Ursa Mini Pro 12K is here

We are always learning from each other here, so I’m really looking forward to seeing the 45mm IRIX on the UMP12K. Good luck with the purchase.

Well, I think I have made the decision to get the camera. Right now I plan on starting with the 45mm T1.5 Irix Cine Lens (https://irixlens.com/cine-lenses/cine-lenses-45mm/ ). If that doesn't give me a look appropriator for the camera (based on everyone here!) then I'll step up to a Sigma 35mm T 1.5 High Speed Prime to start with. The issue I have is I cannot justify financially getting a set of lenses that are greater per lens than the $3500 cost. And yes, I know that is my issue and that my issues and real life requirements often conflict.

Honestly this has been the biggest issue I have grappled with. It's useless to buy the camera if I cannot get everything out of it that it can produce. We know what it can produce with a $20,000 plus lens, I just do not know the deficits you get with a lower cost lens.

This is why they call things like this "living on the bleeding edge"!

Funny enough, I've spent all morning and last night trying to find an IRIX 45mm near me to test on the camera. I'm not a fan of how the Sigmas look on anything just about, so they weren't an option for me, but the IRIX looks to have very very little CA and seem to be ridiculous sharp.

Unfortunately, nobody here in LA owns them so I may have to try the Dragonfly EF mount copy first and see where that goes. CAn't imagine them being any different other than housing.

Edit: should add, my CInealta MKiis resolve plenty on the camera, I'm just bored of the focal lengths (20, 25, 35, 50, 85, 135 zzzzz) so have been looking around. Will be picking up a 45mm Mamiya lens and a Helios 44 to play with, I believe they'll look very interesting.

If I were any less moronic I would just use the cinealtas and move on from glass hunting, as they render beautifully on the 12K body and can be had for around 8500-9500 for the entire set.

Very interested in hearing about what you see.

If I were any less moronic I would just use the cinealtas and move on from glass hunting, as they render beautifully on the 12K body and can be had for around 8500-9500 for the entire set.

Interested to hear your results too. I've been trying the SLR Magic APOs on the Canon 5DS at 50mp 135 full frame. They are plenty sharp in the center for portraits. . . of course I don't have a 80mp super35mm sensor to try them on. . .

SLR magic is making the APOs in EF mount for the same price as the IRIX and they have a bigger head start towards a complete set. SLR magic also updated their specs to say "suitable for 8K."

Ryan, which site is SLR Magic using now? In the U.K.? Sounds like the SLR Magic are still a good choice for BMPCC8K but they’re not as fast as the IRIX. Would like to hear which Fujinon zoom will be required. I have my eye on the MK zoom for MFT, but don’t know if that is still good for the BMPCC4K; it’s fine for the BMPCC4K though. And as Kholi mentioned, regardless lower resolution lenses may still be good. But not great I suppose.

And as Kholi mentioned, regardless lower resolution lenses may still be good. But not great I suppose.

Well, to be clear, I think they'll actually look great as well, just in a different way that I absolutely do not mind. Going back to mentioning the Leica Rs, they had an even more "nostalgic" film like rendering to me in motion, compared to my Cinealtas which looked much more modern "high end".

Both of these things are great, and I see the differences as an opportunity to further differentiate images during a time when things look pretty similar. I love it, I wouldn't be looking at Mamiya glass if I weren't trying to embrace it fully on both sides!

I see what you mean. You are really into the possibilities and it is important to establish looks that work for different purposes. When you’re doing a commercial, you’re going to want a different look than when you’re doing a music video or narrative work. So there’s room for many possible solutions.

I was feeling intimidated that these 2.2 micron photosites wouldn’t respond well but the SLR Magic APO are decent lenses and I may continue to get pleasing results from them on the BMPCC8K. That makes another camera more affordable for me next year.

Really appreciate your input.

Ryan, which site is SLR Magic using now? In the U.K.? Sounds like the SLR Magic are still a good choice for BMPCC8K but they’re not as fast as the IRIX.

They have them advertised for 8K on slrmagic.com and B&H.

I can see if I can post a few images in the SLR Magic APO thread if I can get to exporting them, the 5ds is 8688 x 5792, full frame, not sure if it helps the cause here.

