Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

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

Valery Axenov

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:49 am
  • Real Name: Valery Axenov

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostTue Jan 22, 2019 11:31 am

lee4ever wrote:
And yes, I'm willing to drill holes in BMPCC when BMD finally releases an unofficial firmware with 48, 50 or 60fps.


May be you will need only one hole for Turbo button.)) I remember my early decktop in 90th had this button, that simply change clock speed twice. I know that some gays here in Russia overclock Lenovo Y550P with early models of i5-i7 1,6Gh changing physically a bit voltage in clock electrical circuit. I say this only from point of view of pure phys.experimental idea. If circuit of both cameras is the same in principal, so software of both cameras in main blocks of program (developed by one person) should be also the same. Only one point - blocking of clock speed for 60fps by program means. So, if somebody overclock by physical means the circuit may be camera will record at higher fps still "Thinking" that it record, let say, at standard 30fps.)) In this case you will need only turbo button and old filmware (without menu support and upgraded metadata for higher fps). )) In any case software is closed and nobody have interest to upgrade it.)

I think that Micro is still the best option for 60fps.
Offline

michaeldhead

  • Posts: 450
  • Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2017 5:41 pm

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostTue Jan 22, 2019 3:29 pm

My mistake on the BMCC vs BMMCC.

Look at the bodies of the OG Pocket vs the BMMCC - what differences do you see? A screen (which generates heat) and a larger body on the Micro. Do you know what the largest internal component on the UMP is? A heatsink.
Michael D Head
www.michaeldhead.com
producer/writer/director/DP
Offline

Chris Whitten

  • Posts: 500
  • Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostTue Jan 22, 2019 4:21 pm

Also, the OG Pocket can get very hot.
I mostly used mine in Australia. On days of 35c when I was filming the whole body was very hot to touch.
And that was just 25FPS Raw.
Chris Whitten
Online

Denny Smith

  • Posts: 11149
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:19 pm
  • Location: USA, Northern Calif.

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostTue Jan 22, 2019 5:54 pm

Also, the Micro has vents and a fan, which require noticeable. This is pure physics, faster frame rates require additional cooling. As the sensor heats up, the noise level increases also, which is another issue with faster frame rates, even on small sensors.
Cheers
Denny Smith
SHA Productions
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostTue Jan 22, 2019 6:31 pm

I thought you were still in Mexico. But you are right, it's not as simple as made out here.

Valery Axenov wrote:
michaeldhead wrote:
Valery Axenov wrote:I have upgraded my Lenovo notebook in the past from T4200 2.0Gh to T9900 3.1Gh. And it still works fine.)

I think that hardware of BMPCC 30fps is the same as BMMCC 60fps. The reason to downclock BMPCC system was no air cooling of the sensor. May be it is not true.


Upgrading a component is not overclocking the system. Take your 3.1 Gh processor and overclock it to run at 6.2Gh - it's not hard to change the system settings to do that. See what happens.

*disclaimer: if you choose to do this, you are making that choice. I am not forcing you to do this, and I recommend against doing it. If you do it, I am in no way responsible for what happens to your computer.


I think that BMPCC and BMMCC is the same Lenovo notebook in this case. Because it was designed and issued in principal at the same time for one 100fps chip. I cann't imagine the situation that BM pay for the same job twice to the same stuff.) The same situation was with my Lenovo motherboard, I think.


I was waiting to answer tomorrow, but I wanted to clear some things up, but I think it was another post I wanted to reply to.

Lee, they upgrade the hardware to handle the extra performance for a given quality. So, it is likely to have component upgrades. Plus, if they only expected one data rate in the design, they would design for that. If the components can do more, that's a bonus (often parts are manufactured in bulk to sell to different manufacturers, and you buy in grades, so the grade might have overhead). It's a matter to see what can be done, even if it works at a bit less temperature or in the shade.

Also, most everything processing is over clocked (but maybe not low powered fpga, as they have been so power hungry). I knew a guy that designed world leading processing technology, especially low energy (the lowest, makes arms look very power hungry) and his designs would run a lots faster on a metric etc. Low power processors use special design and fabrication and run at very low speeds. For a long time around 300mhz or lower, years back). I don't know what the current system of the art is. I hope to see 5ghz low powered using more conventional technology, but I doubt it soon unless I get my stuff out. I imagine they will get to 2ghz. The problem is design. The way things are designed is massively over clocked and complex. On our side the design path is measured in thousands of transistors with no clocking, pipelining and other modifications to optimise for complex designs. So poetic, those were the days). I've got design proposals to remove clocking from quantum cellar automata processors, that's tetra hertz up from 1ghz+, at good energy. But the new proposal is an improvement. Through redesign you can take advantage of the natural characteristics of the fabrication, hardware and the data. The richest companies in the world are sloppy in this. It is very philosophical to open one's mind to paths possible, all paths. It is a graceful dance like funk. So, if people I know can do this, people can look into his to massage more from a pocket. Now its 4:30am, time for bed.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostTue Jan 22, 2019 7:08 pm

Chris Whitten wrote:Also, the OG Pocket can get very hot.
I mostly used mine in Australia. On days of 35c when I was filming the whole body was very hot to touch.
And that was just 25FPS Raw.


