 10 bit color internally as well as 4K. It performs extremely well in low light at high ISO's. It also has great dynamic range. Workflow is very simple once you get the Sony software to "unwrap" the files. Or, use an external recorder and gain more data and use ProRes for editing.

Good morning Randolph and thank you for your feedback. I think if you can be romantically involved with a camera, mine would be the Arri Alexa, because of seeing the results on other films. (I wonder what Gordon Willis used?) And yes a dynamic workflow is important to us. It is interesting that after all I've saw and read about the Blackmagic, low light isn't its strength! Ah well, I guess sometimes you can't trust the marketing propaganda! What about the Red Epic? I know that early on there seemed to be battery problems with the Red camera, overheating if I remember correctly, but this was obviously a few years ago and so things have moved on. I shall check out the A7s Group page on Vimeo. Thanks for the tip. Best Wishes, Geoff

@Randolph, yes, the low light capabilities of the camera are very impressive, working in Moonlight at 25600 - 32000 ISO. https://vimeo.com/105690274

Geoff, I agree that the Arri Alexa is probably the nicest camera all around. I think that the best quality of the Alexa is the smooth "roll off" going into the highlights before it clips. It's a little more like film. No other camera can match that. But as I mentioned, it has it's weaknesses as well. Except for the newer Alexa Mini model, they are fairly heavy and large cameras. So they require more bodies in the camera crew and take a little more time to move around. Need a strong operator if you do a lot of handheld. Not efficient for run and gun - even though Arri promotes them as great documentary cameras. The biggest disadvantage of the Alexa for an independent filmmaker is the high rental cost. I personally don't think it's worth spending too much of your budget on a camera when money is needed for other important areas like lighting and the art department - which often gets short changed. The RED Epic with the Dragon sensor is a beautiful camera as well. The highlight roll off is much nicer than earlier models. These cameras aren't cheap either, but usually less than an Alexa. The bodies are cheap, but you need lots of accessories to make them function well. You will spend a significant amount in hard drive storage with these cameras since you must work in 4K or 5K. And you must have a powerful computer with lots of RAM to edit in 4K. Again, you have to be careful not to shoot at very high ISO's. It all depends on what your budget can afford and the aesthetic and technical challenges that your project faces. If you need to shoot a lot at night under existing urban lighting - or shooting with available firelight or candle light, then you should consider and test the Canon C300 or C500 - or the Sony F55, F5, FS7 depending on what you can afford. I would recommend listening to your DP's input and then testing any potential cameras (that you can afford) under the lighting conditions that you will face. Also, look at your test results "blind". Have your editor or someone else remove the identification slates and label each camera with only a number or a letter. This will prevent brand name bias with you and your DP. Your favorite choices will often surprise you. Lastly, I think that you are confusing your love of a cinematographer's work with the camera they used. With high end budget films, you will naturally see more work shot with Alexas and then RED cameras. But the skill of the DP using the camera is MUCH more important than the camera used. If you have a talented DP who understands how to compensate with great lighting and exposure, it really doesn't matter that much what camera is used. My latest commercial / corporate reel was shot with 10 different cameras: https://vimeo.com/120633861 My narrative reel used about 6 different cameras: https://vimeo.com/141443858 Sometimes the camera used was my choice based on aesthetic, technical, and budget needs. Other times it was dictated by the client or production company. I doubt that you would be able to tell me which clip was shot with what camera. You would be surprised to learn what some of the cameras were. Especially when viewed on the web which is where most indie films end up. By the way, I don't believe that Gordon Willis shot any features with a digital camera. They were all shot on film. Many of his classics like "The Godfather" were shot on film with an ISO equivalent rating of only 100. He was not working with low light (by today's standards). He was lighting with lots of contrast (deep shadows) and often underexposing significantly to create his Prince of Darkness style.

Avoiding the other questions for the moment, what do you mean by low-light? What situations? How much ambient light? What are the deliverables and what are the screening venues?

@Randolph, thank you so much for your input. Yes, we can be pursuaded by the brand, usually falling for the hard sell that you get at trade shows and on the internet. Gordon Willis. I was thinking of the characteristics of the camera he was using, but good to know how he created his Prince of Darkness style. Thanks. And yes, it really is the best DP and not the camera that you need, that is important. That will be my mental view point now that we've conversed. I think as a Director on his first feature, I want to have an intelligent conversation with the DP and the rest they can educate me on during the shoot. I think I will try and keep a journal of each day, so that lessons learned will not be lost. I shall also check out you vimeo links. Thanks again for sharing.

