Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

The place for questions about shooting with Blackmagic Cameras.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

Savannah Miller

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:02 pm

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 5:05 am

When you watch the video, he talks about all the "mounts" he is building for the lenses. You can't just build EF mount micro 4/3 lenses. It's not so easy to build all the different mounts like he thinks it is. On top of that, all the lenses look different. Some have a yellow ring, some have focus gears, some do not. These lenses have IDENTICAL spec to the ones sold on Aliexpress and even look identical. The bokeh looks similar to the lenses as well, leading me to believe the are the same with a 10x markup on the price.

He uses the words "designed in France" because it's not a legally binding statement. His company is registered as an optical materials reseller, not a manufacturer. I'm guessing it's a scam. A good example is John Brawley is a cinematographer and does not directly manufacture cameras or sit in the factory when they're being made, but he works with Blackmagic enough to have an understanding about how the cameras work. If you own a LENS company, if you hired an engineer to make your lenses, he would have at least told you it's not possible to adapt a micro4/3 lens to an EF mount camera. Conveniently, however, the same cheap chinese lenses are also made for other mounts, so likely he's just buying existing lenses.

Even if you're not a lens engineer or clueless about lenses, it's impossible to own a lens company and not learn how lenses work because you have to hire people to design them, and through that process you're naturally going to learn something whether you like it or not.
Offline
User avatar

Kim Janson

  • Posts: 750
  • Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2015 6:54 pm
  • Location: Finland

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 5:34 am

"RED simplifies cinema camera lineup, dramatically drops prices"

DSMC2 Helium is now less than half the price, $24,500

One more reason for BMD not to make 8k camera at this time.

Though I am pretty sure this is thanks to BMD offering and other competition, the low cost cameras are just geting good enough for many uses. I wonder though why RED is dropping the prices of 8k cameras, there is not much competition there, so it must be due lack of demand.
LeViteZer Smooths the movement, www.levitezer.com
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 10:54 am

Surely it's lack of demand as there are not many 8K cameras out there.
Looks like people prefer to shoot on Alexa, even if it has no 8K sensor + you have waaay cheaper options if there is no huge demand for high-end quality. Now RED became sort of Canon :)
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 11:40 am

Lol! They have done this before. You can't just charge what you like, it opens up the way for competition to under price you like Red did to others, and BM did. So, when they paid down their investment (the official line) they did this sort of thing before. Anybody thinking and setting up costing to offer cameras anywhere near the new price is strategically devastated. It takes a bit to line up costings, as you have to setup a network and contracts. But the niave just see money, easy money, and try to drop in there. If you are not near spending and delivering your investors can get spooked and may leave. You then might have another 2 years delay. Now, it happens so regularly there maybe not enough time for people to get confident to get investors to attempt it. Let's say it takes 2-3 years for people to feel this way. Even if you aimed at 70% of the expected price, Red can just drop the price over you. Existing competitors it doesn't matter much, and they have stuff under that.

So, like the previous time, expect new cameras in future. We are just seeing new cameras under but they're are patents for professional multipoint 3D larger cameras (the tablet sized patients). I don't know if we will see the tip end be $60k, but if not the 8k's may reflect the price of the cheaper cameras or more expensive ones. So, 10k+ is possible and may still present similar performance to up to 16.5 stops like the dragon/helium. These would be suitable for 8k delivery.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 11:59 am

Point is- RED 8K sensor is not the key driver when people choose camera. 8K is meaningless here atm. (even if RED sensor is quite good) as it's simply not much needed.
Repeating someone's comment on dpreview:
"Arri killed at Sundance this year. Canon was second and Red nowhere"

I think you have hard time to understand that it's not "K" which makes great camera. Arri proved it, so BM instead of chasing Ks as you suggest should take their time and make GREAT (well designed/polished) 4K camera at decent price and then they can make better money on it than on pointless "some" 8K one.

RED's need for Ks actually killed them, not gave advantage or earn huge money.
Sony is probably in the best position to make 8K camera, yet after F65 "fiasco" they realised this is not what market needs and made Venice instead, which seems to be good product.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 12:26 pm

Savannah Miller wrote:When you watch the video, he talks about all the "mounts" he is building for the lenses. You can't just build EF mount micro 4/3 lenses. It's not so easy to build all the different mounts like he thinks it is. On top of that, all the lenses look different. Some have a yellow ring, some have focus gears, some do not. These lenses have IDENTICAL spec to the ones sold on Aliexpress and even look identical. The bokeh looks similar to the lenses as well, leading me to believe the are the same with a 10x markup on the price.

He uses the words "designed in France" because it's not a legally binding statement. His company is registered as an optical materials reseller, not a manufacturer. I'm guessing it's a scam. A good example is John Brawley is a cinematographer and does not directly manufacture cameras or sit in the factory when they're being made, but he works with Blackmagic enough to have an understanding about how the cameras work. If you own a LENS company, if you hired an engineer to make your lenses, he would have at least told you it's not possible to adapt a micro4/3 lens to an EF mount camera. Conveniently, however, the same cheap chinese lenses are also made for other mounts, so likely he's just buying existing lenses.

Even if you're not a lens engineer or clueless about lenses, it's impossible to own a lens company and not learn how lenses work because you have to hire people to design them, and through that process you're naturally going to learn something whether you like it or not.


I don't know what you on going on about? That's not the guy from Cinemartin and not the same company.

Isn't he talking about doing seperate lens with different mounts? This sort of X times the amount of lenses to offer (and negotiate licenses) would explain the expression. When you offer a lens for a different mount, you adjust the optics as needed. Speed boosters are one example using seperate mounts.

What is the problem with having different lenses? He says there are three different optic specs, but there could be other options like you mention? You said they are identical to the ones on AliExpress? So, they have yellow rings and gears as well?