On holiday, Jamaica, my bmpcc wasn't as hot as you describe it. It was not hotter as my GoPro. Maybe you have the worse heat sink? See: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=84865&start=50#p471458

Can you run your BMPCC 5min and then record 1min (RAW) with closed lens (so nothing is visible/black) and then post here the last DNG file?
Offline
User avatar

Valery Axenov

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:49 am
  • Real Name: Valery Axenov

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostTue Jan 22, 2019 10:38 pm

lee4ever wrote:
Chris Whitten wrote:Also, the OG Pocket can get very hot.
I mostly used mine in Australia. On days of 35c when I was filming the whole body was very hot to touch.
And that was just 25FPS Raw.


On holiday, Jamaica, my bmpcc wasn't as hot as you describe it. It was not hotter as my GoPro. Maybe you have the worse heat sink? See: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=84865&start=50#p471458

Can you run your BMPCC 5min and then record 1min (RAW) with closed lens (so nothing is visible/black) and then post here the last DNG file?


I shoot last Sunday one long panoramic plan for documentary. It was -7C. I think, that I don't need any additional cooling of my camera for 60fps.)
Online
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2620
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostWed Jan 23, 2019 1:42 am

Chris Whitten wrote:Again, I disagree. The vast majority of people you are describing above aren't trying to make actual films, they are making demo videos for Youtube, they are camera 'enthusiasts' or bloggers etc. When the original BMPCC was launched the internet was flooded with test videos. Since then, those same Youtubers haven't uploaded dozens of actual short films, either narrative or documentary, they just continued to post test videos with other cameras GH5, Sony A7 etc....


You just proved me right though -- those folks are the most likely to upgrade as soon as there's a new camera available ;)

I'm an amateur myself, but I'm trying to make short films with good quality visuals.


You're one of the exceptions. There are some amateur filmmakers who ALSO make youtube videos (it's a good way to build an audience after all), but amateurs who are actually striving to make quality visuals are a rarity these days.

That's a good thing in the long run; it means that if you persist at it, then you'll sooner or later stand out from the rest, even fi you don't upgrade your gear.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore i7/32GB/2070 Max-Q
Online
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2620
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostWed Jan 23, 2019 1:52 am

Valery Axenov wrote:I think that BMPCC and BMMCC is the same Lenovo notebook in this case. Because it was designed and issued in principal at the same time for one 100fps chip. I cann't imagine the situation that BM pay for the same job twice to the same stuff.) The same situation was with my Lenovo motherboard, I think.


You're making an entirely unfounded assumption that the Pocket HD has both enough computing power and a fast enough data bus to handle 2-3x its current maximum data rate. Neither of those assumptions are based on anything other than speculation, which makes them hopeful guesses, and not particularly meaningful.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Alienware M15 Hexacore i7/32GB/2070 Max-Q
Online

Denny Smith

  • Posts: 11149
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:19 pm
  • Location: USA, Northern Calif.

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostWed Jan 23, 2019 3:50 am

Well put Rakesh, I completely agree with you on this.
Cheers
Denny Smith
SHA Productions
Offline
User avatar

Valery Axenov

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:49 am
  • Real Name: Valery Axenov

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostWed Jan 23, 2019 9:58 am

I think that both points of view are a speculations at this moment. It's easy deal to open the camera and to check chipset data inside. Q is. Why not to use for BMPCC 30fps sensor in this case? No sense to pay extra for 100fps chip. With available buss chipset data the situation may be absolutely the same. Who knows?)

Are you sure that there are to different buss chipset lines of production available for 24-30fps and 50-60fps?
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostWed Jan 23, 2019 12:18 pm

You're making an entirely unfounded assumption that the Pocket HD has both enough computing power and a fast enough data bus to handle 2-3x its current maximum data rate. Neither of those assumptions are based on anything other than speculation, which makes them hopeful guesses, and not particularly meaningful.


