Saturday
Sep272008
What Should a Movie Camera Look Like?
Saturday, September 27, 2008 at 4:46PM
Click image to enlarge.
If there’s anything certain about the crazy camera events and announcements of the last few weeks, it’s that folks are thinking about what matters to them in a motion picture camera from a much broader perspective. Let’s recap:
- Panasonic announces the LX3, a pocket stills camera that shoots 720p HD movies at 24p
- Nikon releases the D90, a live-view DSLR that shoots wiggly 720p HD movies at 24p
- Canon announces the 5D MarkII, featuring 1080p video at 30fps
- Ikonoskop announces the A-cam dII, a uniquely-shaped HD camera with a super-16 CCD that shoots up to 60fps uncompressed DNG
- Panasonic shows a prototype Lumix G, a Micro Four Thirds interchangable-lens camera designed specifically for HD shooting, to be released next year
- RED scraps their Scarlet designs because “the market has changed.”
- RED announces the Digital Still & Motion Camera (DSMC), designed to “mark the end of DSLRs” and, presumably, to offer more professional control over big-sensor video in a compact housing
- Vincent Laforet unveils Reverie, a short film shot with a pre-release 5D MarkII
- 650 people and counting add their voice to Laforet’s plea to Canon for 24p on the 5D MarkII
Interesting times to say the least. Would you want to shoot a movie with something that looks like the above? If you could have any camera capability in any feasible form factor, what would you want?
Reader Comments (38)
Beyond the essentials like manual exposure control and a 24 fps, variable frame rates and WiFi or Bluetooth control over frame rate for ramping would be nice. Since we're making a wish list.
I don't know if it would be perfect, but house a DSLR into a more "movie" like form factor, give it manual control over shutter and aperature, and sell it for @ 3000, I think I would be satisfied for a little while. Framerates from 1 to 120 or so. Asking too much?
well whats been clear in recent tweets and blogs is that everyone has a different idea of what works for them. i guess id start with a shopping list.. which these days isnt so out of the park.
• 35mm sensor- D90 can do it so lets start from there
• Interchangeble lense, PL, PV, Nikon, Canon mount options
• 1080P, 2k+ even better (with look around)
• stop motion & 1 to 60fps higher fps for burst or with down to 1080P
but no cropping plz
* shoulder mountable..sensibly
• minimal compression / raw mode with no proprietry codecs...
something FCP & and AVID can happily read
• Full size XLR audio inputs or the option of an adapter to do so
• HDMI & SDI out & EVF option
• sensibly priced non proprietry storage
thats all for now.. im sure more will come to me
jas
Art, what's more "movie" like? A camcorder? A Bolex? An SL Cine? Your next movie camera can be any shape you want—thing big!
Feature wishlists are fun, but I'm trying (and failing, it seems!) to start a conversation about form factor.
If you take interchangeable lenses and Super 35 sensor, with the commensurate bulk (equal to the 5D maybe?), as a starting place, that still leaves you with infinite possibilities for the shape of your dream camera.
Or is it really all just variations on a box with a lens?
I only ask because while there are folks on the Rebel Café swearing that they'd never want to shoot video with something SLR-shaped, many others were thrilled at the old Scarlet design, and are enthusiastic about RED's DSLR/motion hybrid. And some seem just fine with the idea of shooting a movie on an unmodified SLR.
If I handed you two pounds of Play-Doh and a lens, what would you make?
The form factor depends on whether you want something hand held or something that will sits on a tripod.
Personally I'd like something that you can pull out of a bag and start shooting, I can live with an SLR form but would like a flip-out LCD and an easy way to add an external mike (and of course easy manual focus and easy manual aperture/exposure).
Interesting times.......
I wouldn't turn away from any particular form factor as an indie filmmaker. I understand the need to impress a client if you're shooting corporate or commercial gigs where the client needs to be feel like they are getting their money's worth.
For filmmakers that want the best image for the money on the other hand, I think as long as it is compact enough to build your kit around, you can customize to suit the needs of the project (or not). That's one of the big draws to RED. Modularity.
Ok, I'm going to throw around some ideas and see if any of them smells good.