If the AliExpress ones are identical, wouldn't the bokeh be identical? Just yesterday I saw some new high-end name brand ones that look similar. I didn't compare, but maybe near identical look. This is how it works in China, they copy each other even, and sell the same thing with alterations. TV's have been done like this for decades. Multiple brands just order an OEM design done at a plant that probably does special ones for name brands. This is common, called network manufacturing as well, which Nintendo always did. I'm actually thinking of using some of those EF ones with similar spec to famous ones. As long as the quality drop is not much, I'm happy with it and can figure out something really good to maximise quality.

I would imagine the French (of all people) would be particularly interested in "Designed in France" being legally binding. They're a bit particular. But this is common. Stuff designed in Italy manufactured in China, for Chinese or other nationalities. France is just another country you can get a good 'local' talented engineer to work closely with. You can get the lens made in Europe or India, and assembled in barrels from China if you want, or in China. (Personally, I prefer to keep money making components local).

But it's true you can get items on AliExpress at Chinese wholesale like prices and mark up and sell locally. 4x-10x the price is reasonable, as there are a lot of expenses and mark up for retail stores as well as carrying ALL the warranty handling. They tend to buy on the basis of X percentage will be defective and simply replacing it and chucking the old one. This is the way it used to be done. If you have got somebody you can trust to deal with.

I guess the guys business might have been related. So, optics materials reseller is ok. Supplying companies and optical engineers you could talk with. He seems to be only just moving into lens manufacturing and maybe even product branding.

There are companies with people running them that know little technology. It's business, they tend to be run by business people. It's like journalism. The most important thing is to be a journalist rather than a technical person. I know, I've enquired. If you don't have journalism under your belt, they weren't that interested before. But you haven't shown anything that shows he doesn't know anything. I guess he is still learning as well.

Wouldn't you agree, it's a matter of seeing how something can be true as well as false?
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 12:48 pm

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Point is- RED 8K sensor is not the key driver when people choose camera. 8K is meaningless here atm. (even if RED sensor is quite good) as it's simply not much needed.
Repeating someone's comment on dpreview:
"Arri killed at Sundance this year. Canon was second and Red nowhere"

I think you have hard time to understand that it's not "K" which makes great camera. Arri proved it, so BM instead of chasing Ks as you suggest should take their time and make GREAT (well designed/polished) 4K camera at decent price and then they can make better money on it than on pointless "some" 8K one.

RED's need for Ks actually killed them, not gave advantage or earn huge money.
Sony is probably in the best position to make 8K camera, yet after F65 "fiasco" they realised this is not what market needs and made Venice instead, which seems to be good product.


It's about.the game they are playing, to get people to buy more cameras they are playing 8k. If they don't get people to.buy, they will go broke. This is what companies do.

Well, I have seen it said the 8k market starts this year. So, contracts for 8k will already be out.tjets, and there will be more. But it's the same as 4.xk, 5.xk and 6.xk, which are supposed to deliver better 4k. I much prefer 8k+ for 4k. But to me 8k itself has some benefit past stills, but not much.

Now, Arri at Sundance, doesn't mean much about 8k image quality. You know the past Arri reliability compared to certain other cameras. I don't think these days the image you 'can' get, is the issue it used to be compared to before. But things linger, and having heaps of modules isn't my thing either. Modules should be less according to functionality. I would suggest it maybe a lot more than the image. Now BM is supposed to have Arri like image quality, yet where was it at Sundance?

With 4k, Red might not exist these days. It is what gave them market focus. However, I did not like the image quality before dragon. But now they have both the image quality you can grade to Arri style, or better, and the resolution, and the TV's are moving to THX recommendations for viewing and that Arri stuff is going to need upscaling. We might not see it, but younger people can. It's going start to look soft/chunky. It's not about the past, it's about the limits we are moving to. To me 4k is good enough, close enough, it's just hard enough to pickup as to be acceptable to 8k. But 8k is a real limit, gold standard. So, there is some use on high end/quality production.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 1:05 pm

Frankly, I would have aimed Red at the price BM does, but do a lot more functionality inbuilt, with no less reliability. Real sellable pro elements. For high end models you could make it very reliable and usable. For cheap it could have less absolute reliablity and be more dynamic, and more run around.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 1:48 pm

Wayne Steven wrote:Well, I have seen it said the 8k market starts this year. So, contracts for 8k will already be out.tjets, and there will be more. But it's the same as 4.xk, 5.xk and 6.xk, which are supposed to deliver better 4k. I much prefer 8k+ for 4k. But to me 8k itself has some benefit past stills, but not much.


Last time:
http://yedlin.net/ResDemo/#
part2, watch from 20min in.

6K RED WEAPON provides in reality not much more resolution than Alexa 2.8K. Then Alexa 65 blows it by miles. I would not be surprised if RED's latest 8K sensor won't outperform Alexa 65 in terms of real resolution.
Those quoted Ks are about useless in reality. This is not CGI footage where we can create ideal 2K, 4K or 8K image and have real meaning of those Ks.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 2:35 pm

Wayne Steven wrote:It's about.the game they are playing, to get people to buy more cameras they are playing 8k. If they don't get people to.buy, they will go broke. This is what companies do.


Well- all companies play games, but looking at last few years looks like Arri ones were the most successful and it had nothing to do with chasing Ks.
Offline
User avatar

Steve Holmlund

  • Posts: 376
  • Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:30 pm
  • Location: Montara, California

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 7:20 pm

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:
Wayne Steven wrote:Well, I have seen it said the 8k market starts this year. So, contracts for 8k will already be out.tjets, and there will be more. But it's the same as 4.xk, 5.xk and 6.xk, which are supposed to deliver better 4k. I much prefer 8k+ for 4k. But to me 8k itself has some benefit past stills, but not much.


Last time:
http://yedlin.net/ResDemo/#
part2, watch from 20min in.



