Pocket Cinema Pro

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

dacloo

  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 10:44 am
  • Real Name: Jeroen de Cloe

Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 6:18 am

Just dreaming here...
I would love to pay $2299 for a BMPCCPro4K that takes the current Pocket4K and adds:
- Tiltable Screen
- Electronic ND filter (variable - exposure adapts to maintain set shutter and/or exposure)
- Weather Proof body
- Reliable Auto Focus (similar to Canon)
- Larger battery
- $299 EVF option that clicks on top of the camera

Basically the same lean body but a clear step up from the current Pocket 4K.

Thoughts?
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 6:22 am

How do those features make it 'pro' vs what's available already?
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline
User avatar

Johannes Jonsson

  • Posts: 107
  • Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 2:35 pm
  • Location: Iceland

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 10:04 am

Only future I would like to see at the moment and would be nice to have would be ND filter (with wheel), not electric one.
Nothing on the list above is making the camera more pro in any way.
Johannes
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 5:03 pm

Pro or not, those features do make sense for a small camera meant for solo operators. It either works for the likely buyer, or it doesn't. How many users of the BMPCC 4K employ focus pullers? And should you really need a pair of industrial knee pads to shoot at low angle?

$2299 probably wouldn't cover it, in which case, there may not be a sufficient market. But it would surely appeal to some.
Offline

Kays Alatrakchi

  • Posts: 797
  • Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 8:22 am

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 5:08 pm

There is the issue of cannibalizing their own product line. I think they would prefer that one-man-army types go with the Ursa Mini Pro for ENG type of shoots.

I'd be willing to bet that BMD has something in store for the Ursa line at NAB next year!
>>Kays Alatrakchi
www.mbkproductions.com
Director, Colorist, Composer (not necessarily in that order).
Resolve 15.2, Mac OS X 10.13.5 (High Sierra), i7 8700k, 32Gb DDR4 RAM, Dual GTX 1080ti, Decklink Mini Monitor, USB 3.1 RAID
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 7:34 pm

John Paines wrote:Pro or not, those features do make sense for a small camera meant for solo operators. It either works for the likely buyer, or it doesn't. How many users of the BMPCC 4K employ focus pullers? And should you really need a pair of industrial knee pads to shoot at low angle?

$2299 probably wouldn't cover it, in which case, there may not be a sufficient market. But it would surely appeal to some.


Achieving autofocus would require getting the technology from other sources or developing engineering skill that is probably not within Blackmagic's remit. Adapted lenses are always problematic, so you'd be relying on manual focus more often than not. Then there are those who use fully manual cine lenses where camera AF is a moot point.

There are some very lightweight field monitors available that make the camera far more versatile than would a tilting or swivelling monitor. A field monitor is also something that you'd would do well to have for other uses such as rigs, which most would end up getting anyway. You need something onto which you can attach microphones and audio gear, and maybe a battery pack.

Tilt screens etc are pretty much useless on say a gimbal, where a field monitor is a much better option. That's also why companies such as Tilta have released follow focus wheels like the nano, specifically for gimbal users, realising that AF isn't the panacea many think. Sometimes getting down and dirty gives you the best results.
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 7:47 pm

What's the logic of making a small camera which requires an external monitor? The camera makes sense as a complete package or it doesn't, since not many people in the market for a $1299 camera want to fool with accessories which can easily cost more than the camera itself. And what's the rationale for rigging a small camera, such that it's no longer a small, light camera?

Same with the gimbal. Putting an external monitor on a gimbal, with one operator, stretches the usefulness of either. It's either simple and light, or it's not. If you have crews and resources, you're not buying a BMPCC 4K in the first place.
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 8:17 pm

John Paines wrote:What's the logic of making a small camera which requires an external monitor? The camera makes sense as a complete package or it doesn't, since not many people in the market for a $1299 camera want to fool with accessories which can easily cost more than the camera itself. And what's the rationale for rigging a small camera, such that it's no longer a small, light camera?

Same with the gimbal. Putting an external monitor on a gimbal, with one operator, stretches the usefulness of either. It's either simple and light, or it's not. If you have crews and resources, you're not buying a BMPCC 4K in the first place.


The camera works fine as it is, you don't need a tilting/swivelling monitor or an EVF etc. If that's what you absolutely need then best get a DSLR/mirrorless camera, not a BMPCC4K. All of the features of the camera were well known in advance, nothing was hidden, nothing was confusing. Now people are demanding something completely different.

I've used my monitor on a gimbal and it's quite effective and a tilting/swivelling monitor (which I have on my other camera) is as useless as the proverbial on a gimbal. Given that the BMPCC4K is already causing issues with gimbal mounting, a 5" tilting/swivelling screen would make things almost impossible to use.

As I've said now and earlier, if the BMPCC4K doesn't meet one's exacting standards, get something that does. A lot of of people that probably don't even have the camera, or have no intention of buying one, are complaining about things that will never affect their cat videos.
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 8:25 pm

Australian Image wrote:As I've said now and earlier, if the BMPCC4K doesn't meet one's exacting standards, get something that does.


This thread, as I understand it, concerns what some would like to see in the camera, not a criticism of what it currently offers.