I see what you mean. You are really into the possibilities and it is important to establish looks that work for different purposes. When you’re doing a commercial, you’re going to want a different look than when you’re doing a music video or narrative work. So there’s room for many possible solutions.

On the Pentax 645Z for example the 90mm FA 645 Macro is pretty much the default "sharpest" corner to corner for flat art, to the point where it makes the 55mm 2.8 AF look broken. I still own the 55mm and use it often for wide portraits where I don't need extreme resolution off center.

They are going to crop and then hit even finer pixels. If they are super sharp at full frame, they may still be sharp at s35 12k, but you either have to fibdy spec, review or photos to find out in advance.

Ask John who publically has the cameras, and see if any of them are using the lens in samples.

I'm going say something that might sound crazy stupid, just because I'm saying it. Why doesn't BM publish a page on suitable 12k and 8k lenses off it's product page, maybe with spec and maybe even a sample photo)? At this early stage there won't be many and it will be hard for buyers to figure out.

But if it was me, I'd prefer to buy s35 versions.

Several of us have the SLR Magic APO primes so I think we shall see some samples on the forum soon enough.

I’ve wondered why there isn’t anything official about lenses but I imaging the company leaves it up to the forum members to post samples. There are scores of good lens families so it might be very difficult for them to do justice to all the kinds of lenses we use. We could start a thread for people to post results for the new 12K sensor though, although we also have the Official thread to do that too.

We don't even have official media to use yet. I believe that the 2-3 week period allowing others to use the camera is their way of gathering some real-life field data that they need. Hopefully within the next 10 days we can get some guidance on a lot more items about the camera.

I will say that if the camera depends on glass like this it is most certainly not for the indie filmmaker..or most anyone else. really looking forward to seeing this in the hands of more people and a wider variety of lenses.

All cameras / images depend on glass though? Scour Vimeo for videos shot on any Arri body and still lenses, compared to cinema lenses. The difference is pretty apparent.

If anything, the sensor will take the unappealing edge off of still lenses and make them feel more palatable.

I’ve got a Voigtlander Ultron 40mm on the body at the moment and I think it looks quite solid. So did the Leica Rs. You will always get the best out of a camera using better glass, it’s just more exaggerated here and that’s not a bad thing by any stretch. Personally I love it.

I agree, but why do you think that is? I'm not enough of a lens expert to point out why things look different. Perhaps the ease of the mechanics makes getting nice pictures easier? Idk.

I have a set of Zeiss Milvus lenses -- sharp, fast, solid mechanics - but it does sometimes seem like I'm missing something, but I don't know if that's all in my head.

I will say that if the camera depends on glass like this it is most certainly not for the indie filmmaker..or most anyone else. really looking forward to seeing this in the hands of more people and a wider variety of lenses.

All cameras / images depend on glass though? Scour Vimeo for videos shot on any Arri body and still lenses, compared to cinema lenses. The difference is pretty apparent.

If anything, the sensor will take the unappealing edge off of still lenses and make them feel more palatable.

I’ve got a Voigtlander Ultron 40mm on the body at the moment and I think it looks quite solid. So did the Leica Rs. You will always get the best out of a camera using better glass, it’s just more exaggerated here and that’s not a bad thing by any stretch. Personally I love it.

I agree, but why do you think that is? I'm not enough of a lens expert to point out why things look different. Perhaps the ease of the mechanics makes getting nice pictures easier? Idk.

I have a set of Zeiss Milvus lenses -- sharp, fast, solid mechanics - but it does sometimes seem like I'm missing something, but I don't know if that's all in my head.

I couldn't tell you really, you'd need someone involved in the design and manufacturing of cine and stills lenses, but I can see it as well—at least in motion. Moving objects, especially people and faces, reveal it the most for me.

Some random still lenses have that "look" to them as well. The 28/2 Canon FD and 135/2 Canon FD have it, the rest in the set I'm not a fan of. The Tamron 24-70 VC has "something" going on that's caused me to buy and resell that lens twice now, and also the Tamron 17-50 VC??? Such an awful plastic lens but in motion it was quite nice.

