Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Approved Cameras

partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 315 posts

Re: Approved Cameras

#101

Post by [deleted] »

bredren wrote: post #40
zucker42 wrote: post #25

What is the purpose of this document, i.e. who does it apply to? Does it mean that a movie like Tangerine[1] (filmed on an iPhone) would never come to Netflix? [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tangerine_(film)

I suspect any film that was good enough could bypass many, many of the guidelines they have for partners, including use of a camera that is not on that list. The collection of documents seems to be guidelines and templates to begin from if seeking to partner with Netflix. It doesn't seem like requirements for the film from being considered for inclusion in the catalogue, but at least offers a relative standard that c…

[deleted]

Re: Approved Cameras

#102

Post by matheusmoreira »

mdoms wrote: post #38
OliverJones wrote: post #15

This means Netflix operates as a production and post studio for their many and talented film-makers. The stuff with the red N on the poster -- some of it is REALLY good -- uses Netflix-operated handling. Any video production goes through a lot of steps from raw studio footage to edited, finished product. This web site says that Netflix processes and people handle a lot of that. Also it looks like 4K is their minimum…

> The stuff with the red N on the poster -- some of it is REALLY good An overwhelming majority of it is total garbage. It's such a bad ratio that I treat the red N as a negative signal when I'm choosing something.

Agreed. Netflix has so much pulp now it's not even funny. It used to produce much higher quality content. After other copyright holders started pulling out they seem to have started focusing on quantity.

Re: Approved Cameras

#103

Post by eropple »

Matsta wrote: post #17
Laminary wrote: post #7

Wonder why they approve the Canon C70 but not Canon C200

The C70 has the same sensor as the C300 MKIII so that could be why. But then you question why isn't the A7s III or FX3 approved when the FX6 is approved and they all share the same sensor.

My guess is that it's what they've been asked to approve and upon which they've done their due diligence.

For Netflix Originals, I would assume most productions are done on rental gear. The difference between renting an FX3 and an FX6 isn't going to be significant at production-budget scales. (And if you had a real burning reason to use something off-list I would bet they can write you an exception.)

Re: Approved Cameras

#104

Post by glandium »

dylan604 wrote: post #65
wyager wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I bet the higher resolution makes it easier, with big*ss GPUs to clean up the raw footage. Even if you don't do any other post-processing, downscaled video looks better than video captured at sensor resolution. This is because you can implement a steeper low-pass filter (closer to ideal brick-wall filter) in software than you can in actual optics. Hardware lowpass filters tuned to block most stuff above nyquist wil…

It was always standard to acquire at higher resolution than being delivered. Hell, they shot 35mm film for SD for decades, 16mm for non-extravagent budgets. The first use of 4k wasn't for 4k delivery, but for single camera shoot of talking head reframing. Full frame for the wide, cropped in for the MED/CU shots. Larger image also allows for cleaner image stabilization. Allows for more detail on pulling keys in post,…

> Hell, they shot 35mm film for SD for decades

They shot 35mm for the big screen.

Re: Approved Cameras

#105

Post by bb88 »

bredren wrote: post #40
zucker42 wrote: post #25

What is the purpose of this document, i.e. who does it apply to? Does it mean that a movie like Tangerine[1] (filmed on an iPhone) would never come to Netflix? [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tangerine_(film)

I suspect any film that was good enough could bypass many, many of the guidelines they have for partners, including use of a camera that is not on that list. The collection of documents seems to be guidelines and templates to begin from if seeking to partner with Netflix. It doesn't seem like requirements for the film from being considered for inclusion in the catalogue, but at least offers a relative standard that c…

> I suspect any film that was good enough could bypass many, many of the guidelines they have for partners...

To clarify, I believe this is for original Netflix content (partners) where Netflix does the production. 3rd party studios licensing their content would be exempt from this (ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX). The big issue is that you have to get pre-approval for non-approved cameras.

