Blackmagic Forum

ProRes RAW Redux

Classic. I get this sort of confusion from people a bit too.

Very good info here! Though, what confuses me - why is B&H answering questions and BMD doesn't simply put infos on ther Specs site like ISO range, weight etc.?

Janis Lionel wrote:Very good info here! Though, what confuses me - why is B&H answering questions and BMD doesn't simply put infos on ther Specs site like ISO range, weight etc.?

You mean this? https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/produc ... nemacamera

michaeldhead wrote:

Janis Lionel wrote:Very good info here! Though, what confuses me - why is B&H answering questions and BMD doesn't simply put infos on ther Specs site like ISO range, weight etc.?

You mean this? https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/produc ... nemacamera

of course i visited that page but for instance; it doesn't state the ISO values as the BH tech did...it only says "up to 25'000" iso. Believing the infos of the BH tech; its 400 and 3200 base iso. so why not put the info online? Maybe they're scared because they promised to much before...global shutter ;P

Janis Lionel wrote:

michaeldhead wrote:

Janis Lionel wrote:Very good info here! Though, what confuses me - why is B&H answering questions and BMD doesn't simply put infos on ther Specs site like ISO range, weight etc.?

You mean this? https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/produc ... nemacamera

of course i visited that page but for instance; it doesn't state the ISO values as the BH tech did...it only says "up to 25'000" iso. Believing the infos of the BH tech; its 400 and 3200 base iso. so why not put the info online? Maybe they're scared because they promised to much before...global shutter ;P

If you look at their other cameras, they never state the native ISO for any of their cameras. Sony doesn't list it on their site either. Grant talked about it at NAB 2018. Check out that video.

Can't copy from SD or CFast to SSD

Does not support USB-C to Ethernet

Can the new pocket use slower FRAME RATES, 1-24fps?

Has this been answered yet?

At this point in time, slower than 24fps is not available on BM cameras, even though it has been requested for some time.
Cheers

Joe Giambrone wrote:Can the new pocket use slower FRAME RATES, 1-24fps?

Has this been answered yet?

If you mean something like shooting 16 or 18 frames per second (for example) no but you can sort play with the time lapse interval to shot one frame and at a 2 frame interval (etc) for off speed effect.

According to "Indie Shooter" (URL's not allowed), the Ursa firmware 4.0 can do it.

Where is the documentation on "Off-Speed Frame Rate?"

And more importantly: is the new Pocket 4K going to have it?

" You can toggle “Off Speed Frame Rate” to slide between every single number between 12 and 60 to get the exact frame rate you want. Many will be quick to say this is useless, while many others will recognize the uncapping of creativity this unleashes, especially for those who love to shoot with higher or lower than normal frame rates."

Joe Giambrone wrote:Where is the documentation on "Off-Speed Frame Rate?"

This is documented in page 66 / 67 of the URSA Mini Manual.

Joe Giambrone wrote:And more importantly: is the new Pocket 4K going to have it?

Yes, this will also be available in the Pocket Cinema Camera 4K. As to high low the off speed frame rate can go, this is yet to be confirmed.

Yes, this will also be available in the Pocket Cinema Camera 4K. As to high low the off speed frame rate can go, this is yet to be confirmed.

This is very good news (and a sale). We need all the functionality we can get!

Suggestion for cDNG in MXF wrapper

Does B&H not queue questions from mobile apps? I asked a couple over the weekend regarding NVMe support over USB-C and wether plugging the BMPCC 4K to a computer would recognize cards as attached drives. Neither has made it to the viewable list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Andres Guzman wrote:Does B&H not queue questions from mobile apps? I asked a couple over the weekend regarding NVMe support over USB-C and wether plugging the BMPCC 4K to a computer would recognize cards as attached drives. Neither has made it to the viewable list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If the NVMe memory in a USB-C enclosure, it will get recognised but your bottleneck is still the USB-C interface.

