Menu

Looking For An Alternative To The Arri Alexa? These 3 Cinema Cameras Have You Covered At a Lower Cost

I don’t think I’ve met a single filmmaker in recent years who hasn’t marvelled over the Arri Alexa. Even with so much competition in the digital cinema camera market, there is no denying that the Arri Alexa is still without a doubt the camera to beat. In many ways, the Alexa look has even replaced film with regards to the base-line aesthetic that most of today’s filmmakers strive for. I’ve outlined this sentiment in more detail on a previous blog post here. 

What makes it so great though? For a long time people chocked it up to dynamic range. When the Alexa was first introduced, very few cameras delivered anywhere near the DR that the Alexa was capable of. But today, there are many cameras that have dynamic range capabilities that are at least within arms reach of the Alexa – yet still none of them look as good.

The reason why is simple: Color science. In my opinion, color matters more than anything else when it comes to the visual perception of a cinematic image. Resolution, dynamic range, grain, motion cadence, and many other factors play an important role too… But color science is at the very top of that list. A camera with less dynamic range but better color science will look more “filmic” than a camera with high dynamic range and poor color science. I believe that many of Sony’s recent offerings prove this point clearly.

Unfortunately for the vast majority of independent filmmakers, the Alexa is simply a far too expensive tool to own. Even Arri’s lowest cost offerings (such as the Alexa Mini and Amira), will cost anywhere from $35K – $45K as base price, and will jump up significantly once the accessories are added. Inevitably, this has led many low budget filmmakers into a desperate search for affordable Alexa alternatives that can deliver similar image quality at a lower cost.

It’s worth stating up front that the only way to get the exact “Alexa-look” that you may be after is to actually shoot on an Arri Alexa (or Arri Amira). That said, a few select cameras in recent years have come reasonably close to emulating the Alexa’s legendary image quality, and should be considered as viable alternatives for filmmakers that don’t want to break the bank.

Below is a short list of three cameras that in my opinion render colors and images that are most similar to the Arri Alexa. Keep in mind, the list below doesn’t necessarily reflect usability, features/specs, ergonomics, reliability, and many other considerations. Rather, these cameras have been chosen based on the characteristics of their image quality – specifically color quality – and how strongly they hold up next to the Alexa.

Here we go. In order of most expensive to least:

PANASONIC VARICAM LT – $16,500

With a price tag of over $16K for the body, or over $27K once fully accessorized, the Varicam LT clearly makes for a pricey investment. Even still, at minimum it will be 2 – 3 x less expensive than a brand Arri Alexa, depending on how each camera is configured. Not to mention, as a rental item, the LT is going to cost far less than the Alexa and will generally be much more accessible to lower budget filmmakers.

Let’s take a look at some of the specs:

  • Single Super 35mm MOS Sensor
  • Interchangeable Stainless Steel EF Mount
  • Dual Native ISO 800/5000
  • 14 Stops of Dynamic Range with V-Log
  • 4K Up to 60 fps, 2K/HD Up to 240 fps
  • Simultaneous Dual Codec Recording
  • Selectable Gamma Curves
  • Removable IR Cut Filter
  • AVC-Intra, ProRes
  • 3.5″ LCD Control Panel

Obviously, this camera boasts some incredibly powerful features, namely it’s dual native ISO capabilities which allow users to choose between ISO 800 or ISO 5000 as their base. But most importantly, the subjective image quality of the LT is absolutely incredible, and is arguably one of the best out there today.

Panasonic-Varicam-LT-vs-Arri-Alexa

Panasonic Varicam LT – $16,500 at B & H

The Varicam LT shares the same sensor as it’s bigger brother (the Varicam 35), which has been used to shoot some really gorgeous looking content – including the Netflix original series “Master of None”. Both cameras not only feature beautiful dynamic range capabilities that allow them to create detailed, rich images, but they also render extremely organic colors. This is what ultimately helps them achieve that Alexa look above all else. While footage from the Varicam LT might not be an exact match for Alexa footage straight off of the cards, the files are very flexible in post, and once graded they can easily hold their own.

CANON C300 MK II – $11,999

I’ve had a love/hate relationship with Canon for a long time, and presently don’t own any of their cinema cameras. With that in mind, I can’t deny that the Canon C300 MK II excels in the color department, which is really no surprise. Over the years, Canon have fallen by the wayside as other manufacturers have run laps around them with higher frame rates, more resolution, and better overall specs, but Canon has always delivered some of the best colors out there, which is largely why they are still relevant.