What we have so far may be a fantasy, combining Canon's dual-pixel technology, something like the GH5 form factor and BMD image, but there's still plenty of room for improvement, in the real world, such as tiltable screen or EVF. if you expect to argue people out of wanting such features, based on how you think they should work, you won't get very far.
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 8:52 pm

John Paines wrote:
Australian Image wrote:As I've said now and earlier, if the BMPCC4K doesn't meet one's exacting standards, get something that does.


This thread, as I understand it, concerns what some would like to see in the camera, not a criticism of what it currently offers.


Complaining about what the camera doesn't have, when it's barely three months old, is pretty much criticism.

What we have so far may be a fantasy, combining Canon's dual-pixel technology, something like the GH5 form factor and BMD image, but there's still plenty of room for improvement, in the real world, such as tiltable screen or EVF. if you expect to argue people out of wanting such features, based on how you think they should work, you won't get very far.


As I've said before, I bought the camera specifically because of the features it provided, something completely removed from the typical DSLR/mirrorless camera. If I could have justified getting say a UMPro4.6K, I would have. That's not what everyone wants, but then why buy something that doesn't meet your needs when there are lots of alternatives available?

If the BMPCC4K was ostensibly the same as every other mirrorless camera (now that Canon and Nikon are in the game) and would inevitably cost much the same, what purchasing advantage would the BMPCC4K offer? The closest comparable mirrorless camera to the BMPCC4K is possibly the Panasonic GH5s. The BMPCC4K is AU$1500 cheaper (not including Resolve Studio), yet is possibly a better camera. And given all the 'desired' features contained in the GH5s, people will still spend extra on cages and whatnot. That AU$1500 difference allowed me to buy everything to set up a capable rig and have a camera that's much more capable and versatile than the GH5s on its own.

I guarantee that if Blackmagic fulfilled the desires that some hanker for, the first thing those same people would complain about is the price, comparing it to the Canon/Nikon FF cameras.
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 9:33 pm

If you're happy, great, but there's no reason to curtail discussions of what people think is missing from the BMPCC 4K, or how it could be improved in future, any more than Resolve users should stop submitting feature requests every time there's a new incremental release.

Alternate workflows, workarounds, external equipment, what people may complain about in the future if all desires are met -- none of that is at issue. Customers will buy or not on how well any model serves the needs of the moment. The camera imagined in this thread would certainly be of interest.
Offline

Chris Chiasson

  • Posts: 424
  • Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:32 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 9:48 pm

dacloo wrote:Just dreaming here...
I would love to pay $2299 for a BMPCCPro4K that takes the current Pocket4K and adds:
- Tiltable Screen
- Electronic ND filter (variable - exposure adapts to maintain set shutter and/or exposure)
- Weather Proof body
- Reliable Auto Focus (similar to Canon)
- Larger battery
- $299 EVF option that clicks on top of the camera

Basically the same lean body but a clear step up from the current Pocket 4K.

Thoughts?


Agree with all of this. At the very least a tilt screen, which I still don’t understand why BM didn’t include it. It was the main request from the original pocket. Though battery wise, even if they made it bigger, knowing Blackmagic, they’ll over drain it. I think a battery grip would be the best option, similar to the one this one concepted. Either that, or BMD needs to figure out how to drain less battery life for their cameras.



Though this is pretty big. Lol. That’s the downside to the pocket name. I’m waiting for a battery cradle to be made that I can just attach to my tripod handle, and pocket when hand held.

And Pro would be a good title, because consumers associates “Pro” meaning more features. It’s Apple terminology. Pro versions cost more, but have more features then the standard.
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostSun Dec 16, 2018 9:53 pm

John Paines wrote:If you're happy, great, but there's no reason to curtail discussions of what people think is missing from the BMPCC 4K, or how it could be improved in future, any more than Resolve users should stop submitting feature requests every time there's a new incremental release.


All I'm doing is pointing out the obvious pointlessness of comparing the BMPCC4K to every other mirrorless hybrid camera and wishing it to be the same. These aren't improvements, they are just requests to copy what already exists in other cameras.

Genuine improvements might be such things as giving the 3.5mm audio port an option to provide power for unpowered mics. Fixing the very low audio levels when using an external mic. Providing a port for external focus control devices. Providing WiFi for external control devices. Providing a purpose designed Bluetooth controller. Providing a battery grip and similar accessories.

If I want to travel light and shoot 4K video, I use my Olympus Tough TG5 that has good AF and a 25-100mm (equivalent) zoom, is the size of the original BMPCC and works in any weather.

Alternate workflows, workarounds, external equipment, what people may complain about in the future if all desires are met -- none of that is at issue. Customers will buy or not on how well any model serves the needs of the moment. The camera imagined in this thread would certainly be of interest.


