Blackmagic Forum

I've pre-ordered BMPCC and my intention is to shoot in live musical situations (2 cams) then add B roll to make music videos. I find that I have shot mostly in an improvisational way - guerilla style.

So in terms of following a moving subject in unrehearsed situations without autofocus, is the idea to set up for as wide a hyperfocal distance as possible with a fast lens below 20mm and hope for the best?


I'm not worried about the B roll that I can rehearse or compose properly. I'm just concerned that no auto focus will prevent me getting those shots that won't wait for me to set them up. Is anyone else concerned about this? The camera seems to be marketed for "street use" yet the lack of AF feels a little scary to me in this situation. I'm wondering what other people are planning to do to get around this.

People have been shooting without autofocus for a long long long time; it just takes some practice to be able to follow with and pull with a subject. Having a 1AC is best, but you can certainly do it on your own, especially on a S16mm sensor working at a good stop unless you're on some pretty long lenses.

I guess I'd better start practicing. Thanks.

Google up Henri Cartier-Bresson. He didn't use autofocus either.

I know my post sounded cheesy. I almost didn't want to ask but I couldn't help it. I am a musician first. But I love editing video and I have the bug now for combining my music and video more in the future. Just like there are so many more people who are "making music" now because of technology, there are more people working with images too. I am way more interested in working with MF than I am with AF. However, there are scenarios when just getting the job done for certain setups would be great. Affordable technology is there for the masses now, for good or for bad. I guess I am, at this point, a self admitted hack with a ton of respect for the folks who really know their craft So I'll keep learning. Thanks for your responses.

Tamerlin wrote:Google up Henri Cartier-Bresson. He didn't use autofocus either.

You know the story of the vogue shoot he did with a kodak disposable? One of my favourites!

Cameras are tool, a skilled photographer can use many tools....

One thing you can do if you're having trouble finding focus is close down your aperture for a deep DOF.. set your focus to 4 feet and stand about 4 feet away from all of your interviews.. (or set to 3 feet and stand 3 feet away.. etc.)
better yet.. you could get an EVF and sharp lenses. The pocket camera has an HDMI output and there are a bunch of HDMI EVF's out there now.

Critical focus is important. Out of focus is still out of focus.. even if it's shot with 13 stops of DR..

If you watch live action videos you'll see artsy stuff with extremely shallow DOF and the subject going in and out of focus. But, once you start shooting for yourself you'll begin to realize those may not all have been artistic choices - rather just the camera operator twiddling with the focus ring, trying to get the subject into focus!

That is no excuse for shooting soft images, and for the effect to work you had better learn to get shots into focus fairly quickly! But, just saying that there is some margin for error because that shallow DOF look can be fashionable.

Yes. I really want to work with a shallow depth of field for the shots I can plan. I'm really looking forward to that ability with my next set of cameras. Funny though, what you're talking about also happens with auto focus. And I have forced my AF video cameras to become confused for the same effect.

What I find interesting though ( and this goes for the world of audio recording as well, as I am a musician ) is that we're always obsessing about pristine results and the best and most expensive equipment. But when I look around me in the world of media, I see nothing but the desire to recreate all of the inconsistencies and the things that were considered "blemishes" in the 20th century. Plugins that recreate grain, light flashes, analogue tape saturation, distortion, even electrical hum,etc, etc. Sometimes it makes me wonder if the 20th century was merely the creation of the palette that we will work with from here on in. Or if maybe if we're just at the end of the line. lol.

I do understand that one who is hired to get results must be consistent and start with something that he then can degrade and undo at the request of the client. So to start clean is a must. I know this of the music world and I'm tired of it. Getting into video is now my chance to play and explore without having a client. I'm very excited to NOT have a gig doing video. Let the mistakes begin!

sean mclennan wrote:

Tamerlin wrote:Google up Henri Cartier-Bresson. He didn't use autofocus either.

You know the story of the vogue shoot he did with a kodak disposable? One of my favourites!

Cameras are tool, a skilled photographer can use many tools....

I didn't know about that shoot, but it does support your point -- which I agree with.

I'm really looking forward to getting both of the Black Magic cameras that I've ordered and am waiting for (Pocket + Cinema MFT), but I'm still shooting in the mean time. I just shot another Kickstarter video on Friday with my Sony, and I'm going to shoot another tomorrow. And I'll use my Nex to practice steadicam technique when my Merlin arrives, hopefully this Thursday.

That said, when I get my Cinema camera, the quality of my work will improve. Eventually I'll be in a position where my Zoom recorder is a limitation, and I'll be able to move up to a Sound Devices recorder to replace it. And then the quality of my sound recordings will improve to match the quality of my moving pictures.

Steven wrote:What I find interesting though ( and this goes for the world of audio recording as well, as I am a musician ) is that we're always obsessing about pristine results and the best and most expensive equipment. But when I look around me in the world of media, I see nothing but the desire to recreate all of the inconsistencies and the things that were considered "blemishes" in the 20th century.

I have various theories about that too, I'm also a musician (well, at least used to be). I feel like the analog gear has a kind of natural quality. Whereas digital tends to be a bit sterile and have unpleasant effects when overloaded like distortion, blown out highlights, etc. Kinda like a florescent shop light vs. a beautiful sunrise coming in the window. All of the plugins to me, seem designed to emulate those pleasing side-effects of the organic and chemical reactions. Of course some plugins are awesome and others are crap. Likewise some people apply them with great taste and others are more ham-handed.

To my eyes the only way to really emulate film is either with a wide dynamic range in the camera - or great skill with lighting and exposure. You can add all the grain, scratches and dust filters that you want, but when I see the digital edges of blown out highlights or crushed blacks, it still looks like a cheap imitation to me.

To bring this around to the point and back on topic - I just shot my first footage with my BMCC last weekend and I have to say, I was really, really happy. I feel like I've waited 20 years for this camera to come along!

Even with a fully manual lens, I have found that with a loupe enclosed to darken view of lcd, and then using the focus peaking button, you soon get used to gradually adjustig focus properly as needed in a moving situation. With a magnified loupe, you are able to use the focusing assist feature much better than trying to use it without a loupe.

Does it support focus adjustments via LANC?
I'm thinking of using a tiny Manfrotto 585 MonoSteady but of cause you still have to pull focus some way. The idea is to program an Atmel and do it via radio.

...the non-articulated screen could be a problem with focusing too as you have to find a way to position yourself, so you can actually see the screen with the focus assist. No holding the camera too high above the crowd or too low.
(Being used to GH1 and GH3 Micro 4/3 cameras.)

from what I understand it will support focus assist / iris control with Lanc. But apparently the camera is still a work in progress. The articulating monitor would be nice. I guess you have go without something for that price.

IMO, the BMCC IS NOT a good run-and-gun cam. It was not designed for that. It is more designed to record great footage if you set up -- like a 'cinema camera'. If I compare it to my Sony EX1, the EX1 just kills it for run-and-gun. When you have smaller sensors, 3-chip, auto focus that actually works, huge DOF in typical shooting situations, INCLUDING indoors where light is limited, auto exposure that is right on and adjusts quickly, audio meters, light histogram, no fussing with lenses, easy button-zoom, etc., you are in a different world for run-and-gun. It is WAY nicer, no question at all. However, it is not in the same league with the BMCC, if you want quality images, nice handling of bright spots, ability to actually grade your footage like the 'Big Boys', and so on. You cannot have it both ways.

People have suggested ways to increase DOF so that in limited situations, your focus will be OK without adjustment on the fly, and so forth. In many situations, you are gonna need someone to pull focus if you want to nail the shot.

Re: the remote capability, I have experimented with that, and I have a rig to leverage that, and it is somewhat useful. It would be MUCH better if BMD would alter the firmware to allow a slower control of focus via the remote, as I have posted elsewhere on this forum. You should know that only the certified remotes will control focus and iris. Your chances with other remotes is not good. With manual cine lenses, forget the lanc remote.

run and gun

http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2013/0 ... ur-pocket/

DNomer wrote:
Re: the remote capability, I have experimented with that, and I have a rig to leverage that, and it is somewhat useful. It would be MUCH better if BMD would alter the firmware to allow a slower control of focus via the remote, as I have posted elsewhere on this forum. You should know that only the certified remotes will control focus and iris. Your chances with other remotes is not good. With manual cine lenses, forget the lanc remote.

Why and how do I get my remote certified?
As far as speed goes, if they react too fast I may do so kind of PWM of the focus+ and focus- commands.
I wasn't talking about buying a remote. I was talking about making one. LANC isn't a terribly complicated protocol and CNC machining a space for the controls right into a handle shouldn't be hard either.
(other handle already has the audio controls to remote control a Zoom H4N. My current right handle can "only" start, stop and autofocus a GH2/GH1/GH3)

You probably need to connect BM directly for that.

Margus Voll wrote:You probably need to connect BM directly for that.

Sorry, I don't see a reason for any kind of certification.
It only makes sense for customers, who want to make sure to buy equipment that had been tested and proven to work.
Not for people who simply code, design and build their own.