¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

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

Rafael Molina

  • Posts: 304
  • Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 8:49 pm
  • Location: Medellín – Colombia

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSat May 18, 2019 7:13 pm

Yeah, I’ve read it’s because of RED patent claiming about they were the first of including RAW recording in camera. The thing is, CinemaDNG isn’t RED’s. As long as Blackmagic can legally get a license from Adobe I’d say they can use CinemaDNG. I don’t fully understand the deal, RED would just have to sue every camera manufacturers because they claim “it’s their patent” I just hope Blackmagic to include CinemaDNG again, once this legal matter is solved, and improve their BlackmaRAW so everybody can use what workflow prefer.
Rafael Molina
Independent Professional Filmmaker and Producer
Medellín – Colombia


BMCC EF
Reseller: Televisión y Video Digital Ltda.
Ordered: 28th january 2013
Arrived: 5th june 2013
Offline

Chris Mo

  • Posts: 36
  • Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSat May 18, 2019 7:23 pm

@Rafael

The problem is, RED is bullying all other manufacturers one by one - I think Atomos was first..now BMD - and all the other companys can't manage to get together and once and for all shut RED down by going to court and tearing this strange patent down.

(RED itselfe doesn't make any real profit from its camera sales any more, so they ned to get the money somewhere else or kick competitors out of there market. So, our only hope would be, that RED is going bankrupt sooner than later.)
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSat May 18, 2019 8:08 pm

Nick Heydon wrote:
Anatoly Mashanov wrote:Well, I am an open source man and I use CinemaDNG to make stills (I cannot carry a separate camera for stills and Ursa Mini is also too heavy).

So can anybody advice me a way to import Blackmagic RAW to GIMP? Without such feature BMPCC4K is useless for me.

Edit: I know that BMPCC4K is advertised to have DNG stills. Is that feature preserved in latest firmware?


If you use the stills button, you get a DNG image on your media. It's only while recording video that you can't get DNGs on the newer firmware.


and I thought CinemaDNG didn't work on the newer BMPCC4K because of the new screen?
Offline

youlikeny

  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 9:45 pm
  • Real Name: Alessandro Penazzi

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSat May 18, 2019 8:11 pm

lee4ever wrote:
Nick Heydon wrote:
Anatoly Mashanov wrote:Well, I am an open source man and I use CinemaDNG to make stills (I cannot carry a separate camera for stills and Ursa Mini is also too heavy).

So can anybody advice me a way to import Blackmagic RAW to GIMP? Without such feature BMPCC4K is useless for me.

Edit: I know that BMPCC4K is advertised to have DNG stills. Is that feature preserved in latest firmware?


If you use the stills button, you get a DNG image on your media. It's only while recording video that you can't get DNGs on the newer firmware.


and I thought CinemaDNG didn't work on the newer BMPCC4K because of the new screen?


According to Blackmagic, the new screen requires a firmware incompatible with the older firmwares, it's unrelated to the DNG issue.
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 11960
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 4:38 am

Anatoly, I’m also looking forward to shooting DNG stills on the BMPCC4K Mark II. No firmware, licensing issues there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Rick Lang
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2396
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 9:04 am

youlikeny wrote:Here is a quick comparison, at 300%, of a shot with a huge amount of details, screenshot directly from DaVinci, no compression involved... CDNG LossLess vs BRAW Q0.
Just curious, would you call the difference in the details a deal breaker?
Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 16.00.53.png

Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 16.00.43.png


Put up better examples with detail. But you can still see differences in the white tower walk cable.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2396
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 9:06 am

Rafael, you really walked into it here.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

deezid

  • Posts: 243
  • Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:38 am
  • Real Name: Dennis Schmitz

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 9:16 am

Arri cameras don't do noise reduction and other filtering when shooting ProRes and have an OLPF. That's the reason why it looks so good.

cDNG was the only option to bypass the BMPC4K's strong internal processing and now it is gone and won't come back to newer models.
Download my 55M Advanced Luts for the Pocket 4K and 6K here:
www.55media.net/55m-p4k-color
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 2151
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: London UK

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 9:27 am

deezid wrote: BMPC4K's strong internal processing and now it is gone and won't come back to newer models.


What strong internal processing ?

I may be totally wrong, but it's long been the case that no BMD cameras have noise reduction or "internal processing" when recording to ProRes.

