Blackmagic Forum

Just wow! Indeed. Whoa!

BTS:

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/produc ... ne/gallery
Additional 17K footage in the UCine Gallery Page on BMD Website. And, The Ranch footage looks incredible!

I hope BMD has a popup theatre at NAB2025 to showcase this URSA Cine 17K 65 and 12K LF footage in a proper presentation with ushers to close the access and turn down the lights and pickup the shattered naysayers after the show is over.

Blessed are the children coming of age in 2025 who will create art with these tools that seem limitless and uncompromising, that only seem beyond reach but are within their grasp.

Great images from Florent as always.

I feel there is lot more to this sensor outside the nature, deep in the shadows...

Very dreamy and smooth footage, I feel it can get pushed further before it breaks.

The Ranch:

As I said above this is some of my favorite footage so far released from the 17K 65mm.

I loved Iceland footage from Florent as well. As always he delivers the goods.

timbutt2 wrote:The Ranch:

As I said above this is some of my favorite footage so far released from the 17K 65mm.

I loved Iceland footage from Florent as well. As always he delivers the goods.

Yes, this is what I meant, great range in this clip, colour is bit conservative, which is subjective off course, love to see more colour separations, vibrant colours in one of the clips...

Stunning !

I really like Florent Piovesan - think he's a great documentary filmer. I think the super large sensor is a little bit wasted on his style of grading (pretty contrasty and using filmconvert as a basis). Some of the color and detail get a bit crushed in my opinion. Very pretty shots though.

That ranch footage is insane.

EDIT: My autocorrect absolutely butchered your name.

timbutt2 wrote:https://youtu.be/59SyIMD48hU?si=DRgQN55PmTwICktz
Just wow! Indeed. Whoa!

BTS:

Thank you for sharing Tim!
It was an absolute privilege to be a part of this .

Darko Djerich wrote:Great images from Florent as always.

I feel there is lot more to this sensor outside the nature, deep in the shadows...

Very dreamy and smooth footage, I feel it can get pushed further before it breaks.

Thank you!!

Sean van Berlo wrote:I really like Fiorent Posovan - think he's.a great documentary filmer. I think the super large sensor is a little bit wasted on his style of grading (pretty contrasty and using filmconvert as a basis). Some of the color and detail get a bit crushed in my opinion. Very pretty shots though.

That ranch footage is insane.

Thanks for the compliment! Just to clarify I didn't grade this. I really like how it turned out though .

Anyone got a VIMEO link? I always prefer the vimeo uploads.

Love that 65mm look! Curious how the 17K performs with Sekor C lenses.

I’m also wondering how Blackmagic deals with support and warranty. In case something fails after two years, is there still any form of support or service available?

I wonder how far off before 8k TVs are more popular and standard?
With upscaling and now, cameras that can shoot beyond 8k, I think some people will want to get an IMAX lite version of a theatre at home, just like the 90’s used to feel, haha.

I remember when surround sound started popping up… everyone I know was converting their basements into home theaters. It seems there’s still a few that do this, but I think the demand has been more mobile/phone screen usage. It’s just a shame, IMO.

Sean van Berlo wrote: I think the super large sensor is a little bit wasted on his style of grading (pretty contrasty and using filmconvert as a basis). Some of the color and detail get a bit crushed in my opinion. Very pretty shots though.

That ranch footage is insane.

I graded all 4. Florent's work in Iceland, the BTS for it, Dylan's ranch footage and the BTS for it. You can blame me.

Damn, I'll be eating crow tonight. In that case - great job on the grading Hook, even though the Iceland footage wasn't quite to my taste. Was I right in saying that you were going for film emulation? Perhaps with the Film Look Creator tool?

The Ranch (cowboy/girl stuff) looks incredible. I know they were using top-tier glass as well, but man, oh, man, does it look insanely good. So much color depth and dynamic range.

I thought it was insightful when he mentions in the BTS about how a 55mm looks on a 65mm sensor size. You're able to get a lot of subject separation while still getting a great looking wide.

That shot of moving the camera around the two cowboys gave me a very brief moment of vertigo as my brain expects to be seeing a flat screen, but it was almost 3D in the ability to separate foreground from background to that extent revealed by the motion; if the camera was static, the brain sees what it expects, but it’s obvious these cameras will unleash new immersive engagements beyond the modest camera movement used in that clip.

It’s so recent that we heard so many shooters say “12K, I don’t need 12K!” By the end of NAB2025, it wouldn’t surprise me to have some of those people walk back their prior criticism by saying “17K! I need 17K now.”

