Dynamic Range on TVC = AMAZING (love my BMCC)

Hey all, used the the BMCC today on a commercial shoot and was blown away with what we achieved. We were in a winery and shot underneath a tree in shadow and had full sunlight at 12:30pm in the day.

I used a Canon 16-35mm lens with Inca variable ND with a quick slight grade in Photoshop. I exposed by setting my zebras to 100% then once I hit peaking I pulled it back slightly.

Will post the full commercial once completed in a few weeks.

DNG available for you all to play with here.

https://docs.google.com/folder/d/0BzHut ... sp=sharing

BMCC DR 1r.jpg (993.54 KiB) Viewed 6425 times

Quick grade in resolve!

RESOLVE STILL.jpg (367.97 KiB) Viewed 6368 times

Nice! Thanks for sharing.

that's a nice shot! Love how well the BMCC holds shadow detail while exposing for highlights!

This is probably a stupid question, but with all this dynamic range and being able to pull highlights back in from very overexposed shots, why is an ND filter still needed?

Not a stupid question... there's a big difference between a shot that LOOKS overexposed, but is still below the clipping range of the sensor, and a shot full of zebra stripes (when zebra indicates 100%.)

You can't pull back anything at all once it has clipped... there's nothing there except the maximum value of the sensor. No matter how much dynamic range the BMCC has, if you're at the beach on a sunny day, you're going to need some ND to keep things in range.

Personally, I love shooting RAW so that everything is washed out... but I avoid clipping unless it's an isolated highlight or the sun. Then when you pull your shadows down in Resolve, they're clean and noise-free. ETTR, my brother. (Expose to the right!)

[CaptainHook]

You're not getting THAT much dynamic range. Even with an IRND1.5 outside here in NZ i'm getting clipping in the sky until i stop down to about F3.5~4.0 (depending on the direction i'm facing/time of day/etc).

Yeah, I meant overexposing without zebras showing. One of the first test shots I did was in the snow and I didn't need an ND at all. On a DSLR without an ND, it would have been quite a nightmare... though I guess it was quite cloudy.

[CaptainHook]

One of the first test shots I did was in the snow and I didn't need an ND at all.

What stop was that at though? Here in NZ the sun is brutally harsh (and we're just leaving summer now).

This is probably a stupid question, but with all this dynamic range and being able to pull highlights back in from very overexposed shots, why is an ND filter still needed?

No stupid questions here! I still used a ND because even in this light I wanted to achieve depth in the preceding shots and wanted to keep the look consistent throughout the commercial with the ND.

You're not getting THAT much dynamic range. Even with an IRND1.5 outside here in NZ i'm getting clipping in the sky until i stop down to about F3.5~4.0 (depending on the direction i'm facing/time of day/etc).

Well if you think so, but personally our lighting guy was stressing massively because he said there was a difference of 6-7 stops between under the tree and the valley behind. I wouldn't even dare shoot this scene on XDCAM or even DSLR. Sun was directly behind us so was blasting light straight into the side of the valley.

Nice shot and lighting. Did you use any additional lights or bounce?

Nice shot and lighting. Did you use any additional lights or bounce?

Thanks! We had 1 flecky up on camera right but that is all. Everything is is natural light.

This is probably a stupid question, but with all this dynamic range and being able to pull highlights back in from very overexposed shots, why is an ND filter still needed?

one reason is.. Shallow DOF

Very nice indeed, looks like it would've been a hell of a tricky shot without the added DR.

Very nice indeed, looks like it would've been a hell of a tricky shot without the added DR.

Yeah we were only just saying about how the stills photographer there was refusing to shoot in that scene and asked why would we ever do that... knowing that I could still recover the image in Resolve!

Nice shot and lighting. Did you use any additional lights or bounce?

Thanks! We had 1 flecky up on camera right but that is all. Everything is is natural light.

I'm not up on all the gear terms yet, or maybe it's an Austrailian term, is a "Flecky" an HMI? Or some other daylight source?

If you want to open up to f4 or wider, you'll need an ND to shoot outdoors.

[CaptainHook]

You're not getting THAT much dynamic range. Even with an IRND1.5 outside here in NZ i'm getting clipping in the sky until i stop down to about F3.5~4.0 (depending on the direction i'm facing/time of day/etc).

Well if you think so, but personally our lighting guy was stressing massively because he said there was a difference of 6-7 stops between under the tree and the valley behind. I wouldn't even dare shoot this scene on XDCAM or even DSLR. Sun was directly behind us so was blasting light straight into the side of the valley.