In case you haven't noticed, the existing BMPCC4K is of such interest that the back orders apparently are in the thousands. There is no lack of interest in this camera whatsoever and the only complaints come from reviewers who, for some odd reason, weren't aware that the BMPCC4K didn't have a tilting screen, EVF, IBIS, C-AF etc. These things took them by complete surprise.
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline

microobserver

  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:07 pm
  • Real Name: William Tuke

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostMon Dec 17, 2018 12:01 am

Just want to support Dacloo 100% - exactly what I was thinking and wishing for. Despite the various counter-arguments, I still agree with Dacloo - this is exactly what I want as well. I do think BM could develop this for the price point, as it would appeal to what I believe would be imho a large segment of solo, Run-n-Gun/evet and doc. filmmakers, who want something lighter than the other heavier and more expensive options on offer. I do hope that BM takes notice. I have my money ready and waiting for exactly that model - now! So, over to you BM - work your magic!
Offline

robstowell

  • Posts: 26
  • Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2016 10:27 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostTue Dec 18, 2018 4:02 am

I'd be in there too. A tilting swiveling screen would make a big difference for handheld work. It doesn't just allow you to get low and high shots, it also means you can tilt/swivel away from sunlight, and (for me) hold the camera lower, elbows locked into body, which often just works better. Holding it with two hands in front of your face is hard, less stable, and kind of unnatural. And who wouldn't love better battery life :) I'm not a fan of auto focus and would much prefer ND to be mechanical. But that would be ace!
I think we all know nothing like this will come soon. But who knows. I heard for years a 4k pocket was impossible etc etc and here we are :)
Offline

Ryan Payne

  • Posts: 215
  • Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2017 6:48 am

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostTue Dec 18, 2018 10:58 am

I'd love an increased focus on making a unit like the pocket 4k a solo experience. Tilting screen, easy to go onto a one handed gimbal, greater battery life with small batteries and an ND would be the cherry on top. I don't believe weather sealing is possible with the current cooling system.

I completely understand why the 4k is what it is though. From the choice of a 5.5inch monitor because it's the standard size for a phones lcd and there for is the cheapest and highest quality, to the ease of manufacturing a camera with a built in monitor. The pocket name was always designed as a way to give a real cinema camera to everyone, people always joke about the size and it not being very pocketable but the name refers to it's ease of access to the masses.

BM really tried to give it all they had while being able to offer up a real cinema camera and end to end production suite for 1300 USD.

I do hope BM start to focus on aspects like energy efficiency, higher quality control and a single camera experience where additional add-ons aren't as necessary. However for the moment I can't put up a camera in the pocket 4k price range and say that it delievers a better image, better user experience maybe but at the end of the day in the edit you'll be happy you brought the pocket.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1459
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostTue Dec 18, 2018 12:01 pm

They are welcome to take your money. I would want 8k on top of that, or a sub $1000 for what you said. This year $1295 is not cgesp over here. We will probably see an 8k $700 8k phone (with good 4k filming mode) soon with enough processing power to do cdng, BM Raw, pro res and prores raw. That's the sort of thing which indicates what may be done. Mind you, I expect a sub $500 8k camera to be released soon, but that won't vebso flexible to do much above consumer level filming. Sony etc, with have their $1k-$2k+ 8k consumer prosumer camcorders out soon.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostTue Dec 18, 2018 2:06 pm

Wayne Steven wrote:I would want 8k on top of that


Actually, this ideal camera would make much more sense as HD only, downsampled from a slightly larger sensor, which is all any actual, as opposed to imaginary, filmmaker needs. The Canon C100 still sells for $3500, despite its "low" resolution, because it's self-contained, reliable and so well designed.

It's true that imaginary filmmakers with imaginary Netflix contracts would be furious, but you can't expect to please everyone for $2299, much less $1299.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1459
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostTue Dec 18, 2018 3:54 pm

John , so you imagine. Apples and oranges. That Canon is likely to be a much better video filming solution, which matters more to a lot of those people than monkier terms like "cinema camera". There are people who would choose a more professional small sensor Sony prosumer camera over these cameras, because they can get the job done reliably and have good support. Not to mention Canon's old down sampling trick from 4k to 2k they did first up, or that like here, a fan will buy what he wants to support, and talk it up, and the alternatives down. I'm even want to checkout a new handy to handle Canon model on from the cx-15 (maybe the 20 or rumored a cinema camera replacement in the same style. As Panasonic never bought theirs out and JVC stopped at the old px-100 ). The handability says a lot, but seriously the pocket blows rings around a lot of stuff.

So yes, an 8k image down sampled to HD, is probably going be a better image in ways over the HD sensor for our purposes.

You just caught me after 4 hours of tracking down the fate of some technology from a old sensor company I like. Unfortunately they seemed to have moved to automotive applications and then stopped developing new image oreintsted sensors in 2014. Their technology has some really big performance numbers on dynamic range with 0.0005 lux low light, which I have only seen in one other company which is older. The image I get from one of my old cameras using one of their sensors, as crusty and washed out as it is under the harshest light, is still my favorite. But their last such image sensor will do 720p60. I had been interested in doing a cinema camera based on the older sensor 14 years back. So, have been pondering about using this new one, after a previous HD statement here. But, the issue is, performance like this transfered over to smaller 8k pixels, is likely to be still more than enough (maybe past 20 stops) and maybe give that organic 8k Panasonic sensor run for it's money and best the Alexa. BM should contact them to use the technology and special chip sensor making process. Grant, or one of his guys, can contact me by private message. Its one of the ones which slipped through the cracks.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 4:20 pm

SO... on this.

