Daniel D. Teoli Jr. Posted April 24, 2022 Share Posted April 24, 2022 History of Arriflex https://www.arri.com/en/company/about-arri/history/history Cinematographer Anna Foerster with ALEXA Photos: Arri - Fair Use ...Too bad Arri doesn't make an affordable film scanner for archivists. <><><><> Betty Brosmer - The top earning figure model of the 1950s DDTJRAC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted April 24, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted April 24, 2022 They almost went out of business... had they not purchased Moviecam, I have a feeling they'd be a distant memory. It was the success of the Arricam, which was a Bauer design, that pushed Arri into a new realm. Arri has dominated the digital industry in a way they never did with film, mostly because they took a different approach to other competitors. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giray Izcan Posted April 24, 2022 Share Posted April 24, 2022 (edited) Arriflex is more common and dominant in most parts of the world, was and still is actually. Outside of the US, UK and Australia, most productions used Arriflex and Moviecams - mostly Arri though. Most countries don't even have Panavision rental houses. Edited April 24, 2022 by Giray Izcan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Dom Jaeger Posted April 24, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted April 24, 2022 4 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said: They almost went out of business... had they not purchased Moviecam, I have a feeling they'd be a distant memory. It was the success of the Arricam, which was a Bauer design, that pushed Arri into a new realm. Arri has dominated the digital industry in a way they never did with film, mostly because they took a different approach to other competitors. What are you talking about? Arri absolutely dominated the film era. The first Arriflex revolutionised filmmaking tools, and since the 70s there has really just been Arri and Panavision cameras used for the majority of movies. Outside the US most films were shot on Arriflexes, but even in the US all those other rental houses that weren’t Panavision were also renting mostly Arriflexes. The majority of 16mm camera rentals worldwide would also have been Arris since the SR. Aaton barely dented the 35mm market, and while Moviecam was a very successful design they never made enough cameras to seriously put Arri out of business, or made a MOS camera to rival the 435. Moviecams were not without their own issues, when Arri bought the Moviecam design they improved it to create the Arricam range. It was only released in 2000 mind you, so Arricams only had about a decade before digital finally took over the movie industry, and film cameras stopped being made altogether. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted April 25, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted April 25, 2022 5 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said: What are you talking about? I'm just basing my knowledge on stories told to me by people who were there when the deals happened. Bauer and Arri had a pretty long relationship before all of this went down. The BL4S movement was straight from Bauers early Moviecam designs and the 535 is just a "copy" of what Bauer was developing. Sadly for Arri, 535 was an unmitigated disaster. Even though they were using Bauer's movement, the camera itself was nothing special. Even the "B"model, wasn't enough to compete against the Moviecam Compact and SL. Bauer couldn't afford to produce the camera he wanted to make. Arri had the money, but they were also desperate because they saw Bauer taking business from them. Arri had nothing in the pipeline to replace the 535 and it was a lot easier to re-work the Moviecam into something that worked. So they worked out a deal to keep Moviecam alive, but put all their collective efforts into the Arricam. Arri built all new electronics for the Moviecam's, the first of which was the Moviecam Compact II and of course, the joint-effort SLMKII, which was basically an early variant of the Arricam LT. Where it's true, Arri across the entire world, dominated the international market. What people forget is that, most of those cameras were OLD cameras. They weren't "new" 535's and 435's. They were BL's, III's and even 2C's. Panavision DOMINATED the theatrical and TV market in the US. You can't stay in business selling parts and doing service, you have to sell NEW cameras. When rental houses saw the 535, they had to make a decision, buy them or Moviecam's. Many actually moved over to Moviecam as a consequence as the "modern" competitor to Panavision. I mean please tell me a competitor so the Moviecam SL, because I don't know of another quiet shoulder mount camera that existed in that time frame anything like the SL. So yea, Arri was in trouble. They only exist today because they made a deal with Bauer and basically took his excellent designs and turned them into more sellable cameras. Imagine if Bauer made a deal with someone else in the early 90's instead of Arri and had someone else build their electronics and had a huge budget to make the moviecam version of the arricam's. Arri would have been totally screwed and that's what I mean by my comment. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karim D. Ghantous Posted April 26, 2022 Share Posted April 26, 2022 All I will say here is that ARRI's 35mm cameras are just beautiful. Imagine being in the right place at the right time to buy a discounted 435. That was perhaps 10 years ago? I'm sure someone here remembers when film cameras were at their cheapest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted April 26, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted April 26, 2022 45 minutes ago, Karim D. Ghantous said: All I will say here is that ARRI's 35mm cameras are just beautiful. Imagine being in the right place at the right time to buy a discounted 435. That was perhaps 10 years ago? I'm sure someone here remembers when film cameras were at their cheapest. Yep, I mean my friends and I got in when things were cheap. I have a feeling the pricing will start to go down as Kodak raises prices and we see people needing the cash due to an economic down turn. I've already seen some incredible packages become available, stuff that even 2 years ago was unobtanium. It's a waiting game and I think we'll see private owners part with cameras soon enough. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel D. Teoli Jr. Posted May 2, 2022 Author Share Posted May 2, 2022 On 4/24/2022 at 1:27 PM, Tyler Purcell said: They almost went out of business... had they not purchased Moviecam, I have a feeling they'd be a distant memory. It was the success of the Arricam, which was a Bauer design, that pushed Arri into a new realm. Arri has dominated the digital industry in a way they never did with film, mostly because they took a different approach to other competitors. Didn't know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giray Izcan Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 Because they didn't almost go out of business. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karim D. Ghantous Posted May 2, 2022 Share Posted May 2, 2022 On 4/26/2022 at 3:12 PM, Tyler Purcell said: It's a waiting game and I think we'll see private owners part with cameras soon enough. So those of use with some spare cash might be able to snap up some bargains? Assuming that they will be in demand later on, of course. I almost bought an Aaton A-Minima some years ago. It was fairly cheap. Quite frankly I didn't even know if I was going to use the thing. Try finding one now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Dom Jaeger Posted May 2, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted May 2, 2022 13 hours ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said: Didn't know that. You still don’t, it’s not reliable information. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted May 2, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted May 2, 2022 (edited) 21 hours ago, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said: Didn't know that. Not very many people do who are willing to talk about it. I'm more interested in facts and truth than political theatrics, which is all you'll ever read about in public settings like this. My fascination in this time period was only spearheaded by Denny Clairmont who I spent many days with at the end of Clairmont camera, shooting the shit and enjoying each others company. He was a sponsor of my film school, great advocate for young filmmakers and also very knowledgable about Arri. Needless to say, the bodies are buried and Arri is now one of the most successful cinema camera companies in the world, but there were a few rough years in the 90's which all of that may have ended. With a leap of faith and some incredible engineering from Bauers team, they pooled resources, which allowed Arri to survive. Had Bauer been more successful and not needed the financial aid of Arri in the early 90s, Arri would have floundered. Bauer had the superior design and Arri had nothing. Remember the BL4S and 535 series cameras were all based on Bauer designs. Arris prototypes prior to Bauer designs were supposedly (according to Denny and not confirmed, so could be totally hearsay) not in any way better than the BL4. Its an interesting part of history and I’m sorry if my words about “going out of business” were too strong. Edited May 2, 2022 by Tyler Purcell 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Dom Jaeger Posted May 3, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted May 3, 2022 4 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said: I'm more interested in facts and truth.. You are so funny. 