The Canon 70-200/2.8 II, Nikon 70-200 ED VR, to a great extent the Helios 58/2. For stills glass, they all look quite wonderful in motion to me. Leica R's the same, but I do NOT like the Summilux glass in motion at all. That 80/1.4 was so flat in comparison to the 90/2.

I've owned a full set of: Zeiss ZE, Zeiss Contax, Canon FDs remounted to EF, Leica Summicron R late 90s, and a lot of different randoms and the closest I could ever get to it in stills were the Leicas. That's why I finally gave up and got Cinealta MKiis.

I was hoping to see more footage by now, especially some run and gun stuff, but what was exhibited motivated me to make the purchase. So I put in an order for the 12k, a few of the accessories and a DZOFILM 50-135mm. From the examples I’ve seen online with this lens, I’m expecting some impressive footage with this lens/camera combo.

Alex 16 blade iris should create very nice bokeh. Are you going to add the 20-55mm? Then you’re covered with two zooms. Will be curious to know what you think. Same housing design as my Tokina 11-20mm PL mount if you ever feel the need to add a third zoom! A range of 11-125mm is very useful.

@rick.lang I’ll get the 20-55 most likely after Labor Day and I have a Tokina 11-16 cinema zoom lens for mft and I’m not really impressed with Tokina’s image. It seems to leave an odd tint on the images I captured. Maybe the ones you referenced are different.

We are always learning from each other here, so I’m really looking forward to seeing the 45mm IRIX on the UMP12K. Good luck with the purchase.

I recently acquired an Irix 150mm lens, and I've used it on my Sigma fp and I'll be using it on my Red on a shoot this weekend. So far I'm loving it -- great handling, very sharp, and very neutral. It's also a macro lens. If Black Magic made lenses, that would be one of them.

I'm hoping to get a chance to try out some of the cine glass, and hoping that Irix will fill in the 90mm gap...

Several of us have the SLR Magic APO primes so I think we shall see some samples on the forum soon enough.

I’ve wondered why there isn’t anything official about lenses but I imaging the company leaves it up to the forum members to post samples. There are scores of good lens families so it might be very difficult for them to do justice to all the kinds of lenses we use. We could start a thread for people to post results for the new 12K sensor though, although we also have the Official thread to do that too.

It's too new and early to easily tell, and putting it here is only going make it hard for most users to notice, as many people won't come here. They are best sending a camera and some test charts around the manufactures to send back samples of which lenses are most appropriate. There is just a problem with testing different focus, zoom and iris effects. Big manufacturers will have their own individual test rigs, and you simply could order a video sweep of focus for each iris setting, but then you have to do all again for each zoom setting, and all of that again fir different light levels. 1x16x60x10,000 seconds not footage, too much. Cutting that back 1 (1 second 60 frame focus sweep) x16 (iris) x16 (zoom levels) x20 (light levels 10 low light) seconds= 5120 second test suites might be a good test, on a 3D test scene. You just fast forward and see if anything looks off at any time). That's maybe 512 seconds of fast forwards. The problem is setting up the angles of light in parrallel to test for various lens issues. The outer limits of the box. But, yeah, a listing and a few test samples instead is a start, people will converge on certain lenses, and the first couple of owners can report issues. But, that's just what I would do.

So, Rick, you could request to run a closed sticky top thread, where people submit lenses links and spec, and you approve the post, and modify as needed, and a second stick discussion thread, otherwise not even forum owners will find it easy to find good posts on all the best lens after they get burried eventually. There should be a lens sub forum with such sticky top threads, and an rigging accessories sub-forum, and post processing sub-forum.b such sticky info and frequently asked questions threads answer most questions without users have to reason them because theybare burried. But that's just what I would do.

Rick, this camera is probably no better than a 4.6k for dark lit stage work. I would carefully test it out before buying. I have wondered if this is meant to be a rental house favourite aswell. If so, you might be able to rent and test soon.

I imagine a lot of old Red's will be dumped on the market shortly given the Komodo this and the pockets. The little old tin bread bins (I've seen them) are probably going in pact low end sales, until people find out how much it costs to fix one, and as old ex rentals they might be sting it.