There are other cameras with Spartan 6 FPGA and they can handle more than 30FPS (guaranteed, no speculation). There are more complex Spartan 6 hardware that needs more Poswer than what BMPCC needs and Spartan 6 FPGA has no problem with it, it all runs in real time (!) reliably and stable. It doesn't get warmer.
The (BMMCC and BMPCC) sCMOS sensor can handle 100FPS (guaranteed, no speculation)
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostWed Jan 23, 2019 12:22 pm

Valery Axenov wrote:I think that both points of view are a speculations at this moment. It's easy deal to open the camera and to check chipset data inside. Q is. Why not to use for BMPCC 30fps sensor in this case? No sense to pay extra for 100fps chip. With available buss chipset data the situation may be absolutely the same. Who knows?)


No check/comparison is necessary because there is technical information about the built-in hardware in BMPCC and according to it the BMPCC is guaranteed to achieve 48, 50 or 60fps.

There are even other cameras (not only BMMCC) with the same sCMOS sensor and there is not only more fps, but also sensor calibration is possible. That means both is possible with the sCMOS. The only question is why BMD does not provide this. If you check all this, then you will speculate about BMD.
Offline

Chris Whitten

  • Posts: 500
  • Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostWed Jan 23, 2019 1:12 pm

lee4ever wrote:
Chris Whitten wrote:Also, the OG Pocket can get very hot.
I mostly used mine in Australia. On days of 35c when I was filming the whole body was very hot to touch.
And that was just 25FPS Raw.


On holiday, Jamaica, my bmpcc wasn't as hot as you describe it. It was not hotter as my GoPro. Maybe you have the worse heat sink? See: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=84865&start=50#p471458

Can you run your BMPCC 5min and then record 1min (RAW) with closed lens (so nothing is visible/black) and then post here the last DNG file?


You can't compare. It depends on the type of shooting you are doing. Is Jamaica 35 to 40C?
The part of Australia I was in was very harsh weather conditions. Like being in an oven, no sea breeze.
The camera most definitely got very hot on longer filming sequences.
I have since sold my OG Pocket and am very happy with my Pocket 4K so far.
Chris Whitten
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostWed Jan 23, 2019 2:17 pm

Chris Whitten wrote:You can't compare. It depends on the type of shooting you are doing. Is Jamaica 35 to 40C?
The part of Australia I was in was very harsh weather conditions. Like being in an oven, no sea breeze.
The camera most definitely got very hot on longer filming sequences.
I have since sold my OG Pocket and am very happy with my Pocket 4K so far.


as mentioned before, I think they had a BMPCC that has a worse heat sink. I don't think the BMD have changed the heatsinks without reason. I bought the BMPCC new in the store, end of 2018, so it certainly doesn't have the older/worse heat sink.
With me the BMPCC was not so warm and it was 3 days not under 30c and I have recorded very long, one scene is even 42min. No picture problems or anything else, everything went well.
I also bought the Pocket 4k recently and sent it back after a few days. I like the IQ of the old BMPCC much better - I LOVE IT! :)
Offline

Marshall Harrington

  • Posts: 435
  • Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 5:48 pm
  • Location: San Diego, California

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostWed Jan 23, 2019 9:55 pm

I had the same issue with phones. I love rotary phones but no one ever kept improving them. Why couldn't they come up with some kind of digital conversion where the phone kept count of home much space the rotor moved. I never understood why the actual phone manufacturers didn't try to keep that base of products active much less add new features to those phones. I still love the feeling you get when you dial the number. It just feels good. Thankfully I've still got a few packed away just in case someone comes out with an update.
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 12:20 am

This is about BMPCC which is still one of the best Cinema cameras, with professional features and enough power for 48,50 or 60fps.

For phones you might try here: https://www.xda-developers.com ;)
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 1:12 am

BMD people don't do anything here. None of them write "yes, please here an unofficial firmware for you with 60fps!" :) Probably the moderators have to pack the new BMPCC4k together too... are working very hard on it, so that the angry BMPCC4k orderers don't have to wait any longer.

Loving customers like me are patient and wait. 8-)
Offline

Aaron Swann

  • Posts: 40
  • Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 2:07 am

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 3:34 am

Perhaps we can get some Wayne Stevens' input on a firmware update for a rotary phone project! We'll get the rotary dial to do a full 360 using his prism capture technology from his most recent thought bubble!!
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 3:50 am

Aaron Swann wrote:Perhaps we can get some Wayne Stevens' input on a firmware update for a rotary phone project! We'll get the rotary dial to do a full 360 using his prism capture technology from his most recent thought bubble!!