Hello @Andrew, Screenings. We are planning a theatrical release, followed by the usual distribution windows for VoD and DVD. Low-light. We have night-time scenes in a shopping precinct (an alley way between shops) and also under a bridge. There is street lighting either side of the bridge, but little underneath. It is a cold dark space. There are scenes in: A basement. A bedroom with ambient light coming through the windows (at night). plus a dream sequence shot in a darkened studio with one source of lighting. Hope that helps. Best, Geoff

Considering your aim is a theatrical release the quality of your picture has to work in that display venue. If it looks overly noisy, soft, with odd colours, or myriad other visual no-nos it will have failed to do what you need to say nothing of what you want. For a theatrical screen you also want to use a professional record format that will capture and maintain image quality. Thanks for the info on the low light situations you are considering. These are all things that can be lit to any level you wish. Under a bridge? In “A Clockwork Orange” there is a very famous scene under a bridge that works very well while being shot, I believe on Kodak 5254, a 100iso film stock. Coincidentally 5254 s also what “The Godfather” was shot on. Low light has been done and can be done again. However, with the idea of minimizing lighting and maximizing usage of ambient light levels, my current go to camera for low light is the Panasonic Varicam V35 in the 5000iso base setting. Great color, wonderful latitude and very very low noise, unlike anything else out there right now for shooting a low light levels. At 5000iso with an f2.0 stop you get full exposure with 1 foot-candle of light while still having a dynamic range that is 5-6 stops wider than what was available in 5254. The 5000iso setting allows a properly exposed image in 1/50th of the light needed for the same exposure on 5254. When lighting at these levels the sets are dark, I mean look at the floor so you don’t trip on something you didn’t see dark. Quite astounding the first time you work with it. Of the other cameras you asked about, the Alexa is the best. Not the sharpest, but beautiful images. If you push the speed of the Alexa you will end up balancing noise reduction and image sharpness which is being caught between a rock and a hard place. The Blackmagics are ok, but have limitations in terms of noise, sensitivity, latitude and colour. The discussion a director needs to have with a DP is about the images, what they look like in artistic terms not technical ones. I would much rather talk about the story and how it can be interpreted than an arcane discussion about why all the talk about the number of photosites on a chip is not resolution and why compressed RAW is actually spelled BS-RAW. As DP’s we translate Artsy into Techno where necessary as part of what we do on a creative team. Its what we do. Knowing is good, but trusting the folks you work with is priceless.

Good advice Andrew on all accounts. I haven't shot with the Panasonic Varicam V35, but I have seen lots of demos and I've played with it a little. The 5000 ISO is very impressive and pretty clean. Great dynamic range. Nice design and ergonomics as well. On paper, Panasonic's post workflow is very versatile. However, I've heard that there are bugs that need to be worked out with the workflow. Any thoughts or experience with post workflow? Unfortunately, no one in my market has purchased one for rental.

I haven't heard anything about any issues in post. Both Premiere Pro and Avid were used. I'm assuming that no news is good news in this case. If you cannot get the camera in your area, then you probably shouldn't consider it. But that is just one of those crazy suggestions on my part :-) There is also the Sony F55 or F65 to consider as well. Fast and clean and pushing a stop or a stop and a half is fine. If you are worried about noise, one trick is to push everything. Using the higher speed as your base setting so that the noise doesn't change even in your daytime scenes (what's a little more ND between friends). As long as there is not a lot of noise you are fine. The eyes of general uninformed audiences quickly become accustomed to such things and just stop seeing them, so you are fine showing it to producers and directors :-).

Thank you @Andrew for your post. I will check out the V35. I'm not sure what is available in local hire companies, but it's another camera to add to the list of possibilites. (Apologies for my sporadic replies, I'm busy juggling with my son's wedding this Saturday and casting director contracts as well as investors). Well said, the DP will do the techno translation work, which is a relief to me. If we are to talk in visual rather than technical terms, then Pakula's 'Klute' is a reference point on my mood board. Yes, I do have a mood board. Other reference points may also be the Underpass in Gaspar Noe's 'Irriversible'. The story of Seeing Rachel is one of what lies beneath the surface of things, of society, and the implicit tensions within a city, Bristol, known as the most desirable city in the UK to live, juxtaposed with the growth of criminal gangs establishing themselves in the human trade 'industry'. Yes, I'm very conscious of noise, maybe even frightened of it, because it would be such a destroyer of the visual quality we wish to create and the mood we wish to evoke.