Actually, if everything is rugged, and rental houses reserve a pool of 12k's for pre-approved people who know what they are doing, they could rent at the same price as the Canon, crushing it in the rental space, given it's issues. Everybody else gets the higher rental price until they know how to look after one filming.

When I have no other choice, I’ve used the original UM4.6K in low light and the client’s have never complained, but I don’t like it. It’s certainly far better than my old Canon camcorder! I do suspect the UMP12K will be an improvement of the UM4.6K due to the RGBWWW design and downscaling from 12K. The claim of 14+ stops is likely reliable and that may be increased due to finer noise. The UM4.6K is referred to as a 15 stop camera, but you don’t get that in a low light situation of course due to the noise.

I hope it is aswell. But I say test rather than trust.

I thought you were using a pocket now?

I also use the BMPCC4K and really like the ability to shoot useful ISO 3200 as well as the light weight.

Yeah. I'm thinking of the low light and lighting contrast. Don't know if the 12k will handle it well. I look forwards to a fullframe 16k or so pocket. I hope that the 14 stop is extra clean in keeping with the high quality ranking, and binning will decrease noise and increase latitude. The images that people are in awe at, is because it is HDR like. Where is this 14 stops, on the clear pixels? So, we might get 16 stops+ out of it.

Notice how dark John's night sample is, but it's really clean on here.

Where is this 14 stops, on the clear pixels? So, we might get 16 stops+ out of it.

The additional stops would come from the resizing. There's no separate 14 stops on the clear pixels though, the luma channels are already combined to get the 14 stops at 12K.

Notice how dark John's night sample is, but it's really clean on here.

There's a night sample? I don't think I've seen it.

He had a full day of shooting from morning to evening so a few shots, one in particular of a dark-skinned male, is low light. Not remembering but I thought it was posted here. Take a look at John’s blog. Look at this about 1:10 and 2:00 to the end:

https://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2020/ ... es-to-12k/

Where is this 14 stops, on the clear pixels? So, we might get 16 stops+ out of it.

The additional stops would come from the resizing. There's no separate 14 stops on the clear pixels though, the luma channels are already combined to get the 14 stops at 12K.

I'm talking about sensor stops through the clear pixels. The colour filters themselves will reduce the signal to noise ratio. I'm hoping that using the different colours to achieve an independent ND effect on each pixel to extend range (highlight recovery), before even binning.

I'm talking about sensor stops through the clear pixels. The colour filters themselves will reduce the signal to noise ratio. I'm hoping that using the different colours to achieve an independent ND effect on each pixel to extend range (highlight recovery), before even binning.

I'm not sure that could be done before binning but I'm pretty positive it happens afterwards and has the same effect.

I mean in 12k, highlight recovery technique with a extra channel of colour. During binning that and more can be done. But is it binning or downresing in camera, I've forgotten.

He had a full day of shooting from morning to evening so a few shots, one in particular of a dark-skinned male, is low light. Not remembering but I thought it was posted here. Take a look at John’s blog. Look at this about 1:10 and 2:00 to the end:

https://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2020/ ... es-to-12k/

No stills. At 4k fullscreen on my maybe hd phone screen, I can see what looks like noise. Like thousands of Australian swimmers doing the Australian crawl, rippling along. Pretty much busts that. Am I wrong?

I’m not seeing that with 4K shown at 6K on Apple's Pro Display XDR (just cleaned screen), but I’ve no idea what I’m actually looking at in terms of compression or the site that hosts it, presumably Wordpress. John didn’t make that footage available as a BRAW 2 file. Now my eyes aren’t the best and there’s a lot of light in my room now. Anyone else see dancing noise from 2 minutes to the end of John’s first video?

The before image on the product page is very desaturated. Maybe the white pixels. How would this go in grading?

I’m not seeing that with 4K shown at 6K on Apple's Pro Display XDR (just cleaned screen), but I’ve no idea what I’m actually looking at in terms of compression or the site that hosts it, presumably Wordpress. John didn’t make that footage available as a BRAW 2 file. Now my eyes aren’t the best and there’s a lot of light in my room now. Anyone else see dancing noise from 2 minutes to the end of John’s first video?