How is a design a thought bubble :roll: sounds like more foolishness I have to put up with.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 4:58 am

Guys, in general, you have to listen to each other. You are both sides speaking hypotheticals about something that needs work to research and determine if it should be possible. Except, I think Lee is the only person to present any actual evidence of anything. Not one BM employee has come in to present concrete proof it's not possible, which is a bit interesting. Even if they did, you would then see if you could design around that. But, you are having a talk fear with no advancement. Denying without evidence is not helpful too. It's worse than believing with little evidence. Fill in the gaps, then you can say more than maybe.

You need to examine the whole circuit to see if all parts are up to processing the data, before you get into the thermals. Now at 100 fps it likely is over clocked, 0.8 watts is not low. But maybe at 50fps it is 0.2 watts, and lower windowed 2:41:1 and 48 fps (easily shiftable to 50 fps).


lee4ever wrote:
Chris Whitten wrote:Also, the OG Pocket can get very hot.
I mostly used mine in Australia. On days of 35c when I was filming the whole body was very hot to touch.
And that was just 25FPS Raw.


On holiday, Jamaica, my bmpcc wasn't as hot as you describe it. It was not hotter as my GoPro. Maybe you have the worse heat sink? See: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=84865&start=50#p471458

Can you run your BMPCC 5min and then record 1min (RAW) with closed lens (so nothing is visible/black) and then post here the last DNG file?



Lee and others. Dry air is one of the best thermal insulators known to man. I do a lot of design stuff in a lot of areas, including trying to come up with new thermal insulation schemes. However, warm moist air is definitely not. So 35 degree dry heat is going be hard in the cooling system, but in 30 degree humidity, the moisture in the cooler air is going to pick heat and which it away more. Now the extra 5 degree is also going to produce a higher level of heat build up.

But this leads to some ideas about getting heat out of the body. A new body enclosure of a bare heat conductive metal/alloy, as done for some cameras like gopro, yi 4k+, could yield better thermals. But if you are going that far, the enclave sure could have minature fan venting slots. It could be weather proofed with a second skin venting scheme, where airflow is forced thru the skins to take heat out, where the first skin acts like a heat sink, and is finned inside and structured outside, to that effects. Which means maybe scroll fans. Actually, that would he a rather nice solution. In such a case you could put a high thermal capacity/transfer substance in the case. I don't think there are gases for this, but there is a liquid you can breath used first this, in bags even, and some oils, they use of very high heat applications. I matter of fact, the pocket 4k could have been smaller if they used those techniques, but frankly, it is probably beyond the knowledge of their engineers. I deal with some high end issues and obscure stuff, so look into stuff. Frankly, if BM had made a liquid filled unit, it would have had to be water proof, which means potentially useful for diving, but obviously requiring a lens housing. We are maybe talking original pocket size here. But if you are going to replace the old pocket's case, you might as well look at upgrading the heat sinking components while you got the case apart, if practical.

But let's take a step back, what can be done with the current pocket 2k. Examine where heat is or can be drawn away. A second skin could be a heat skin thinned glove like case, with or without, an air gap where air is forced through. It depends on what works for the enclosure it has. Now, dimpling has a smoothing effect on air flow, reducing resistance, allowing lower powered quieter fan to be used. But, I've just got in mind am entirely new technique, and maybe a passive way of doing it. Anyway, the skin csmmbe finned or structured for heat transfered in and out, and if double skinned a liquid can be drawn around inside, even just moist air, to draw heat away to a fanned venting mechanism.

Anyway, I don't think this old camera is worth doing internal hardware modifications on, or an new enclosure (but if some existing company wanted to do it, that's great). We should concentrate on the soft modifications and then maybe second skin heat mod might be printable on a 3D printer. I should say, that there is newer techniques which allow metal to be printed relatively cheaply (though I wouldn't want to use it to make a lens mount). But hers the catch. You use extrusion of a substance with metal particles in it, so 98% or so metal. It holds together OK as a shape before finalising. But then you have to out it in a kiln to burn off tjr binder sinister things together. But I don't have any place for a kiln here. This technique should suit low cost printers. I was looking into buying something with high precision (10-2.5 micron) a few years ago, looking for the lowest cost metal, when this technique had recently came up. There are other techniques, but this particular one looked promising.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Aaron Swann

  • Posts: 40
  • Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 2:07 am

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 6:50 am

Wayne, foolishness? You mean reality; a state in which you are unfamiliar with...
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 8:56 am

But maybe at 50fps it is 0.2 watts, and lower windowed 2:41:1 and 48 fps (easily shiftable to 50 fps).