Before we go on, here are some specs on the C300 MK II:

  • Super 35mm CMOS Sensor
  • 4K,1920×1080 60/50i, 23.98/25p True 24p
  • Canon XF AVC H.264 Codec
  • EF Lens Mount
  • Dual Pixel CMOS AF Technology
  • Rotating 4″ LCD Monitor
  • 2x 3G-SDI Output, 2x XLR Inputs
  • 2x CFast Card Slots
  • Timecode I/O, Genlock In & Sync Out
  • Canon Log 2 Gamma

Canon’s C-series cameras have a long history of under promising and over delivering. Their cameras never look great on paper, but they always seem to deliver really strong images that far exceed what you might expect of them based on their spec sheets alone. Canon have also been accused of overpricing their cameras (I’m sure I’ve called them out on that myself), but with the recent $4000 price drop, the C300 Mark II is now more accessible than ever. And while their colors might not always look Alexa-like right out of the box, Canon has a new trick up their sleeves –

The C300 MK II now comes with a “Production” camera profile that is designed to mimic the color science of the Arri Alexa. When combined with Arri’s Rec. 709 conversion LUT in post, the resulting images between the two cameras are almost too close to call the difference on. For this reason, the C300 MK II is often used as a B-Camera to the Arri Alexa or simply as a cost-effective alternative for the A-camera.

Canon-C300-Vs-Arri-Alexa

Canon C300 Mark II – $11,999 at B & H

For those of you that don’t think you can achieve great narrative results on the C300 MK II, I’ll remind you that the 2013 Cannes Palm D’or winner (Blue Is The Warmest Color), was shot on the original Canon C300.

BLACKMAGIC CINEMA CAMERA 2.5K – $1995

By far the best bargain on this list, the original Blackmagic Cinema Camera was hailed as the “Alexa Mini” when it was first released, and for good reason. Although the ergonomics, build, and overall design of the BMCC couldn’t be more different than the Alexa, the overall image quality is amongst one of the best matches to the Alexa to this day. The subtle colors, high dynamic range, and natural texture of the BMCC’s images are just a few of the reasons why this camera disrupted the cinema camera industry in such a dramatic way.

Here are the specs:

  • 2.5K Image Sensor
  • 12-bit RAW, ProRes, and DNxHD Formats
  • 13 Stops of Dynamic Range
  • 23.98, 24, 25, 29.97, 30p Frame Rates
  • Canon EF Lens Mount
  • LCD Touchscreen with Metadata Entry
  • SDI Video Output and Thunderbolt Port
  • Mic/Line Audio Inputs
  • Records to Removable SSD Drives
  • Includes DaVinci Resolve and UltraScope

The fact that the original BMCC even shot at 2.5K (very close to the older Alexa model’s 2.7K ARRIRAW capabilities), made it even more compatible with the Alexa as a B-cam or C-cam. But as I stated above, the most important consideration here is the color science, and the 2.5K BMCC has some of the strongest color science I have seen on any camera to date. I am a big fan of Blackmagic and currently shoot on their URSA Mini 4.6K (also a fantastic camera), but it has a distinctly different look than the BMCC 2.5K.

Blackmagic-BMCC-Vs-Arri-Alexa

Blackmagic Cinema Camera 2.5K – $1995 at B & H

With the URSA Mini 4.6K, Blackmagic have started to really define a “look” for themselves, much like RED has with their camera lineup. It goes without saying that the 4.6K generates beautiful images across the board, but they have a personality of their own, whereas the original 2.5K BMCC comes closer to an exact match for the Alexa – at least to my eye.

FINAL THOUGHTS

Arri have managed to strike gold with the Alexa in the color-department, and as stated at the top of this post, the only way to get a perfect Alexa look is to actually shoot with an Arri Alexa or Arri Amira. That said, the cameras on this list can get you really close when treated right on set and in post. Once you know the quirks and limitations of these cameras (or any camera for that matter) you will be able to squeeze the most out of them from a technical standpoint.

Post-production and color processing are also huge. Shooting with a color chart on set, and balancing your shots effectively in post are two of the most crucial steps in ensuring that you achieve the best possible results. In the end though, your skills on set and in the color suite will be the biggest factors in your overall ability to achieve a cinematic look, and that is something that should never be overlooked.