4 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said: Had Bauer been more successful and not needed the financial aid of Arri in the early 90s, Arri would have floundered. Bauer had the superior design and Arri had nothing. Remember the BL4S and 535 series cameras were all based on Bauer designs. I really didn't want to bang my head against the impervious wall of your limitless self-belief again, but people seem to keep believing the half-truths and misinformation you post. First off, the BL4S and 535 were not Bauer designs. The BL4S technical Oscar award in 1991 was given to the Arri Engineering team, not Bauer, and the 535 was developed in large part from the work Arri had done designing the 765 under Otto Blaschek. They had set up Arri Austria in 1985 because Vienna was a precision mechanics centre, which is also where Bauer was. I believe his movement design was utilised, but there is a lot more to movie cameras than the movement. Drive systems, electronics, viewfinder optics, reflex mirror design etc. Both the 765 and 535 also won technical Oscars for Arri. It's no secret that the 535A was not commercially successful. But the re-designed 535B was bought by many rental houses worldwide, and used on plenty of movies throughout the 90s and beyond. Roger Deakins thought pretty highly of it. It also wasn't the only thing Arri produced in this period. There was a little camera called the SR3, which was by far the most widely used S16mm camera for professional productions everywhere. Movies, documentaries, music videos, TV shows, even the NFL all used them and rental houses and production companies bought hundreds and hundreds of them. Then there was the 435, a MOS camera that changed the face of advertising, and really hasn't been equalled in versatility and build quality. Panavision never even bothered to produce a MOS camera to rival it. Every rental house in the world (including Panavision) bought them in bulk, because every movie, TV ad or music video with a decent budget wanted to use them. Arri won another technical Oscar for the 435 in 1998. Then there were all the accessories Arri was producing which became industry standards - rail systems, lens supports, matteboxes, follow focuses, the Arrihead, not to mention their UK lighting division. The dominance of the PL mount and Arri/Zeiss lenses all solidified in the 90s. Hardly a company on the brink of extinction, about to fade from memory. Moviecams were terrific cameras, I know because I serviced them (along with Arricams) for a rental house for 10 years. But while they were very successful, not all industry veterans embraced them. Some people who had used and trusted Arri or Panavision for years were slow to totally accept Moviecams. So you'll find a lot of 90s movies used Arri 535Bs or BL4s as A cams, and Moviecams as B cams. In the film industry reliability is at least as important as the design itself, and Arri had earned that reputation. The Moviecam SL was a real game changing design (it won Bauer his third technical Oscar) but it didn't come out until 1996, and by 2000 there was the Arricam LT, so there really wasn't much of a lag. Most people also recognise that the Mk II Moviecams, produced after collaborating with Arri on things like electronics and viewfinder optics, were better than than the Mk I cameras. I think Arri recognized the advantages of Bauer's camera designs pretty early and would have designed something along similar lines had he not sold to them with the intention of collaborating for their mutual benefit. It's also worth remembering that by the mid 90s Arri were already preparing for the digital transition, with the Arrilaser and later the Arriscan, which directly led to the D-20 and ultimately the Alexa. Unlike Kodak, for instance, who squandered their inheritance, I think Arri always had their eye on the future. I have no affiliation with Arri, and I certainly don't think their designs have been without flaws. But I have always respected their build quality and durability, and their commitment to retrofitting and product continuity. The fact a mag from their 1937 Handkamera could still work on a 2003 235 was an incredible feat, and many of the film standards we have now are due to Arri's consistency over the years. So I take my hat off to a company that has absolutely dominated and shaped the cinema industry for at least the last 50 years. 1 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted May 3, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted May 3, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said: First off, the BL4S and 535 were not Bauer designs. ... I believe his movement design was utilised, but there is a lot more to movie cameras than the movement. The movement is the heart of the camera. Bauers design was game changing. 2 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said: The BL4S technical Oscar award in 1991 was given to the Arri Engineering team This was Bauers design, as you well know. 2 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said: It's no secret that the 535A was not commercially successful. But the re-designed 535B was bought by many rental houses worldwide, and used on plenty of movies throughout the 90s and beyond. Roger Deakins thought pretty highly of it. It also wasn't the only thing Arri produced in this period. But the 535 was released in 1990. The "B" model in 1992. Arri had NOTHING after that for 35mm sync sound cameras. We're talking about a company who had a new camera system every few years and then suddenly, had nothing. Meanwhile Bauer was developing the Moviecam system, the "compact" came out in 1990 and was in a lot of ways a better camera. It was a direct competitor to the 535 and only lacked in the electronics front, something Bauer needed help with