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

201–210 of 315 posts

Re: Approved Cameras

#201

Post by germinalphrase »

dylan604 wrote: post #185
germinalphrase wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose, but we’re talking about Netflix here. DP, Operator, 1st AC, 2nd AC, and a loader is pretty standard on even sub-10 mil budgets (which is nothing ).

Debating the size of the crew is fun and all, and yes, traditionally for a full crew, this is the purview of the 2nd AC. As the crew gets smaller, those duties roll up to the next person. The fact that a "log" is still a thing in today's productions is not dependant on which crew member is doing it. In fact, with all of the digital f/x, they are crucial.

Absolutely. No disagreement here.

Re: Approved Cameras

#202

Post by erklik »

antisthenes wrote: post #68

It's too bad they don't screen their actual content with the same rigor as they do their technical side. I don't doubt their technical side is excellent. Most of Netflix is utterly mindless garbage content for background consumption. I struggle to name even 5 of their originals over the years that you could call good "TV" or Cinema. Black Mirror is the only one that really comes to mind.

Stranger Things

The Crown

Bojack Horseman

Lupin

Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt

Russian Doll

Glow

Narcos

Sex Education

House Of Cards (although, this is less fun to watch now considering Kevin Spacey's real life actions but the show itself was and is quite good)

Dark

The Witcher

Daredevil

The Haunting of Hill House (similarly Midnight Mass and Haunting of Bly Manor)

All of these are award winning as well as just being incredibly good shows. I think Netflix just pumps out so much content. There's plenty of bad stuff, but there's also plenty of very very good stuff.

Re: Approved Cameras

#203

Post by anarayanan31 »

Tomdarkness wrote: post #112

The technical quality of Netflix originals is really high. One thing that annoys me though is for some reason despite having rigorous standards for the camera it seems a common trend through numerous Netflix Originals to use the Vantage Hawk V-Lite Vintage '74 line of anamorphic lenses. I guess it's a stylistic choice but it results is some (for me at least) annoying image distortion that can really distract from the…

A lot of cinematographers don’t really like the extreme resolving power inherent to 4K+ sensors, and optics that diffuse that sharpness (for instance, a lot of anamorphics) are VERY much in vogue as a result.

Re: Approved Cameras

#204

Post by Pulcinella »

ryandamm wrote: post #182
zakary wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately it isn’t that simple. A lot of these lenses are expensive not just due to rarity but from the shear complexity and difficulty in producing them. Some can take literally months of production time. They frequently contain dozens of pieces of specialised glass which are ground to tolerances measured in nanometers. The way the light interacts with these lenses is simply not something that you can simulate.…

I believe it's the other way around: Kubrick got a version of the NASA lens modified to accept a Mitchell mount so he could put it on a 35mm motion film camera. He only used it for the candlelight scene because he had to remove the spinning mirror assembly used for monitoring, so they were shooting blind. Don't remember the sources for the anecdote, sorry. But the wikipedia page corresponds: https://en.wikipedia.org/…

This video goes into it: https://youtu.be/2p5E7iXxeQE

Note that even then they had to use brighter candles (they had 3 wicks instead of one).

Re: Approved Cameras

#205

Post by anarayanan31 »

TedShiller wrote: post #143

This is totally arbitrary. Many Nikon cameras match those requirements but are randomly not listed. You could use an “unapproved” camera and just overwrite the metadata. Nobody would know (unless you’re using an iPhone or something).

It’s not just the number of photosites, or even the bit depth - Netflix approved cameras need timecode support, among other features that distinguish a “production ready” camera from a consumer one.

Re: Approved Cameras

#206

Post by anarayanan31 »

dylan604 wrote: post #22
Laminary wrote: post #7

Wonder why they approve the Canon C70 but not Canon C200

If it were up to me, if the camera doesn't have Global Shutter, it should not be allowed. Nothing more annoying to me than when flash/strobes appear on partial multiple frames. Then again, if it were up to me, it would not be allowed to be called cinema unless it used global shutter.

You are aware film cameras use a rolling shutter, too?

Re: Approved Cameras

#207

Post by mdoms »

Krustopolis wrote: post #197
geenew wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What other language(s) is that word used in? It's a moderately rare word in everyday spoken English.

“Dreck” is a German word.

I didn't know that! I got it from my mum who presumably got it from her British mum.

Re: Approved Cameras

#208

Post by staticautomatic »

cialowicz wrote: post #193
staticautomatic wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but crazy shallow DoF goes back at least to Kubrick famously shooting parts of Barry Lyndon at f0.7.

Barry Lyndon was shot with an f/0.7 lens because Kubrick wanted period-correct lighting: candlelight, which required a super fast lens with the film used. To my knowledge he wasn’t going for shallow DoF.

Be that as it may, the DoF is unavoidable unless every shot is insanely tight.

Re: Approved Cameras

#209

Post by WalterBright »

laurent92 wrote: post #186
WalterBright wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's just add some explosions! That'll fix a terrible script. The king of witless, trite scripts has got to be the recent "La Brea" series. There's such a lack of creativity that the characters recycle each others lines.

Let me bet, they stare at each other to express feelings, very very often as a way of stretching the duration of scenes?

They'd say things like "I promise I'll come back for you", and "I can't leave XXX" ad infinitum.

They'd also do the usual plot device of splitting up and wandering around alone, for the sole purpose of getting into a fix so everyone else can rescue them.

Although sabre tooth tigers and dire wolves regularly eat the red shirts, the rest never think of arming themselves.

I watched the show out of incredulousness. And because I enjoy snarking on bad shows :-)

Re: Approved Cameras

#210

Post by GhettoComputers »

fleddr wrote: post #177

Netflix is like an in-flight entertainment system. There's really nothing there you genuinely want to watch, but here you are, you might as well watch something. Every once in a while, they do have a good show. And even that sucks, because you know they will now ruin it by adding 3 seasons where absolutely nothing happens. And there's the woke thing spreading its wings. Even in the Witcher, where it's perfectly fine…

Agreed.

I’ve been at a friends with all the streaming subscriptions. The most used is HBO (been watching Silicon Valley and they got tons of movies), Amazon is second (terrible ads at the beginning, sells movies as well), then Disney+.

Post reply on HN