For those of you looking to improve your results in the color department, be sure to check out my recently released Cinema LUT Packs by clicking here.

 

About Author

Noam Kroll is an award-winning Los Angeles based filmmaker, and the founder of the boutique production house, Creative Rebellion. His work can be seen at international film festivals, on network television, and in various publications across the globe. Follow Noam on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook for more content like this!

40 Comments

  • Chad
    July 28, 2018 at 11:37 pm

    Noam, I have recently been trying out a red weapon with the dragon sensor after not loving the C200 color as much as the old C100 Mark II I had before. When putting some basic red looks together my out of camera 1dx Mark II matching shots just look better color wise. So to get great color and dynamic range and an easy to color image, do you like the Varicam lt or C300 Mark II better when comparing to a red? Great color and easy to grade are my biggest priorities but a filmic image with good highlight roll off would be a bonus.

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      August 21, 2018 at 9:26 pm

      I definitely think the Varicam will match a RED more easily than the C300 II, but both could work… Panasonic just seems to have a neutral color science that matches other cameras quite easily, where Canon has more of a distinct look… At least in my opinion!

      Reply
  • Dustin
    March 9, 2018 at 11:08 pm

    I was tired of all the debate so I rented all of the above including a Red and to be completely honest, right out of the camera with a simple Rec 709 LUT the Arri kills’em all! There’s NO comparison! I feel like all of these reviews wasted my time. I should of just spent the money finding out for myself. Not to say I don’t appreciate your expertise, along with everybody else’s but for anyone that’s actually used the cameras in dual purpose, mixed lighting environments on a true two day workflow… the Arri is just better! Add real glass, OMGoodness. And I really wanted to be a VLT guy… but it’s digital. Arri… Ah… LOVE…

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      April 2, 2018 at 3:55 am

      I agree, Dustin. Arri is the best. However – not everyone can afford one! These cameras get close-ish for a lot of people, without having to take out a mortgage on the house…

      Reply
  • Sheikima Taylor
    January 25, 2018 at 7:23 am

    Hi Noam, I’m shooting a feature film this year and wanted to know what is a better camera option to invest in your opinion? Blackmagic cinema camera 2.5k or the Panasonic Gh5?

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      February 1, 2018 at 3:54 am

      Both are amazing cameras… If it were me, I would go with the BMCC 2.5K – for image quality alone. The GH5 will be way easier to work with and has a lot of advantages over the BMCC workflow-wise, but based on color science and IQ, I would go Blackmagic.

      Reply
  • hugo
    January 8, 2018 at 8:27 am

    Wow, this was really informative from the article to the comments. Noam I will be doing a feature film and various web content projects, I’ve fallen in love with the cinematic feel of the Lomo lenses and with a partner realized his credit can qualify us for an Arri Alexa mini body. But as you know, that doesn’t count the lenses, gimbals, sound equipment etc.

    My question, do you think for cinema I should do Arri Alexa mini financing, get in debt with gimbal and lenses lol Or is the Black Magic 4.6 with those Lomo lenses a seriously formidable replacement? It may feel like you’ve been asked this question before. But comparatively it just seems to me as great as Black Magics have been, Arri Alexa minis seamlessly fuse warmth, 4k capacity, and dynamic range in a way that brings back the majesty of film cinema again in away BMs just don’t. But could the Lomo lenses really be the equalizer?

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      January 18, 2018 at 6:19 am

      Thanks for the great question, Hugo. I’m always torn by these types of decisions myself, so I definitely get how challenging it can be. One question for you right off the bat though –

      Would you consider renting the Alexa? If so, that might be the way to go so you don’t spread your budget too thin, but still get that great image quality. If you’re going to buy, I would only recommend the Alexa over the Ursa Mini Pro (from a business standpoint), if you also plan to rent it out or get hired as a freelancer and bill it as your kit fee. If it’s strictly for your own projects, you may not recoup the cost… At the same time, if that’s a non-issue for you then by all means go Arri. You can’t beat the look!