Like I said a few times, It's not very useful to look hyper closely at noise from an OLD and PROTOTYPE camera that didn't even have the correct colour calibration loaded.

Here's a direct link



There's a FB discussion right now with 5000% blowups and examination of the noise patterns. I understand people want to understand the limitations of the camera, but again, this is not the final shipping product.

JB

There's a FB discussion right now with 5000% blowups and examination of the noise patterns. I understand people want to understand the limitations of the camera, but again, this is not the final shipping product.

JB

I guess they still haven't learned what "beta" means... sigh.

(Or alpha, for that matter.)

Looked clear with light on or no movement. If anybody has 12k frames, we could look. No samples posted from anybody in gallery yet.

John, surely the sensor can't be that old, or different


Rakesh, I do know what beta means, and you normally post recent samples to be more indicative of final performance, and hopefully with production chips while they are being pretested. But if it's from last year, all bets are off. But I presume the sensor is at least a last release candidate.

There's a FB discussion right now with 5000% blowups and examination of the noise patterns. I understand people want to understand the limitations of the camera, but again, this is not the final shipping product.

JB

I guess they still haven't learned what "beta" means... sigh.

(Or alpha, for that matter.)

No.

And EVERYONE seems to be missing the other three clips that are LIT and shot in a STUDIO...about half way down this page....


https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/produc ... iTsqnKqDNY

JB

They certainly have given us a lot to talk about this year.

Looks even better with the direct link to the video as I view in Picture-in-picture and expand to it’s maximum size (not blown up). I can’t see anything to be concerned about in terms of noise viewing this normally or looking a frame by stopping the video playback. That’s all I do to judge. Blowing up more than tow or three times just to see what’s there isn’t important regardless, it’s how you’re viewing footage. Didn’t see any issue when playback stopped. I have seen a ton of noise from my videos; I don’t have to strain to find it. The 12K production sensor on the BMPro12K production camera can only be better.

Sorry I don’t use Facebook for camera stuff with the odd exception if there’s no other way to communicate with the vendor.

Edit
Looking at the angry man with a chain, at the actual BRAW 12K file not a video; using BRAW player. The background behind the man and off to the side is very dark, certainly low light. I can’t see the problem of dancing noise in motion. Whatever may be there isn’t going to be evident in a theatre.

I can only see the old Braw clips there.

Thank for that Rick, turn what are they talking about on Facebook?

It's really about low light and latitude. But hey, let's see.

Wayne, the clips on the BMD Blackmagic raw page were not recorded on the makeshift camera John was using. I think CaptainHook mentioned they have the colour balance corrected and perhaps are the final prototype or first production run of the BMP12K camera. They’re also 12K BRAW 2 files.

I mean in 12k, highlight recovery technique with a extra channel of colour. During binning that and more can be done. But is it binning or downresing in camera, I've forgotten.

I don't know how it's doing the in-sensor scaling but byy the time you're seeing the footage, it's already doing that highlight recovery. Just averaging a darker luma channel and a brighter, clipped, luma channel would recovery highlights, clean up the shadows, and denoise the mids.