That's right. That would be minimal <0.2W, maybe not even more than it is now (with lower window).
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 9:53 am

Aaron Swann wrote:Wayne, foolishness? You mean reality; a state in which you are unfamiliar with...


You could try holding your breath. I'm about the only one being realistic here, and I am not being an idiot.

So try not picking on somebody at all.
Last edited by Wayne Steven on Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:01 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: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 11:01 am

Aaron Swann wrote:I have no issues with what Lee is trying to achieve whatsoever. Your "thought bubbles" had nothing to do with this topic and therefore were irrelevant! You could have finished your post at "Lots of declaring in these threads, too little learning". I'm not trying to argue against Lee's venture/curiosity, I'm trying to understand your point of view Wayne. You're very fast to challenge Blackmagic's product and it's limitations. However they have produced a camera and you haven't. They are a credible company and I'm not even sure what your qualifications are wayne.


So, getting back to posts I didn't get to reply to yesterday. You should microscopically examine your thinking like I do (my iwb, not just yours). You blurt why not do something (instead of yourself doing it, mind you), I say I have enough to waste time on and give a concise example. All relevant to your statement. Then you go onto thought bubbles after I said I'm not doing just thought bubbles, I deal with solutions. You say you don't understand(!). You erroneously try to out BM producing a camera and their credentials out there, which is the classic trap people who don't know fall into. Both are irrelevant. BM is in no way a leading thinker or developer of camera technology, ambarella who you might find in $30 cameras, is by far way ahead and a leader on their side of the business. But people rather feel proud of Donald Trump then the talented people who made him his money. So, if they are in no way a leader, what does it matter if they made a lesser camera than what another would have! Zilch. It's an admirable effort on their part, but it doesn't make one Einstein. We could put most manufacturers in this boat, with somebody like Sony on top of the technology heap, developing stuff that others will just react to instead of developing better first. Even BM is buying Sony sensors for the pocket instead of developing their own. Get the pyramid the right side up, BM and you are not the top. Understand the simple explanations rather than rejecting them. On not going strain and struggle to type and to answer time wasting. This is Lee's battle, I'm only saying he has a valid point to investigate, and I few directions.

You are not related to Michael Aaron?
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline
User avatar

Valery Axenov

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:49 am
  • Real Name: Valery Axenov

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 11:36 am

Australian Image wrote:I have a solution! Threaten to hold your breath until Blackmagic capitulates to your terms.


Agree with Wayne at 100%

I think that BM understand that BMPCC was, let say, the same as 16mm Bolex H16 camera in the past. It was popular by pro and amateur users. And with new "pocket" ( in fact downsized BMCC ) BM have lost this "pocket - rangefinder" - size camera market. That's the matter of fact. BMPCC4K is a brick in hands the same as big pro photo-cameras for pro users. BMPCC has Leica feelings. BMPCC4K looks like Nikon F5. Absolutely different cameras in approach and style of shooting.

I hope that BM in future will return back to original bmpcc (or micro) body formfactor and issue new simple 16mm (4K) camera for all advanced users, who want and understand why they shoot (at the moment 2K) footage in pro cine codec (not sony mpeg4). With small air fan cooling system, same 3.5" monitor, same sound, based on S16 broadcast line on sensors. No dual iso range, native iso 800 (max up to 1600-3200 is sufficient for most real life applications). If you need bigger monitor you have option to use an external.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 2:34 pm

Funny thing, if you search through here, you will find me saying years ago that a bigger pocket, mentioning the size of the original cinema camera as comparison, and Sony sensors, to get 4k, is fine. I might have even directly compared to other mirrorless, like gh5 etc. Here we have it, it's still popular, as I predicted, except a few things like a bit too wide versus height, older HDMI no WiFi etc. But given BRaw on it, an ok camera. But the problem is I put stuff into all sorts of companies and governments which gets implemented, but virtually always differently to what I intended by people who 'think' they know better without my help and **** it up a fair bit. Not really the case here, I did nit outline anything really insightful, just a direction and they did a good BM job on it.