JB
John Brawley
Cinematographer
London UK
Offline

youlikeny

  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 9:45 pm
  • Real Name: Alessandro Penazzi

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 11:39 am

Wayne Steven wrote:
youlikeny wrote:Here is a quick comparison, at 300%, of a shot with a huge amount of details, screenshot directly from DaVinci, no compression involved... CDNG LossLess vs BRAW Q0.
Just curious, would you call the difference in the details a deal breaker?
Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 16.00.53.png

Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 16.00.43.png


Put up better examples with detail. But you can still see differences in the white tower walk cable.


So you can barely see differences in a 300% zoomed in still image... which means that there is not a “deal braking” difference in a 100% moving image, can we agree on that?
Offline

deezid

  • Posts: 243
  • Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:38 am
  • Real Name: Dennis Schmitz

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 11:43 am

John Brawley wrote:
deezid wrote: BMPC4K's strong internal processing and now it is gone and won't come back to newer models.


What strong internal processing ?

I may be totally wrong, but it's long been the case that no BMD cameras have noise reduction or "internal processing" when recording to ProRes.

JB


Well there's lots of spatial filtering (cDNG + fast spatial noise reduction at 4 provides very similar results) and some low radius sharpening (aka midtone detail) going on. And I'm not a fan of it.
Other's even think the A73 image is great - tbh it is quite terrible with strong sharpening (even at -7) and temporal noise reduction applied creating lots of ghosting artifacts and halos - even when recorded externally.

Spatial filtering can also be used to cover aliasing and colorful moire artifacts but it causes low frequency texture loss on the other hand.

Red and ARRI cameras don't have these issues independent of what codec has been used.
Download my 55M Advanced Luts for the Pocket 4K and 6K here:
www.55media.net/55m-p4k-color
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 3044
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 1:02 pm

deezid wrote:Well there's lots of spatial filtering (cDNG + fast spatial noise reduction at 4 provides very similar results) and some low radius sharpening (aka midtone detail) going on. And I'm not a fan of it.
Other's even think the A73 image is great - tbh it is quite terrible with strong sharpening (even at -7) and temporal noise reduction applied creating lots of ghosting artifacts and halos - even when recorded externally.

Spatial filtering can also be used to cover aliasing and colorful moire artifacts but it causes low frequency texture loss on the other hand.

Red and ARRI cameras don't have these issues independent of what codec has been used.


We've been through these claims before.... You've been repeating them for months now. Where are the samples of all this terrible processing, perceptible under normal viewing conditions? As I recall, the last time you were asked to produce proof, your example wasn't useful or persuasive.
Offline

Anatoly Mashanov

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2014 11:36 am
  • Location: Russia

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 1:11 pm

Nick Heydon wrote:
Anatoly Mashanov wrote:Well, I am an open source man....


If you use the stills button, you get a DNG image on your media. It's only while recording video that you can't get DNGs on the newer firmware.

Well, is there any method to import Blackmagic Raw into KDENLIVE or any other open source video editor?
Offline

Chris Mo

  • Posts: 36
  • Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 1:39 pm

youlikeny wrote:...
So you can barely see differences in a 300% zoomed in still image... which means that there is not a “deal braking” difference in a 100% moving image, can we agree on that?


It doesn't matter if YOU can't see it or if YOU think its not a deal breaker - there IS a difference and it CAN cause problems. This it not about your taste, its about objective facts.


Anatoly Mashanov wrote:...
Well, is there any method to import Blackmagic Raw into KDENLIVE or any other open source video editor?


What about going just one question further: How many programs do support BRAW? - Not many!
(And don't tell me "they will in the future", because that doesn't matter now.)
Offline

youlikeny

  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 9:45 pm
  • Real Name: Alessandro Penazzi

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 1:40 pm

Chris Mo wrote:It doesn't matter if YOU can't see it or if YOU think its not a deal breaker - there IS a difference and it CAN cause problems. This it not about your taste, its about objective facts.


Great, care to explain what "objective" problems can it cause?
Offline

youlikeny

  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 9:45 pm
  • Real Name: Alessandro Penazzi

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 1:47 pm

Chris Mo wrote:What about going just one question further: How many programs do support BRAW? - Not many!
(And don't tell me "they will in the future", because that doesn't matter now.)


Out of curiosity, is someone forcing you to buy a BlackMagic camera?
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 2:19 pm

youlikeny wrote:
Chris Mo wrote:What about going just one question further: How many programs do support BRAW? - Not many!
(And don't tell me "they will in the future", because that doesn't matter now.)


Out of curiosity, is someone forcing you to buy a BlackMagic camera?


You're unfortunately wasting your time here. Cdng has it's own workflow problems which is why prores is a great codec for many workflows. Arguing cdng is better than braw for workflow concerns is rather funny to me. Premiere and resolve, two highly used programs, have support for braw, which is a relatively new codec.

