720p prores in enough to make bmcc the best camera???

hello respected members,
i am a new bmcc user.and after working on it for a few days i came to a conclusion that bmcc is a near perfect camera if see its cost (its 1000 dollars less than a high end dslr).,but but where it lacks is HIGH FRAME RATES.so i thought if at this image and price if we can get 60fps 720p prores (at least) it will be enough for a lot of users becz at 720p prores the image will be workable and might cut with 1080p.
is it possible ?what do u all the experienced ppl think?
thanks

It has been said many times before, by various people "in the know" that higher frame rates won't happen... and even if they did BMD would probably fix the other simpler issues with the camera first.

Being a DOP/cameraman for over 14 years (professional that is, as in tv doc etc), I never had a need for slomo... It's a thing of the last two years, like 3D IMHO

Slowmo isn't a thing of the last two years... if you consider that Bolex H16 reflex cameras could shoot at 64 fps (vs 24fps projection), that's a considerable slow-mo effect and those cameras date back in excess of 40 years.

I think that slow-mo, like everything else (incl. shallow DOF) is another tool for the cinematographer and as long as the production isn't saturated with it it can be used to great effect... and in that vane, the BMCC supports 30fps, which is quite often sufficient for a slightly dreamy effect (assuming 24 or 25p projection).

My inexperienced 2 cents .

Agreed, I am not saying that slomo in general is a new thing, but indeed is to the digital cinema(topographer). Aside from the super nice looking Vimeo test footage or the likes, I don't see it that much in use, on the tv shows or even feature movies. Not to mention "mainstream tv docs".

Yeah, pretty much. If I could I'd overcrank every shot of a music video to have the option of ramping in post, but I also have only rarely NEEDED a practical use of slowmo in a pro environ except, again, music videos. Movies, adverts, generally 24fps. If the BMCC undercranked would I love it? Absolutely, and I'd use it a lot...on music videos...but for practical movie purposes? Eh, rent a phantom.

I think you mean overcrank ? Unfortunately it seems you generally have to make a decision as to whether or not you want your footage to be slow-mo or not (as opposed to shooting everything at a higher frame rate so you can make the decision in post); slow-mo requires a higher frame rate, which invariably means that the shutter period is reduced which can create stroboscopic effects. This was quite evident in recent episodes of The Borgias, where various horse riding scenes made use of slow-mo. It was quite obvious when they had cut to slow-mo footage being played back at normal speed (due to the lack of motion blur).

I have used overcrank in most of my work. Most of the times being a very subtle effect, not slowing a bullet, but giving a different cadence to the movement. It is indeed a great tool if you can master it without making it visible.
People in this forum claim it is imposible to get BMCC to shoot at a higher frame rate... but i´ve never read any blackmagic designer saying so

Lord of the rings was filmed in 48fps

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-20676605

No, it wasn't.

The Hobbit was filmed 48 in order to accommodate the 3D, and still allow for a 24P version to be made for normal cinema. 48 was used for it's higher temporal resolution based off of the work of Doug Trumball back when he was developing the Show Scan system which is used in ride films.

And, one should note, outside of those two things very few productions have, or would, shoot 48P because it is substantially more expensive than 24P even in the digital realm. One a project like the hobbit, they have more money than god, sadly, but for the most part, it is non-sensical to double costs for the whole duration of production (you need 2x the storage as well as 2x the lighting equipment).

48P, if it even becomes the standard for 3d, which it might, is non-sensical for non 3d production.

Ok! Thanks for the clarification.