christian mann Share Posted April 29, 2016 Hi there, looking at the ALEXA Mini which has built in ND filters I wonder why ARRI wouldn't use built-in IRNDs if the sensor was sensitive to infrared pollution.... Does ARRI want to support Tiffen and Schneider by not using built-in IRNDs or is the Mini simply not sensitive to IR pollution? Has anyone tested this maybe? Thanx Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brian Drysdale Share Posted April 29, 2016 (edited) I suspect it's just because time has moved on and given these uses on the Arri web site, having built in filters make sense, as against using external ND filters. "The body design is optimized for use with new-generation brushless gimbals, multicopters and other specialized rigs. It is compact enough in the lens direction to allow the use of standard PL mount lenses even on lightweight and space-constrained rigs, such as gyro-stabilized aerial systems." Edited April 29, 2016 by Brian Drysdale Quote Link to post Share on other sites
christian mann Author Share Posted April 29, 2016 sure it makes sense. but why not have built-in IRND instead of straight ND ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brian Drysdale Share Posted April 29, 2016 It seems they use Full Spectrum Neutral Density Filters, which have scratch issues and are only manufactured in small sizes.. https://www.arri.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=105&p=206 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Satsuki Murashige Sustaining Member Share Posted April 29, 2016 The built-in NDs do filter out IR. Shot with a Mini and Amira yesterday, we used the internal NDs up to 2.1 combined with regular Schneider NDs 0.3-0.6. No IR problems. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Adrian Sierkowski Sustaining Member Share Posted April 29, 2016 I always assumed the IR filtration, in that case, might be on the sensor proper? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Brian Drysdale Share Posted April 29, 2016 It's the filter they use, it's explained in the link above. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
christian mann Author Share Posted April 30, 2016 But isn't the ARRI guy making contradicting comments? Looking at the graph it shows that the internal FSND 1.2 blocks IR light. So why would I use an additional IRND like he recommends? Wouldn't that result in a greener image? If the internal FSND 1.2 and 2.1 block Infrared light the use of an additional IRND makes only sense in combination with the internal FSND 0.6 (which doesn't block Infrared I assume). Then again why would you call the internal 0.6 filter Full Spectrum ND if it doesn't block Infrared light?? Any thoughts on that ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Satsuki Murashige Sustaining Member Share Posted April 30, 2016 I think what the guy is saying is that the Arri internal FSNDs filter both visible light and IR light in equal proportion. So even an internal ND2.1 when used alone doesn't need any additional IR filtration because the IR is reduced to essentially invisible levels. When using external NDs (either instead of or in addition to) the internal NDs, then he recommends using IRNDs from ND1.2 and above. Below that, IRNDs are not necessary in his opinion. Since you really only need to carry 0.3 and 0.6 of external NDs to have a full set when combining with the internal NDs, you should not really need to ever use IRNDs with these cameras. But some DPs are old school and don't want to use internal NDs because they feel they affect image sharpness, or they simply prefer to filter in front of the lens. So the options remain for both working styles. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.