Prores is easily the most useful of the three in terms of workflow, but according to certain individuals in this thread, prores is a junk codec only suitable to use as a proxy and not useful on "high end"projects.
Offline

Richard Knight

  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:39 pm

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 2:27 pm

Premiere only supports BRAW with a third party plug-in which, at the moment, is for Windows only.
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 2:42 pm

Richard Knight wrote:Premiere only supports BRAW with a third party plug-in which, at the moment, is for Windows only.


And cdng is entirely inconsistent from one nle to the next. The argument regarding workflow benefits of cdng is just not a good one. Develop braw in resolve, you get it for free. If you have Windows, lucky you that you have a plug-in. If it's such a problem, don't use braw and shoot prores. There is not a clear benefit workflow wise shooting cdng which is discussed within this thread and others.

The only valid arguments here that I can see are based in either you care about the extra detail on cdng or not. Trying to argue workflow benefits of cdng is just a funny thought.

To be frank, I care not what other people choose, but the arguments in this thread and others about the benefits of shooting cdng and how these supposed benefits are greatly exaggerated deserve push back.
Offline

MishaEngel

  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 12:18 am
  • Real Name: Misha Engel

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 3:48 pm

Dune00z wrote:prores is a junk codec only suitable to use as a proxy and not useful on "high end"projects.


Their are no current camera's that can deliver an accurate 4k ProRes 4444 XQ.

For real high end you use ProRes 2k or upscaled ProRes 4k straight from the camera.

As an intermediate codec ProRes is just one of them.
Biggest advantage of ProRes is that it is completely opensource and that you can export it in 99.9% of the NLE's under any OS, or was that an other intermediate codec?
Offline

youlikeny

  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 9:45 pm
  • Real Name: Alessandro Penazzi

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 4:42 pm

MishaEngel wrote:
Dune00z wrote:prores is a junk codec only suitable to use as a proxy and not useful on "high end"projects.


Their are no current camera's that can deliver an accurate 4k ProRes 4444 XQ.

For real high end you use ProRes 2k or upscaled ProRes 4k straight from the camera.

As an intermediate codec ProRes is just one of them.
Biggest advantage of ProRes is that it is completely opensource and that you can export it in 99.9% of the NLE's under any OS, or was that an other intermediate codec?


Oh come on... Here it is again... For real high-end you use prores 2K or upscaled prores 4K straight from the camera? Yesterday you said that for real high-end you could only use uncompressed RAW 6K...

And ProRes is open source? It's the exact opposite of an open source format...
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 4:51 pm

I believe that my quote is being taken out of context. I said that there are certain people in this thread saying that prores is junk and can't be used in high end projects. I am not one of those people.

I'm all in favor of using prores even on "high end" projects.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2396
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 10:03 pm

youlikeny wrote:
Wayne Steven wrote:
youlikeny wrote:Here is a quick comparison, at 300%, of a shot with a huge amount of details, screenshot directly from DaVinci, no compression involved... CDNG LossLess vs BRAW Q0.
Just curious, would you call the difference in the details a deal breaker?
Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 16.00.53.png

Screen Shot 2019-05-16 at 16.00.43.png


Put up better examples with detail. But you can still see differences in the white tower walk cable.


So you can barely see differences in a 300% zoomed in still image... which means that there is not a “deal braking” difference in a 100% moving image, can we agree on that?


No, you picked a scene that deliberately had less detail because of smog etc that narrows the gap, and I still picked a difference at 100% on a frame on my little PHONE SCREEN.

Now, please pick suitable images in attacking people. Not the usual Braw is the bestest fan tricks. Listen to what the OP Raphael is saying, he's spent time seeing it beforehand, like others have, and is asking something entirely different and "on topic".

You might also look up how the human eye samples images, moving or not, at even 500th a second, and realise if you are not shaky cam extremist, dialogue leads to a lot of artistic moments of rest. The obfuscation of moving the debate onto more extremist areas in order to fan up some meaningless defence of 2k, Braw, Monochrome or whatever, is the problem, not people seeing the reality.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Steven Abrams

  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2015 12:43 am
  • Location: LA La Land

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostSun May 19, 2019 11:25 pm

deezid wrote:Well there's lots of spatial filtering (cDNG + fast spatial noise reduction at 4 provides very similar results) and some low radius sharpening (aka midtone detail) going on. And I'm not a fan of it.
Other's even think the A73 image is great - tbh it is quite terrible with strong sharpening (even at -7) and temporal noise reduction applied creating lots of ghosting artifacts and halos - even when recorded externally.