It’s not really about 17K, it’s about the whole package. It may not be an ARRI or a Venice 2, but the Cine 17K is peeking from behind the red curtain, as the audience shuffles to their seats, eager to have stolen the show.

rick.lang wrote:It’s so recent that we heard so many shooters say “12K, I don’t need 12K!” By the end of NAB2025, it wouldn’t surprise me to have some of those people walk back their prior criticism by saying “17K! I need 17K now.”

It’s not really about 17K, it’s about the whole package. It may not be an ARRI or a Venice 2, but the Cine 17K is peeking from behind the red curtain, as the audience shuffles to their seats, eager to have stolen the show.

I totally agree, after using the cam for a couple of weeks it's definitely not just about the resolution but also very much about depth and the feeling I got filming and seeing the footage. Resolution is of course extremely handy in post, huge flexibility!

Sample footage looks amazing. Brings back so many memories to my Iceland trip about a decade ago.

I do wonder, as I sit here watching this streamed in 4k, how much difference there would be if the film were shot with the 12K versus 17k? For punching in I certainly can see why 17k would be far superior, if the full 17k sensor capability was used.

The grading looks great to me, video looks very much as I remember many of those places being in person. The lighting in Iceland was very challenging when I was there over the summer, because of the position of the sun and the extreme contrast in some scenery, not to mention the weather It's very different than filming say a national park in the USA.

Traveling with this beast of a camera and all its ancillaries must also have been somewhat of an ordeal. As a solo operator on a family trip, I had a hard enough time with just a compact Sony mirrorless camera! Having an AC surely helps but still that's a lot of volume and pounds of equipment to bring and set up at each filming site, and while Iceland looks small on a map it takes a long time driving to various scenic sites, and some places a bit of walking is required. Speeding is not really an option as cameras were everywhere and fines brutal. As were rental car prices, be prepared for that to anyone planning a trip there.

I'm still thinking a Ronin 4D (with the new VIltrox f1.4 cine lens set + 17-28 DJI kit zoom) is a better choice for my travel needs, although there are a few things about that camera I do not like, particularly the costly 1TB proprietary (chipped) SSDs and the very limited codecs available with the 8k head. Also the audio options are poor, only lenses < 1kg work with the 4-axis gimble, and cannot use a matte box with the LIDAR focus system (which is inferior to their current DJI Focus Pro setup). On the other hand, it's largely ready to go out of the case and proper tripod not really necessary, hence desirability for travel. Hoping to eventually have Cine12k & Ronin 4D, then I can use my Sony Mirrorless setup primary for photography and social media videos.

I’m guessing the immersive feeling is more about the sensor size than the resolution. Is that it or is it more about the magic in the novel way the sensor works?

There's an element of mysticism -- trying to be polite -- about the supposed aesthetics of large format sensors. Apart from reduced depth of field for any given field of view at any given distance compared to a smaller sensor, which is just optics, it's a bit dubious....

We can agree the settings are spectacular, but I'd say we're looking mostly at grading. Nobody shoots no-budget movies on 65mm film, but if they did, it would become obvious how little the format (or the film stock, for that matter) has to do with the look of the thing, in itself.

This isn't to claim that this camera offers no advantages. But magic? Well..... Bring out the double blind tests first.

going from s35 to FF, for me, it's about getting more separation from subject-to-background shots at wider fields of view. Other than than, I can't imagine how anyone can tell the difference between the URSA Cine 12k and the Ursa 17k on close ups of faces.

But yes, the color and dynamic range has been the best looking image from BMD we've seen, IMO.

Adam Langdon wrote:going from s35 to FF, for me, it's about getting more separation from subject-to-background shots at wider fields of view…

My perceptual vision goes from mostly Super16 and mirrorless, to Super35, to 135 film (aka full frame), to ‘65’ (otherwise known as medium format). There’s quite a difference across that range in how you perceive the image when the camera is in motion.

It’s not magic that results from deception, but our visual cortex is doubtless an illusionist at perceiving whatever is in our field of view (assuming one is not afflicted by psychosis).

CaptainHook wrote:

Sean van Berlo wrote: I think the super large sensor is a little bit wasted on his style of grading (pretty contrasty and using filmconvert as a basis). Some of the color and detail get a bit crushed in my opinion. Very pretty shots though.

That ranch footage is insane.

I graded all 4. Florent's work in Iceland, the BTS for it, Dylan's ranch footage and the BTS for it. You can blame me.

I like your grades! Very nice job! I loved the Ranch footage a lot. Since it had more skin tones to be able to analyze.

Sean van Berlo wrote:Was I right in saying that you were going for film emulation? Perhaps with the Film Look Creator tool?

I used FLC (Film Look Creator) on all of it (with different settings), yes. But I originally made FLC to help my own grading so that's probably not surprising.

CaptainHook wrote:

Sean van Berlo wrote:Was I right in saying that you were going for film emulation? Perhaps with the Film Look Creator tool?