The pocket 4k is already pro as far as I am concerned save a few minor niggles I have with the build quality, such as the on/off switch feeling a little junky, slightly loose mount, and a little creaking on parts of the plastic used to make the camera. Other than a few software bugs, I do not really find the pocket 4k to be a non-pro camera to be honest here. There is nothing on the market I can think of that comes close to what it can do at the price point at all and as such really doesn't seem to have any peers.

What would I want in a version of this same camera with "pro" added to it? Maybe internal ND filters (real ones and not digital with IR reduction), use of larger capacity batteries internally, and better build quality. A nice to have would be wifi so that I can use a phone or other device to see the picture like many other cameras offer. That is about it and of course it would likely at least double to triple the current cost, which at that point I would likely just get an ursa or a number of other cameras.

I see people comparing the pocket 4k to the canon c100 and I do not understand this. I have used the c100 for years for regular work and I do not find it any more professional than the pocket 4K and not worth the cost. I actually prefer the pocket 4k in just about every way save that the c100 has internal nd filters, longer battery life, and the build quality is a little better. Other than that, the pocket 4k is a much more capable professional line camera to me simply because it provides much more professional acquisition codecs compared to the Canon and is capable of 4k recording whereas the c100 is not. Maybe a tilting screen might be nice for some but I wouldn't want to pay for this simply because I prefer the freedom of external monitors that can be mounted anywhere on the camera and seldom use tilting on camera monitors that do have it anyways.

I can tell you that as far as I am concerned, there is not much on the market right now that really can compare to the pocket 4k in terms of codecs, image quality, and UI control and I would imagine that a pro version of it would probably simply be just a more expensive version with a few things that may or may not be wanted by pros and non-pros. Because it seems BMD is much more interested in really inexpensive pro IQ cameras to the masses, I would imagine that a pro line of the pocket 4k may not sell very well.

This is my first Blackmagic design camera and I have been blown away by how easy it is to use and the IQ that it is capable of for such a ridiculous price point. The thing just shouldn't exist as far as I am concerned. I think it would have been a lot easier for BMD to provide a "pro" version that was 3500 than this version at 1300 to be honest, and I am pretty happy with what they provided already.
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 5:13 pm

Dune00z wrote:S
I see people comparing the pocket 4k to the canon c100 and I do not understand this ...

there is not much on the market right now that really can compare to the pocket 4k in terms of codecs, image quality, and UI control and I would imagine that a pro version of it would probably simply be just a more expensive version with a few things that may or may not be wanted by pros and non-pros.


The issue isn't the presence or absence of "pro" features. It's a question of how usable the camera is for solo operators, since it has no other conceivable market (what industrial-level production would choose a $1299 camera of this type?). Codecs, image quality, UI control and 4K won't assist anyone trying to keep a shot in focus or shoot a low angle.

As was the case with the BMPCC, it appears this camera is bought mostly by amateurs -- an aspirational cinema camera for people who don't, and never will, shoot cinema. For many, the purchase looks to be a fantasy (just like film school, for that matter), since few will ever be able to exploit its image quality.

The suggestions raised here are reasonable, if we're talking about actual usability. Whether BMD is interested in making such a camera, or whether its market requires these improvements, is unknown.
Offline

michaeldhead

  • Posts: 381
  • Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:41 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 6:06 pm

John Paines wrote: (what industrial-level production would choose a $1299 camera of this type?).


Quite a few "industry-level" productions used the original Pocket cam - it was used as a crash cam more than anything, but it has been used in almost every Marvel movie since it's release plus several other action films.

Natalie Portman even used the original Pocket to a great extent in some of her directoral work (https://www.creativeplanetnetwork.com/n ... ras-615509)

And "industry-level" films are now being shot on iPhones and Sony A7sii's - so now more than ever it's not the camera that matters, even in "industry level" films - it's the skill of those using it.

PS: as far as I can tell, the P4k meets all requirements for a Netflix partner production.
Michael D Head
www.michaeldhead.com
producer/writer/director/DP
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 6:16 pm

michaeldhead wrote:
Quite a few "industry-level" productions used the original Pocket cam - it was used as a crash cam more than anything, but it has been used in almost every Marvel movie since it's release plus several other action films.

Natalie Portman even used the original Pocket to a great extent in some of her directoral work (https://www.creativeplanetnetwork.com/n ... ras-615509)

And "industry-level" films are now being shot on iPhones and Sony A7sii's - so now more than ever it's not the camera that matters, even in "industry level" films - it's the skill of those using it.

PS: as far as I can tell, the P4k meets all requirements for a Netflix partner production.


Please, not this again. Crash cams and one or two shots per movie don't constitute "use". iphones were used, largely as marketing gimmick by Steven Soderbergh, but I don't see anyone abandoning the Alexa for them.

You can of course shoot anything with anything, and if the subject matter is sufficiently compelling or crowd-pleasing, and you have a 7 or 8 figure production budget, it won't matter much to general audiences. But that's been true since long before iphones or the BMPCC 4K.
Offline

michaeldhead

  • Posts: 381
  • Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:41 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 6:39 pm

John Paines wrote:
Please, not this again. Crash cams and one or two shots per movie don't constitute "use". iphones were used, largely as marketing gimmick by Steven Soderbergh, but I don't see anyone abandoning the Alexa for them.