Thank you! I had seen part 1 but not part 2. Excellent exposition of the issue. I'm not quite sure why everyone is so eager for more pixels to copy, archive and process if they don't make a practical difference in the final image quality for the typical viewer. This is why I had hoped BMD could have bucked the "cultural conditioning" and done a 2.5K successor to the BMPCC in its near-original form-factor, focusing on usability enhancements. As others have noted, the BMPCC4K seems to be more of a successor to the original BMCC than the Pocket.
Steve Holmlund
Hobbyist
BMPCC, vintage Rokkor lenses, Olympus 12-40, Panasonic 100-300 II
i7 8700k / GTX 1080
Online

Denny Smith

  • Posts: 10149
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:19 pm
  • Location: USA, Northern Calif.

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 7:36 pm

I think it is thr next Camera successor for both Steve, combining bits from each and correcting the errors or shortcomings of thr esrly Cameras. I felt the Pocket was a little too small, scree hard to see (fixed by the BMPCC4K) and the BMCC was a little large for the size of its sensor, and while it had excellent IQ, it had a lot of RS issues due to its slow readout time. Again, this is solved with the new 4K Camera, so we can call it a compromise camera between the two.

The Mincro Cinema camera is still there for a small form factor HD camera, which again solved the shortcomings of the original Pocket, with better controlled RS and a faster sensor resdout time, upgraded video processing and you can choose your monitor to suit.

The new Pocket Camera 4K looks very promising, and will be the successor for my AF100a which I kept for interview projectes or event coverage where I needed a ready to use recording with simple edits, no color grading in post. Panasonic csme upmwith the EVA1 as it’s AF100 sort of replacement, but abounded MFT format and Mount, and it cost $8K. The new Pocket 4K keeps the MFT Mount, so my MFT lens collection is kept in service.

While I can see a need for 8K for specialized situations, I do not see a general market for it, until projection and home monitors are 4K, where the added resolution is needed to meet the higher resolution projection requirements. Look how long SD was the normal standard, 4K is going to be this next long term plateau, and will probably be “king” for a long term.
Cheers
Denny Smith
SHA Productions
Offline
User avatar

Steve Holmlund

  • Posts: 376
  • Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:30 pm
  • Location: Montara, California

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 8:17 pm

One very interesting point in Yedlin, part 2, is that if bandwidth stays fixed (e.g. your internet connection speed), and you increase the resolution of the source material, then compression needs to increase for distribution, which can then decrease perceived resolution by generating more banding and compression artifacts.
Steve Holmlund
Hobbyist
BMPCC, vintage Rokkor lenses, Olympus 12-40, Panasonic 100-300 II
i7 8700k / GTX 1080
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostFri May 25, 2018 10:04 pm

Compression is a big enemy of details/grain/noise which are key elements which affect perceived resolution.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 12:37 am

But best available compression easily does 8k on best broadband. If Red would have only let it roam free. They are selling 8k this year, and expect 120 inch+ next year. It does scientifically make a real difference even if dense or blind people can't see it. I much rather trust the eyes of people I know that can see full vision, as to what can be seen. Even at 70 inch 7 feet it is reported to be significant difference.

Now, putting aside reality of vision, it still benefits 4k quality and other uses such as stills/advertising, and post workflow reframing. History will prove it in the future. Maybe there will be a celebration where we role out all your statements, along with the guy years ago that said DVD resolution was all you needed for cinema (I think that guy might have been indicating he couldn't see the difference between DVD and FHD). :)
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 12:43 am

Aiming to get 3-4 meter wide 8k screen myself. I can stick the kids viewing windows on different parts of it with head phones, while I watch a 4k window until I chick them off and go the full 8k for various things. If f you guys come over we can view a 55 inch 2k window on it and put flowers or paintings etc on the rest of it, or if you really enjoy me, let the kids play pong on it.
:)
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 10:19 am

120inch, 8K projector.....are you millionaire with 120m2 room for kids?
For 'normal' people 50inch TV is big and all what they need and most importantly have space and can afford.
Besides, todays TV is total crap.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 11:42 am

What is normal? The normal range will move to include 120 inchs. You only need a 3x3 meter room for that. The price, less than $10k, even less than $5k, and eventually less than $1k. Many good TV's are better than my local cinema.

Let's look at the technologies. Modular microled is out with 146inch 4k, and a long way to go. POLED technology is out. Eventually a 120 inch screen can be printed and sold rolled up. Another step down in price from the conventional microled. We maybe talking about near rec2020 coverage in a roll up using quantum dot technology. But I don't know what the long life prospects of doing that with hdr.

This stuff is real, and edging closer.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 11:51 am

Well, turns out my personality type is intj.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2451
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 2:35 pm

Kim Janson wrote:Though I am pretty sure this is thanks to BMD offering and other competition, the low cost cameras are just geting good enough for many uses. I wonder though why RED is dropping the prices of 8k cameras, there is not much competition there, so it must be due lack of demand.


Based on how many cameras Red is selling and shipping, there is plenty of demand. This is a result of cutting down on camera models; now Red is making just one camera body and offering it with various sensors.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore + Radeon VII + Razer Core
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2451
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 2:43 pm

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:6K RED WEAPON provides in reality not much more resolution than Alexa 2.8K.


That's not even remotely accurate. The fact that it DOES offer significantly more resolution is what makes the Dragons so popular with VFX folks. It's also why there are quite a few shows with Alexas as A cameras that use Dragons to shoot the scenes that are going to be VFX heavy.

I would not be surprised if RED's latest 8K sensor won't outperform Alexa 65 in terms of real resolution.


It does, in reality. Anyone claiming otherwise is most likely just suffering from pointless Red envy.

