Jump to content


Photo

Aaton HD mag


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 04 March 2010 - 02:07 PM


  • 0

#2 Tim Carroll

Tim Carroll
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2165 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 04 March 2010 - 02:14 PM


Saw that, looks interesting.

Best,
-Tim
  • 0

#3 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3510 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 04 March 2010 - 03:50 PM

Should have asked what ISO they are shooting for!
  • 0

#4 Thomas Chatelet

Thomas Chatelet
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts
  • Director
  • Paris

Posted 04 March 2010 - 05:00 PM

Well, actually, I asked him but his answer was pretty vague and off the record... Too soon to talk about it. So, it's not in the video.
What I can tell you is that he has a little plan for that part, a good one I guess.
Anyway, he won't be able to avoid the question at the NAB! ;)
  • 0

#5 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3510 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 04 March 2010 - 07:42 PM

Well, actually, I asked him but his answer was pretty vague and off the record... Too soon to talk about it. So, it's not in the video.
What I can tell you is that he has a little plan for that part, a good one I guess.
Anyway, he won't be able to avoid the question at the NAB! ;)

Ah, well no problem then. Looking forward to the details!
  • 0

#6 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 05 March 2010 - 11:23 AM

I will assume that nothing gets Jannard going worse than an old film camera manufacturing company's claims to true 4K video images from their equipment:

"4K? Uncompressed? Bah! That is nothing, RED will soon come out with 16K sensors that will produce images with 30 stops of dynamic range and hard drives the size of matchbooks."

"DPX? Are you kidding?? Why use an industry standard format when you can start from scratch and use a proprietary (heavily compressed) RAW format --an oxymoron if I ever saw one-- that people will have to decode at painfully slow speeds to use!!!"

And on and on . . . :P

Edited by Saul Rodgar, 05 March 2010 - 11:24 AM.

  • 0

#7 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 05 March 2010 - 02:22 PM

Hello, Stephen Tim and everybody.
I think he said something about it but I'm not sure. I'll ask Thomas to check that up. You can see the itw on our site.
  • 0

#8 Tim Carroll

Tim Carroll
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2165 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 05 March 2010 - 02:36 PM

Hey Laurent, long-time-no-talk-to.

Looks like Aaton may have "hit one out of the ballpark" with that Penelope camera. 35mm 4-perf, 3-perf, 2-perf, Super 35 and now 4K HD digital. Don't think you could possibly have more options than that.

Best,
-Tim
  • 0

#9 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 05 March 2010 - 02:40 PM

Yes Tim, I actually got involved a lot in our french site and different things that I can't mention here...
  • 0

#10 Tim Carroll

Tim Carroll
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2165 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 05 March 2010 - 04:51 PM

. . . and different things that I can't mention here...


But you could send me a PM. ;)

Best,
-Tim
  • 0

#11 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 05 March 2010 - 05:33 PM

Done ;)
  • 0

#12 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3510 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 06 March 2010 - 03:41 AM


Looks like Aaton may have "hit one out of the ballpark" with that Penelope camera. 35mm 4-perf, 3-perf, 2-perf, Super 35 and now 4K HD digital. Don't think you could possibly have more options than that.

Hey Tim,

There's no 4-perf option on the Penelope, as far as I know.
  • 0

#13 Tim Carroll

Tim Carroll
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2165 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 06 March 2010 - 08:48 AM

Satsuki,

Yeah, you're right, I should have read that more carefully.

Best,
-Tim
  • 0

#14 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 06 March 2010 - 11:53 AM

Ultimately, is having a "jack-of-all-trades" camera that can shoot many formats, better than several cameras that can only shoot one or two for the rental houses?


If you have a Penelope body, that can take 35mm or digital magazines, with a 3-perf., 2-perf., S35 gate (I wonder what size the digital sensor is, I assume 3-perf.) and you have four different people making movies in each of the different formats, this camera doesn't help at all.