      Reply
  • Charles wright
    December 22, 2017 at 6:44 pm

    Hi Noam, I want to buy a camera to shoot my first feature film with. I currently have a Nikon D610 and Nikkor AI-S lenses (28mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/2, 105mm f/2.5). What is a good budget option you recommend? I would love the Ursa mini pro, but that is out of my price range. I’m working with a $2,000 budget. Also, give me your thoughts on the lenses I have. Are they good enough to shoot a feature with; anything wider perhaps?

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      January 7, 2018 at 11:15 pm

      Hi Charles! I love the Nikkor lenses, and would certainly be comfortable using them on a feature shoot, especially a micro-budget. I would recommend also picking up a wide angle (maybe 24mm or 18mm) depending on which camera you shoot on and what the crop is like.

      In terms of camera choice, i would consider the Blackmagic Pocket Camera or Micro Cinema Camera. For the money I really think they offer the best image, but if you need 4K you could also consider a Lumix GH5 or Fuji X-T2.

      Reply
  • Marty
    December 20, 2017 at 12:52 pm

    Hi Noam,

    Thanks for the most and blog.

    Just wondering about your thoughts concerning the EVA1 in connection with the colour science, in relation to the ARRI that is. Just because you mention the Varicam and the EVA is regarded to having similar colour science to the Varicam?

    Cheers

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      January 7, 2018 at 11:05 pm

      Currently, I still don’t think any cameras out are as good as the Alexa with regards to color science… However the Varicam is quite good, and to my eye the EVA1 delivers a really similar image. It might take a bit more work in post than the Alexa, but it’s still amongst the best out there in my opinion.

      Reply
  • James
    December 3, 2017 at 5:59 pm

    Thanks for this article. I’m so glad someone is talking about colour science as one of THE most important aspects of a beautiful image. So few people, on the internet at least, consider this of prime importance. Personally I’d even rather have less resolution/DR and great colour science; I find Sony almost unwatchable.

    I’m about to return to Canon for my stills photography, as it will allow me to own good Canon glass which I can then use on a C200, as early test footage looks very promising. I will miss my X-Pro 2 for stills (which I also chose partly for its excellent colour), but Fuji’s video isn’t going to compete with C200 RAW lite any time soon.

    Are you aware if the C200 has, or will have, the Production camera profile, please?

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      December 6, 2017 at 10:10 pm

      Thank you so much for the kind words. With regards to the C200, I haven’t shot with it yet but am very interested in it right now. And I would guess that the raw mode should produce some gorgeous results! I’ll be sure to do a more detailed post in the future once I have a chance to play with it.

      Reply
  • Jack
    June 8, 2017 at 11:44 am

    Hey Noam,

    Do you feel the Ursa Mini Pro would be a reasonable alternative to the Arri Alexa, considering colour science, dynamic range and highlight rolloff? Less or moreso than the original 2.5k cinema camera?

    Personally, I absolutely love images from the Varicam LT, however its price is still a little too steep to justify for my needs (and bank account). Which cameras in the $6,000 – $10,000 range do you feel come closest to colour, texture and native ISO flexibility of higher end cameras such as the Alexa Mini and Varicam LT?

    Thanks.

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      June 8, 2017 at 5:16 pm

      In short – yes, I think the URSA Mini Pro is an excellent alternative. Especially now that is has the built in IRND filters, which (compared to the previous model), allows for even better color results when shooting in brighter conditions. I used it recently on a feature film myself, and while it is not an Alexa (no camera is), it is definitely very filmic, and very cinematic in it’s own right.

      Reply
  • Hariharan
    April 1, 2017 at 4:26 pm

    Hi Noam
    I am in the market after a long time to make upgrade from 5d mark ii to a cinema camera. I love canon c300 mark ii but unfortunately can’t afford it. I am now narrowing it down to Ursa mini Pro . I was able to deliver whatever I could with 5d but you know, that step up is necessary. As I am doing several short films now and need external monitor and recorder, high red codec it seems necessary and 5d mark ii can’t keep up. Pls share your thoughts on ursa min Pro and if it would be a good long term choice for at least another 6 years. It’s still expensive for me as I don’t generate any revenue. Looking forward to hear from you. Thanks. Hariharan

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      April 3, 2017 at 12:26 am

      Hey Hariharan – Thanks for the question. I personally think the URSA Mini Pro is an incredible camera… That said, it’s hard to know if any camera will still be relevant in 6 years from now, since technology is now changing so quickly. What I usually recommend is that you only buy a new camera when you absolutely need to. For instance, if your clients are demanding 4K and you have a camera that only shoots HD, then you might want to upgrade. But there is no sense in upgrading unless you absolutely need to. I’ve seen some amazing films made on the 5D MK II and some poor films made on an Arri Alexa. It all comes down to your content, story, direction, etc.