Of course, if the same people who are trying to pretend that Red's resolution claims aren't valid actually paid attention to the rest of the conversation, they'd realize that it's just evidence that having more resolution isn't enough. The Alexa's continued dominance has nothing to do with having more or less resolution than any other camera system, it's due to the combination of color rendition (i.e. image processing) and the fact that Alexas are basically production-ready out of the box (i.e. no rigging).

Hence Red's IPP2 push... that was a major R&D investment whose only goal was to improve Red's color rendition out of the box.

Either way, it's still evidence that while 8K is nice, it's still not necessary, and definitely overkill for most.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore + Radeon VII + Razer Core
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R
Offline

Scott Pultz

  • Posts: 556
  • Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:36 am
  • Location: Seattle

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 5:44 pm

I'd like a 6k or 8k camera simply due to the fact that BM doesn't include an OLPF option. Higher resolution in that case would help.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 6:22 pm

Rakesh Malik wrote:That's not even remotely accurate. The fact that it DOES offer significantly more resolution is what makes the Dragons so popular with VFX folks. It's also why there are quite a few shows with Alexas as A cameras that use Dragons to shoot the scenes that are going to be VFX heavy.


I am purely based on quoted video where 2 (different) shots proved otherwise. Also noise looks very bad on RED. I have nothing against RED, but I never liked look of first RED cameras. Shots were done by rather experienced people. They also show that Sony behaves quite differently.

If you know from real cases that Red Weapon provides way more resolution than that's fine. It definitely should, which is so visible on Alexa 65. It still doesn't change fact that pure Ks can be very misleading measure.
Offline

Steven Abrams

  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2015 12:43 am
  • Location: LA La Land

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSat May 26, 2018 10:07 pm

Rakesh Malik wrote:
Andrew Kolakowski wrote:6K RED WEAPON provides in reality not much more resolution than Alexa 2.8K.


That's not even remotely accurate.

Reds OLPF and image processing result in the resolved detail being very low compared to the amount of pixels they record. The 6K weapon really does only resolve around 3K of actual detail. Yes VFX may take more pixels, but they don't hold more detail in them. You can verify yourself easily by testing accurately with a resolution chart. The images are shockingly soft for the resolution. Especially compared to a camera without an OLPF like a DSLR or blackmagic camera.
Offline

Savannah Miller

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:02 pm

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 2:50 am

I work in VFX and I don't understand this resolution talk. I can think of very little scenarios where I ever need more than a 1080p image as 90% of TV shows are shot with 1080p 4:4:4 Alexa prores. I have no problems with these kind of images.

I work in the VFX industry, and even for the occasional shot that requires extreme resizing, clients generally have no problems with the final output. Even occasionally shots will be 120fps 4:2:2 HQ and I don't have problems with those plates either, although it would be nice to have 4:4:4 for keying but it's not unusual.

If anything, the occasional 4K RED stuff I've done for Netflix didn't seem particularly sharp or detailed, but that could have been some other screw up along the line when plates were made.

THE FLASH is currently the most VFX heavy show on TV with almost 300 shots per episode and almost 1/3 of their budget is spent on VFX. That's disproportionately high to other shows, and they use the Alexa with no issues.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 4:00 am

There's a lot here. Don't trust experts, trust knowledge experts, then apply their knowledge with experience and then see what you come up with. If you miss-apply it, learn and apply again. Even in science this a problem, with experienced practitioner types cocking up experiments and cling it as evidence. It's working together you figure things out, and it can take a mungef if guess, years. Do you think I design a camera without getting hands on, and getting input from relevant people to hone it. You ask a practitioner, you are asking the limits of his or her's experience. But you take that to see if you can come up with something more or better. There are do many issues out there in designing things.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 4:35 am

So let's start, which OLPF for Red? There are several, and picking tnesrong one can me it look bad.

A mistake people make is running the compression ratio on Red's too high. It's not magic, it's not some super intelligent codec. Once you run it past lossless it gets further compression by lowering from differences between pixels, reducing quality.

6k is meant to reduce sharpness at 4k. If you process straight from lossless 6k to lossless 2k, with the best OLPF, that's a test. If you use multiple processes and resolution shifts on varying compression quality, it can stuff up.

A real test is to preserve and render 6k and compare it to the 2k. I still would expect some minor improvement render to 2k it fine right. Red became industry leaders at delivering resolution measuments for given resolutions. I would not expect Arri to do better, and unless they are doing what I have been talking about for maybe a decade, and picking out the peak in the data corresponding to the pixel, reducing the encroachment of neighbouring ohotodites under the pixel.

Rakesh is right. But it is also the reliability and durability of the Arri too. The K:s were Red's marketing bling. It allowed them to sell more.

Now, Arri uses a scheme where is derives the likely RGB components in a pixel for greater accuracy. I imagine this is patented so others can't use. It could even also have special colour filters involved. I've lost track of companies but if this is the fillfactory technology, they had a second pickup area between the sensor pads, to give 100% coverage, allowing a very sharp pixel indeed. But, if this interests pad pickup is filtered to another colour, it could be used to help isolate out the primaries under the single colour filtered pads. Could that even mean the pafs could be filtered a bit complementary even? Actually, I wonder if my mate is developing cameras over Arri. Last I heard he was shopping between various companies. Now, the thing is, that 8k into 4k with a moderate OLPF can get higher colour accuracy instead of the above. I wonder if I talked to the before mentioned person about some advanced techniques related to this colour seperation. But I've got confidence that Arri is good enough to come up with that themselves or to buy it in. Anybody know the patents on that? So, yes, 8k can help 4k be more Arii like once you grade it.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 4:54 am

Savannah. I think they might be referring to high end film production resolutions, where differences are more evident.

One of the other issues is, which I forgot to mention, is if you are spatially measuring detail, or by it's intensity. You would have to process it to preserve intensity. The OLPF, oversampling and higher compression reduces differences between pixels, therefore pixel contrast. The mind responds strongly to contrast or higher resolution. The resolution/detail may still be there at 4k+ just very soft/smudgy.