-Minimum bulk. Sensible Center of Gravity.
-Modularity. Ability to attach and detach quickly, easily and with minimal tools any kind of accesory, support, handle, etc. Don't care much about current cinema standards: if it makes sense use it, if there's something better, implement it. Red One tried. Let's keep trying and see where we get.
-I want a design that is self-conscious and very explicit about the concepts of optical axis, nodal point, center of gravity, etc.
Think about current panoramic and stereo rigs and how to help simplify them and make them much more easy to use.
-There was some talk on the red forums about how to solve the problem of the poor accesibility of the current Red controls for the Epic design. I believe someone from Red chimed in claiming it was already solved with a removable panel. I say: go deeper, wilder with this idea. Make a wireless protocol and open the spec. Open controls and open feedback display. Let the market figure out the best control. Call somebody like Viewfactor Studios and ask for ideas/collaboration. Let us control the thing from the handles, from the iphone, from my DIY arduino hack, from outside the underwater housing...
Another idea is to start with something like the SI-2K Mini and then make series of accesories for different uses. Maybe like these things that turn your wiimote into a gun, a wheel, a racket. Something like the current DSLR's battery grips, they give you another way to handle the thing and better placed controls. Cheap, ergonomic, varied.
Ok enough blabbering for tonight. Ignore me if I'm wrong. If I'm right hire me for R&D :)
If I was an ex-CEO and founder of some random sunglasses company, my dream cam would cam would probably look like this:
-take the a-cam dii and get rid of the insides (i like the funky design of the case)
-take the 16mm ccd and use it as a coaster for shooter glass
-smash a Red One to pieces with a crowbar (baseball bat wouldnt do it, these things are rock solid)
- take the Red's 35 mm sensor and stick it in my dii case
-then id find the fastest ram or flash memory and build something that could hold at least 500 gb
-create a flat drive with it that would fit perfectly with the dii's case to keep it balanced
- ship the cam with 2 of those damn drives
- id stay with the DNG frames output, cause i do vfx heavy films and everything always end up in frames anyway
- on the drive, every take would be a different folder containing frames and a .wav file for audio
-add to that 4k 120 fps
-add the possibility to apply a custom LUT in the viewfinder
-add a solid handle on top of the cam
-IMS mount
-Boom
There you have it... It looks like my dream cam is a cross between the dii and the red one that spits out a ridiculous amount of data... And writing this from my iphone was a giant pain in the ass
How many times do I say, I wish I had a camera mounted inside my head? What if there was a way to solve the stability problem, and mount the camera literally at eye level?
Maybe something that was tethered to a hard drive you could wear on your belt.
Too bad the neck is actually a very poor camera platform!
Wow - I just bought a HF10 and now I'm looking at these cameras, still cameras, that can do far more impressive things than my movie camera... hmm...
Very interesting times indeed.
Dream-Form-Factor? Okay.
The Cam should be rather thin, formed like a dslr, but capable to hold a bigger screen. Like a 8,9" or so. Give it Handle bars at the left and the right wit controls over Focus and Zoom and other stuff. It should nearly look like a 8,9" LCD-Monitor with handles on it side and a Lens mouned at the back.
Understand what I mean?
I personally really loved the form-factor of my HVX. Top handle = must-have for me.
Something between the HVX and the RED in terms of FF and weight, but pretty much in line with RED in terms of specs (except higher framerates available) would be perfect.
I really don't get the fuzz about the form factor of the recording device... I'm not a cinematographer but on my job I hang around film sets a lot and at home I'm doing my own projects with a HV20.
One thing that my hobby filming and the stuff the camera guys on set do have in common is that we both use rigs to accomodate to the requirements of different shooting situations. Hence, the best body shape for a camera is one that mounts nicely on a rig. from there you can go shoulder-mounted, tripod, steadycam, handheld, crane or whatever and have the convenience to mount matte-boxes, monitors of all sizes/builds , follow focus, sound recording devices or whatever you like at the position that suits best the individual situation you're in.