to compete. Rental houses did buy 535's, but nowhere near the popularity of the BL series cameras. From my understanding, the reason Bauer didn't take off was literally down to marketing and a few small issues which plagued early cameras like the Super America. There weren't enough rental houses willing to take the risk, due to the high cost. It's not like Moviecam's were half the price of the 535, they were very similar price wise. 2 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said: There was a little camera called the SR3, which was by far the most widely used S16mm camera for professional productions everywhere. Right, the SR3 came out in 1992. Again, that time period was successful for Arri, nobody is arguing that. But I'm talking about AFTER the 435 came out, I'm talking about the period between 1995 and 2000 where Arri had zip. Arri and Bauer had already worked an agreement for his movement. Meanwhile Bauer re-wrote the book on sync sound lightweight cameras with the SL (1996), which was a game changer, especially for Steadicam operators. It takes years to develop a new camera system and Arri had nothing in the works for sync sound 35mm. Sure the 435 sold well, but it wasn't what people were clamoring for. 2 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said: It's also worth remembering that by the mid 90s Arri were already preparing for the digital transition, with the Arrilaser and later the Arriscan, which directly led to the D-20 and ultimately the Alexa. Yes, you're starting to see my point. Arri had so much money cooped up into other ventures, the Arrilaser which was developed through the late 90's and released in 2002 and the Arriscan which was developed in the early 2000's and released in 2004. Both massive undertakings, that needed tremendous budgets to get going. Both machines are horribly complex, they make a film camera look like a children's toy honestly. 2 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said: I think Arri recognized the advantages of Bauer's camera designs pretty early and would have designed something along similar lines had he not sold to them with the intention of collaborating for their mutual benefit. Had Bauer the money to make his real vision; the Moviecam SLMKII, which was already in the works during the delayed release of the SLMKI, things would have been way different. Arri was in trouble financially. Would they have gone out of business? Denny thought they were very close. They were developing two major new post systems. The cost of doing that was far greater than another film camera because they had never done anything like it. By 1998, they had nothing new outside of demoing a very early version of the recorder. They had to create something sellable right away. Had the Arricam been a dud, or come out a few years later, that may have been the end of them. Had Bauer the money to make his camera system, same story. This is the "speculation" in my original post you so distasted. Yes it was bold of me to make the statement "Arri was close to going out of business" but if you actually spend time researching and talking to people who were intimately involved, it's clear not all was right in Austria during that time period. I'm only stating what "could" have happened and there is no harm in doing that. I get tired of the age old political theatrics, especially in this industry, always forcefully pushing the status quo like some automaton. No reason to ever think outside of the box. Edited May 3, 2022 by Tyler Purcell 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Sekanina Posted May 3, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted May 3, 2022 The abrupt decline of sales of film cameras in 2008 before the Alexa took off was quite disruptive, from what Shipman-Mueller once told me a decade ago. Were they ever in real financial trouble? I have no idea. Cancelled ARRI Valencia, 3-perf 250fps 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Walters Posted May 23, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted May 23, 2022 On 4/24/2022 at 11:13 PM, Daniel D. Teoli Jr. said: Betty Brosmer - The top earning figure model of the 1950s DDTJRAC I can't believe I'd never heard of Betty Brosner before!https://youtu.be/2HHTmPukoy8 Not sure what that has to do with Arri though.... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Peterson Posted May 23, 2022 Share Posted May 23, 2022 On 4/25/2022 at 5:27 AM, Tyler Purcell said: Arri has dominated the digital industry in a way they never did with film, mostly because they took a different approach to other competitors. The "not chasing resolution" approach?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Tyler Purcell Posted May 24, 2022 Premium Member Share Posted May 24, 2022 6 hours ago, David Peterson said: The "not chasing resolution" approach?? Yep. They went for the big pixel which was smart. I think it's the right way to go because the bigger the pixel, the more light you can get in, which theoretically mixed with a decent preamp circuit, can give you greater dynamic range. That mixed with unmatched color science, gives them an upper edge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now