Code: Select all

{
   Tools = ordered() {
      Loader3 = Loader {
         Clips = {
            Clip {
               ID = "Clip1",
               Filename = "",
               FormatID = "JpegFormat",
               StartFrame = -1,
               LengthSetManually = true,
               TrimIn = 0,
               TrimOut = 0,
               ExtendFirst = 0,
               ExtendLast = 0,
               Loop = 1,
               AspectMode = 0,
               Depth = 2,
               TimeCode = 0,
               GlobalStart = 0,
               GlobalEnd = 0
            }
         },
         Inputs = {
            Depth = Input { Value = 2, },
            ["Gamut.SLogVersion"] = Input { Value = FuID { "SLog2" }, },
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 1510.56, 232.323 } },
      },
      ColorCorrector2_1 = ColorCorrector {
         Inputs = {
            WheelSaturation1 = Input { Value = 0, },
            MasterRGBGain = Input { Value = 2.21, },
            MasterRGBGamma = Input { Value = 1.89, },
            ColorRanges = Input {
               Value = ColorCurves {
                  Curves = {
                     {
                        Points = {
                           { 0, 1 },
                           { 0.4, 0.2 },
                           { 0.6, 0 },
                           { 1, 0 }
                        }
                     },
                     {
                        Points = {
                           { 0, 0 },
                           { 0.4, 0 },
                           { 0.6, 0.2 },
                           { 1, 1 }
                        }
                     }
                  }
               },
            },
            HistogramIgnoreTransparent = Input { Value = 1, },
            Input = Input {
               SourceOp = "Loader3",
               Source = "Output",
            },
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 1573.33, 174.242 } },
      },
      ColorCorrector2 = ColorCorrector {
         Inputs = {
            WheelSaturation1 = Input { Value = 0, },
            ColorRanges = Input {
               Value = ColorCurves {
                  Curves = {
                     {
                        Points = {
                           { 0, 1 },
                           { 0.4, 0.2 },
                           { 0.6, 0 },
                           { 1, 0 }
                        }
                     },
                     {
                        Points = {
                           { 0, 0 },
                           { 0.4, 0 },
                           { 0.6, 0.2 },
                           { 1, 1 }
                        }
                     }
                  }
               },
            },
            HistogramIgnoreTransparent = Input { Value = 1, },
            Input = Input {
               SourceOp = "Loader3",
               Source = "Output",
            },
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 1460, 174.576 } },
      },
      CombineLumas_1 = Custom {
         CtrlWZoom = false,
         NameSet = true,
         Inputs = {
            LUTIn1 = Input {
               SourceOp = "CombineLumas_1LUTIn1",
               Source = "Value",
            },
            LUTIn2 = Input {
               SourceOp = "CombineLumas_1LUTIn2",
               Source = "Value",
            },
            LUTIn3 = Input {
               SourceOp = "CombineLumas_1LUTIn3",
               Source = "Value",
            },
            LUTIn4 = Input {
               SourceOp = "CombineLumas_1LUTIn4",
               Source = "Value",
            },
            Intermediate1 = Input { Value = "(r1 +r2) /2", },
            RedExpression = Input { Value = "i1", },
            GreenExpression = Input { Value = "i1", },
            BlueExpression = Input { Value = "i1", },
            AlphaExpression = Input { Value = "1", },
            Image1 = Input {
               SourceOp = "ColorCorrector2",
               Source = "Output",
            },
            Image2 = Input {
               SourceOp = "ColorCorrector2_1",
               Source = "Output",
            },
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 1524.45, 132.495 } },
      },
      CombineLumas_1LUTIn1 = LUTBezier {
         KeyColorSplines = {
            [0] = {
               [0] = { 0, RH = { 0.333333333333333, 0.333333333333333 }, Flags = { Linear = true } },
               [1] = { 1, LH = { 0.666666666666667, 0.666666666666667 }, Flags = { Linear = true } }
            }
         },
         SplineColor = { Red = 204, Green = 0, Blue = 0 },
         NameSet = true,
      },
      CombineLumas_1LUTIn2 = LUTBezier {
         KeyColorSplines = {
            [0] = {
               [0] = { 0, RH = { 0.333333333333333, 0.333333333333333 }, Flags = { Linear = true } },
               [1] = { 1, LH = { 0.666666666666667, 0.666666666666667 }, Flags = { Linear = true } }
            }
         },
         SplineColor = { Red = 0, Green = 204, Blue = 0 },
         NameSet = true,
      },
      CombineLumas_1LUTIn3 = LUTBezier {
         KeyColorSplines = {
            [0] = {
               [0] = { 0, RH = { 0.333333333333333, 0.333333333333333 }, Flags = { Linear = true } },
               [1] = { 1, LH = { 0.666666666666667, 0.666666666666667 }, Flags = { Linear = true } }
            }
         },
         SplineColor = { Red = 0, Green = 0, Blue = 204 },
         NameSet = true,
      },
      CombineLumas_1LUTIn4 = LUTBezier {
         KeyColorSplines = {
            [0] = {
               [0] = { 0, RH = { 0.333333333333333, 0.333333333333333 }, Flags = { Linear = true } },
               [1] = { 1, LH = { 0.666666666666667, 0.666666666666667 }, Flags = { Linear = true } }
            }
         },
         SplineColor = { Red = 204, Green = 204, Blue = 204 },
         NameSet = true,
      },
      ColorCorrector3 = ColorCorrector {
         CtrlWZoom = false,
         Inputs = {
            MasterRGBGain = Input { Value = 0.95, },
            MasterRGBGamma = Input { Value = 0.7, },
            ColorRanges = Input {
               Value = ColorCurves {
                  Curves = {
                     {
                        Points = {
                           { 0, 1 },
                           { 0.4, 0.2 },
                           { 0.6, 0 },
                           { 1, 0 }
                        }
                     },
                     {
                        Points = {
                           { 0, 0 },
                           { 0.4, 0 },
                           { 0.6, 0.2 },
                           { 1, 1 }
                        }
                     }
                  }
               },
            },
            HistogramIgnoreTransparent = Input { Value = 1, },
            Input = Input {
               SourceOp = "CombineLumas_1",
               Source = "Output",
            },
         },
         ViewInfo = OperatorInfo { Pos = { 1517.22, 82.8282 } },
      }
   }
}

