Why Most Movies Are Shot On Arri Cameras

INTRODUCTION

“I think digital cameras…they’re all tools. It depends on the project. You choose a different camera like you used to choose a different film stock.” - Roger Deakins, Cinematographer

You hear cinematographers claim all the time that a camera is just a tool. One of many tools that can be selected from their cinematic toolbox. However if we look at the statistics, there is one particular brand of digital cinema camera that far and above is the most selected. 

From the 2022 Best Cinematography Oscar nominees, four out of five productions used Arri digital cameras. Out of the Best Picture nominees that number was six out of ten. 

You may think that this is just coincidence and we need a larger data sample size. Well then, from the 2021 Best Cinematography nominations four out of five used Arri. And the 2021 Best Picture nominees? Five out of eight.

If you keep going back it’s easy to see a clear pattern emerge. Most films these days are shot on Arri digital cameras. So, based on my own experience of working in the industry with these cinema cameras, I’ll explain the four main reasons that I see as being responsible for why most cinematographers on high-end productions select to shoot on the Arri Alexa. 

HISTORY

“The Alexa is my digital camera of choice. It has been since it came out.” - Ben Davis, Cinematographer

Someone might say it’s as simple as Arri cameras produce the best looking image. But there’s more to it than that.

To understand why Arri’s digital cameras are so popular we need to understand how the movie industry operated before digital when all productions were shot on film.

Due to the prohibitively high cost of film gear and cameras, they need to be rented out for films by production companies on a daily or weekly basis. There were two dominant gear manufacturers that emerged to produce this niche rental equipment: Panavision and Arri. A key difference between them is that Arri sells their equipment to third party rental houses or individuals, while Panavision exclusively rents the gear they produce. 

Each constructed their own camera system that had some differences, such as Panavision cameras using a PV lens mount and Arri cameras using a PL mount. However these cameras were all built around a standardised way of working that accepted most third party gear accessories, such as using 19mm rods to mount a mattebox. This meant that crew with different gear accessories could jump from a Panavision to an Arri system on different jobs without needing separate kits.

When digital began taking over from film, Panavision and Arri needed to come up with a digital alternative to their film cameras that could be interchangeable with existing lenses and gear accessories. 

Over the years, many working cinematographers had built relationships with these companies and had a track record of exclusively using their gear. So when film changed over to digital they naturally were drawn to what these two companies had to offer. 

Panavision produced the Genesis using some of Sony’s digital imaging technology which had a 35mm sized sensor. After early operational issues were fixed and the Genesis began seeing some initial use, it was quickly overshadowed upon the release of Arri’s competing camera the Alexa. 

The quality of the Alexa’s image, its usability and basic ProRes direct-to-edit workflow and being able to be privately bought up by a range of individuals and companies around the world meant that the Alexa took off, leaving the Genesis in the dust.

COMPATIBILITY

“It was kind of scary for me because…until then all my movies had been on film…Of course for me it was no doubt that if I was going digital it was going to be Alexa…I knew the Alexa would be the camera…that looked more the way I used to work with film.” - Natasha Braier, Cinematographer

When it came to this transition from film to digital cameras, Arri tried to make this leap as smooth as possible.

The Alexa was designed to be compatible with existing lenses and film equipment. Importantly, the user experience was also designed around the way that film was shot. Their camera had a recommended native EI, like a film stock, and had a menu screen on the camera which was simple to operate, which was based on the same few settings available on film cameras, like shutter angle.

Other menu systems of competitors like the Red One were a bit more convoluted and had more requirements such as needing to do ‘black shading’ to recalibrate the black balance of the camera.

This meant the Red’s menu was more technical, like a computer, which I think appealed less to many experienced cinematographers who were used to working on film cameras that had limited settings. The Arri menu was a far easier transition.

Initially the Red also had a more complicated RAW workflow than the Arri’s ProRes one.

Over time, Arri added more Alexa cameras to their line up featuring different body sizes and formats all based on the Alev sensor. This meant that cinematographers could choose between mini cameras, large format cameras, studio cameras, or even 65mm cameras and maintain the same Alexa look and compatibility in whatever format they needed. 

Arri accessories, such as their wireless follow focus, are also compatible with their cameras. It’s easier for camera assistants to work with both an Arri camera and Arri accessories. Kind of like having a Macbook and iPhone from Apple, rather than a MacBook and an Android phone. 

Using Arri accessories on a Red is of course possible, but it limits some features such as changing settings or playing back takes remotely from the focus handset, and requires additional elements such as an R/S cable to run the camera.   

Overall Arri’s simplicity and compatibility won out amongst cinematographers making the jump from shooting on film to shooting digitally.

LOOK

“I think the Alexa at the moments is the best camera out there…I thought that the image quality just in terms of its resolution and just that tiny little bit of movement from the pixels moving or whatever. The Alexa just has a little bit of life to it and I think if you go too far the image becomes lifeless. So I like that bit of texture it has.” - Roger Deakins, Cinematographer

We now get into probably the biggest reason most cinematographers love the Alexa: its look. 

The Alexa is favoured for producing excellent, flattering skin tones, colour that feels filmic and resolving detail in a way that balances a high resolution with an organic texture.

This is due to two factors: the camera’s sensor and its image processing ability.

The Alev CMOS Bayer sensor that is found in the Alexa has a high number of photosites that balances image sharpness with a high dynamic range and low noise. It has a low pass filter that blocks artefacts and an IR and UV filter which avoids strange colour effects but leaves enough of the red spectrum intact to deliver pleasing skin tones. 

The image processing of the Alexa was designed by Arri colour scientists who had developed their ARRISCAN and ARRILASER film scanning technology and were able to render colour in a very natural way. 

While companies like Red pursued high resolutions, Arri took their time and focused largely on colour science - which to many cinematographers was, and still is, more important since most projects still get finished at a 2K resolution.

RELIABILITY

“I also bought the very first Alexa Classic you know when it came out and I go you know I’ll be fine if it’s useable for three years and it ended up being a functioning tool and I still use it…the longevity of these products has been amazing.” - Phedon Papamichael, Cinematographer

Finally, the durability and reliability of the Alexa is incredibly renowned across the industry.

As cinema cameras are designed to be rented out and used regularly and over many years in the extreme outdoor conditions that movies are shot in this is an important factor.

While most high end cinema cameras now have a high degree of reliability, during the early development of digital cinema cameras there were many horror stories of cameras breaking down. The Red One had a reputation for being temperamental and overheating, while the Alexa was a solid workhorse with incredible reliability.

As I say, although these reliability issues from competing cameras have been smoothed over, in the early days I think this made some people nervous to shoot on a Red and gave their cameras a bit of a stigma, as time on a film set is extremely valuable and waiting for a camera to cool down before you can reboot it wasn’t very appealing.

I’ve worked with Alexas that are many years old on beaches, in deserts, in extreme temperatures and never encountered any issues. Arri’s track record of robustness, reliability and the longevity of their cameras remains to this day.   

CONCLUSION

Overall I’d say these four factors: Arri’s historical legacy in the film industry, the compatibility and ease of use of their products, the all important look, and their reputation for reliability, are what has made them the default choice for most cinematographers working today.

So much so that, as a camera assistant, when you work on any camera other than an Alexa it’s seen as an exception to the norm. I don’t see this trend changing any time soon, especially once they release their much anticipated Super 35 4K camera.