Neal Norton

Rajendra I would find it interesting to learn more about why and how you felt the Arri Alexa was entirely responsible for the "hideous" cinematography. The camera did not make the pictures all by itself. . . I think more than a few people were involved in the process. I would also find it interesting to learn more about what you DO like in a big studio feature film. Maybe you have an example of your own work that we and Mr. Deakins could study in order to improve our work? I thought "Skyfall" was a little long and the day exteriors a little bright for my taste but I consider the camera work right about the level of fantastic. "Sloppy" and "ugly" to describe the girls? Really?

I saw "Skyfall" last night and thought the camera work was an example of very fine craftsmanship. Wonderful story telling with the camera and the lighting. I thought some of the day exteriors were timed a little 'hot' but that I'm sure was a matter of taste and not a failing by any means. I saw the film projected on a Sony 4K digital projector and the film was very sharp - including wide shots.

Hi James: Hand held with the F35 is pretty awful. If you have the deck on the back of the camera it is not just very heavy - it is also very top heavy. My experience has been that moving/walking with this top heavy beast makes for a lot of roll/pitch and yaw and I found it disagreeable visually. Adding an Easyrig to the equation helps carry the load but if anything makes the package even worse for walking because the easyrig shifts the weight even further up away from your shoulder. If you remove the recorder from the camera, it is of course much lighter but very front heavy so it would be important to add a battery as far back as you can. Even so it is even worse than carrying a 435 with a top load mag. The best solution for me was to use the Panavision version with the SSR deck attached and an AB battery behind the SSR. I hope you can persuade the boss to stay on the dolly with this camera. Hand held with the F35 (&F23) blows. Good luck, Neal Noton

Hi All: I did a write up on the fun stuff I saw at IBC this year. Mostly lenses but also a bit about cameras. Here is the link: http://www.gulfcamera.com/ibc-recap/ Hope you find it intersting

Sorry: Here is the link... http://www.gulfcamera.com/zeiss-shows-new-28-80-at-ibc-amsterdam/

Zeiss unwrapped a new Compact Zoom at the IBC in Amsterdam. Here is a little bit about the new lens. http://174.121.0.219/~gulfcame/zeiss-introduces-the-28-80-compact-zoom/ We will have more pictures and an interview tomorrow. Neal Norton

Hi Charles: I agree 100% about the Oconnor. Rugged, reliable and very easy to find a good one. If I had to work with only one head - the 25-75 is peerless. And yes, the tilt plate/wedge can make for a very heavy and clumsy tilt! And yes, I know that also from painful experience. Neal

I like using both a gear head and a fluid head. The gear head is more fun, hands down. I have no doubt a fine camera operator would be able to mimic a shot performed on a gear head using a fluid head - but I think the quick dolly in/out is much tougher with a fluid head even if the tilt brake is in perfect condition and is expertly applied. My best reason for using the gear head is that a gear head is naturally static - that is holding a static frame seems to be a normal/default condition and putting the camera in motion requires a conscious effort. In a wide screen format especially I find that to be a positive. With a fluid head, the camera is naturally "alive" and connected to the operator - so when a movement or motion vector attracts the attention of the operator it often results in a small but noticeable 'chase' with the camera. It can require some real fortitude to let your brilliant artists move within the frame and a gear head, for me, supports a passive style where a fluid head tends to be more active. Getting your hands on a really well maintained gear head is a whole different kettle of fish. Finding a really good gear head is tough. I own 2, an Arrihead and an Arrihead 2 and both are as perfect as I can get them - the model 2 is just back from routine servicing and it is not perfect so I will have to spend alot of time and money giving it another trip cross country for further attention. The best gear head I've come across lives at Arri Rentals in Germany and they really do know how to make their heads perfect. So far the best I've worked with in this country is a Panahead brand new out of the box and that was just plain 'sexy' good. Happy panning and tilting! Neal Norton Camera operator

I believe that the 120fps will be an SR codec function and the output will be HD (1080) not 4K raw. The bigger question is when will this camera have 120fps functionality. I have been told that the F65 will not have any SR codec recording available until March 2012 (4K raw only at launch) and that the 120fps functionality will not be enabled until June 2012. The 4K raw will be a big data pill to swallow for TV production. I am very interested in the SR-Lite codec recording 220mbs at up to 120fps for the small screen. I think producers and post houses will like the speed and smaller files. With the DN-HD option coming this January for the Alexa it will be interesting to see if the F65 is chosen for any episodic television in 2012. The Alexa already has 120fps, a proven record of reliability, DP's love the camera and with DN-HD I wager that Avid based post houses will be happy with Alexa. My guess is that the Alexa will continue to be dominant in the TV biz for some time. Maybe very VFX intensive TV productions would select the F65 or the Epic for the 4K raw. Feature film production may embrace the F65 particularly for VFX heavy production. When the F65 has all of the speeds/functions up and running it may give the Alexa some real competition. Neal Norton

I started a feature 6 weeks ago shooting Alexa. We are shooting Arriraw to codex. We also began the film with an Epic camera that was going to be used for high speed and VFX work. I have seen a fair amount of the Arri footage projected on a large screen and it is VERY good. The thing that impresses me the most is how good our actors look. . . surely due in part to the great work of our cameraman but the results don't have a clinical look like other video cameras I've seen. I think the Alexa makes skin look almost as good as film. From what I've seen the resolution of this camera projected is plenty high enough for theatrical projection. I haven't seen the Epic projected because it only worked very briefly before failing and had to be returned. We now carry a 435 for HS work. This was very disappointing as I think the camera looks like a great tool and I would like to work with it and I would like to buy one when available. But at this time it is not possible to buy, beg or steal one of these cameras. When sorted out and really out on the market I think Epic could be a real contender. How people can say the Epic is good or bad or what before we really have a chance to work a bit with it is strange. The Alexa is widely available, shooting all over the world and is proving reliable and very user friendly. When another actually on the market product is out there we can decide if the Alexa has any competition. And in my opinion, the optical finder on the future Alexa "studio" will be a great asset and for my work will be a much bigger plus than many other features. Neal Norton Camera Operator

With an Arri Ultra prime the Alexa camera is very very nice hand held. The Alexa is better on my shoulder than any 35mm sound camera I have used. . . I haven't worked with the Aaton, I think the 235 is the best handheld camera I have used. The Alexa is light (comparatively to the sound cams) and the CG is low which is great. The cut-out proves that Arri actually considered a human shoulder and not just ease of mounting or keeping the costs low - Thank You Arri! As to mounting on a remote head, what camera are you looking at? The Alexa is compact and low profile and with the exception of being power hungry is a remote head techs wet dream. Would you prefer the huge and heavy and hot and loud wide and high F23/F35/Genesis Sony mess? Or the tinker toy flopping all around with hinges tubes and duct tape and cable rats nest of a Red? The 35mm sound cameras are all heavier and wider and have mags of some flavor that have to be reloaded regularly. Even a 435 is tougher to deal with on a remote head. The mounting points on the Alexa are plenty well engineered for the job they do. If you would like to see small mounting screws then check out the 3 tiny allen screws that hold all Panaflex cameras on to the head. And I haven't seen a Panaflex shear off a head very often. All mounting hardware can fail. . . thats why every time a camera goes on a remote head the camera is secured with a secondary safety attachment. . . right? Sincerely, Neal Norton Camera Operator

According to a representative of a major Hollywood rental outfit, right now, 85% of feature films originate on film and 15% on video. Neal Norton