Umm, I know how Arri can get a much better sensor, and also use some of my techniques I have on hold as well. Somebody said that Cypress could make a better sensor, this is often because these sorts of situations are IP islands. You find a company with some fancy technology that gives you the lead but the advantage runs out unless you have inputs of new technology. They need to license in to get the technology. Unless they have heaps of customers with high volume, that can be expensive per unit. If you cross license, than your technology starts to leak out to others. I know a company that may have compatable cross license interests.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Savannah Miller

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:02 pm

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 7:31 am

Even in high-end film production, you would be surprised how much post is done in 2K resolution. Big marvel movies, star wars, etc. Very few people are actually doing 4K, so mostly 2.8K Alexa plates are more than enough resolution. Only types of VFX where resolution really makes a measurable difference would be paint/roto shots as sometimes the cleanplates you use get warped/distorted and they tend to get softer. Otherwise, it's really not a huge issue and especially in episodic TV and even Netflix shows, I've never been called out for a shot looking too soft.
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2451
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 7:07 pm

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:I am purely based on quoted video where 2 (different) shots proved otherwise. Also noise looks very bad on RED. I have nothing against RED, but I never liked look of first RED cameras. Shots were done by rather experienced people. They also show that Sony behaves quite differently.


I've pulled frames out of 8K footage that look better than what I can get with my Sony A7r... less noise, better color, and even more dynamic range... there are of course caveats with that, like motion blur at normal motion picture shutter speeds, but that's easy to address.

If you know from real cases that Red Weapon provides way more resolution than that's fine. It definitely should, which is so visible on Alexa 65.


My own personal experience is a small sampling of evidence that it does... and I don't even have a Weapon, "just" an Epic-W. (Which I'll probably upgrade to the newly unified DSMC2 body this summer.)

It still doesn't change fact that pure Ks can be very misleading measure.


You should be well aware of the fact that I agree with that... which unless you're either not reading what I've been writing or simply daft, indicates why people should stop complaining about BMD not having an 8K camera, and instead being happy about getting such an insane bargain in the UMP.

Personally, I think the logical next step after the new Pocket cinema camera is an OLPF plus updates to the color filter array. IMO those would probably do more for BMD's image quality than more resolution.

For me the main benefit in the extra resolution is for stills, and that's actually the main reason that I'll probably upgrade to DSMC2... to get 60fps motion capture in 8K, mainly for the higher shutter speed for nature photography in motion.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore + Radeon VII + Razer Core
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2451
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 7:09 pm

Steven Abrams wrote:Reds OLPF and image processing result in the resolved detail being very low compared to the amount of pixels they record. The 6K weapon really does only resolve around 3K of actual detail.


If that were the case, printed still frames pulled from video would look horrendous, but instead they look stellar, assuming that everything else is done well. (Lighting, color management, etc.)
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore + Radeon VII + Razer Core
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2451
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 7:16 pm

Savannah Miller wrote: Otherwise, it's really not a huge issue and especially in episodic TV and even Netflix shows, I've never been called out for a shot looking too soft.


Even Game of Thrones, as stunning and VFX heavy as that is, is shot on Alexas.

Which just reinforces the silliness of people complaining that BMD doesn't offer an 8K camera... it's really not necessary.

I understand why the really high end VFX guys care because some of them have explained and shown why, but it's clearly still only relevant for the ultra budget folks for the most part.

That said, I do like having a hybrid camera that I can make fine art quality prints with. For filmmaking the color and dynamic range are a lot more useful.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore + Radeon VII + Razer Core
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R
Offline

David Hessel

  • Posts: 274
  • Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 7:53 pm

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 7:18 pm

Savannah Miller wrote:Even in high-end film production, you would be surprised how much post is done in 2K resolution. Big marvel movies, star wars, etc. Very few people are actually doing 4K, so mostly 2.8K Alexa plates are more than enough resolution. Only types of VFX where resolution really makes a measurable difference would be paint/roto shots as sometimes the cleanplates you use get warped/distorted and they tend to get softer. Otherwise, it's really not a huge issue and especially in episodic TV and even Netflix shows, I've never been called out for a shot looking too soft.


And there is a very good reason for this. Moving to a 4K finish affects far more than you might suspect. Obviously render time, 4K at 4x the number of pixels as 2K will take 4x as long to render, that is major factor when some shots have renders that can take 24 hours for a single frame at 2K.

But beyond that there is everything else that goes into producing CG content, textures need to be larger and have finer detail creating more work for texture artists, ditto for matte paintings. Models need finer details and more polygons and again more time. Simulations for things like smoke, crashing bulidings, etc... will need finer details, more particles, fluid simulations with higher voxel counts. All of this leads to a huge increase in memory, storage and time for what is quite frankly very little payoff. As someone who works in CG I can tell you there is a massive difference in working in 2k compared to 4k, I can barely even fathom working in 8k.

BM does not need an 8K camera, I don't want an 8K camera it is pointless now with the world not even ready for 4K to deal with the massive overhead for 8k, 16x the data as 2K. What BM needs is a rock solid camera with no cross hatching, magenta corners, rainbow flare or fpn. We need better pixels not more of them.
Last edited by David Hessel on Sun May 27, 2018 7:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.
David Hessel
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 7:25 pm

Rakesh Malik wrote:I've pulled frames out of 8K footage that look better than what I can get with my Sony A7r... less noise, better color, and even more dynamic range... there are of course caveats with that, like motion blur at normal motion picture shutter speeds, but that's easy to address.


Yes, but until you shot same scene with both cameras with optimal condition for each camera you can't really tell as there are to many variables (if you start comparing different shots). This is why mentioned video for me tells something. Not some speculations based on quoted Ks, but real shots done by experienced people. It still may not tell whole story, but I can see that Alexa sensors have something "special" compared to all others. Alexa65 blows RED Weapon in these shots by miles and quoted Ks are about the same.