      Of course, some cameras are objectively better than others… But the question is whether or not having an older camera actually prevents you from doing the work you want to do. If it does, then by all means buy a new camera. And get one that has the features you need. If you like the DSLR format, cameras like the GH5 or 5D MK IV are good options too! Hope this helps…

      Reply
      • Sani
        April 20, 2017 at 6:48 am

        Hi Noam! Is blackmagic 2.5K still acceptable in todays film festivals? I’m wanna shoot a children’s movie with it. Thank’s for reply!

        Reply
        • Noam Kroll
          April 20, 2017 at 7:58 pm

          Absolutely! It’s still an incredible camera and can produce gorgeous images. Festivals care a lot more about story, performance, originality etc. as opposed to camera quality – although it never hurts to have nice production value 🙂

          Reply
      • hariharan
        July 5, 2017 at 3:54 am

        Hi Noam, I ended up buying RED Scarlet W. I haven’t shot anything with it yet, as I had a job that needed Canon C100 Mark II and I also bought that. C100 Mark II was incredible for what it was meant to be. Thanks for your inputs.

        Reply
        • Noam Kroll
          July 22, 2017 at 2:33 am

          Glad to hear! Best of luck with everything.

          Reply
  • Andres Munoz
    January 26, 2017 at 8:35 pm

    Hey Noam,

    Have you ever covered Red cameras?? If so how would you compare them to the Arri or the Panasonic Varicam ? What i really like about red is that its an investment that you can keep on upgrading from the cheapest to the most expensive “brain” as they call it. Im asking this question because im trying to move from a DSLR to a more “cinema” camera.

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      February 9, 2017 at 8:29 pm

      Hey Andres! RED cameras are excellent, but on the high end of the spectrum I prefer the Arri Alexa look. That’s just personal preference, but generally speaking I do find it a bit more organic, filmic, and forgiving at times. RED footage is gorgeous, but sometimes too “real” for my taste, if that makes sense? The Varicam is a great option as well, and sort of fits somewhere between RED and Arri. As for upgrading, you are right that it’s great that RED offers an upgrade path. That said, Arri’s cameras hold their value very well – so you can’t really go wrong with them either!

      Reply
  • Michael
    January 1, 2017 at 2:39 am

    Glad you’re covering this topic and mentioning Blue Is The Warmest Color winning at Cannes. People filming indie projects and short on funds will pout to use an Alexa — as if their project will greatly suffer if they don’t get what they want and have to film with a Canon C300 or Varicam.

    Meanwhile, I have been pleased when filming with the Canon C300 and the Canon C300 Mark II. We shot a recent feature in the log mode on a pair of C300s, then professionally color-corrected in Davinci, then did a ProResHQ output master for the DCP maker.

    We played this movie at an AMC cinema in Times Square, the AMC Universal in Orlando, the AMC in Burbank, and at over a dozen more cities across the USA. It looked at home on cinema screens. One cinema projectionist with over a dozen years of multiplex experience told us our movie looked as good up on that screen as most of the movies they play. So the Canon C300 — and the newer and 4k capable C300 Mark II — is certainly more than viable for use on TV-bound productions and web shows.

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      January 4, 2017 at 7:42 pm

      Great to hear Michael! And congrats on your project – sounds like it was a big success.

      Reply
  • Jacob
    July 21, 2016 at 6:09 pm

    None of these cameras have global shutter. Waste of time I’m just not sure when we decided rolling shutter artefacts were acceptable for high end production. Come on Arri. FFS

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      July 22, 2016 at 5:48 pm

      Correct, but as I think you pointed out, Arri doesn’t have a global shutter either. I agree with you that in an ideal world all cameras would have global shutters, but unfortunately most of the time dynamic range is greatly reduced on global vs. rolling shutters… Hopefully in time we’ll get a best of both worlds option.

      Reply
  • Nelson
    July 16, 2016 at 1:18 am

    how about a used c500 and an odyssey 7q for under 10k?