The body of an Arri 435 for example is nothing much but a triangular shape. but one that mounts nicely on rods... ;)
In conclusion I wouldn't mind the dslr form factor at all, because for serious shooting I'd modify it to my needs anyway and - as others have stated on the different forums before - in casual or no-permit shooting situations it might actually come in usefull as it is not perceived as a motion-camera.
Give me a box with a lens (interchangeable) and as long as I can hold it comfortably, I'll make a movie with it. I don't really think it's the form factor that matters too much (aside from being able to hold it comfortably) as long as it's got mounts where I can put stuff like a should mount, etc on it so that I can choose any accessories I want to essentially make it into any form factor I want.
I think my ideal design would be a box (think something like a Panasonic AK-HC1800N) that could then be mounted on a tripod or a sholder rig. Fundementally, I want the camera body to get out of my way and just let me shoot. A box could have a top handle attached, or mounted on rails, or ratchet strapped to a pole, or anything else your twisted little mind can come up with. For controls, let's put them on a wired or wireless remote panel, and taking a page out of high end remote camera setups, integrate the control setup for zoom, focus, and iris right into the box. That way all you have to do is buy the lens gear and the motor, all your controls are integrated (you are not trying to juggle five remotes around).
I want a camera that doesn't look like a movie camera so I can shoot clandestinely in public places. What I like about having video capture capabilities in DSLRs is, that for the short term, no one will know you're shooting a movie.
-I want a design that is self-conscious and very explicit about the concepts of optical axis, nodal point, center of gravity, etc.
Totally agree with this. I think the most sensible camera would be as small as possible -- much like industrial cameras with the little cube behind a lens. Have this cube well-marked (for example, lines indicating the sensor plane) and have it perforated with tapped 1/4 20 holes spaced 1/2" apart.
That way, even with minimal machining skills, (and here I mean a tap and a drill press), you could attach any kind of handle or equipment and essentially customize your form factor. Anyone could manufacture a grip, handlebar, disk mount, LCD, etc. And you could keep it all very minimal, if you liked.
Personally, I'd love nothing better than a tiny cube with an http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/25/casio-goes-insane-with-2-inch-960-x-540-pixel-lcd/" REL="nofollow">ultra-high res screen hooded and mounted on the back and all the controls up near the lens. Boring, perhaps, but so moddable.
HV20 hands down
SLRs are built to shoot stills. The mere fact that they should BE ABLE to shoot motion is not a reason that they SHOULD.
This all seems so simple now. It is strange how the idea of SLR turned HD acquisition device never really occured to usd until now. I guess we never thought the players would jeopardize their product lines.... until they were forced to (Thank you Jim) change.
But HELL YES! Take a beautifully balance high end DSLR... and have options to "kit" it up to a motion picture rig... and let us do this for under $4000.. then use our stock of lenses we already own...
I think we are witnessing a real change in the ballgame... Many thousands of us have been waiting 15-20 years for this.
If you look at Canon's history they have been creative in their form factor. Remember the first Optura? It was a DV cam that had the body of a still camera. Then they did the Optura 200 MC which had a Bolex look. When seeing behind the scenes of Reverie, I liked the look and use of the 5d as a film camera.
Stu,
Stu,
I apologize in advance for the long list here of rants.
The new paradigm:
All cameras must be out of the box usable by one person and have all capabilities of said camera usable by one person, the "one camera one person" approach not 5 people. Sorry 600. They must support lenses in field with total sensor contact. no lens disabling features allowed.
Same look and feel of regular DSLR, with a 4.5 or larger HD capable live view touchscreen . Helps get rid of a lot of buttons. Sorry shoulder mount guys but this is first a still camera, not some Ikegami based form factor.
Stop 35 mm sensors, go to 48 mm or larger for acquisition sensor.
Dual sensors, one large for raw/open dng acquisition, one for viewer screen and / or output to hd/hdmi output. Obviously some mirror / prism optics engineering here.
Total support for raw at all frame rates, which sort of makes NLEs possibly EOL'ed. Especially if Lightroom /Aperture / Photo-Mechanic start to support time lines.