Spatial filtering can also be used to cover aliasing and colorful moire artifacts but it causes low frequency texture loss on the other hand.

Red and ARRI cameras don't have these issues independent of what codec has been used.

You are dead wrong and don't seem to know what gets done in camera calibration or debayering/demosaicing and how in just those steps alone you can completely change noise/sharpness that is nothing like your typical spatial noise reduction or low radius sharpening, even if you can't spot the difference.

You're also dead wrong that red and arri aren't doing anything with noise and sharpness in their raw images. Dead wrong. You may like it more, which is fine but they are doing processing in those areas no mater what you think you may know. It's also obvious if you've done work in this field and study their images. Or if you've done work directly for them.

Also, I really can't understand how anyone would prefer the dng images to the braw ones here:

https://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Bl ... schen.html

Image

Image

What some call detail here in dng is totally false detail. And look at the color moire on the dng horizontal line. Braw has much nicer smooth edges too. Yes, "use an olpf" but guess what your dng is then also just as soft as braw except the dng edges aren't as smooth and nice. Compare an olpf dng and olpf braw image. If you still say dng is better I can't help you anymore. Olpf doesn't fix the noise issues in dng that you see above either. Braw looks like normal noise, dng looks like digital hash.

The armchair expects here would get laughed out of any serious camera engineering room, especially the ones I've been in.
Offline

Anatoly Mashanov

  • Posts: 518
  • Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2014 11:36 am
  • Location: Russia

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 3:08 am

Steven Abrams wrote:What some call detail here in dng is totally false detail. And look at the color moire on the dng horizontal line. Braw has much nicer smooth edges too.

Have you specifically chosen the worst possible debayering algo in your DNG preprocessor?

Maybe BM RAW is better than my DNG front-end but I still lose the possibility to debayer as I like.

I am not a cinematographer, I am just an amateur and scientist, but I see the compression artifacts in almost every footage that is shown in electronics shops on every shiny and expensive UHD TV. Luckily I've discovered BM. Also, when I shoot my experiments I just want to see everything the camera gives. Wonder why doctors prefer lossless compression of their X-Rays?
Offline
User avatar

Valery Axenov

  • Posts: 163
  • Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:49 am
  • Real Name: Valery Axenov

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 1:16 pm

From above pictures it's definitely clear that BRAW lost a lot of data. That's the matter of fact. Amount of data your codec is able to handle have direct correlation to post production final quality of your footage. CDNG is much better from this point of view. And all this is pure math rules that do not depend upon what you see or do not see on your computer screen at the moment. It a basis principal.

Why BM do not give possibility to end users to handle all data available from the sensor and make his own decision what will be better for him, that is the question?)

ps Difference between right side of the test chart is a difference between expensive cine lens with good resolution and micro contrast and soft lens. It's possible from CDNG codec test chart to make soft image like BRAW, but it's not possible to return lost data from BRAW test chart. That's the main limits of BRAW.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2396
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 4:13 pm

That's right. Why do braw fans have to put up such bad examples and make excuses so often. The dng material had actual material pattern in it, the Braw one you could have been looking at liquid of some soft, or sand. How Cara's about moire, if you have the right processing that example could be processed out. It's obvious the misalignment of coloured pixels there really were the surrounding colour. But, if you did a close up of that size, the exaggerated miore going be minor instead. As it is at full size the amount of it is not going be as obvious as a blow up.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 6:38 pm

Braw has much nicer smooth edges too.


Really?

https://www.bmpcc4k.tech

cdng
Image

braw-q0
Image
Offline

Chris Chiasson

  • Posts: 542
  • Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:32 pm

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 7:11 pm

If CinemaDNG matters, it's a matter of downloading the old firmware, so I don't really see a deal breaker. If it's a matter of "But I want to have the latest updates AND CinemaDNG", well, it ain't happening.

But saying Braw isn't good enough, I'm sorry, but you realize everything you're shooting is gonna end up being displayed on a smartphone, or streamed to a TV? Like whatever "lossless" quality you're getting is gonna be gone for the final version that's shown to everyone. Including most 2K projectors in theatres, downscaling your 4K footage. So saying Braw and ProRes looks like crap, and unable... makes me question how you go about watching anything lately.

