Why Hollywood Fears the Sony FX3

#filmmaking #cinematic #cinematography
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases*
Some of my GEAR:
*These are Affiliate Links, I may earn commission from purchases made from links.*

Technology has changed filmmaking but filmmaking hasn't not changed.
When director Gareth Edwards made The Creator chose the Sony FX3 Cinema Camera, his choice to use a unconventional camera fora big Hollywood movie was a attempt to make movies in a better more effective way. Indie filmmaking can now also use affordable gear to change the way films are made and maybe more big Hollywood Studio movies can now too.

[robvision]

Both “Captain America” and “Black Swan” were partly filmed with a Canon 5D Mark II in 1080p.. most people today walking around with 4K cameras still cannot create images better than how the Canon 5D II was used for those films. Moral of the story, masterful technique is more effective than merely higher specs.

[theranchhand]

Some very good points. I have made close to a dozen sub million dollar films and when I work on the almost no budget (under 100k) films you learn that your limitation can be your best friend. Walking with my 3 person or so camera and lighting crew from one side of a location to the other takes 5 minutes. But, even on a half million dollar budget where the producer (in two cases I dealt with this) wants to hire an “impressive” looking 4:03 crew, that same walk across the location took an hour. Cables, people, gear, etc. you shoot only 2/3rds of the shots you want. And you are doing it with more money! I have been dealing with this for over a decade, trying as a director to explain less is more sometimes but the union requirements that can kick in turn films into big slugging machines and you are better served often by minimizing to your essentials if you know what you are doing. And that comes from practice. So grab your DSLR and your friends and go try something. Bet you get more coverage in your neighborhood in a day than any of the big studios do

[IdeaStudioBKK]

I think you are bang on. I had a small (very small) role in The Creator and was blown away by how small and nimble the crew was and how hands on Gareth was.

I’ve been on much lower budget films with much larger crews.

as a one man band doc filmmaker i took so much away from my short time on set having the chance to see that amazing crew in action.

[thevideoplug]

Well, when you have a budget of $80M for set dressing, location, vfx, marketing, story, and cast... the camera used to shoot it becomes a less important matter.

[kane]

Short & Sweet - great vid and insights - love how you get so much info across in your vids under 10mins - keep it up! Subbed.

[mikelreborn]

I'm making a music video with a high end phone..lol they have come a long way...has a great cinema mode.

[serbza]

After watching your videos, I can say I'm your thousandth subscriber!

[JaymesMedia]

I like the video. I think the creator just prove what others have said in your comment section. Filmmakers been using prosumer tools for years. The possession of Hannah Rose was shot on a Sony A7S2 at 8bit and still came out looking good except for a few scenes.

I think we’re focusing so much on the tools and not our skill set or getting better with our skill set.

[MockeryManor]

That’s a dope name for a YouTube channel. You’re spot on….most of these cameras can get very close to the quality of Arri cameras. I’m into my Sigma FP. The form factor, image, and color science is phenomenal. My intent is to master that camera, regardless of new camera releases.

[VIPAH]

It's not just the FX3 making headlines from the 81 million dollar feature, the DJI Ronin 4D was a B Cam for "Civil War". Mixed with Komodo Drone shots.
Canon will get into the mix at some stage with the roll out of C80 and C400, anything is possible.

[freaker]

it's not just the technology it's how the world have evolve and the type of people watching movies. In the old days, people love going to the movies and watch latest blockbusters but now there's social media like tik tok, Instagram, youtube etc. Hollywood won't change because they're too big and don't want to lose money. It's a money driven industry. Now, even with little or no budgets, you can make interesting short cinematic videos that people would watch. I myself like watching them more then watching Netflix. It's everyone for himself now and won't be long big movie companies have to compete with them.

[ivanmeza]

Uhhh, Hollywood doesn’t not fear the FX3, what a ridiculous statement. Cool video tho.

[nativestrong]

Many BBC drama shows like Luther started using the original 2.5K Black Magic camera for quick settup shots for the same reason.

[yasunakaikumi]

ngl Ian Hubert is one of those people I admire on doing VFX and also be a film maker at the same time, just using Blender 3D now a days to make set extension and simple VFX is so much easy to access compare to where I started doing it back in 2008, I think the future of filmmakers will pretty much a bunch of small team making their own small series of movies (similar to making comics/manga)

[skyko]

Making films is so NOT about what camera you use. It is about just about everything BUT THAT. When you get out to actually make a film using things other than what you have laying around your house and your friends, you will find that out for yourself. Superb story, great actors that know what they are doing, exceptional locations, food, wardrobe, props, grip, lighting, the list goes on & on. And you can't do ANY of it without money. Not saying this to discourage, just be prepped for it while you are obsessing about the "camera".

[LuminProductions]

Truth be told only some shots were a FX3, a majority were FX9 - double check you'll see :)

I personally don't think saying the FX3 was needed to create this film is even responsible, it leads on future filmmakers with nonsense. Any camera could have shot The Creator - it was clearly for publicity, not because it was the best tool - the right lighting and lenses, any camera could have done the same job. I've personally tested several cameras at half the ISO as the FX3 and boosted the exposure with cleaner more pleasing results - it all comes down to how you understand exposure, and how digital sensors work.

Future filmmakers, you don't need any specific brand of camera to shoot anything, it is and always will be about what you need to tell the story the way you need to, the FX3 is not some god send monster camera, it took expensive lenses and lighting to even pull the quality out of that camera, and not to mention, The Creator is far from a visual masterpiece, loaded with tons of artificial noise to hide the issues the camera posed for the editing team, look closer next watch, and on a much bigger screen you'll see what I'm talking about.

[TheGoddon]

They sure don’t fear utterly tasteless writing.

[unclejezza]

This is a fantastic and intuative insight. Well done brother 👍

[Sgyozo]

Well, actually te FX3 is kinda cheating for low light, but if you look closer, a lot of detail and sharpness is lost, even with the FX9. Compare them to a Venice (2) or an Alexa 35 and you'll see. Maybe not so obvious on the devices most people watch the movies on, but on a decent HDR screen or in the cinemas there is. Sure, some can be fixed in post, or most likely cover up, but these consumer/prosumer cameras are not a real threat. Especially when it's less than one percent of the whole budget.

[retroelectrical]

The FX3 isn't going to take over, nor threaten Hollywood. There's a reason why it takes 30 min. to hours to light and setup a shot or scene for Hollywood productions. That's kinda what the audience is paying for. For "The Creator" nobody will ever want to actually watch the film again after the initial viewing, so the quality of the cinematography doesn't really matter.
Again, there's a huge difference between pointing a camera in a general direction with some LED lights and staging proper cinematography.