The ability to have a real easy up-loadable parameter settings. So I can have my Lightroom preset be embedded in the viewer sensor parameters. Then my clients can have a real time near approximation of a final look if wanted. The paint box approach to looks on a still camera. From off the shelf software.
Absolutely no snap in or plug in hardware modules except for battery and maybe memory. Which leads to a all weather camera. Nikons are noted for their "takes a licking and keeps on ticking". As a former USAF photographer I can attest to that.
If audio is needed, allow non manufacturer connectivity. Open standard, audio is not a real need or make or break here. In the highest capture form, you should be capturing audio to a separate means. Maybe said camera also has a separate audio module that is either wireless or a small tethered device. Again no hardware snap in modules. Plus a time code generator or genlock thing.
"Where I look " focusing, With the hi end Nikons and Canons having multi point focusing systems this would be a real nice feature to have. Canon does this, called the Eye Controlled Focus.
The ability to have my flash usable during HD/ High frame rate capture, pocket wizards stuff like that with the ability to program my flash modules as needed or allow the camera to do its TTL thing. And have color temperature settings changeable on the fly.
Now to go into "Out-there land".
If the next macintoshes coming out are gestural based touchscreens, allow the user to be able to change lens or camera or whatever settings on the fly with real time viewer feedback systems. Tethered or wireless, I prefer tethered for reasons of reliability.
Have a new "Open Platform Stability Standard" which allows the creation of "Intelligent Monopods, Tripods, Steadi cam," systems so you can offload some of the processes or power/ memory requirements to the stability platform. The idea of "one person--one camera" to me makes this a nice addition. Though I can see someone like Lars von Trier doing a 100 camera setup ;-)
Finally:
If nikon is true to their word they are making probably ± 90,000 D90 cameras a month, opinion based on this link:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6168993-7.html.
Therefore, anyone trying to keep this camera above $3000 for body alone would be out of business soon.
Thats my dream camera, for now at least. Oh one more thing, must have the hi end canon/ nikon iso range...
Laurence
When I read Laurence's post... I started to think that photographers have a different workflow/priorities than filmmakers....I think many photographers are not filmmakers.. but most filmmakers are also photographers -IMO (don't hurt me!)
No offense to any photographers...It's just my opinion that stills and motion image acquisition are two different disciplines... that now seem to be on the verge of using the SAME EQUIPMENT.
As an effects artist, I am concerned with:
- upholding quality "visually lossless" RAW or high dynamic range frames - that means a pretty washed out, flat looking image to endlessly, non-destructively tweak.
- 24fps at 48th shutter. Pick a pretty scene... and switch your camera between 30/60i and 24fps.. and the discussion is over - 24 is film's "way". 48th is huge.. other shutter speeds that are not mulitples of 24 look like video again.
- good lenses..shallow DOF with MANUAL focus (with ability to monitor that with a my own external screen.) Actually shallow DOF is kind of a pain in the ass for vfx work... but there are lots of scenes that do not have CG integrated in them, and when the talent's ear is out of focus, we read their eyes much better! Manual focus needs a tech overhaul... maybe a hybrid MANUAL control + some kind of camera operator auto-assist, that slowly brings the image to perfect crispness with some sort of handheld analog pushbutton... like a cable release to "feel" the last bit of a focus "pull". Most of the time, we know we have it close... would be nice if we could have a tactile ability to let auto-assist "ride" us to perfect focus.. smoothly... maybe some kind of wireless control so focus puller is 10 feet out of the way getting perfect focus on a 30" flat panel.
- and no skewing images on panning. I need trackable footage! Thos skews are a semi-deal breaker.. basically means you are locked off.. or moving VERY slowly.
Apart from those key points.. the camera could look like a dog turd... and I would strap some kind of rig to it to smoothly pan around.... all the better... The more I look like an Academy of Art student screwing around with my little camera... the better... My dream camera would look like a toy, but blow away the Genesis, Viper, etc. and be cheaper than RED. - RED kicks ass... just saying "dream camera".
I was torn between the D90 and 5DMkII, but realized the D90 will fit me better. Part of it is the 24p on the D90, and the ease of editing its format. I'm also a current Nikon owner (D80), so I'm in a comfort zone. It's just a very simple, and fairly effective video feature for great little DSLR. I can work around the rolling shutter.