If you really want quality, why aren't you filming in IMAX? Why aren't you renting an 8K cameras? Why aren't you filming on actual film? Like if it comes down to the client, fine. But the client should pay for the equipment, so who cares if the client passes on the Blackmagic. It's not like you bought it specifically so clients can hire you. You should be renting equipment for clients anyways.
Offline

Chris Mo

  • Posts: 36
  • Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 8:14 pm

Chris Chiasson wrote:If CinemaDNG matters, it's a matter of downloading the old firmware, ...


No, you can't downgrade 99% of all Pocket 4ks!

(Maybe next time do some reading first...)
Offline

youlikeny

  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 9:45 pm
  • Real Name: Alessandro Penazzi

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 8:29 pm

Chris Mo wrote:
Chris Chiasson wrote:If CinemaDNG matters, it's a matter of downloading the old firmware, ...


No, you can't downgrade 99% of all Pocket 4ks!

(Maybe next time do some reading first...)


How are only the most recent ones 99% of them? They added BRAW in March, so every camera shipped between September and March can downgrade, seems to me a little bit more than 1%...
And those who ordered after March bought a BRAW camera, not a CDNG camera, so we are only talking about the people who ordered before March but received theirs after March... Pretty sure it's less than 99%...

Or am I missing something?
Offline

Chris Mo

  • Posts: 36
  • Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 8:51 pm

@youlikeny

Yes, you are missing one simple fact: They are all named/sold/advertised as BMPCC 4k and BMD is still not making any official statement about that there are different cameras and is still not even telling resellers.

Outside of this little thread, no one knows that there are two versions of this camera.


At the moment the ratio of the old Pockets is probably more like 10%, but in a few month many new bodys will have been sold and it will get close to 1%.
Offline

Chris Chiasson

  • Posts: 542
  • Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 4:32 pm

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 9:10 pm

Chris Mo wrote:At the moment the ratio of the old Pockets is probably more like 10%, but in a few month many new bodys will have been sold and it will get close to 1%.


Even if "newer" shipped Pockets somehow don't allow to downgrade back to an older firmware, that doesn't change the fact that it's a matter of buying one used that does support the downgrade. Just don't buy a new one if it matters that much. Doesn't change the fact that, honestly, I don't think it matters that much in the long run. At the end of the day, all final products are compressed from their original formats one way or another, and 90% of the time streamed.
Offline

youlikeny

  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 9:45 pm
  • Real Name: Alessandro Penazzi

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 9:21 pm

Chris Mo wrote:@youlikeny

Yes, you are missing one simple fact: They are all named/sold/advertised as BMPCC 4k and BMD is still not making any official statement about that there are different cameras and is still not even telling resellers.

Outside of this little thread, no one knows that there are two versions of this camera.


At the moment the ratio of the old Pockets is probably more like 10%, but in a few month many new bodys will have been sold and it will get close to 1%.


I'm sorry but how are all the cameras shipped between September and March 10% and the ones shipped in the last 3 months 90%?

And BlackMagic stopped advertising CDNG as a feature in March, clearly stating that the camera records BRAW and ProRes, it's 100% official. So anybody who ever opened their website can clearly see that since March they have been selling a camera that shoot BRAW and ProRes. So nobody of those who bought the camera after March can be possibly expecting a CDNG camera.
Offline

Frank Engel

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 11:09 pm
  • Real Name: Frank Engel

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 9:30 pm

Australian Image wrote:other camera brands that have CDNG available


Chronos for one...
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 9:34 pm

I've been doing a lot of YouTube watching as well as website reading since BRAW was added to the BMPCC4K and this is the only place where I keep hearing of people's lives being ruined with the removal of CDNG.


You seem kind of unsympathetic with your evaluation. Customers who bought the camera because of the cDNG support can get annoyed about the distance from cDNG. You can't accuse them of anything because they get angry because of it, and no life is ruined. For the affected customers cDNG is ruined.

Here you are addressed. https://www.bmpcc4k.tech
Offline

Steven Abrams

  • Posts: 267
  • Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2015 12:43 am
  • Location: LA La Land

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 10:06 pm

Anatoly Mashanov wrote:Have you specifically chosen the worst possible debayering algo in your DNG preprocessor?

This was done by Slashcam.de, very reputable site for testing/evaluating. This is what you get with the Resolve debayer, which is what 99% of pocket users complaining will use and get.

Valery Axenov wrote:From above pictures it's definitely clear that BRAW lost a lot of data. That's the matter of fact.

Not a fact. You have no idea what data came off the sensor and what happened to it before it was stored, and what additional data is being created in dng processing (which any demosaicing algorithm HAS to do). There is clear evidence there that the dng has false data/detail created. It's not real and didn't exist before the dng was debayered.