There. Copy and Paste that into Fusion and link the Loader to whatever image you want. This node tree will create two version of the image. Both are desaturated but one is brighter. Then it averages the two together and beings down the brightness a little to show that the highlight info is back.

The before image on the product page is very desaturated. Maybe the white pixels. How would this go in grading?

No. Not how that works.

Just some fun with numbers: given the
photosites are 2.2 microns and the Pro Display uses a 32” 218 dpi panel, like the iMac in terms of DPI, I would need a 45” panel to display the 12K pixels 1:1. That’s a lot of screen real estate to display about 80 megapixels.

If I kept the panel 32” diagonal, the screen would need to be 384 dpi roughly to accommodate a 1:1 screen pixel to image pixel view.

There isn’t a screen like that as far as I know.

That won't give you as good or much highlight recovery as recovering before the averaging. I'm about milking the most, to use on great images. BM agrees, so I'm very happy they are doing many of the things I talked about so long. Really great.

But, seriously I have seen desaturated images before grading, and that's a lot. The Sony pregraded images are looking more like the ones graded in the daylight samples. The desaturation looks like levels from years back. White pixels desaturate images, and have to be calculated out and saturated.

Rick 90 degree view at 2400dpi/2-8, depending on how close you are. At 60 degrees the detail should be not close to the visual threshold. It's not easy.l to put 12k on the threshold of vision.

Wayne, the clips on the BMD Blackmagic raw page were not recorded on the makeshift camera John was using. I think CaptainHook mentioned they have the colour balance corrected and perhaps are the final prototype or first production run of the BMP12K camera. They’re also 12K BRAW 2 files.

Rick, the only clips I can find, are the original clips from the Braw release years ago.



BTW, what's with 5:1 minium compression ratio? Did they change the compression type like I suggested?

Ok, found them John. The files Hidden, in the Braw page instead of Gallery, aren't on the mobile page, it's broken, instead it displays the old wedding blood from Braws release for the 4.6k.

I changed to desktop mode to see them.

So, is Captain Hook, Grant?

Rick, the only clips I can find, are the original clips from the Braw release years ago.

John linked you directly to a page with three 12k clips. It's on the Blackmagic RAW tab of the Ursa Mini Pro page and under the header "Feature Film Quality". There's three more on the first tab under the header "Generation 5 Color Science".

That won't give you as good or much highlight recovery as recovering before the averaging.

The averaging is what does the highlight recovery.

When you look on a phone, for some reason the BMD website links to the 4.6K clips.

Compression settings as detailed on BMD's webpage for everyone to read if they can be bothered...

They offer

5:1
8:1
12:1
18:1

And four different variable compression rates

Q0
Q1
Q3
Q5

No one has picked up yet that the clip of the woman that's the first one to download was shot at Q5. It's in the metadata and you can also use the "Get info" in the finder on a Mac as well and it tells you there.

If you do the maths on that with the file size then the compression rate is astonishing.

It's 60:1 !!

Other clips are at other rates but BMD lead off with the most highly compressed 12K shot as their first impression and no one even noticed that. I think it says a lot about how good Blackmagic RAW is.


JB