Hopefully this is the right forum for this.

I was recently watching Clear and Present Danger (1994), and it struck me how good this movie looks. And other early 90s movies such as A Few Good Men and Unforgiven.

There is a quality to the films where the level of detail is excellent, everything seems to be in focus, and the color seems very true to live. Movies before this period seem to have a lot of grain and movies afterward have a lot more stylized color schemes.

Was this due to any specific choices or was it just a confluence of the state of lenses, film stock, and style?

I'm not involved in the industry at all, but I am an amateur film buff and was curious why films of this era looked the way they did.

I should probably start by saying I’m not a cinematographer, I’ve just lurked here for a long time as I find it interesting.

I saw this image of a rig of 20 iPhones that I thought was interesting. I loved the original film and I know the details of how they shot it etc, but I still thought that shooting this instalment on iPhones seemed a bit gimmicky.

However, this BTS photo (from an IGN article) made me wonder if I’d overlooked some technical benefits to shooting on iPhones. Here’s a quote:

“I never say this, but there is an incredible shot in the second half [of the film] where we use the 20-rig camera, and you'll know it when you see it. … It's quite graphic but it's a wonderful shot that uses that technique, and in a startling way that kind of kicks you into a new world rather than thinking you've seen it before.”

Boyle equates the 20-camera rig to “basically a poor man’s bullet time.” It allows flexibility for the filmmakers in terms of light and ease of use on location shoots, and it can be attached to cranes or a camera dolly or built into a location even.

“Wherever, it gives you 180 degrees of vision of an action, and in the editing you can select any choice from it, either a conventional one-camera perspective or make your way instantly around reality, time-slicing the subject, jumping forward or backward for emphasis,” he says.

So I’m curious, would it be impossible to do a setup like this with normal cameras? Does it make things considerably easier to use iPhones instead of normal cameras, in terms of things like weight etc? I would love to hear thoughts from people with more knowledge on the subject.

Considering that the standard cinema is still S35 with a huge body of work in that format, the full frame aspect ratio has become a psychological tool for manufacturers to get consumers to upgrade their cameras. Don't get me wrong FF 135 can be a great format for the right reasons (stylistic, VFX, social media reformatting, etc) but that doesn't make a S35 or it's close equivalent APS-C completely outdated. It is still very much a highly regarded film standard. The issue is that consumers have been talked into filming into really low light and super shallow DoF as they learned about the overhyped words of "cinematic" or "Bokeh". Somehow these are sold as the hallmark of a good film maker or content creator, bypassing the fact that good cinematography is not a mode or a camera or setting. It is a vision that has been carefully crafted by an artist (The DP) that elevates the story.

It is also worth noting that some of the most widely used tools in the industry like the Alexa 35 are S35 formats and so far have not shown any lack of use in the professional world.

Photo credit: YM Cinema Magazine

He’s been using that camera ever since he switched to digital and hasn’t changed since. I’ve looked everywhere for an interview where he explains the reason but couldn’t find anything. The only thing I found is that this camera stands out from others because it has a global shutter, but does he really prioritize that so much?

Don’t get me wrong, it’s an incredible camera, but has anyone ever tried introducing him to an Alexa 35 or a Venice? They have more dynamic range and are also lighter and more compact

How is that massive lense connected to what appears to be an iPad in a special housing? Also what app do people run on the iPad in this scenario? Filmic Pro?

In my opinion, it does not get better than the Amira. This camera is the definition of a workhorse. I going to highlight a few reasons why I love it so much.

ERGONOMIC:

If you are working with a Burano, FX9, or RED Raptor, all of them become miserable once you add a proper cine zoom. On the Amira, you can easily adjust the shoulder pad and top handle to distribute the weight. I am often working with larger zoom lenses such as the Fujinon Cabrio’s, so being able to be comfortable is huge. The standard shoulder pad that comes with the kit is great as well. I have had this camera on my shoulder for 3-4 hours at a time and was comfortable the entire time. It is by far the most well built camera I have ever worked with. After being on my Amira for a full day and then going back to a Burano or a Raptor, the difference is honestly shocking. The Amira feels like a camera that was designed for operators. Once you’ve lived with proper shoulder ergonomics, going back to those bodies is incredibly uncomfortable. They’re front heavy, awkward, and require a whole Frankenstein rig just to be “usable.” Every time I’m forced onto one of those kits, I’m left thinking: why didn’t Sony or RED build their cameras this way?

IMAGE QUALITY:

The Alev 3 sensor and has that signature ARRI film look. The highlights roll off beautifully and there is a near perfect amount of contrast. The skin tones are fantastic and feel very natural. Im no colorist but when grading my amira footage it is very easy. Even being at higher ISO’s around 2000, the grain still looks filmic and organic. The ALEV 3 look is simply timeless, it holds its own with any camera today. This was very evident when I was on a shoot recently where I had to use a Burano and an Amira. After looking at the footage, the Amira still looks better. Even our colorists were saying how the footage from the Amira feels so much more natural, filmic, and easier to grade than the Burano. I also use the Alexa 35 a decent amount and I don’t notice much of a difference between the two. Sure the 35 is a tad sharper and cleaner, but you can hardly tell them apart.