You can of course shoot anything with anything, and if the subject matter is sufficiently compelling or crowd-pleasing, and you have a 7 or 8 figure production budget, it won't matter much to general audiences. But that's been true since long before iphones or the BMPCC 4K.


It's true, so yes, "this again" - and it does constitute "use", regardless of how you feel about it. And I guess you didn't read the article I posted, either.
Michael D Head
www.michaeldhead.com
producer/writer/director/DP
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 6:42 pm

Hi John,

I work as a solo video producer/editor/director/whatever working about 60+ videos per quarter. I have no idea what you think "usable" means but I have no problem at all using this camera professionally as an A camera by myself.

Many of the features asked for are not what I would personally consider necessary features for me as a professional, but that does not mean others don't need them for their particular work, and I can understand that. I shoot on tripods and I use external monitors regardless of what camera I am using, so the features requested would be wasted on me. The tool is exactly what I wanted in a video camera and I, again, am a solo operator. I know that my personal needs are not the same as others and would not dismiss a tool with in camera stabilization, auto focus, tilting screens, etc. as objectively "unprofessional" or a waste simply because I don't need them, and I certainly would not think that another version of the same camera with a tilting screen, auto focus, etc. (other than build quality improvements) would be any more "pro" than this version. It would simply have more features and cost more and frankly, I wouldn't buy it because I don't want to spend money on things I won't use.

"As was the case with the BMPCC, it appears this camera is bought mostly by amateurs -- an aspirational cinema camera for people who don't, and never will, shoot cinema. For many, the purchase looks to be a fantasy (just like film school, for that matter), since few will ever be able to exploit its image quality."

Yikes. I am not sure where this came from but I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that people who buy and shoot with this camera likely never will shoot cinema. On that note, you could say that about any camera since most people in general who ever even think about being involved in film making won't ever shoot a higher end narrative regardless of what they buy because so many factors, many they can't even control, can keep them out regardless of how good they are at their art/craft.

Not only that, but the idea that "cinema" is the only area where a "cinema camera" might be useful as a professional is very narrow thinking. I have friends I know personally who work as cinematographers in Hollywood who use higher end Reds/Arris and all they do is shoot commercials, higher end corporate projects, and occasional music videos. That aint really "cinema" as many people think of, and does that mean they aren't professionals or something because they aren't shooting narrative features, just good looking video projects? I don't get it.
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 6:45 pm

michaeldhead wrote:And I guess you didn't read the article I posted, either.


I not only read it (in the past), but I read clarifications of it elsewhere. The number of BMPCC shots in that movie was tiny. You could just as easily make a case for the Canon 5D, which was used in "Black Swan", for one scene.

The point is, image quality alone doesn't determine the usefulness of the camera, least of all when the overhead is thousands, or tens of thousands, of dollars an hour.
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 6:53 pm

Dune00z wrote:Not only that, but the idea that "cinema" is the only area where a "cinema camera" might be useful as a professional is very narrow thinking. I have friends I know personally who work as cinematographers in Hollywood who use higher end Reds/Arris and all they do is shoot commercials, higher end corporate projects, and occasional music videos. That aint really "cinema" as many people think of, and does that mean they aren't professionals or something because they aren't shooting narrative features, just good looking video projects? I don't get it.


You don't get it, because I never said what you're attributing to me. Did I really have to explicitly exempt expensively produced commercials? And, on that subject, how many national TV commercials were shot on the BMPCC?

The refutation to all these claims is reality: however you may use the BMPCC (if you did?), or intend to use the BMPCC 4K, the BMPCC did not become a widely used camera in cinema or high end production and there's no evidence that DPs are going to junk their Reds and Alexas for the UMP, much less the BMPCC 4K.
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 7:08 pm

John,

I don't think you really understand the differences in scope of what you are suggesting and are not grasping what I am trying to tell you. The pocket 4k and original were, can, and are used for professional projects that fit in the scope of using such a camera. The very thought that a red or higher end cameras will be replaced by the pockets in a high end project is just not in the cards at all, but it is totally useful for lower end projects, which are a huge amount of projects in an under-served market in the real world.

I was clearly responding to your assumption that the camera is for people who will never shoot "cinema," (whatever that means) as if that is any reason at all to assume the camera is not useful for professionals in production. Some professionals such as myself do not have such aspirations to shoot "cinema" and still make a living using these "unusable" or "unprofessional" pocket cameras for solo productions.

My point is that your thinking about usefulness of gear appears to be quite narrow to me as professional generally means you make a living doing a particular job. I make a living working video production and have been doing so since film school, so my hope is that you can maybe broaden your thinking a bit in regards to what is or isn't useful professionally.
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 1917
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 7:15 pm

If you're not bothered by the production limitations of the BMPCC 4K for your particular line of work, great. Awkward or difficult doesn't mean impossible.

However, the reality of the market, and the distribution of BMD sales, says the rest.

Don't get me wrong, I have a BMPCC 4K as well as a BMPCC. But I do wonder for whom exactly these cameras are intended, beyond the filmmaker fantasy quotient.
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 7:32 pm

There's a lot of argument about what a BMPCC4K can and can't do, but it's still very early days of ownership. How about waiting a year or so until it is truly evaluated by the industry and not just YouTubers?