Yes, I've seen that you agree that Ks is not really good measure nor that BM desperately needs an 8K camera "tomorrow".
Last edited by Andrew Kolakowski on Sun May 27, 2018 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 7:31 pm

David Hessel wrote:
BM does not need an 8K camera, I don't want an 8K camera it is pointless now with the world not even ready for 4K to deal with the massive overhead for 8k, 16x the data as 2K. What BM needs is a rock solid camera with no cross hatching, magenta corners, rainbow flare or fpn. We need better pixels not more of them.


Yep, I fully agree. We have enough pixels atm. Make them as good as they can be, then there may be time to move to 8K.
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2451
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 9:00 pm

Andrew Kolakowski wrote:Yes, but until you shot same scene with both cameras with optimal condition for each camera you can't really tell as there are to many variables (if you start comparing different shots).


I've done comparison with stills.

This is why mentioned video for me tells something.


Obviously, it's telling you what you want to hear.

Not some speculations based on quoted Ks, but real shots done by experienced people. It still may not tell whole story, but I can see that Alexa sensors have something "special" compared to all others. Alexa65 blows RED Weapon in these shots by miles and quoted Ks are about the same.


Arri got the image processing right early on, and that's been serving its cameras VERY well. Most people who continue to use Alexas as their first choice are doing so both because they know the cameras and like the look. Technology wise, it's simply amazing that the Alexa has held up for so long (and still holds up) in spite of Sony and Red having better sensor technology.

The biggest irony in the whole thing is that the only reason that Arri bothered with a 4.5K LF (I still find that designation silly, having shot with real large format cameras for so many years) camera is that Netflix essentially mandated it. And because there aren't enough Alexa 65s available... and most of the people using the Alexa 65 were using them in 4K windowed modes. It just goes to show how little relevance the resolution has, IMO.

*I* don't even believe that I need 8K. I didn't really care all that much about it when I bought my Epic-W. What appealed to me about it was its color and dynamic range, and those are still IMO the camera's best assets as far as image quality goes... but while Red was still ironing out the image processing, the images had more noise and harsher highlight clipping than they do now. By quite a margin.

That also reflects how much Arri got right. All of Arri's experience in processing and scanning film helped a lot, and BMD has a similar edge in the form of the DaVinci team.

Yes, I've seen that you agree that Ks is not really good measure nor that BM desperately needs an 8K camera "tomorrow".
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore + Radeon VII + Razer Core
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R
Offline

Andrew Kolakowski

  • Posts: 4870
  • Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:20 am

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 9:47 pm

Rakesh Malik wrote:
Obviously, it's telling you what you want to hear.



No, because I don't know what I want to hear :)
I most likely will never use RED or Arri, so it doesn't really bother me which one is better or worse, etc.
I said what I saw.
Offline

Savannah Miller

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:02 pm

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostSun May 27, 2018 10:12 pm

For CG you don't really need higher voxel counts, higher resolution textures, or higher resolution matte paintings than what is already done. Most matte painting artists work in 4K already, and generally FX work is simmed at the highest acceptable resolution already. If you shade it correctly, you might not have necessarily 4K worth of detail, but it will look smooth and you won't see any blockiness. Plus you can cheat the shading of fluids in many ways or even upres them. Likewise, standard texturing and modeling of TV and Film assets should easily hold 4K worth of detail as well.

On top of that, rendering CG in 4K doesn't exactly take 4x longer anymore. A lot of TV houses are switching to GPU rendering such as redshift and sometimes even octane. Those take barely longer for significant resolution increases. That's at least what we use where I work and it's very good.

I think that the only real difference is a slight increase in render times and the network speed difference when compositing 4K plates vs 1080p. Other than that, it's not that much slower like you would assume. With the difference between 4K and 1080p production, there's very few times where someone is 1:1 inspecting different areas of the 4K image to make sure it has the full 4K worth of detail. If it looks better than 1080p, than that is often good enough.

My estimation from all the 4K vs 1080p shows we do is that it takes about 20-30% longer to do an easier shot (shots that take less than 1 hour), and then the real issues come from very long shots where it sometimes takes twice as long.
Compositing and tracking are probably the areas that seem to be most affected by the 4K switch.
Offline

Steven Abrams

  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2015 12:43 am
  • Location: LA La Land

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 1:24 am

Rakesh Malik wrote:
Steven Abrams wrote:Reds OLPF and image processing result in the resolved detail being very low compared to the amount of pixels they record. The 6K weapon really does only resolve around 3K of actual detail.

If that were the case, printed still frames pulled from video would look horrendous

There is no correlation to that point.
If I shoot a 6K pixel camera and it DOES resolve close to 6K of detail, but then use diffusion and slightly miss focus I may only end up with 4K of resolved detail but that doesn't make it horrendous. Maybe "soft" but it's NOT like 3K upscaled to 6K. And even upscaled it wouldn't look horrendous printed either.

Go shoot a controlled resolution chart and compare to other cameras without an OLPF and come back. I know people like to justify purchases but the chart won't lie. Your evidence seems anecdotal without actual controlled testing of this attribute.
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2451
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 1:38 am

Steven Abrams wrote:Go shoot a controlled resolution chart and compare to other cameras without an OLPF and come back. I know people like to justify purchases but the chart won't lie. Your evidence seems anecdotal without actual controlled testing of this attribute.


I've shot high details scenes and made such comparisons with those. The images don't lie. I'm not exactly alone in having done such tests, so it's clear that you're basing the credibility on the tests on which ones conform to your wishful thinking.