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      July 19, 2016 at 1:56 pm

      That would be a great option too. I’m not sure if the C500 has the same picture profile as the C300 (allowing you to match it to the Alexa), but it is an excellent camera regardless and is capable of doing some serious damage.

      Reply
  • roshdi
    July 13, 2016 at 7:10 pm

    Hi Noam, thanks for the info. You might want to fix the link that states the price for the C300 Mark II, it says $1199 at B & H

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      July 14, 2016 at 9:54 pm

      Thanks! Fixing it now.

      Reply
    • Marc Cayce
      April 11, 2017 at 4:04 pm

      So, are you saying I should just invest in lenses and keep my BMCC 2.5k because I’m in love with the film look. I was going to upgrade to the 4.6k Pro. I mainly do feature films for DVD.

      Reply
      • Noam Kroll
        April 13, 2017 at 11:04 pm

        Hey Marc. I would say if you’re happy with the 2.5K and don’t mind the ergonomics – stick with it. The 4.6K is an amazing camera, but one of it’s greatest assets now (especially with the Pro version) is it’s design/ergonomics. If you don’t feel like you need a more traditional camera body like the 4.6K offers, then you may in fact be better off investing in glass…

        Reply
      • marc Cayce
        May 1, 2017 at 10:05 pm

        Hello, thanks for the earlier reply and advise. I woke up thinking since I’m investing in glass maybe I should get a set of the New SLR Magic 2xAnamorphic lenses. Or should I get the New Sigma 18-35 T2 and 50-100mm T2 CINE Lens? I have a BMCC 4/3 and a EF model. Once again I’m only shooting narrative feature films very little to none run and gun. I’m really looking for the best Cinema look lens in my budget.

        Reply
        • Noam Kroll
          May 2, 2017 at 4:12 pm

          Both options are great, and you really can’t go wrong either way… It’s hard to say which to pick between the two of them, since they are both amazing in their own ways. I recently saw the new SLR Magic lenses at NAB and was really impressed. But I also just shot a feature on the Sigma’s and was blown away by them too. They have a different look (and of course one is anamorphic), so I would choose between them purely based on the aesthetic’s you’re after. If you want an anamorphic look, go with SLR Magic. If you like spherical and want something a bit cleaner looking, the Sigmas are a great choice.

          Reply
  • Ellory
    July 13, 2016 at 5:36 pm

    It is true that the Blackmagic URSA Mini 4K and 4.6K has taken the direction for Blackmagic to define their own look. However, would you say that the Blackmagic URSA 4K (V1/V2) and Blackmagic Cinema Production 4K Camera still resembles the Arri look? I’d like your opinion on it.

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      July 14, 2016 at 9:54 pm

      Great question – In a way I think the 4K sensor has more of the Arri look than the 4.6K. That said, I would choose the 4.6K sensor 99 times out of 100 because of it’s increased dynamic range, less FPN issues, and so forth. For those reasons and more, I think the 2.5K (image-wise) is still the one to beat…

      Reply
  • Kim
    July 9, 2016 at 4:35 pm

    Color science, is it something that happens after the bits are gathered from censor or already at censor? It sounds like it is something that happens after, but I suspect sensor filters etc. have a lot to do with it and AD converters etc.

    About what happens after the sensor, I understand the needed to compress the data, but wonder why 8 bits are still used so commonly on lower end cameras and even more expensive ones, and displays….

    Color science, I am not sure if it is science at all or just historical burden, too many “standards ” and layers preventing to do it like engineers would do it if developing it today.

    It is sure though, some cameras do it better, and some editors handle it better. I am just starting to understand how different cameras can be, from perspective of 5D II, GoPro, GH4, BMMCC…

    Reply
    • Noam Kroll
      July 9, 2016 at 7:02 pm

      Hi Kim – When I refer to color science in the context of camera technology, I am generally referring to the sensor/capture calibration on the cameras themselves. In other words, the exact same image sensor may produce completely different results if used on two different cameras from two different manufacturers, if they are calibrated differently. Arri has managed to really perfect the art of color, which is why footage off of their cameras looks so natural, filmic, and organic. It’s also worth noting that color science can be a very broad term and often is used in reference to many other things – including post-production. Everything from LUTs to color software to various color spaces that you can work in, all fall under the umbrella of color science to one degree or another. Understanding how to manage your colors from capture to final delivery is critical in ensuring you achieve the most consistent and best quality results.

      Reply

Leave a Reply