And speaking of YouTubers, there are many who use the likes of the RED for just YouTube (Marques Brownlee, Linus Sebastian). A camera is just a camera, you select what fits your needs regardless of the work undertaken.

I did professional photography for a long time and very few used the newest, most expensive, cameras available because they were often a poor business choice. There are swings and roundabouts regardless of what you use.
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2371
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Tacoma, WA

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 7:34 pm

michaeldhead wrote:PS: as far as I can tell, the P4k meets all requirements for a Netflix partner production.


I expect that Netflix is going to test the P4K sooner or later, and based on the criteria, I'd expect it to pass.

Netflix will of course specify which codecs are allowed also, which will most likely rule out ProRes and possibly some of the higher compression ratio settings for Braw.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R w/ 1080Ti eGPU in RazerCore
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2371
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Tacoma, WA

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 7:46 pm

John Paines wrote:The refutation to all these claims is reality: however you may use the BMPCC (if you did?), or intend to use the BMPCC 4K, the BMPCC did not become a widely used camera in cinema or high end production and there's no evidence that DPs are going to junk their Reds and Alexas for the UMP, much less the BMPCC 4K.


I agree, that's not going to happen.

It's also not relevant to BMD's business, because BMD is obviously not attempting to compete with Red or Alexa; if it were, the cameras wouldn't be priced so low.

BMD is basically taking stuff that the high end has developed and commercialized in the high end with low volumes and making it available to people who don't have Hollywood or corporate budgets to work with.

In the end, the viewers aren't going to care which camera who used for what. They just want to sit back and enjoy the film.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R w/ 1080Ti eGPU in RazerCore
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 8:13 pm

And what about all those aspiring film makers, those out of film school, Indi film makers etc, who suddenly can get a true cine camera for half the price of a GH5s or A7R etc? How many started out as Indi film makers with virtually no budget and are now recognised directors, producers, etc? Maybe Blackmagic's approach isn't as dumb as it appears to some.
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 9:30 pm

"Awkward or difficult doesn't mean impossible."

There is nothing I find necessarily awkward or difficult about this camera, so I am not sure what is meant here. It is actually the simplest camera I have used so far. It just "gets out of the way" as they say. I come from learning to shoot on 16mm and 8mm film, so I think I understand a little on how difficult shooting can be.

"However, the reality of the market, and the distribution of BMD sales, says the rest. "

Can you point me to the figures you are using to make your claims about the sales numbers including whether or not they are non-professional users or fantasy film makers? I am having a hard time finding any numbers on this, but then again, I am new to BMD as a company so maybe you have access to resources I am unfamiliar with.

The price of gear and production essentials has always been the biggest gate keeper in this industry. 10 thousand dollars for a camera body alone is simply not in the budget for a wide variety of professionals if they can't make a reasonable ROI compared to not buying it and using an alternative. It makes a lot more sense to pay considerably less for a tool that provides exactly what you need for far less cost if you are trying to make a profit. This has nothing to do with how good cinematography skills are, it simply is looking at production cost in a realistic way.

"But I do wonder for whom exactly these cameras are intended, beyond the filmmaker fantasy quotient."

I do not understand this kind of gate keeping thinking based on the things you buy and I do not know when it became so common place to think this way. This is not what I learned from any mentor I have met nor the kind of thing I hear professional cinematographers say. If you make films, you are not in any kind of fantasy, you are actually doing it, even if only a few people see your work or it sucks, and it matters not what its shot on or how much money you spent.

As far as a target market outside of "fantasy film makers," I think BMD has been very clear that the camera is designed for consumers looking to bridge a move from DSLR/Mirrorless hybrids to cinema cameras and for those who want high IQ and industry professional codecs in a compact package. Seems pretty clear to me. Considering the vast number of professionals in real life using DSLR/Mirrorless cameras professionally, I do not understand your assumption that the only understandable market for this camera consists of film makers living in some kind of dream world.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1459
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 10:45 pm

2+ on many of the things John said.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1459
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostWed Dec 19, 2018 11:35 pm

SO... on this.

What is this obsession with people that for an extra $10 is do parts that you should pay 2+ times the price,?

Based on how the Pocket is constructed, not what other companies charge (extreme) I would think $995-$1295 is a realistic price. Based on how a $299 micro 4/3rds is constructed, $299+ is a more realistic price if done in a similar way to a mass market. Which means for $995 they could afford to offer a much better pocket pro than today at the flip ofna switch, so to speak.

But let's get back to usability. I notice people avoided my Sony Prosumer camera statement, because it clesrly illustrates what's wrong. Sure somebody might work a certain way, going through all the extra effort, and rigging, but immediately you have to rig the camera with a cage, to compensate, its not that handy natively for this free flowing bumping awkard work where you are trying to follow things straight up in one pass if possible,, and a cage is not usually as handy. But boy doesn't it make you feel grand with a nice rig to show off. Form over functionality, cost and expediency. That's why you byy those Sony things for that sort of work, which is something maybe 2000 people in Australia and 30,000 in America and 60,000 in Europe and maybe over 50,000 in the rest of the world and increasing, do regularly. So, it makes sense to add these often cheap features to cameras to sell into those markets to gain extra income from higher production numbers to afford to offer even better equipment cheaper. Then people also wouldn't need to buy ripoff prosumer cameras for the price of a mini. I'm often thinking of the bigger market for more people, not just the small cinema market. There are also too many cinema cameras out there, which leads to a production collapse as demand goes down, which produces company collapses. More numbers means more numbers after a market collapse from market satiation. After all, cameras will break down and get old, and need replacement, as long as you have enough of those to service you keep in business at a good prive which it is hard for new competitors to competed in (this low priced section of the market existed because regular companies were charge way too much, leaving a gap to compete in, which doesn't exist in the above scenario). I'm thinking of business, and what better suites more people. Adding those cheap to implement consumer features (a few buttons and software) allows even more sales to bring down costs and increase ehst is offered, and support the company in the end scenario. Red is I believe, attempting this now, but maybe, as usual, at premium pricing, allowing them to be competed against.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostThu Dec 20, 2018 12:12 am