You sound like someone who's insecure about his gear because Black Magic cameras don't carry the same reputation as Red cameras, even though that really has no effect on the quality of the cameras. I know what my tests have shown me, and you don't agree even though clearly you're wrong, since if you were correct I wouldn't be able to get print quality images that match my A7r's.

Ergo, you're wasting your time. I've seen enough bogus tests to know that most shootouts are just that; bogus. They're usually trying to convince people that the camera they own is the better than the competitor's camera in an attempt to get hired based on having the "better" camera.

But I don't advertise what kind of camera I own, so I don't waste my time making bogus shootouts.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore + Radeon VII + Razer Core
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 4:54 am

Savannah. I don't doubt what you are saying. But I was merely saying that these guys might have been relating to high end 4k productions. It might be their viewpoint.

Personally 4k animation for 2k sounds good too.

I'll relate an example that happened. They wanted to redo and distribute higher end versions of the Babylon 5 series. But the graphics were is the wrong screen format and resolution. This is an industry, to sell product tomorrow world, people should shoot for at least a resolution where going further matters little and is acceptable to those that have good vision. This is 4k. Now, when things need to be redone, you have the native ability to do it. You can even up res 4k if you really wanted the best. Now, 8k, I talk about, has its uses, one being better 4k colour and sharpness, but the happy medium (or minium) is 4k.

I feel sorry for the Babylon people. Those battle images are corregraphed for the screen ratio, so that things emerge into frame and hang around in relation. Changing to wide screen virtually needs to be recorographed/redirected it.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline
User avatar

Kim Janson

  • Posts: 750
  • Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2015 6:54 pm
  • Location: Finland

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 5:09 am

On normal filming the motion blur ofthen takes care that the absolute resolution is not that important and who wants really to see all the fasial details. I can not really think many aplications where the pin sharp image would support the story, except maybe some nature documentary etc.
LeViteZer Smooths the movement, www.levitezer.com
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2451
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 5:14 am

Kim Janson wrote:On normal filming the motion blur ofthen takes care that the absolute resolution is not that important and who wants really to see all the fasial details. I can not really think many aplications where the pin sharp image would support the story, except maybe some nature documentary etc.


That is quite true. It's one reason that I don't find that pulling stills from video works all that well most of the time, because if you're planning to pull stills you'd want to use a higher shutter speed to eliminate the motion blur, but then you end up with stacatto looking video.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore + Radeon VII + Razer Core
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 5:55 am

Savannah Miller wrote:For CG you don't really need higher voxel counts, higher resolution textures, or higher resolution matte paintings than what is already done. Most matte painting artists work in 4K already, and generally FX work is simmed at the highest acceptable resolution already. If you shade it correctly, you might not have necessarily 4K worth of detail, but it will look smooth and you won't see any blockiness. Plus you can cheat the shading of fluids in many ways or even upres them. Likewise, standard texturing and modeling of TV and Film assets should easily hold 4K worth of detail as well.

On top of that, rendering CG in 4K doesn't exactly take 4x longer anymore. A lot of TV houses are switching to GPU rendering such as redshift and sometimes even octane. Those take barely longer for significant resolution increases. That's at least what we use where I work and it's very good.

I think that the only real difference is a slight increase in render times and the network speed difference when compositing 4K plates vs 1080p. Other than that, it's not that much slower like you would assume. With the difference between 4K and 1080p production, there's very few times where someone is 1:1 inspecting different areas of the 4K image to make sure it has the full 4K worth of detail. If it looks better than 1080p, than that is often good enough.

My estimation from all the 4K vs 1080p shows we do is that it takes about 20-30% longer to do an easier shot (shots that take less than 1 hour), and then the real issues come from very long shots where it sometimes takes twice as long.
Compositing and tracking are probably the areas that seem to be most affected by the 4K switch.


Savannah wins the logic reality award. None of this simplistic quadrupling of numbers. The resolution of a texture only makes an big difference when you are either close enough to see it, or it somehow effects the lighting etc. So, I could have 3D dirt texture (particles prefered) but until you get close enough, it doesn't need too much resolution. However, modern 3D graphics are a bit more sophisticated than that these days. But many things are so far away you could use even gey away with corse texturing.

A lot of you guys are not really contributing much but insisting your perception is it. This is a market. 8k and beyond has real uses, especially in quality. The market depends on new sales to continue. The market realised this, and doesn't agree with you guys, but are pushing to 8k and beyond.

You are also quoting what it looks like on yesteryear equipment, equipment (and yesteryear mistakes) with no vision for tomorrow year. Like those that argued Standard Definition was enough. The equipment planned in the next 10 years, makes handling 8k look like handling 176 phone video in jpeg. We are talking hundred to a million times more computing power.

Should one aregue that we should not have more than Standard Definition, or more than 2k on some me future 120-200 inch+ reality screen? Of course not. 2k with start looking like SD video on a big screen, vhs on your 55 inch. It is about what you can deliver against others

Now, a final point, you guys have not sort of spotted that current favorite delivery camera might still be low resolution, and though short of the 16.5 stop across the board human vision related gold standard (not even Red does that, look at the tests), they have not improved much has not improved much over the years. That they might be on a technology island, land locked. Not the sort of thing to compare against. If you are on a technology island you had better hop to the.next one, before somebody else sales by and gets there first. Now, Red, on-semi, Sony and Canon are. Past reputation is a delusion against future reality of reputation changes.

Having said all this, Red wins in certain aspects, as does BM. But Arii has a track record that makes it a lowering common dominator quality standard, but integrated, durable and reliable, all the things that matter when million of dollar budgets depend on the camera and not going faulty and halting the days timeline, which is the multimillion dollar timeline. Which do you get in, the battle tank that will chug along.all day but still make pretty images.