No, plugging in the camera to a computer will not allow the media in the camera to be accessed.

Kristian Lam wrote:
If the NVMe memory in a USB-C enclosure, it will get recognised but your bottleneck is still the USB-C interface.

Thanks Kristian; however, my assessment is a little different. I see USB-C as the pipe but not what flows through it. Sure, if the BMPCC 4K comes out with USB 3.1 Gen 1 specs (5 Gbps theoretical), I totally see that being a bottleneck. But — if it comes out swinging with 3.1 Gen 2 or later... we are looking at ~10 Gbps speeds. Whereas SATA interface caps out at 6 Gbps, NVMe is based on PCIe protocols (e.g. 18 Gbps write speeds).

My point? I envision an M.2 SSD USB-C enclosure, capable of more than 6 Gbps so... if we want to push 4K60 DCI Uncompressed RAW out of the Pocket to small/inexpensive SSDs (smaller and cheaper than Samsung T5s), then why not? CFast 2 sure can’t hang at those speeds.

I can’t wait for September 3rd!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Info about USB-C port closer to release.

More info about 12V connector coming closer to release

Andres Guzman wrote:Thanks Kristian; however, my assessment is a little different. I see USB-C as the pipe but not what flows through it. Sure, if the BMPCC 4K comes out with USB 3.1 Gen 1 specs (5 Gbps theoretical), I totally see that being a bottleneck.

It will be USB 3.1 Gen 1 (5 Gbps).

How come not the still slow 10Gb/s version?

TB just walks it. Why didn't the USB forum just role USB efforts into TB. That standard is still stick with USB compromises.

USB 3.1 Gen 1 is certainly a step in the right direction, but I’d expect the company that pioneered 12G SDI to have at least moved to recording 10 Gbps in a DCI 4K camera. Time to sharpen the pencil? Well apparently not as that ship has sailed. Gen 1 will handle raw up to 30 fps which will consume likely about 300 MB/s in real life and possibly more. Gen 1 should handle raw 3:1 at 50/60 fps. Gen 2 would have managed raw up to the camera’s maximum 60 fps for DCI 4K. Perhaps BMD felt so few people are shooting raw (now that raw 3:1 is so good) that it wasn’t so important to offer Gen 2. The recording media continues to achieve new performance highs, but the camera’s USB pipe may be a limiting factor in time.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rick.
You articulated it so much better than me! If USB 3.1 Gen 1 ships, external speeds would not be that much different than internal recording. Certainly a missed opportunity.

Wayne Steven wrote:TB just walks it. Why didn't the USB forum just role USB efforts into TB. That standard is still stick with USB compromises.

USB standards require committee approval, and hence will always be the least common denominator.

Thunderbolt is an Intel technology, so it's limited only by Intel, and probably hobbled by association with Apple, even though all that Apple really contributed is branding... without which it would probably instead have some bizarre numerical name like highly unmemorable IEEE 1394.

Rakesh Malik wrote:Thunderbolt is an Intel technology, so it's limited only by Intel, and probably hobbled by association with Apple, even though all that Apple really contributed is branding... without which it would probably instead have some bizarre numerical name like highly unmemorable IEEE 1394.

Well, Intel introduced it originally as 'Light Peak' in 2009 at the Intel Developer Forum, because it was conceived as an optically technology. And Apple contributed a bit: "Apple contributed to the development by including the mini DisplayPort standard and an "electrical solution" that changed the original optical cables to copper to provide power."
https://appleinsider.com/articles/11/05 ... e_to_intel

IEEE 1394, off the top of my head, FireWire. Another exciting branding, compared to 1394. Same goes for h.265 with its really exciting brand HEVC. Boy that’s so exciting I can hardly contain myself. Names like FireWire, Light Peak, Thunderbolt are kinda silly but they are memorable. Actually very useful when trying to remember Intel’s chip sets and architecture. Sky Lake, Cannon Lake, etc.