The price of a product is not dictated solely by how much the parts cost.

Your version of handy is not another's version of handy. Your version of a light setup is not that of another's version of a light setup. Your version of practicality is not another's version of practicality. Your version of affordability is not another's version of affordability. And so on.

It's a pity that discussion has devolved down to criticism of the camera and how it's impossible to produce any video because everything is wrong with the camera.
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 57
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostThu Dec 20, 2018 1:25 am

Australian image is right on the money here.

The cost of a product of any kind includes salaries/wages, research and development, overhead, distribution, manufacturing, a ton of things, much like the cost of a production isn't just the physical equipment used on set. You've got transportation, wages, rent for a studio or building, overhead, marketing, distribution, a ton of things to account for. Using a piece meal way of looking at parts only is not really a proper way to look at how much something should cost at all.

This is all I'm going to say on this thread. Good luck to all of you.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1459
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostThu Dec 20, 2018 12:41 pm

No, I'm right on the money here.

You are talking about opinion and personal interpretation narrowing down practicalness, I'm talking about industry standards well worked out over time which would widen practicalness sales volume and deliverables per dollar. Which any good leading manufacturer should do. I'm sure you can disagree with me and others here, and Sony, panasonic, Jvc etc who deliver these leading solutions for decades. But I'd rather side with them on this one.

You are favouring a filming subset, I'm actually the one saying there is a wider set of professional work that could be supported to fit the handability of a wider amount of people. The irony is, it takes away very little from what you do now, but adds a lot more for minimal cost, but is argued against.

Now, manufacturing. Is made up of fixed and variable costs etc. It's late. Parts is only a small part of it, it's volume that reduces cost per unit, and cost per part, and through design reduces the extra cost of dealing with heat and battery drain issues. There is a sample of what is involved. So, as you manufacture, you get some costs that largely stay the same during manufacture, and some costs that go down from higher volume of manufacture. You get better deals on parts, reduced cost per unit of parts handling, bigger more streamlined production runs using better technology and techniques, more automation being one of them, better contract manufacturing deals on parts contracted out, lower cost handling per unit of product etc etc. Including all the things you mentioned, which go down per as more units manufactured absorb the cost leading to more money for more research and design, hopefully, which you could have known I was telling about. So, the $299 m4/3rds comparison stands. It is maybe $200 from being a pocket 4k with the right elcheap chipset, more modern sensor, and some cheap parts for the ports. But you need to manufacture in volume to get it there, then maybe mark up to $995 to give extra support. But you can end up with a produce more towards the original pocket's or micro's size.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

michaeldhead

  • Posts: 381
  • Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:41 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostThu Dec 20, 2018 3:10 pm

2+ on most of what Dune00z has said.

@Rakesh re: P4k and Netflix. Prores is allowed as a Netflix Partner capture format, but I think most people lean towards raw simply for the extra control in post. What will be more interesting is what Netflix says about Blackmagic raw - that will likely require some extensive testing before they officially approve it.

But remember that that only applies to Netflix Partner productions - you can shoot a project on any camera and try to sell it to Netlflix; the camera requirements only come into play if you pitch an idea to Netflix and they fund it on the production side. (https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/ ... ge-Capture)
Michael D Head
www.michaeldhead.com
producer/writer/director/DP
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2371
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Tacoma, WA

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostThu Dec 20, 2018 5:02 pm

michaeldhead wrote:@Rakesh re: P4k and Netflix. Prores is allowed as a Netflix Partner capture format, but I think most people lean towards raw simply for the extra control in post. What will be more interesting is what Netflix says about Blackmagic raw - that will likely require some extensive testing before they officially approve it.


I must be misremembering... there were some restrictions on codecs for some cameras, so I thought some were OK provided that they were filmed in raw. It might have been due to requiring ProRes flavors that the cameras didn't offer (e.g. 444). Like mine... I can record raw, but in 4K my ProRes options are limited to HQ, so I might not be able to pass muster in ProRes due to the 4K acquisition requirement, and need to choose raw instead if I'm on a Netflix partner film.