I used FLC (Film Look Creator) on all of it (with different settings), yes. But I originally made FLC to help my own grading so that's probably not surprising.

FLC is definitely my favorite new tool inside Resolve. So thank you so much for designing it Hook! And, I'm looking forward to seeing what updates come to it in Resolve 20 at NAB 2025. Hoping for more film emulations.

Feed us more 65 magic (clips) BMD ... some kind of Indian Bombay disco really colourful , something like ARRI did

I want to see a sort of epic sci-fi shot on the UC17K.

****! That's sick!

I wish these things were shot with a dual rig with the camera and a comparison camera. I know it’d be a lot more work but it’d be so much more useful and compelling to see what difference the actual camera made.

Probably counter though to the camera maker’s interests as it probably wouldn’t show enough benefit these days since most cameras are “more than enough” to make a very compelling image.

Joe Shapiro wrote:… it’d be so much more useful and compelling to see what difference the actual camera made…

Cine 17K 65 and Cine 12K LF when viewed in their intended presentation are going to be an apple and oranges comparison.

To make it apples to apples, with the same cropped resolution, they’re likely going to be identical. But both open gate will be different at open gate due to the significantly larger/smaller sensor coverage, the longer/shorter lens used, the higher/lower open gate resolution.

You have to think that the 17K will be superior for plate work, but even for narrative recording, it’s going to look different than 12K for a given shot, especially with camera movement in my opinion.

rick.lang wrote:

Joe Shapiro wrote:… it’d be so much more useful and compelling to see what difference the actual camera made…

Cine 17K 65 and Cine 12K LF when viewed in their intended presentation are going to be an apple and oranges comparison.

To make it apples to apples, with the same cropped resolution, they’re likely going to be identical. But both open gate will be different at open gate due to the significantly larger/smaller sensor coverage, the longer/shorter lens used, the higher/lower open gate resolution.

You have to think that the 17K will be superior for plate work, but even for narrative recording, it’s going to look different than 12K for a given shot, especially with camera movement in my opinion.

Cine 17k is clearly intended for IMAX delivery and any comparing on YouTube while watching on 8bit / 10 bit screen is pointless.

Bit like driving Ferrari thru Sydney CBD , looks great but still stuck at 20km/h along with other Corollas.

Real challenge or proof of success will be when it is put against others 65mm cameras both film and digital on the huge screen and pushed to the limits of the range and creativity.

Something BMD probably already knows how it holds up...

Could do an Alexa65 comparison. That’d be apples to apples!

Not looking different in that scenario would be a big win for BMD I’d think.

Darko Djerich wrote:Something BMD probably already knows how it holds up...

Well let’s see.

CineD rate the Ursa Cine as being the same as a Mini LF.

“ And here we go – we finally have a camera that shows better results (using RAW) than the ARRI Alexa Mini LF. ”
https://www.cined.com/blackmagic-ursa-c ... -latitude/

And then look at the Alexa 65 and the newer 265. Both cameras use stiched versions of that sensor…

Ergo….

JB

The wood textures in the hotel shot at 1:51 are extremely detailed.

for me, it was the drone shots of the truck's headlights in a setting sun that floored me. So much detail and latitude. The highlight rolloff looks really really great, especially in those 'hot sun' shots with the cowboys where the sun is actually in the frame.

Wow!


Does the model in the Iceland shot come with each camera?

The dog has blue eyes.

The detail on the dark side of the face in shot@3:03 while exposed for hot background. Amazing!(cowboy behind the scene)

On cowboy video exterior shots were any lights or grip gear used or was it all ambient?

Question for Florent:

In the interview with you, what was the thinking on crossing the 180 degree line?(sorry, had to ask)

Leon Benzakein wrote:Wow!


Does the model in the Iceland shot come with each camera?

The dog has blue eyes.

The detail on the dark side of the face in shot@3:03 while exposed for hot background. Amazing!(cowboy behind the scene)

On cowboy video exterior shots were any lights or grip gear used or was it all ambient?

Question for Florent:

In the interview with you, what was the thinking on crossing the 180 degree line?(sorry, had to ask)

Simple reason, time and space. I only had 1h to setup by myself as I was still shooting a lot at that time before I sent the camera back.
Originally we were supposed to do the interviews whilst on shoot in Iceland but couldn't find the time to do it.
So I had to do it at home asap and my studio space is simply too small to accommodate for 2 cams on one side unfortunately with lights/mics etc. Was fully aware of it but didn't have a choice .