Sorry, my reply wasn't directed towards you. It was towards the question of 'why bother with ND's with that much dynamic range?'. To which i was saying if you want open the aperture up, you will still need it since the dynamic range isn't THAT large that you can open up that far without clipping the sky. I've tried. Which is why i said even with 1.5IRND i was 'only' able to open up to around 3.5~4.0, any more and i got clipping in the sky.

This is probably a stupid question, but with all this dynamic range and being able to pull highlights back in from very overexposed shots, why is an ND filter still needed?

I know a couple people have already mentioned that the use of the ND is to enable the ability to open up the aperture which will result in a more shallow depth of field and the background will then be increasingly out of focus. But, I'd like to note that most lenses perform best and are sharpest around a 4-5.6 aperture range. Some DP's will shoot consistently at these apertures for that reason. Also lens' flare differently at different apertures. So if you want to adjust your aperture to make use of the lens' full potential you'll constantly use NDs.

[CaptainHook]

I've read a lot of sources say 3 stops down from wide open is generally the 'optimum' but every lens is different and should be tested.

Nice shot and lighting. Did you use any additional lights or bounce?

Thanks! We had 1 flecky up on camera right but that is all. Everything is is natural light.

I'm not up on all the gear terms yet, or maybe it's an Austrailian term, is a "Flecky" an HMI? Or some other daylight source?

Sorry "Flecky" is a large reflector screen like a silver reflective surface on a board, unsure of the exact term.

I'm not up on all the gear terms yet, or maybe it's an Austrailian term, is a "Flecky" an HMI? Or some other daylight source?[/quote]
Sorry "Flecky" is a large reflector screen like a silver reflective surface on a board, unsure of the exact term.[/quote]

Got it. Thanks for the clairification! It would be interesting to see a shot without the reflector fill to see how much effect it makes in the shadows.

Sometimes referred to as a "flecky board", this is a specially-designed reflective surface which is usually used to act as a secondary light source. It is particularly useful as a fill light when working in strong sunlight.

Very nice indeed, looks like it would've been a hell of a tricky shot without the added DR.

Yeah we were only just saying about how the stills photographer there was refusing to shoot in that scene and asked why would we ever do that... knowing that I could still recover the image in Resolve!

Todd, mind to explain that? I don't really understand... DR of still cameras is normally way larger as they capture 14bit raw, at least my 1d. He should've pull that shot even easier..

Very nice indeed, looks like it would've been a hell of a tricky shot without the added DR.

Yeah we were only just saying about how the stills photographer there was refusing to shoot in that scene and asked why would we ever do that... knowing that I could still recover the image in Resolve!

Todd, mind to explain that? I don't really understand... DR of still cameras is normally way larger as they capture 14bit raw, at least my 1d. He should've pull that shot even easier..

Yeah honestly not too sure myself, but he was not willing to shoot in that scene with contrast between the two. I thought that at the time, but he was positive that it was no where near ideal for him. Maybe not a big Photoshop fan!

[CaptainHook]

Todd, mind to explain that? I don't really understand... DR of still cameras is normally way larger as they capture 14bit raw, at least my 1d. He should've pull that shot even easier..

Dynamic range and bit depth are different. The 1D mk4 has about 12 stops of dynamic range, the 5Dmk3 11.7 according to DxO measurements:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/795%7C0/(brand)/Canon/(appareil2)/629%7C0/(brand2)/Canon

The BMCC is reported to have around 13 stops. It should in theory deal with this situation better than most digital still cameras. Also apparently the BMCC captures at higher than 16bit and converts to 12bit log uncompressed in RAW mode to DNG, which will 'unpack' back into 16bit when you 'develop' the raws.

Todd, mind to explain that? I don't really understand... DR of still cameras is normally way larger as they capture 14bit raw, at least my 1d. He should've pull that shot even easier..

Dynamic range and bit depth are different. The 1D mk4 has about 12 stops of dynamic range, the 5Dmk3 11.7 according to DxO measurements:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/795%7C0/(brand)/Canon/(appareil2)/629%7C0/(brand2)/Canon

The BMCC is reported to have around 13 stops. It should in theory deal with this situation better than most digital still cameras. Also apparently the BMCC captures at higher than 16bit and converts to 12bit log uncompressed in RAW mode to DNG, which will 'unpack' back into 16bit when you 'develop' the raws.

Thats really interesting info out there CaptainHook, thanks for the link! I always thought BitDepht&DR depend proportionally as every 2bits multiply levels/contrast ratio X4
According to chart on linked site DR of 1D is 11stops@800iso
Thanks again for the tip!