Even if the 5DMkII did implement the 24p, they'd still have rolling shutter too, so it's an unavoidable beast that requires taming in either circumstance.
Choosing the Nikon D90 also affords me the opportunity to invest in the new 14-24 f/2.8 Nikkor that even Canon users are buying to adapt to their cameras. It's an uncontested lens, many Canon shooters openly admit it, and they say the same about Nikon's new 24-70. So, lenses play a big factor for me right now. Nikon's slowly updating their primes, whereas Canon's already got a great set of updated primes. So there's another trade-off.
I think Canon does make some great lenses. I really like their 135 f2 L. I think Canon could have done a lot better in updating the 5DMkII's AF, their flash sync and flash system isn't necessarily on par with other cameras in its range either, or even with some costing less. I just think the 5DMkII is simply trying to push resolution, both in terms of still and video, and offering little else. While the image quality is there; DR, sharpness, high ISO etc. I still think my overall needs are better met by the D90 for the time being.
One thing the 5DMkII leaves me waiting for is Canon's announcement of a new line of APS-C 1.6x EOS mount D-cinecams; competition for the RED one. They'll implement a RAW video format too; assuming it actually materializes. When that happens, I'll probably set aside some time to diversify my Nikon lens collection to include some L glass.
IMHO, RED's in a reactive phase rather than a proactive phase, making them appear on the defensive for missing their mark.
Therefore, I know that I won't hold my breath until next NAB to see what the market influenced them to do rather than what their own imaginations and communities influenced them to do.
I remain hopeful and cheer them on, afterall if it weren't for them we probably would have never seen any of this take place so soon, but they appear to be out of their element at the moment.
Matt Moses:
I've been a full time still photographer for 10 yrs. I am now 3 years HEAVILY invested in filmmaking.
When I'm shooting stills, I want that 1DsII in my hands and when I'm shooting "film" (filmmaking), a DSLR is the last form factor I want in my hands.
Interchangable lenses are nice, but I dont need them. 35mm shallow DOF is nice, but I dont need it.
There is just so much more that is important to me beyond many of the things people are so excited about.
The DR of my 1DsII would be greatly welcome in my "film" camera, but put it in a "film" body, not a stills body.
(And I apologize for using the term "film", but I am a FILMmaker, not a VIDEOmaker.)
Yes, you most certainly are.
I, on the other hand, have always been a filmmaker first and a photographer second, but my favorite video camera design ever was the Canon A1 Digital Hi8 camcorder, which had a vertical handgrip on the back that made it feel like holding an SLR!
But it also had a more HVX-like handgrip on the side, and was much bigger than any DSLR.
And it was mother fugly. But I loved it so.
Brian, is the HVX the be-all-end-all camera form factor for you?
Form factors are interesting things; originally out of necessity of the technology, they hang aroudn way after their "technical expiration date".
For example, there is *no* reason the housing of a DSLR shuold have a shape originally designed to feed film between two rolls across the lens.
Equally, ther is *no* reason the form factor of a "video" camera need the bulky long shape that screams "there is a VHS tape lodged in here somehwere".
Yet "looks" is important to people; people "don't take you seriously" when you film on something you don't need to hold on a jib or rest on your shoulder, coz if it isn't big, it isn't "pro".
/Z
To "my favourite form factor", it's something like this:
- The *right* half of the camera looks like an SLR, i.e. you hold it like you hold an SLR, with trigger etc. in those locations.
- It has an "eyepiece" viewfinder like an SLR (not necessarily the mirror through-the-lens stuff, just sometihng I can "press my eye against" to block out ourdoor light.
- It has no "left side" like an SLR has, which, on an SLR, forces me to squish my large greasy nose against it to get to the viewfinder. It would instead have a flat left side, so my large greasy nose can slip past it to allow my eye to connect with the viewfinder.
- the left side is *also* a LARGE, flippable, LCD, for those times you don't need the viewfinder thing.
- The LCD (and viewfinder) is zoomable, so you can make intelligent focusing judgements on it.