You still need four bodies. I guess it would be very useful for productions that own their own cameras, but those are obviously few and far between, especially when we are talking about people owning their own 35mm bodies. Half the people on this site now seem to own REDs :unsure:
  • 0

#15 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5069 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 06 March 2010 - 12:09 PM

I suspect it's aimed at productions that rent cameras (which most, if not all of the higher end 35mm productions do), rather than the owner operator. Even BBC dramas have been shot with the 35mm Aaton.
  • 0

#16 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 06 March 2010 - 01:32 PM

But Brian, except in states of severely depressed production volume, wouldn't having a camera that can shoot four formats, but only be rented out to ONE PRODUCTION at a time, ultimately put a bottleneck on the amount of rentals a house can have?

If I were in the rental business, I'd much rather have a bang-up set of 2-perf., 3-perf. and HD camera bodies to rent out instead of one that can do all three.

If a Penelope body gets damaged, similarly, you are out of commission for all three possibilities, whereas if your 3-perf. camera gets run over by a train with malfunctioning brakes, you can still rent out your 2-perf. and HD systems while your 3-perf. body is getting repaired/replaced.
  • 0

#17 Tim Carroll

Tim Carroll
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2165 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago, Illinois

Posted 06 March 2010 - 01:46 PM

Karl, buddy, did you ever take economics?

Rental company A owns three cameras. A 2-Perf, a 3-Perf and an HD.

Rental company B owns three cameras. Three Penelopes.

Three customers come into each rental house. No matter which format the three renters wants to shoot, Rental company B can cover all three. Rental company A has to hope the three renters all want to rent different formats.

Rental company A loses one camera, due to "malfunctioning brakes", so now it can only cover two different types of renters.

Rental company B loses one camera, due to "malfunctioning brakes", and it can still cover all three different types of renters.

I think the Penelope would make a great camera for a rental company to own. Even if their budget can only afford one or two cameras, they can still cover renters who want to shoot any of the three formats.

Best,
-Tim
  • 0

#18 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 06 March 2010 - 01:54 PM

Tim, yes I did take economics. I got an "A."


Granted, hardly anyone on a serious shoot would come in for 2-perf., but 3-perf. and HD are both perfectly viable shooting options, still in demand.



Let me put it another way: Would you want one more-expensive camera that can shoot 3 formats (2 of them with high income potential and relatively certain future business) or be able to afford a few older 3-perf. cameras and an HD camera that you can rent out to multiple parties simultaneously?

I don't know the cost of a Penelope body, but I am sure you could purchase older HD and 3 perf cameras, a pair, for the cost of one Penelope.
  • 0

#19 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 06 March 2010 - 02:07 PM

Ultimately, is having a "jack-of-all-trades" camera that can shoot many formats, better than several cameras that can only shoot one or two for the rental houses?


If you have a Penelope body, that can take 35mm or digital magazines, with a 3-perf., 2-perf., S35 gate (I wonder what size the digital sensor is, I assume 3-perf.) and you have four different people making movies in each of the different formats, this camera doesn't help at all.

You still need four bodies. I guess it would be very useful for productions that own their own cameras, but those are obviously few and far between, especially when we are talking about people owning their own 35mm bodies. Half the people on this site now seem to own REDs :unsure:



Swopping between 2 & 3 perf takes under 30 minutes, many rental houses will find that useful IMO,
  • 0

#20 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5069 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 06 March 2010 - 02:17 PM

In the end, you still need the same number of camera bodies regardless. The cost part would be having digital magazines sitting around when the camera body is out on a 35mm shoot. If this mag is say the cost of say an Epic or the bottom end Arri Alexa camera, this could be a factor, given how fast you need to pay off any electronic camera. Perhaps this is less of a factor with the film mags, which get upgraded by Kodak and Fuji, although a set of those wouldn't be cheap.

It really depends on large the demand is for optical viewfinder cameras compared the electronic viewfinder and how much the Penelope with 4k mag rig costs to rent compared to the high end Alexa with it's optical viewfinder.

Also, it may depend on what the images like from the camera. If they're the most beautiful, least electronic looking digital images, there are people who will be attracted to that.

The market for these cameras tends to want newer gear rather older cameras.

Perhaps this could a half way house for a totally digital camera from Aaton, when the camera movement is removed from the camera.

Edited by Brian Drysdale, 06 March 2010 - 02:19 PM.

  • 0


Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Tai Audio

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Opal

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

The Slider

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

CineLab