Its like when scientists show clear evidence of the shape of the earth, and the wackos scream "see, its clear the world is flat. That's a fact". :roll:

lee4ever wrote:Really?

https://www.bmpcc4k.tech

That website was long ago debunked for poor testing practices and incorrect data - easily verified. Slashcam.de which I linked to is the exact opposite. Of the two websites, guess which one camera developers take seriously and which they do not.

Here's the end of it though, dng is gone. Good riddance.
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 10:18 pm

Australian Image wrote:
Why do people keep quoting this same individual over and over again? Give me a list of 10 reputable people that dislike BRAW and can't work with it. And it's always test charts and static models. Pixel peeping at it best. I've never seen a movie yet where the story is about shooting test charts and table top models.


Its not that people dislike braw or think its unusable I think, its that according to these people its not as good as cdng for whatever reasons they are claiming. People are mostly arguing completely different things on this and are throwing up examples taken from different people running tests from two different cameras to argue about what codec is better based on mostly undefined points.

Whether or not a codec is good or bad is completely relative and generally, for most people, the best compromise of quality, durability, compression, cost, production speed, etc. separate "good" codecs from "bad" codecs and this is all project dependent as well. And believe it or not, compressed files like Redcode, prores, and now braw make a lot of sense for a wide variety of productions. Even H264/5 have a place in quality video products regardless of how much IQ purists cry foul.

The off-base claims here have been around braw or proes not being good enough for real work or higher end productions, which is utterly ridiculous. Its also not true that there is zero difference between the codecs. Whether or not cdng is producing false details or whatever I guess is up to whoever is looking at it, leaving "whats better IQ-wise" based in opinions which cant really be argued with. Somebody would need an engineer or scientist to prove it is or isnt false detail right?

And when was the last time you had a scientist tell you what was good or bad about art?

Now there is a new thing about people being mad because of false advertisement, which is fair.

Honestly the whole thing has got my popcorn stale at this point.

I'd say, BMD would be great to provide at least the lossless compressed format as cdng was originally promised on the Pocket 4K if possible to satisfy the iq purists and people who want what they thought they purchased. It would be a fair compromise to make, but the "unnamed patent troll" may have other words about that since competition from the BMD's newer cameras was evidently too strong to deal with.
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 2151
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: London UK

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 10:19 pm

DNG is gone.

There are reasons for it, but the position that BMD have made clear is that it's gone.

You can argue about what's been lost in BMD taking that step, but I don't think DNG will be back.

If you have a workflow that absolutely needs uncompressed then you need to move onto another platform.

There's no point really debating this point. The discussion here has degenerated into a pointless pixel peeping argument.

DNG is gone.

JB
Last edited by John Brawley on Mon May 20, 2019 10:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
John Brawley
Cinematographer
London UK
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 10:21 pm

That website was long ago debunked for poor testing practices and incorrect data - easily verified.

The tester comments on the accusations and has made new comparisons.

Here's the end of it though, dng is gone. Good riddance.


For customers who bought the camera because of cDNG, this means the following, Blackmagic Design has lost a professional feature. That's gone.
Last edited by lee4ever on Mon May 20, 2019 10:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 2151
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: London UK

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 10:27 pm

Steven Abrams wrote:That website was long ago debunked for poor testing practices and incorrect data - easily verified. Slashcam.de which I linked to is the exact opposite. Of the two websites, guess which one camera developers take seriously and which they do not.


I agree. Slashcam has a long established track record and the review in the linked article is vary fair.

They discuss at length the differences between false colour detail and what is happening with RAW.

The other site already has a mark against them for some erroneous testing methodologies. We don't even know who it is because for some reason they choose to be anonymous.

JB
Last edited by John Brawley on Mon May 20, 2019 10:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
John Brawley
Cinematographer
London UK
Offline

youlikeny

  • Posts: 149
  • Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 9:45 pm
  • Real Name: Alessandro Penazzi

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 10:43 pm

lee4ever wrote:
That website was long ago debunked for poor testing practices and incorrect data - easily verified.

The tester comments on the accusations and has made new comparisons.

Here's the end of it though, dng is gone. Good riddance.


For customers who bought the camera because of cDNG, this means the following, Blackmagic Design has lost a professional feature. That's gone.


How is CDNG more "professional" than BRAW? Can you use one in a professional setting and not the other? No.

Let's stop this nonsense, BlackMagic moved on, first they had DNG, then they developed a proprietary codec, announced that it was coming, announced that it would be on the new firmware released in March and finally pushed it to their new cameras.