But I'd have to look again to see where my memory went awry on that. I just checked, saw that the cameras that I cared about were on the list (well, except the Pocket 4K because it wasn't even shipping yet), and since I'm not on any Netflix partner projects yet, didn't worry about it any further. :)

But remember that that only applies to Netflix Partner productions - you can shoot a project on any camera and try to sell it to Netlflix; the camera requirements only come into play if you pitch an idea to Netflix and they fund it on the production side. (https://partnerhelp.netflixstudios.com/ ... ge-Capture)


Good reminder. I think a lot of people see the partner requirements and don't realize that Netflix doesn't care all that much what a non-partner film was shot on if it's a good film.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R w/ 1080Ti eGPU in RazerCore
Offline

michaeldhead

  • Posts: 381
  • Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:41 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostThu Dec 20, 2018 5:58 pm

Rakesh Malik wrote:
Good reminder. I think a lot of people see the partner requirements and don't realize that Netflix doesn't care all that much what a non-partner film was shot on if it's a good film.


Funny story - I got into a....discussion on Instagram with a "camera rental advisor expert" from a *well known* camera and photo store (not that one, another one) who posted the camera list from the Netflix partner page and was telling people "if you want to sell to Netflix you must use these cameras."

I pointed out that that only applied to partner products and used "Mudbound" as an example of a film shot on a "not approved" camera that Netflix bought - yes, it was shot on the Alexa Mini. He said "Alexas are on the list", and I pointed out the Alexa Mini was not on the list.

He then went on this rant about how he "learned in the days of film; I know what lighting ratios are." I said, "great, you're still not right" and suddenly got a lot of personal insults from him before he deleted his post.

Needless to say, the head of the "camera rental department" got an email the next day with screenshots of the exchange (I had a feeling he'd delete the post) and got a very nice apology. I did start with "I am NOT trying to get anyone fired, but you need to know how [name] is talking to potential customers on social media."

I hope he did not get fired, but I hope he thought about how he talks to people. You don't always have to agree with people, but civility is not an unreasonable expectation.
Michael D Head
www.michaeldhead.com
producer/writer/director/DP
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostThu Dec 20, 2018 7:43 pm

Wayne Steven wrote:No, I'm right on the money here.


That must explain why Apple phones, RED cameras, Leica cameras etc are so cheap.
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline

michaeldhead

  • Posts: 381
  • Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:41 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostThu Dec 20, 2018 8:06 pm

Australian Image wrote:
Wayne Steven wrote:No, I'm right on the money here.


That must explain why Apple phones, RED cameras, Leica cameras etc are so cheap.



+1 so much!

Sorry - 2+ :)
Michael D Head
www.michaeldhead.com
producer/writer/director/DP
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1459
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostFri Dec 21, 2018 6:02 am

That's the level of thinking around here as I've been grinning reading the latest posts

Can somebody point out the fault to them please?
Last edited by Wayne Steven on Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:35 am, edited 2 times in total.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline
User avatar

Australian Image

  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:08 am
  • Location: Mirboo North Victoria Australia
  • Real Name: Ray Pollanen

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostFri Dec 21, 2018 6:14 am

Wayne Steven wrote:That's the low level of thinking around here as I've been grinning reading the latest posts here. Not a clue again. :) +1


A world without the clueless masses would mean there'd be no way for the genius few to stand on their lofty pedestals
https://australianimage.com.au/
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1459
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostFri Dec 21, 2018 6:21 am

Yeah, sorry, I cut that one down but not in time. But you can cut back that quote, can't you please?

Are you saying you're a pedestal? Sorry, couldn't resist, been watching Doc Martin as I'm typing. :)
Last edited by Wayne Steven on Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 1459
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth
  • Warnings: 1

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostFri Dec 21, 2018 6:27 am

But, you do know, a fair few of us know how to make our own pedestals, it doesn't require a genius. What was this thread about, I'm sure it wasn't about disagreeing with anything correct I say?

Ah yes, your suggestions for a Pocket Pro OP are most welcome, as well as anything I correctly said. John's opinion was pretty valid too.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2371
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Tacoma, WA

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostFri Dec 21, 2018 7:53 pm

michaeldhead wrote:Funny story - I got into a....discussion on Instagram with a "camera rental advisor expert" from a *well known* camera and photo store (not that one, another one) who posted the camera list from the Netflix partner page and was telling people "if you want to sell to Netflix you must use these cameras."


While I suspect that having a 4K (and even better, HDR) option to offer would help to get you a better deal when selling to Netflix, that's not a requirement for sure... unless Netflix is funding it.

The secret however:
1) Make a good film
2) Know someone at Netflix

I imagine that Netflix has submissions coming out of its ears, and considering the "quality" of what amazon prime puts in its "included in prime" lineup, I'd imagine that Netflix is so inundated with drivel that its reps don't even have time to look at most of it...
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
HP Spectre x360 Kaby Lake-R w/ 1080Ti eGPU in RazerCore
Offline

michaeldhead

  • Posts: 381
  • Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:41 pm

Re: Pocket Cinema Pro

PostFri Dec 21, 2018 8:02 pm

You're right that Netflix probably deals with a lot of.... not too good films, and you're also right that Amazon will let just about everything on it (I watched one recently that....yikes). But my understanding is that Amazon pays per minute played while Netflix pays a fixed sum (an acquaintance of mine sold a horror film to Netflix a few years ago that was produced for about $25,000....and they got $10k from Netflix. Hmmm....
Michael D Head
www.michaeldhead.com
producer/writer/director/DP
Next

Return to Cinematography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests