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

31–40 of 315 posts

Re: Approved Cameras

#31

Post by hug »

Raidion wrote: post #11
sen wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the most ridiculous thing about Netflix. So many great brains there yet none of them can perceive a world where not everyone has a high end home cinema.

I mean, this isn't for movies that are bought by Netflix from an existing rights holder, it's movies and series that are commissioned by Netflix. It seems reasonable that they'd want to capture as high quality as possible for as much content as possible, as you can always lose quality in post (or distribution). I don't suppose this would preclude directors using cameras that wouldn't work otherwise when needed (like…

You may have mixed up where you're responding to: This particular comment thread is not really about the cameras that are in use, but instead about the sound. (Sound recorded by the camera itself -- if it can even record sound -- is essentially never used.)

The problem is that the camera requirements are defined, presumably to try to have some lower bound on the quality of the visuals, there is no requirement for audio such that it sounds good on stereo speakers, which is probably what the majority of consumers are using.

The idea that Netflix have such a strict definition on camera quality is also a bit of a farce, given how woeful the image looks after it goes through their incredibly overenthusiastic level of compression, but that's neither here nor there.

Re: Approved Cameras

#32

Post by chrisseaton »

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)

Look at the domain name. It's Netflix Studios, not Netflix the consumer service. If you aren't doing business with Netflix Studios then ignore it. I'm sure you already know that there are many films and TV programmes on Netflix that were made before any of these cameras existed that they're perfectly happy to accept for Netflix?

Re: Approved Cameras

#34

Post by chrisseaton »

KaiserPro wrote: post #8
ugjka wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the problem?

When the sound design is targeted for 5.1, most of the dialogue comes from the center speaker. This is great if you have one. However if its downmixed on the fly (ie done on the client side) the center channel is often just played out of both speakers. This means that sound can be muffled, because its drowned out by the incidental noise that comes from the left/right channel.

> the center channel is often just played out of both speakers

Well what other option do you have when there are only two speakers? Only play it out of one?

Re: Approved Cameras

#35

Post by colechristensen »

erikstarck wrote: post #23
garyfirestorm wrote: post #19

Nothing from NIKON?

Nikon does video cameras?

Not much separates high end still cameras from video cameras besides taxes and a bit of firmware (some other stuff too, but all minor issues).

The big reason all high end cameras aren’t video cameras are mostly taxes in some regions and lazy product differentiation.

Re: Approved Cameras

#36

Post by dylan604 »

baxtr wrote: post #21

Top of the list is Munich based ARRI. A fascinating story by itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arri

Industry holds Arri color science above all others. Even when Red and others were shooting higher than 2k images, people preferred to shoot Arri for the color.

Arri was quite proud of their RAW format. I was told that on top of the price of the camera body, it was $20k to license the RAW format for the camera. Their RAW format was a sequence of frames that used the frame number derived from timecode appended to the filename. Had a strange situation with a client's Arri RAW footage. Typically, the camera's timecode is set to time of day. However, this particular day the camera op failed to do this. During one of the shots, the timecode rolled over "midnight" so the 23:59:59:23 timecode had a frame number of 2073599, but the very next frame 00:00:00:00 has a frame number of 0000000. Importing the footage broke this shot into 2 pieces. The last half of the shot showed up as the very first file in the imports, and the first half showed up as the last. RAW formats that are saved into a container format avoids this.

TR;DR camera peeps love Arri, post peeps have other opinions

Re: Approved Cameras

#37

Post by nitrogen »

dylan604 wrote: post #16
Grakel wrote: post #2

Now do "sound must be remastered for stereo speakers."

This pretty much ended around Blu-ray/HD-DVD switch from DVD. It was pretty standard to have a dedicated 2.0 Lt/Rt (sometimes a Lo/Ro) mix that was typically included as the first (default friendly) audio track on the DVD. This was convenient for people that did not have a surround system. Ideally, these were separate mixes vs automated downmix. They typically sounded good in stereo only. With the HD formats, it beca…

Still, Bluray discs with the downmix metadata set correctly should still sound better in stereo than a streaming source that was downmixed without dynamic range and mix preference metadata.

The technology is old enough to be long out of patent either way.

Re: Approved Cameras

#38

Post by mdoms »

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.

Re: Approved Cameras

#39

Post by colechristensen »

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?

I’ve seen people try to make “uber for camera rental”, I’m not sure if any of them succeeded. Most photography specialized retailers rent equipment.

I think there’s a good mix between rent and own as there’s a lot of diversity in creators.

Re: Approved Cameras

#40

Post by bredren »

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 can be deviated from as necessary.

For example, the general safety and guidelines document they provide for the US includes guidelines on weapons handling and stunts.[1] Having documents like this to start from might remove some of the administrative overhead to creating art in film.

To offer a comparison, YC has the SAFE investment template, an enterprise sales agreement template and recommendations for organization of startups. Using these might make a new company an easier fold into the portfolio but if the startup is successful enough, many things likely can be seen past.

Regarding iPhone specifically, the device has been able to record in 4k since the 6S and 6S Plus, which was one generation later than Tangerine which used the 5S. That said, I don't know the details of video capture to say if anything up through the 13 Pro compares with these other cameras.

[1] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gs6n32bMC_2zLGp2jI4U3JA7k7q...

Post reply on HN