For those few customers who bought the camera specifically because of CDNG, ordered it before the March announcement but didn't receive it before March yes, too bad, the pocket4K won't work for them. I'm just wondering how many are there and if the Pocket4K was the only camera on the market they were considering, because as far as I know, nobody is making people buying the Pocket4K against their will...
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostMon May 20, 2019 10:49 pm

How is CDNG more "professional" than BRAW? Can you use one in a professional setting and not the other?

Ask the disappointed customers. I personally find BRAW also professional, but in image quality, no better than cDNG.

Let's stop this nonsense, BlackMagic moved on, first they had DNG, then they developed a proprietary codec, announced that it was coming, announced that it would be on the new firmware released in March and finally pushed it to their new cameras.


The problem is that BMD did not inform in advance about removing cDNG completely. Some people are annoyed about this.
Offline
User avatar

Valery Axenov

  • Posts: 163
  • Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:49 am
  • Real Name: Valery Axenov

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostTue May 21, 2019 12:16 am

Steven Abrams wrote:
Valery Axenov wrote:From above pictures it's definitely clear that BRAW lost a lot of data. That's the matter of fact.

Not a fact. You have no idea what data came off the sensor and what happened to it before it was stored, and what additional data is being created in dng processing (which any demosaicing algorithm HAS to do). There is clear evidence there that the dng has false data/detail created. It's not real and didn't exist before the dng was debayered.

Its like when scientists show clear evidence of the shape of the earth, and the wackos scream "see, its clear the world is flat. That's a fact". :roll:



)) Unfortunately I know how test chart should look like in original. From pure physics approach I know better theoretical model and math gives better correlation to direct experimental measurements of the object. CDNG calculate better model with better math. Test chart is very simple thing. It's not possible to resolve it without available data. Less data = less resolution. This works for lenses the same as it works (let say) for film or digital sensor+math.

I have no interest to discuss which one look better for someone. I say only that CDNG operate more correct available data about the object. That's the matter of fact. Otherwise I should not believe my eyes.)) CDNG simply more close to resolution of fine grain film vs BRAW.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2396
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostTue May 21, 2019 1:08 am

The proof in testing has been established many times yet we have to endure a long rant in every thread with corrupt fuzzy logic (which is the source of all this). We even have given such diabolically evidentially fuzzy test charts that show Braw inferior, and are told the exact 'opposite'. The flat earthers have won, sort of idea. People are being fooled because they perceive a bit of grade out of braw, that they can do in cdng anyway, with better detail. And telling people to go buy other (E2 with raw) with raw is not helpful for the brand.

Bringing on some mode we can get real Braw out of please? Yes, it maybe 2:1 or less, but it will be ROBUST (and without the fringing).

Now, I don't want to wait for an 8k Braw camera to get descent 2k out of it (that is a lot of fuzz). So, we can stop with the mobile phone and TV like they are the only display solutions, and also realise that even when they are used the better the original print they compress the quality out of, the more details and better levels they can choose from to preserve in the finale compression. So, yes, that is why better cameras eben stand out of YouTube. If you are serious about your art you WILL want something suitable for a higher format on hand. Will you tube has Vern teeivke in the distant past, it has become better and better. In case people ha end noticed we are moving to h268/h269 where we start to get into redray codec territory and premium YouTube with be able to do cinematic imax quality. However cinematic 2k at 18mb/s is 266/267 territory. 266 is currently either out or coming, and 267 not so long in the future. 267 at 9mb/s is prime quality. So, yes, add as much fuzzy as you want but it won't be 2k on a 2k.

A test chart is what true professionals used to tell what is actually happening in an image and how it is performing, not wishful thinking.

The reality is the fuzz is ALL false detail, and there is a lot of fuzz.

Braw is great marketing, but we should hold off until we see what is coming next (no, not prores raw on E2 which will give a sensational according to the samples, but what will happen with Braw next). Coming in next post.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2396
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostTue May 21, 2019 1:47 am

OK. What could happen with Braw.


They get together with others (Apple, Adobe, Google and all other raw codec and raw camera makers to split the bill, and try to overturn the offending patent applying to all raw compression methods, as there is prior art publicly disclosed by David Newman over at dvinfo, and then sue for any possible damages, so say hundreds of millions in their favour.

They try to pay a license and use cineform's raw codec, wgich is a lot better to use with modern gpu's being able to process wavelet data (well Nvidias work on Redcode at least).

They try to convince a judge this is anticompetitive under the use walk like a duck, quack like a duck used to border discrimination cases, where you don't have to prove discrimination, only that the actions in question result in it. That the for the price of the patent license their whole codec should he licensed, opened up, the company slpit up like they did with Bell decades back, with the codec, and even asic designs going into a licensable open standard. Even Arri should be interested in getting on board with that. Some of those options.