Leon Benzakein wrote:… The detail on the dark side of the face in shot@3:03 while exposed for hot background. Amazing!(cowboy behind the scene)

On cowboy video exterior shots were any lights or grip gear used or was it all ambient?
…

My guess is they went with natural light and no bounce because they also wanted to see what 16 stops of dynamic range would look like. I didn’t see any artificial lights or lighting grip in the brief glimpses of gear we were shown. I’m always impressed with seeing a full steadicam and crane in action. Like a ‘destroyer’ and ‘aircraft carrier’ battle group. Glad they had the budget for all the gear that helps define cinematic footage.

Different cinematographer will have a different approach and take on camera, nothing wrong with that IMO.

I would be very curious where would DP Ermia Ramez @ermiaramez976 take this beast ...

John Brawley wrote:And then look at the Alexa 65 and the newer 265. Both cameras use stiched versions of that sensor…

The 265 uses a new version of the ALEVIII tech, and they squeezed another stop out of it. So it’s close, but not the same as the old 65.

Alex Mitchell wrote:

John Brawley wrote:And then look at the Alexa 65 and the newer 265. Both cameras use stiched versions of that sensor…

The 265 uses a new version of the ALEVIII tech, and they squeezed another stop out of it. So it’s close, but not the same as the old 65.

I would take this with grain of salt, I do love ARRI and trust all they say, however.
I personally shot ARRIRAW at least 20 hours of footage in extremely different environments with old Alexa and graded in Log C4, image is lot cleaner in shadows I can easily see extra 1/2 stop just by debayering Log C3 to LogC4 as that container allows for more info to be stored.

They probably did some enhancement in order to cool that sensor to fit such a small body but for the physics of the sensor, I am not sure, neither ARRI has clarified exactly what they did other then making LogC4 native format.

I think the greatest advantage of shooting in 65mm sensor size over LF and S35 is that you get a naturally widescreen image without using anamorphic lenses that is extremely detailed. The advantage of spherical lenses here really shines.

I'm not a big fan of anamorphic. Not as much a fan as everyone else. I do like it fine enough. But always gravitated to spherical. And, 65mm truly gets the best benefits of that spherical glass with keeping to a widescreen image.

This is basically the same image size as you would get using a 1.5X Anamorphic Lens on the LF portion of the 12K. But you have the advantages of brilliantly sharp spherical glass. The trade offs from anamorphic are gone.

Thus why I love 65mm and am so excited for this 17K camera.

I've shot still photography for sixty years, and saw Doctor Zhivago on it's release, so I'm pretty aware of image quality.
I have NEVER seen an image like Florent's Iceland on a film or digital sensor before. Latitude out the wazoo ('60's speak for a lot), and deep shadows to boot.
And the greatest gift of all: NO MOTION BLUR! I hate fuzzy images with a passion, so seeing these demos made me realize just how much I think motion blur detracts from the intended scene. It helped that Florent used some glass I've had experience with; the Tokina stuff is great.
Anyway, I just had to spout off about these clips, this is a camera to watch (pun not intended).

I'm going to download the footage and display on my close to 20 foot screen. Maybe I should organize a little NYC viewing party.

Richard Dean wrote:I'm going to download the footage and display on my close to 20 foot screen. Maybe I should organize a little NYC viewing party.

Can I come haha ?!

John Brawley wrote:

Darko Djerich wrote:Something BMD probably already knows how it holds up...

Well let’s see.

CineD rate the Ursa Cine as being the same as a Mini LF.

“ And here we go – we finally have a camera that shows better results (using RAW) than the ARRI Alexa Mini LF. ”
https://www.cined.com/blackmagic-ursa-c ... -latitude/

And then look at the Alexa 65 and the newer 265. Both cameras use stiched versions of that sensor…

Ergo….

JB

Screenshot 2025-03-24 at 10.20.49 pm by Darko Djeric, on Flickr

Florent Piovesan wrote:

Richard Dean wrote:I'm going to download the footage and display on my close to 20 foot screen. Maybe I should organize a little NYC viewing party.

Can I come haha ?!

If you are ever in NYC - sure please PM me.

John Brawley wrote:

Darko Djerich wrote:Something BMD probably already knows how it holds up...

Well let’s see.

CineD rate the Ursa Cine as being the same as a Mini LF.

“ And here we go – we finally have a camera that shows better results (using RAW) than the ARRI Alexa Mini LF. ”
https://www.cined.com/blackmagic-ursa-c ... -latitude/

And then look at the Alexa 65 and the newer 265. Both cameras use stiched versions of that sensor…

Ergo….

JB

Ergo…. Nothing changes?!

Help me out. The Ursa 17K and 12K share the same sensor. Opposite to ARRI the sensor in the 17K is not rotated 90 degrees, just extended in width. So the hight stayed the same.

Ergo the exact same amount of photo-sites is used to capture the talent on both the 12K and 17K using the same framing.
The stitched and rotated ARRI sensors increase sensels in both width and hight.