Now, as far as Style, you have a point. I wouldn't mind something a lot smaller, like the Sharp 8k mirrorless or Pocket myself as well. The existing pocket 4k will probably shrink, and a Micro cinema 4k version come our, over time. But, using the cooling techniques I talk about, the existing pocket 4k could. However, all that extra heat in the unit, I wonder his much if it is rebated to the fpga, surely it can't he the cards? However, how skinny could it be on a mobile phone chipset platform. I'm not saying how smart the writer is, I'm saying how smart those mobile chipset people are. The "reality" the 'truth'. If ambarella ever starts to make proper, dense, low energy prores raw circuits (they probably already are in the background where you can license or buy parts special order, like they do for the camera industry) then the whole camera except the mount, could be mobile phone like at less power than a mobile chipset (which might use a too small ambarella circuit). But any chip that handles a lot of the jpeg processing efficiently at high data rate, which should be the bulk of processing in cdng, braw and prores raw, should shrink things a lot anyway. Does the spartan FPGA have custom circuits that do most all, or all, the jpeg part, probably not. FPGA is so 15 years ago. Approaching companies like ambarella, or other chipset providers for the motion jpeg part us the way to go. Mobile chipsets are just convenient, but until they get enough jpeg processing custom circuitry (the photo engine, the iPhone 4 could be made to do 4k jpeg at 24fps, and they were over 5k a few years ago. I even have a link here for a Canon M50 stils camera you can pick up for $150 apparently, which they have shooting at over 5k). Until you get that on a mobile chipset, you are forced to run less efficient mobile and GPU code, but not isn't that less energy than the nearly 29 watts reported here? So yes, a half thickness micro and pocket 4k s possible. I'm actually waiting to see the micro.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 4:03 pm

New thread on future micro.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=85137
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Aaron Swann

  • Posts: 40
  • Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 2:07 am

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 7:11 pm

YAY a new thread for Wayne to pollute!!
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 7:47 pm

Aaron Swann wrote:YAY a new thread for Wayne to pollute!!

Why's that? His idea is really very good. His idea would (in any case) have made a much better camera than the current BMPCC4K.
Offline

roger.magnusson

  • Posts: 913
  • Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 4:58 pm
  • Location: Sweden

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 8:01 pm

But the BMPCC4K is an actual camera. ;)
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 8:08 pm

roger.magnusson wrote:But the BMPCC4K is an actual camera. ;)


But the IQ doesn't see as real cinema (better light doesn't change anything). And you know that... ;)
That's why I want BMD to release an improved firmware for old BMPCC. 8-)

The old BMPCC cannot be replaced by BMPCC4K. The IQ is what many people love about BMPCC.
It has a reason that the old BMPCC is the most sold blackmagic camera and that is not the price, but the IQ.

Man, that's really a great camera. It would be a pity if BMD didn't further optimize/improve it and of course also provided the 48, 50 or 60fps with 2.35/40 image range as well! :)
Offline
User avatar

Valery Axenov

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:49 am
  • Real Name: Valery Axenov

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 10:14 pm

I think that if BM make a decision in time to upgrade original bmpcc to 2.5K camera (or it have been introduced at the beginning as 2.5K) it should be in production at list till it will be possible to put new 4K S16 +13stop sensor to the same better cooling body. I still hope that BM will have new 16mm (4K) "spring motor" simple camera with pro codec inside for documentary and traveling.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostThu Jan 24, 2019 11:56 pm

Indeed, if it had been 2.5k, I would probably had bought one back then.

The pocket sensor real is nearly 15 stops, but in real world they measure less for a reason. A really comfortable warming image, not like the stark cold image of some others.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 12:00 am

Aaron Swann wrote:YAY a new thread for Wayne to pollute!!


Yet, you are here. Unable to answer??
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 12:13 am

lee4ever wrote:
Aaron Swann wrote:YAY a new thread for Wayne to pollute!!

Why's that? His idea is really very good. His idea would (in any case) have made a much better camera than the current BMPCC4K.


Lee, it is always bewildering how the people who can't read or understand sufficiently are ALWAYS the people who have something to say negatively and stir on the internet, polluting others clear pools if water. Not content until they stomp about muddying them. Don't you think?

Wishing you best on your endeavours.

But, I must say, high speed video is a major market with sports coaching (and others) and the pocket's image is nice with latitude. It really should have high speed windowed or down sampled modes. This would go into hundreds of fps or more. Maybe with the micro and pocket 4k we will see?

It is speculated the pocket 4k sensor can do 100 fps/+ 4k modes. Nobody has brought that up here as a more up to date project.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 5:21 am

Thank you so much! I wish you also all the best!
Offline

Aaron Swann

  • Posts: 40
  • Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 2:07 am

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 6:38 am

Wayne Steven wrote:
Aaron Swann wrote:YAY a new thread for Wayne to pollute!!


Yet, you are here. Unable to answer??


Sorry Wayne had to go to work, that's what we do in the real world. Can't sit around all day lurking in these forums.