Now, on image rendering IQ. I forget that Red has there raw bayer? encrypted tied down, restricting options. Frankly, my less than $100 HD camera produced more pleasing pictures than I saw graded from the RedOne when it came out, and this took a while to change. I don't often say anything at all about that, maybe Jim will stop talking to me. It is a matter about who you have to do those things, and if it is about "loyality" they should be loyal enough to step aside and let somebody better than them take the lead, and work with that person. I can tell you, I have conversations with many technical people cutting edge to lower edge, and I can quickly tell how stuffed up they are by the logic of their answers. The cutting edge people are completely different and easier to converse with than others. The few that are reasonable, usually turn out to have big stuff going on behind the scenes. You can actually learn things from them that are not just the trivia of experience. They weigh up things, hopefully reasonably objectively.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 6:09 am

Rakesh. There are ways of doing both in a video stream. But unless you are carrying two cameras, it is still a good option on behind the scenes footage, real life, and promotional. There are tools to add or takeaway motion blur (but often seems to be left out in discussions like this).

Say you shoot at the highest practical shutter, and reproduce desired look through processing. Or say if you shoot in longer shutter and process stills you pull. But you could (and this is a brand new shooting mode I'm calling here, you shoot a mixture of fast and slow shutters and process to unify the look later. In some lighting situations this will been issue. But you could make a frame every fith or fifthteenth of a second fast (a sort of human motion response time). Now, such frame by frame changes might not suite some sensors, but you could even make those 1/5 and 1/15 frames fall inbetween the regular film frames by shifting timing are under, or by fitting in a shutter space if possible (which even fewer sensors would support). The issue is, that sensors are being made to have locked frame rate modes (which they might have to give up).
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 6:14 am

Kim. I loved the interview scenes in the Bill when they went to digital, you could see so many details of the face, and actually do like looking at details on subjects of the image (real details, not fake). We live in this obnoxious Bayer h26x compressed too much world, we forget the pleasure of just scanning.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline
User avatar

Robert Niessner

  • Posts: 2059
  • Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:51 am
  • Location: Graz, Austria

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 10:11 am

Wayne Steven wrote:I'll relate an example that happened. They wanted to redo and distribute higher end versions of the Babylon 5 series. But the graphics were is the wrong screen format and resolution. This is an industry, to sell product tomorrow world, people should shoot for at least a resolution where going further matters little and is acceptable to those that have good vision. This is 4k. Now, when things need to be redone, you have the native ability to do it. You can even up res 4k if you really wanted the best. Now, 8k, I talk about, has its uses, one being better 4k colour and sharpness, but the happy medium (or minium) is 4k.

I feel sorry for the Babylon people. Those battle images are corregraphed for the screen ratio, so that things emerge into frame and hang around in relation. Changing to wide screen virtually needs to be recorographed/redirected it.


That's funny because on the released DVDs they just cropped into all VFX scenes to maintain widescreen. The show itself was shot in widescreen but the live action was framed for 4:3 and originally aired in 4:3.
The animations were done in Lightwave on Amiga 4000s and as far as I know all the 3D data got lost after the VFX studio had closed.
I'd love to buy an HD version of the B5 series but I guess that will never happen.
Robert Niessner
LAUFBILDkommission
Graz / Austria
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Blackmagic Camera Blog (German):
http://laufbildkommission.wordpress.com

Read the blog in English via Google Translate:
http://tinyurl.com/pjf6a3m
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1639
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostMon May 28, 2018 2:29 pm

That's right, thanks. I was thinking of the animation which got cropped. It was the compromise.

They had better to just scan the recorded graphics and convert that to a drafting 3D model, then get artists to redo the graphics and enhance them. I know a guy that could do that conversion. If you have a program that can do that right, you can pick it up well, then enhance . So, 4k-8k versions are doable, but it will cost, which is sorry. That's how they lost the original VFX I think. Tight budget and they slipped away.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 2012
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: Chicago Illinois

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostTue May 29, 2018 3:50 am

Rakesh Malik wrote:
Steven Abrams wrote:Go shoot a controlled resolution chart and compare to other cameras without an OLPF and come back. I know people like to justify purchases but the chart won't lie. Your evidence seems anecdotal without actual controlled testing of this attribute.


I've shot high details scenes and made such comparisons with those. The images don't lie. I'm not exactly alone in having done such tests, so it's clear that you're basing the credibility on the tests on which ones conform to your wishful thinking.


I'll weigh in with Mr Abrams here.

RED are very aggressive with their OLPF. They may have an 8K (or 6K) bucket (file), but they aren't filling it to that number in actual photographed resolution. Which also mean's its more likely to survive higher compression ratios.

When the RED one was introduced a long time ago, they claimed it was a 4K camera, and while it did create 4K resolution files, very few could get a resolution chart beyond beyond the high 2Ks when actually measuring resolution photographically with it.

JB
John Brawley
Cinematographer
Atlanta
Georgia
Offline

Ryan Hamblin

  • Posts: 218
  • Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 10:04 pm
  • Location: LA/Nashville, TN

Re: Reasons for a 8k BM cinema camera.

PostTue May 29, 2018 4:47 am

JB's comments ring very true with all of our testing. Their 8k from the Helium was resolving a very marginal amount more than the 4.6k... but was just a bear to deal with in post with basically no benefit over the 4.6k. It had less dynamic range, similar resolution, and just way worse to work with than ProRes.

I will say our tests with the Gemini were way more favorable. We still walked away liking the image from the 4.6k more, but there are for sure benefits to the Gemini. The OLPF seems to be less aggressive, as the 5k is seemingly resolving every so slightly more than the 4.6k. The shadows held better than any red camera I have played with but the 4.6k seemed to snag about 1 full stop more of information down there. The Dual iso was cool but I've still yet to fall into a spot where 800 hasn't been enough.

I wish more people took a look at the 4.6k... its a stellar image.
www.brainstem.tv
www.ryanhamblin.com
PreviousNext

Return to Cinematography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Denny Smith and 12 guests