I suspect that Netflix/Apple/Amazon is trying to make their name in content beating out cable and movie production studios. High quality 4k video is what people are clamoring for. I've seen a lot of cable/broadcast 1080p (The local CW station comes to mind) that's been recompressed to a lower bit rate. Effectively giving you 720p resolution in 1080p format -- it's not nearly as enjoyable.

Re: Approved Cameras

#106

Post by eropple »

chrisseaton wrote: post #96
eropple wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could. But it's an artistic and a sound engineering decision that changes based on what you actually want the listener to hear. The defaults for automatic sound mixing will almost always be wrong. And they will differ in how they are wrong from consumer box to consumer box.

If wonder if instead of a separate mix, 5.1 could be modified to include hints for how to better down-mix a given production.

It can. That's part of the Blu-ray spec. But it's not standardized in streaming video AFAIK (not that Netflix has to care about that, they have their own player) and, even if the feature exists, somebody still has to go do it.

Re: Approved Cameras

#107

Post by dylan604 »

lekevicius wrote: post #41
colechristensen wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you used actual film it was long lengths of the stuff, hence footage. Lots of words have weird no longer relevant sources. Like “logs”.

Not what I expected at all: log (n.2) "record of observations, readings, etc.," 1842, sailor's shortening of log-book "daily record of a ship's speed, progress, etc." (1670s), from log (n.1). The book so called because a wooden float at the end of a line was cast out to measure a ship's speed. General sense by 1913.* So it does have a relationship to the wooden log - it was originally a series of measurements from a…

On set, depending on the size of crew, part of the job for an AC or 1st AC is to make a camera report. Each shot is logged to note things like which lens was used, what filters were used, the height of the camera from the floor, the distance of the film plane to the focus point, the frame rate, aperture, ISO, etc. All of this info can then be used if they needed to do a pick up later to put the camera in the same setup. Also, it can be used in post production so that the camera can be recreated in 3D to have the special f/x match.

Also, log can refer to the gamma curve which affects how roll-offs in highlights/shadows are saved (rough description).

"Log" is still used daily in production work.

Re: Approved Cameras

#108

Post by stephen_g »

chirau wrote: post #29

I once thought about a high-end camera rental side business. Never really completed the research, but I am curious again... Do studios and creators own these cameras or they usually rent? Is there an aggregated marketplace where I could be able to put my camera for rent if I do eventually get one?

You could maybe do a deal with a bigger outfit to contribute some capital for some gear and get a cut when they rent it? But for having your own rental company (for the kind of people you want to rent to), you need to invest in lot of gear because they want to hire as much as possible from as few places as possible. Hundreds of thousands of dollars in cameras, accessories, lenses (especially important), lights, rigging gear etc.

Re: Approved Cameras

#109

Post by kaczordon »

OliverJones wrote: post #15

This means Netflix operates as a production and post studio for their many and talented film-makers. The stuff with the red N on the poster -- some of it is REALLY good -- uses Netflix-operated handling. Any video production goes through a lot of steps from raw studio footage to edited, finished product. This web site says that Netflix processes and people handle a lot of that. Also it looks like 4K is their minimum…

> Also it looks like 4K is their minimum standard now. I bet the higher resolution makes it easier, with big*ss GPUs to clean up the raw footage.

Resolution is far less important than bit color depth. We barely need 4K(Alexa used to be 2K) much less 8K footage for something to look good on a tv.

Re: Approved Cameras

#110

Post by dylan604 »

glandium wrote: post #104
dylan604 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was always standard to acquire at higher resolution than being delivered. Hell, they shot 35mm film for SD for decades, 16mm for non-extravagent budgets. The first use of 4k wasn't for 4k delivery, but for single camera shoot of talking head reframing. Full frame for the wide, cropped in for the MED/CU shots. Larger image also allows for cleaner image stabilization. Allows for more detail on pulling keys in post,…

> Hell, they shot 35mm film for SD for decades They shot 35mm for the big screen.

Primetime TV shows were shot 35mm. Lower budget was shot on 16mm.

They weren't doing for screen size considerations. It's just what they had. You shot 35/16 or you shot video (shudder).

Post reply on HN