Or the company stops demanding do much, modifies their patent claims and asks for less money per individual implementation (which they may want to do after reading the next bit).

I'm guess the jpeg implementation in Braw they found is jpeg 1. By going to Jpeg XR (which somebody said supports raw) they could double their visual quality, in a format that should be supported by processing hardware. This hopefully would allow a Braw file of similar detail as cdng at similar size, or better. Turning off or down certain things and getting rid of fringing from yuv people suggest, and macro blocking. Now, we have an alternative to the license thus devaluing the usefulness; of the license.

There obviously are reasons people don't want to buy the license and have made their own alternative. So, maybe the license needs to be cheaper and softened up a bit, so companies will prefer to license. But, if you went to Google and made your case that raw bayer would greatly increase their compression ratio, they would be interested in challenging or buying.the patent, just to get it in.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline
User avatar

Valery Axenov

  • Posts: 163
  • Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2018 9:49 am
  • Real Name: Valery Axenov

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostTue May 21, 2019 6:58 pm

Wayne Steven wrote:
A test chart is what true professionals used to tell what is actually happening in an image and how it is performing, not wishful thinking.



Reasonable question is how the same test chart with 2K CDNG codec will stay vs 4K BRAW? Available data pure technical approach only.
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 2151
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: London UK

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostTue May 21, 2019 9:52 pm

Valery Axenov wrote:Reasonable question is how the same test chart with 2K CDNG codec will stay vs 4K BRAW? Available data pure technical approach only.


I think the problem is that what some see as sharpness on a test chart, others see it for what it is...aliasing and false colour moire.

This is for post in stills, but gives you an idea of what false color moire and other imaging artefacts can look like in the real world. Thos orange and cyan colours in the test chart turn into this...

http://www.ishootshows.com/2012/04/09/u ... otography/

JB
John Brawley
Cinematographer
London UK
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2396
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostWed May 22, 2019 1:16 am

What people don't understand is that moire and aliasing are the actual nearly 100% authentic image as a Bayer pattern sees it, which is why you use an anti-aliasing filter and or processing to reduce it, and why the random colour filter etc were made. So is any of it cdng's fault, or is it that cdng is so good it shows them. We can see that braws attempt obliterates things with blurriness. So, if you want to process a better result, you still have to start with a better source.

The problem is that while Bayer detects the true edge of a detail within the pixel which gave BM the sharpness people bought it for, but each pixel gives one colour emphasising aliasing and moire problems. To get rid of this, they use the anti-aliasing filter, that spreads the light from each pixel into surrounding pixels, to contribute the light from missing colours to a pixel, getting rid of much of the problem. However, this reduces detail contrast between pixels and can be so wide that it could be 4 or more pixels in each direction making a more compressible fuzzy mess. I haven't counted pixel blur in Braw images, but like that. But non-aliasing filter is more a still camera thing because if the motion issues. Wide anti-aliasing I think is an old untra-cheap consumer pocket camera trick. I advocate vertical colour filtering with minimal anti-aliasing filter for better picture myself. You can process a lot of the Bayer artifacts out while retaining nearly 100% Bayer sharpness, and close to a vertical colour filter image, but I'm the only person on the planet I've heard of that can see that (which means it's probably 100% true). Braw can be a lot better, and we should concentrate on that. We would like the option of something as authentic to the Bayer pattern as cdng, or better the problems sorted out. That is where Braw can shine, and be licensed as a standard.

What can be done, minimal anti-aliasing filter (to cover a little more then the gaps between sensor pixel pads) random colour filter (if not vertical colour filter sensor) with a lot of work on routines to process out the artifacts while preserving authentic image detail contrast and sharpness.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2396
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: ¿Will Pocket Cinema Camera 4K include CinemaDNG again?

PostWed May 22, 2019 1:25 am

Valery Axenov wrote:
Wayne Steven wrote:
A test chart is what true professionals used to tell what is actually happening in an image and how it is performing, not wishful thinking.



Reasonable question is how the same test chart with 2K CDNG codec will stay vs 4K BRAW? Available data pure technical approach only.


Try 8k Braw. Actually, just examine dng from an equivalent good camera (still or not) with good anti-aliasing filter and see how much artifacting you get? It might take a little while to find the camera with the best implementation rather than be cheapened down to market (I.e. does any consumer camera with dng do it right?).
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: JordanWright, Username and 120 guests