My comprehension of all things in this forum is sound Wayne, what is it you are actually doing on this forum? You regularly state that people steal your intellectual property yet you continually blurt out your ideas. You criticize Blackmagic design then state that your wanting to initiate conversation with BMD for exchanging of ideas. I don't believe you've ever owned a Blackmagic camera. I'm quiet certain that you're not into cinematography. This is a cinematography Forum, hence why I come on here and act like a jerk towards you, nothing you post is specific to cinematography, it's always about how you could have made a better camera and the fact is you haven't and you never will because you're a dreamer Wayne...
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 7:24 am

I find Wayne's criticism of BMD is justified. Are there no reasons? Yes, there is something to criticize. Criticism can develop into positive things. Through this, BMD can also learn and do better in the future.

An example of justified criticism is the new BMPCC4K. I held 2 BMPCC4K in my hands. One of them had pixel errors (4 HotPixel on the LCD) and the other one just turns off (with fully charged battery) and power LED blinks. The seller was very angry about the problems with BMPCC4K.

Actually, there must be more of Waynes, with good ideas and suggestions. So BMD knows what people like and how to develop the cameras in the future.
Last edited by lee4ever on Fri Jan 25, 2019 7:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 7:33 am

What is not realistic? I have only mentioned current problems, which are also a reason for justified criticism. If salespeople are already annoyed, then I don't even want to know how customers see it.
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 8:05 am

There is not much to understand, ask all customers. The customer does not want to be a beta tester. He pays and immediately expects a fully functioning product. This is certainly also BMD's goal, the product must work. In most cases there is no feedback, but a return of the product. I mention the current problems to show that criticism of BMD is justified. And yes, I already dream of an improved firmware with 48,50 or 60fps. :) But even in this case it is simply ignored. A nightmare :roll: I can't see that in a positive light. :geek:
Offline

Chris Whitten

  • Posts: 500
  • Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 9:40 am

This idea that customers are 'betatesters' is overblown.

I've used my BMPCC4K twice so far and not had a single issue.
Youtube is awash with videos from owners showing lovely looking videos made with the BMPCC4K.
Yes, regrettably there are a few people having issues. That's not great. But I think there are a large silent majority happily getting on with it, using their BMPCC4K and getting great results.
Chris Whitten
Offline
User avatar

Valery Axenov

  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:49 am
  • Real Name: Valery Axenov

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 10:43 am

Australian Image wrote:
lee4ever wrote:There is not much to understand, ask all customers. The customer does not want to be a beta tester. He pays and immediately expects a fully functioning product.


Show me one product, any product, that's newly introduced and which works perfectly for everyone. A simple product like a hammer can have manufacturing issues.


I should say that I have couple of products that works fine directly from the factory. First is my Beaulieu R16 from 1972. Still working fine with great footage.)
Second Linhof III (1953) and ContaxIIa from 1952. No problems, no issues both in factory specifications. I do not mention lenses from early 1900 and 1930 Goerz and Voigtlander.))

Technological revolution changed everything... (c)
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 10:58 am

Australian Image wrote:Show me one product, any product, that's newly introduced and which works perfectly for everyone. A simple product like a hammer can have manufacturing issues.


I've never had such a perfect camera that just turns itself off before. Come on. This isn't a joke. I'll tell you, if the salesman is already angry about the BMPCC4K returns, then for what reason? Right, apparently there are serious problems with that, there have been customer complaints and the waiting times are long until a functioning one comes back. He no longer sells the BMPCC4K. Can I do anything? No. I'm just saying what I've seen so far (two BMPCC4K and both had problems) and that, what I've been told.

Is it bad if I write it like that? No, that should be allowed to do. Also at youtube there are reports about problems with battery door... or the camera simply turns off... or that after a few hours, days... the camera no longer works.
BMD reacts and takes care of it, but annoying.

Stop dreaming. The lack of 50/60fps isn't a fault, it's a feature.


I didn't say it was a mistake, but a deliberate deactivation to point to other cameras (similar to Sony's politics). If I read at Xilinx that the Spartan 6 FPGA chip has no problems with high speed (!) cameras (without fan cooling) and also read that the (Fairchild Imaging CIS1910F) sensor can 100fps, then this is a conscious deactivation. And I think that's a pity. Is it bad if I write it like that? No!
There's nothing wrong with asking here. What's bad is that no answer comes from BMD. A factual justification and more is not required. What was previously thought to be justified (it all gets too hot etc.) is incompatible with the FPGA chip and sensor manufacturer.
Last edited by lee4ever on Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:35 am, edited 4 times in total.
Offline

Chris Whitten

  • Posts: 500
  • Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 11:20 am

Trouble is it is all heresay.
People don't post on blogs and on videos if their camera is working just fine.
They started shipping in September and 3 months later with thousands delivered there are what, a dozen videos on Youtube reporting problems.
So far my camera stays on, no issues with the battery door, no dead pixels, absolutely no issues with the Wise SSD (which I highly recommend by the way).
Chris Whitten
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 11:24 am

Chris Whitten wrote:Trouble is it is all heresay.
People don't post on blogs and on videos if their camera is working just fine.
They started shipping in September and 3 months later with thousands delivered there are what, a dozen videos on Youtube reporting problems.
So far my camera stays on, no issues with the battery door, no dead pixels, absolutely no issues with the Wise SSD (which I highly recommend by the way).