“Irreversible”, what a reference! Would probably have done much better in the box-office if it wasn’t so very hard to watch. The underpass scene had its impact for many reasons the look was only one. It could certainly have been shot on virtually anything since it takes place in a contained area and the lighting doesn’t have to be restricted to what is available. We have been lighting and shooting such scenes forever, so your choices are more artistic and logistic issues. Klute is a deserving starting point. Wonderful work. With the very wide latitude cameras we have now, building the contrast will be crucial. Lots of negative fill. Perhaps you and your DP can watch Klute together looking at the lighting in the scenes that you like the most, not to copy the lighting, but discussing why you like them and how to get that feel in your picture where appropriate. Should you leave building the contrast until post, there will be the very probably be a lot of push from various mavens of mediocrity to lessen the contrast and make the image brighter. An important thing Gordon Willis did to preserve his vision was to make his shots almost impossible to time and print in a manner that would change the dark artistry that was created. You need to be able to fend off the criticism that the images are too dark so start thinking of your arguments now. Remember that Klute was also probably shot on 5254, a 100 iso films stock with 8-9 stops of latitude depending upon the print stock. Any current real cinema cameras far surpass those specs however it is not the specs but the artistic impact that makes the images work so well. Where the V35 may prove an effective tool is in night exteriors in cities as well as places where the sensitivity helps. There is very little difference in the look of the 5000iso and the 800iso main setting. That you even know what a mood board is puts you well ahead of so many. Include a colour arc for the whole picture as well as palettes for scenes characters and locations. Keeps everyone thinking along the same lines. Geoff you have a really interesting approach to your project. I hope you can maintain your aims throughout and deliver to the screen the movie in your head. Have fun at the wedding!

Wow, @Andrew, thank you so much. I've just got back from the wedding rehearsal. This is inspirational stuff and so encouraging for this feature debutante. Yes, I need to maintain my aims, which is probably the hardest thing for a newby director, but I have the support of a great, youthful but experienced Producer. Well, youthful in terms of my age! I shall now go and read through the script and develop a colour arc for it. It's really helpful to know that I'm not mad to think of filmmaking in such ways, even at this stage of my 'career'. And now to check out the V35 camera. Thank you so much for your help. Best, Geoff

Hi Andrew and Randolph, I came across this video on the Panasonic website. It seems really impressive. I like the potential that doing on-camera grading could offer us during night shoots and other low-light situations. Here it is, https://vimeo.com/127808600

Remmber, Gordo used 50 and 100 ISO film for most of his movies.. even if push processed, nowhere near current digital ISOs. They are lit to look low key; they were not in any sense low- or existing-light. Trust your DP and get the post people in on the discussion regarding workflow. Ultimately that expensive box won't make your movie, the DP will, with her / his crew. I think the best cameras out there right now on the cheap are the FS7 and FS5 ( latter just getting much needed improvements announced at NAB). I cannot for the life of me understand the popularity of C series Canons... I just hate the looks that come out of them. Said another way, taste plays into cameras as much as dollars. Your mileage will definitely vary. Blackmagics are junk. Arri is the real deal. REDS are forced on professionals by a number of forces without which the camera would be less popular.. it has become tolerable in current incarnations; the RED ONE was a horrible beast of a thing. My latest Epic -shot feature, BONED (award winner in Toronto '15) which used RED primes, is out on iTunes now. There I go, full of shameless self promotion and harsh opinions too ;)

Hi Royce, thanks for posting. Yes, you really have to get past the hard sell of marketing campaigns and connect with people who have actually used the cameras in the heat of production.

Look at the cameras you are interested in, you certainly have a few to look at just from this discussion. I agree with Royce about RED except that I never use any of their products as a rule since they utterly burned that bridge a long time ago. Test the cameras and the post path through to completion looking at both technical aspects, like real resolution as measured on a chart not from some irrelevant number of Ks, and also look at the efficacy of creating a few of the looks you wish in the picture through post. If for some reason you wish to use any LED lights on an actor, testing them with each camera is absolutely crucial. As always when viewing tests remember it is art over technology every time. Without knowing your script it is hard to guess at what more to add at this time unless you have specific questions. Looking forward to hearing more about your project as you move forward.

Thanks Andrew, it sounds like you have a story or two to tell about RED cameras! I'll keep you posted as things develop with the film. Best, Geoff