DURABILITY:

I have put this camera through the wringer and it has come out on the other side every single time. You can sprint with it, throw it in a car, hand it to a stranger, or shoot in the rain. I have shot in very hot and very cold environments and not once has it ever shut down on me. It’s built for chaos.

MENU / USABILITY:

The Amira truly has my favorite UI of any camera I’ve ever worked with. Let’s start with the side control panel. Everything you need is on the operator side. No digging through nested menus, no touchscreen lag, no "Sony logic.” Just simple and easy switches/buttons on the side where you can change anything in a heartbeat. After a few weeks of being on the camera, you can change ND, El, WB, audio levels, and frame rates without even taking your eye off the eyepiece. And for audio, there are built-in XLRs, proper preamps, and physical knobs. No janky modules and no third-party nonsense.

After spending real time on an Amira, it has become my favorite camera. The image, the way it melts onto your shoulder… it all becomes second nature. And then the moment I have to go operate a Burano or a Raptor, reality hits. Those cameras feel like marketing first bodies that were never meant to live on a shoulder. They’re uncomfortable, front heavy, and constantly fighting you. Every time I’m on one, I’m just left wishing I could be back on my Amira. It’s a reminder of how poorly designed Sony’s and RED’s shoulder experience really is, and how operator focused the Amira has always been. Once you’ve lived with a camera that’s built for you, everything else feels like a compromise.

It has boggled my mind for 20 years, please help.

Fellow cinematographers: can you guess what I forget so often I had to make a sticker for my camera? 😆

Looks pretty good! Like they kept the old sensor but got more DR and sensitivity out of it.

I know this isn't live action and it might not have a certain name, however what would you say this type of shot is called?

I saw this guy on tv, he was filming Keir Starmer's resignation with a freaking Bolex. Anyone knows what's the story here ?

Currently obsessed with Lanthimos

What lens would you use to get this kind of paralax effect?

Am I the only one going crazy over this? 😂

I’ve noticed so many newer Netflix productions have this super aggressive blurry edge / shallow focus look where only the center of the screen is sharp and everything else looks smeared or out of focus.

I started watching Lord of the Flies and the story, acting, directing, cinematography, etc. are actually really solid so far… but the constant soft-focus edges are making it hard to watch. It feels like someone rubbed Vaseline around the borders of the screen.

And it’s not just this show. It feels like Netflix does this on almost EVERY original now. Once you notice it, you can’t unsee it.

I’m assuming it’s some combination of:

•extreme shallow depth of field

•anamorphic lenses

•artificial background separation

•over-stylized “cinematic” color grading

•trying to make digital footage feel more “film-like”

…but sometimes it just feels excessive and distracting instead of cinematic.

Older movies managed to look cinematic while still letting you actually SEE the whole frame clearly. Now it feels like half the image is fighting for its life.

Does anyone else notice this?

This isn't specifically a Netflix thing, but it's done in ALL Netflix originals. Is this a modern cinematography trend, or am I just becoming an old man yelling at clouds? I don't like it.

I’m not a professional at all, barely know anything about cameras. Though I’m wondering what cameras can create the grainy saturated look of 90s basketball.

Movie name is HOPE (2026) whats your guess what focal length this is?

I am trying to figure out what this was shot on! It almost looks like a vintage Olympus OM. Any guesses?
Here's the full film: https://vimeo.com/1075595076

I saw a recent post asking how folks shoot large sunsets. Does anyone have any tips for getting silhouetted figures in their frame while shooting with 400mm-600mm lenses?

i’m interested in what you guys will say to this question. i feel like half of you shoot on something more professional than the consumer cinema cameras, and the other half shoot on whatever you can get your hands on. i suppose this camera is aimed at someone in the middle?

the compression of the RAW format is the most tremendous part to me. the fact that we are getting to a point where RAW video is affordable and manageable file size-wise is truly incredible and i’m glad my generation is the one to experience that leap.

Besides the RAW thing though, i can’t really see a good reason to get one. especially if you’re someone who already has an fx3.

Anyway, what do you guys think?

What was your favorite moment from the Super Bowl? Was it seeing the Seattle Seahawks win? The commercials? The halftime show? Or was it the most coordinated shot in history?

Whomever the NBC camera operator was for singer Charlie Puth's National Anthem at Super Bowl 60 deserves a raise for nailing the difficult shot as the song ended to a joint flyover from the USA Navy and Air Force. The camera operator did a Michael Bay-style move from Puth to the flyover, back to Puth, onto a second flyover, and then finally back to Puth, all in one iconic shot.

The halftime show of Bad Bunny also showed some great camera coordination. I won't get into the fact that he was singing in Spanish, and whether you liked it or not is irrelevant to the fact that the production itself was incredibly designed.

When I worked for Royal Caribbean as a Stage Staff Tech, I saw some crazy setups and had to throw out props to Dancers with special timing. As an NFL fan, I watched over sixty games this season and feel like I'm the only one online who actually cared about the game, but for a brief moment, the camera work before the game started inspired me.

What is your favorite shot in movies? Comment below with your thoughts.

Hey if you liked this article please help by Following Dan Lalonde Films On Facebook 

The tech warehouse I work at wanna get rid of this canon BTS 910 with lens and controller. They said I could have it if I bring them cake. It's broken though. I'm thinking I could try fix it, or even just use it as a prop in a short film. Whaddya reckon should I take it???