Then you have received a Perfect Camera. Others can only hope that they also get a BMPCC4K that has no flaws.
Offline

Chris Whitten

  • Posts: 500
  • Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 12:56 pm

Sure, that may be the case for the large majority of Pocket 4K customers.
We don't know. So it's disingenuous to call Pocket 4K owners 'beta testers' and which shows 'criticism of BMD is justified'.
Criticism is justified if you are unfortunate to have bought a defective Pocket 4K. If you are just imagining many more people have bought defective Pocket 4K's it isn't justified IMO. It's just being negative to support your own agenda.
Chris Whitten
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 277
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 1:18 pm

@Chris,
I have only reported what a trusted vendor has said and only that I have seen two problematic BMPCC4K. That confirmed his statement.
The way it looks, the cameras aren't tested before delivery? I wish BMD would change that in the future and test the cameras before delivery to make both sides happy.

I like to be betatester for BMPCC with 48,50 or 60fps. :)
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 3:34 pm

Australian Image wrote:It's one thing to discuss manufacturing/assembly/firmware issues associated with a newly introduced camera; however, it's a completely different and entirely unrelated issue dreaming about, if not demanding, the resurrection of a long superseded camera. Get real.


Then don't sign up for the hackaday email notifications (just removed them, to many emails a day). There must be thousands to tens of thousands of hacking projects for obsolete products out there. Example:

https://hackaday.com/2018/01/03/vectrex ... -in-color/
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2145
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: Why did BM give up the BMPCC?

PostFri Jan 25, 2019 4:03 pm

Aaron Swann wrote:Sorry Wayne had to go to work, that's what we do in the real world. Can't sit around all day lurking in these forums.

My comprehension of all things in this forum is sound Wayne, what is it you are actually doing on this forum? You regularly state that people steal your intellectual property yet you continually blurt out your ideas. You criticize Blackmagic design then state that your wanting to initiate conversation with BMD for exchanging of ideas. I don't believe you've ever owned a Blackmagic camera. I'm quiet certain that you're not into cinematography. This is a cinematography Forum, hence why I come on here and act like a jerk towards you, nothing you post is specific to cinematography, ...


You must be confused. There has only been a couple of incidences regarding theft I know of, and I rarely mention them. So again, no "regularly stating others steal". That's a very simplistic way of viewing it, and in my own defence from your harrasing us, not real. I mention a lot of stuff others may hear, and eventually others discover similar things to me, but not really "theft" in the real world. Again you simplistically talk about criticism, and in the real world actual professionals use constructive criticism and encouragement to better things (though, cutting firmware upgrades early after massive delays in updating left people with problems, was not in my opinion good and constructive) but you don't see that part. Or of my admiration for BM enough to offer then a product partnership. You dream you know about me, but I have actual knowledge and skill. But you offer virtually no valid or constructive criticism, just dreams of how what you say was right and others wrong, without work towards correctness or regard. How continually offensive, yet I put up with it taking time to answer correctly, to consider what is said and the actual limits of the situation/reality.

Just because one can't comprehend, doesn't mean it's not real. A basic principle in understanding, which requires work to understand.

You are overstating your case again Aaron, because you are wrong. You even come along making out that cameras have nothing to do with cinematography (I'm not overstating, I'm merely pointing out what your statements add up to) which makes similar sense to everything else you have been saying. It is Not, sound reasoning, it is the opposite. I am sorry you have to feel it's your mission ("jerk"y mission by your own admission) to waste hours a day of my time, in pursuit of innocents defending others and reality of the truth. It is unreasonable to do all this pointless stuff, please stop! You only continue to dig a hole, and we are not here for your superiority by rubbishing us, please apologise.

It's not called lurking, it's called stalking.

Time to leave Lee and all for it, to it, and if the thread goes quiet, OK. Asides requiring me defend truth, are not necessary.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
PreviousNext

Return to Cinematography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Andy Coulthurst, AP Hunt, Denny Smith, Iain Bason, jmadeja, ph2003, pnguyen720, Rakesh Malik, ttakala and 33 guests