Still have FireWire on some external drives, but no functional computer to drive it so those are reduced to backup and special purposes via lowly USB 2.

Oops, gotta make this post relevant to the thread. I guess I’m suggesting kinda silly but memorable names have a place in BMD’s marketing of cameras. Pocket? Hardly inspirational but better than BMPCC.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rick, you can get a Thunderbolt to FireWire adapter cable, and use them that way.
Cheers

For those asking BMPCC 4K questions to the BMD Expert: the iOS B&H app does not send in the question. At least for me, only asking via a browser works.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rick.lang wrote:Names like FireWire, Light Peak, Thunderbolt are kinda silly but they are memorable. Actually very useful when trying to remember Intel’s chip sets and architecture. Sky Lake, Cannon Lake, etc.

Yep, even Sony is using names like Venice these days instead of PMW-300K1 or the like…

As Robert said.

The real reason is probably a part/parts only support upto those USB speeds and HDMI spec. It could be the FPGA. They could have instead included a better part. Maybe we will see a revision.

Now, the issue. Is to record and monitor externally. TB or best USB, would be a much better option to do it cheaply.

Second issue. People claim (for whatever reason) this is a certain 4kp100 capable sensor. Recording externally could have helped it reach that wiyhit over taxing the camera era. This is also the same datarate as 8kp25 (or 24+). Useful for 4x slow motion on set.

So, my question for BM is, are you going do these things in the next revion of the camera (next year a pocket 4k(b) or pocket 8k even )?

There is a way to do hundreds of gb/s interface too (pm).

Four microphones or two?
Hmm but they keep repeating four elsewhere. Perhaps a more detailed clarification is in order.
Granted two might be noise cancelling but that's speculative.

No Interlaced.

Photo functionality not the same as DSLR

Craig Seeman wrote:Four microphones or two?
Hmm but they keep repeating four elsewhere. Perhaps a more detailed clarification is in order.
Granted two might be noise cancelling but that's speculative.

Screen Shot 2018-05-29 at 8.41.14 AM.png

No inbuilt surround to hear my fingers running on the case? Seriously, the thought of four was rather good.

Can the camera do wireless focus pulling through Bluetooth? The Ronin has a thumb wheel focus control, but how and when it will work is unexplained.

Joe Giambrone wrote:Can the camera do wireless focus pulling through Bluetooth? The Ronin has a thumb wheel focus control, but how and when it will work is unexplained.

Theoretically you should have that control of the camera over the Bluetooth, practically depends on the lens you use.

"Theoretically you should have that control of the camera over the Bluetooth, practically depends on the lens you use."

Yeah, that's what the QUESTION is.

I would not count on how any given feature is going to work, until the camera is released in its finished form.
Cheers

Has this camera got a SDK? This is the sort of camera that screams out for an SDK. There likely is so much you could tweak, even an 4kp120 codec, if it is that sensor people suggest that has that mode. But programming a heap of Bluetooth features is definite.

So, a limited virtualised (sandboxed) virtual SDK to control external features, even put a wifi adaptor on the USB. JavaScript could be used producing binaries to upload, or web assembly.

Thanks


Wayne.

IR Filtering

How to Balance on Gimbal

No Bluetooth video monitoring

iPad Camera Control App will work
Currently no focus control though.

Lens functionality on screen

Time Code and Audio

Image Noise at High ISO

Craig Seeman wrote:How to Balance on Gimbal

Screen Shot 2018-06-27 at 8.58.13 AM.png

Yes, but the tripod mounting hole is on the optical center of the camera lens mount, which is more important for tripod work. This might also end up being the weight balance point, side to side, as the handle is the bit off center.
Cheers

Craig Seeman wrote:Won't have anamorphic mode

Screen Shot 2018-04-18 at 10.19.16 PM.png

I'm a bit disappointed here, was hoping to have the same desqueeze mode as the ursa mini :/