/Z
I'm with you, Stu. I LOVED the Canon A1 and L2 form factors, and I would be glad to see it again. Nicely balanced for tripod use, the best cameras I've ever used for handheld, whether panning, tilting, walking, or running. I think the "elongated SLR" shape, allowing more hand separation then a standard SLR, made for a very stable handheld "platform". Also well set-up for easy manual lens control.
I think it didn't really become a standard form-factor because it was so different from most video cameras at the time clients weren't sure what to think, and frankly Hi-8 wasn't exactly Betacam. But several of my "non-ENG" associates bought an A1 or an L2 after shooting with mine...
Jamie
Interesting discussion over at reduser on this:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19625
24 and 25 fps is very important for me to consider getting the 5dII.
Stu:
Regarding the HVX, actually, no. Right now the DVX is. I also think this is why Panasonic fit the HPX170 into the DVX body. (Granted it is not EXACTLY the "DVX" body, but it's almost identical.
It has enough mass to be a solid motion body, but it isn't ridiculously large. I think the HVX is CLOSE, but just a little too big.
The EX1/3 are also to big and are considered awkward for handheld. (as well as the Canon XL bodies)
For now, it is the best I've used, and I've used a few. I dont care for something as small as the HV20, nor would I want something as bulky as a hooptified HV20.
I actually meant the DVX—I like it too, and find the HVX too lopsided and the EX1 worse.
I am always trying to hold my HV20 from the back. For smaller cameras I wonder if there isn't something to those old Sony "super-zoom" camera designs, like sort of an SLR with the port side sheered off.
Ultimately I would wind up putting any of these on some kind of support, either rigid or a shoulder-mount. But as we all know, the Rebel style occasionally mandates the incognitocam2000™, AKA rip the matte box off, hike up the plaid shorts and pass for a tourist!
I understand the invisicam concept, but I'm not going to sacrifice my film to steal some scenes.
I've shot on busy private property downtown, busy public areas downtown, all through Hollywood, on the subways WITH a steadicam, subway stations and in a busy Santa Monica mall, with the DVX, and have hardly been hassled. The ONE time I was, it was on the private property downtown, and a 5 minute conversation set me up for a secure 4 hour shoot.
AND I didnt have to resort to using a poopy pocket cam.
Hi, I meant to leave this comment a couple of weeks ago when I linked to the D90 sample images on dpreview but forgot. I found a very early review of the Panasonic LX3 from a guy who picked one up in Asia prior to the Uk release (and US). He provides sample images both from the jpeg output and the RAW output of the camera and as a bonus, a sample of the 720P 24fps video the camera can capture. Since this is a CCD sensor and not a cmos one the rolling shutter issue isn't present so the video looks better for this (though there's nothing artistic to be found in the sample footage since it's a wide shot with focus set to infinity). This is the samples page of the review (the video clip can be downloaded from the bottom, below the RAW images section).
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_panasonic_lumix_dmc_lx3_3.php
Mike
Stu,
I guess when I said "movie" like, I maybe mean shoulder mounted, I guess. I was hoping people smarter than me can figure that out. Mainly because I took a Nikon D90 out for a video test run, and other than be extremely disappointed with the video results, the form factor of the DSLR felt a little weird to me shooting video.
I felt for a long time that DSLR's that shoot video was the direction to go, wondering why we cant get those beautiful stills to play back at 24fps, as opposed to video cameras that want to take stills. I just think the form factor is a little weird for anything other than experiments and family vacation videos.
Heres to hoping the new Canon video blows the Nikon out of the water, because the d90 was not even close to what I want out of DSLR video. I normally shoot down the negativity towards rolling shutter as not THAT big a deal, but the d90, its almost unusable.
Hi Stu, the people at Apertus and I have been brainstorming with a team of programmers and designers in hopes of further changing the form and handling of a modern camera. It's just ideas, but your post on 'what your 1000 dollar software can learn from 10 dollar software was our last read of inspiration.
Your thought on this owuld be appreciated. It is vague and rough, I'm still drawing and taking apart the interface.
its at www.tarekkandil.blogspot.com
have you heard of apertus? I don't doubt you have.