Insane moire with BMPCC 6K that was not present in-camera

I just got done shooting some greenscreen stuff with the BMPCC 6K and while I was shooting, I checked the camera's monitor for moire. There was zero. None whatsoever. Not in the full view, and not when zoomed in to check focus.

I get back to the computer and load the footage in Resolve and my jaw hit the floor. The most horrendous moire I have ever seen showed up and it makes the footage completely unusable.

Here's an example:

Capture.PNG (75.91 KiB) Viewed 16742 times

The moire changes intensity based on project resolution and zoom level, but it never goes away and it never gets to an acceptable level. I even tried a project resolution of 6144x3456 which is the BMPCC 6K's native resolution and it makes no difference.

Any ideas why it didn't show up in-camera?

Any advice on how to get rid of it in post? I'd rather not re-shoot what we did today, if I can help it.

I'm seriously disappointed with the 6K camera. The first disappointment was last week, when I shot at 3200 ISO and the noise was outrageous. It's definitely not a "dual native ISO" if 3200 (which is supposed to be a "native" setting) has any noise at all. Look at the Panasonic Varicam for instance, at 5000 ISO there is ZERO noise. Because it's truly a dual-native ISO camera.

Now this. It would be one thing if the moire showed up in-camera and I ignored it. But it wasn't there at all, and now it's atrocious in post.

Thoughts?

If then you were underexposing the Sensor by more than 3-stops from the trstsmi have seen. Properly exposed 3200 footage was clan looking to me.
Cheers

If then you were underexposing the Sensor by more than 3-stops from the trstsmi have seen. Properly exposed 3200 footage was clan looking to me.
Cheers

I overexposed by 1 stop just to be sure there was no noise. And yet, it was terrible. Worst noise I've seen on a cinema camera at 3200.

I’ll be honest and maybe this is harsh, but was that shirt absolutely necessary to be worn? It literally screams moire...If talent came in wearing that I’d probably send them back or put a softening filter on my lens.

I’ll be honest and maybe this is harsh, but was that shirt absolutely necessary to be worn? It literally screams moire...If talent came in wearing that I’d probably send them back or put a softening filter on my lens.

Yeah... It's the kind if shirt that can look horrible on screen even if there's no moire at all in the footage. It's a wardrobe change for sure.

My petition about noise over 3200
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=97882

I just got done shooting some greenscreen stuff with the BMPCC 6K and while I was shooting, I checked the camera's monitor for moire. There was zero. None whatsoever. Not in the full view, and not when zoomed in to check focus.

I get back to the computer and load the footage in Resolve and my jaw hit the floor. The most horrendous moire I have ever seen showed up and it makes the footage completely unusable.

Here's an example:

Capture.PNG

The moire changes intensity based on project resolution and zoom level, but it never goes away and it never gets to an acceptable level. I even tried a project resolution of 6144x3456 which is the BMPCC 6K's native resolution and it makes no difference.

Any ideas why it didn't show up in-camera?

Any advice on how to get rid of it in post? I'd rather not re-shoot what we did today, if I can help it.

I'm seriously disappointed with the 6K camera. The first disappointment was last week, when I shot at 3200 ISO and the noise was outrageous. It's definitely not a "dual native ISO" if 3200 (which is supposed to be a "native" setting) has any noise at all. Look at the Panasonic Varicam for instance, at 5000 ISO there is ZERO noise. Because it's truly a dual-native ISO camera.

Now this. It would be one thing if the moire showed up in-camera and I ignored it. But it wasn't there at all, and now it's atrocious in post.

Thoughts?

.... I want that shirt!


Your problem is your internal monitor is incapable of displaying enough resolution to spot it. Do you have the option in post to better misalign the debayering of the sensor pixels to the work pixel, to hide this?

Did anyone here work with this type of filters?
http://www.caprockdev.com/antimoire.htm

Do they actually remove / reduce moire with manageable effect on detail and sharpness ?

I'd rather wait for the one by RAWlite. Anti-aliasing filters are very sensor-specific and in front of the lens there are too many influences like aperture, reflections and the optical construction of the lens itself.

I'd rather wait for the one by RAWlite. Anti-aliasing filters are very sensor-specific.

Uli, totally off topic, but your iMac with the 580, how’s it working with Resolve?

Just say Great, Good, Ok, or Bad...thaaaaanks!

wait for the one by RAWlite

Where did you see that they have an OLPF for the Pocket 6K in preparation?

I get back to the computer and load the footage in Resolve and my jaw hit the floor. The most horrendous moire I have ever seen showed up and it makes the footage completely unusable.

Are you seeing this only in Resolve GUI or, are you seeing it in footage that's been rendered out of the deliver page?

There are multiple levels of performance settings in Resolve that will reduce the image quality in the Resolve viewer in order to improve playback performance when editing. Those performance settings can make it appear that there is moire in the footage.

Three settings to check:

1. In Project Settings, in the camera raw tab, make sure you have the "decode quality" set to "Full Res."

2. If you're on Mac, make sure to have the GPU processing set to Metal. I've seen issues with BRAW playback and rendering when GPU is set to OpenCL.

3. In the User tab of Preferences, under "Performance Mode" choose the "disable" option

If you do those things, do you still see aliasing in the image?

Since they are taking care of the 4K, I suppose they'll prepare one for the 6K too.
I've got one for the UMP 4.6K and it's excellent, just the perfect balance between anti-aliasing and resolution.

I just filmed myself using the Pocket 4K with a vintage lens.
I decided on a pretty flat, grey shirt, which had a very feint texture in the material. I thought to myself maybe this is a bad idea, but went ahead. All looked fine playing back on the Pocket4K monitor.
Uploaded it into Resolve and the shirt has rainbow moire. Very annoying.
I tried several basic techniques in Resolve to lessen or remove it, but all damaged the image as a whole more than I was willing to accept. So I ended up leaving it in. It IS quite subtle, but noticeable to me.
These newer Pockets are very sharp, almost clinical cameras.

Chris, what lenses or other optics were you using?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I’ll be honest and maybe this is harsh, but was that shirt absolutely necessary to be worn? It literally screams moire...If talent came in wearing that I’d probably send them back or put a softening filter on my lens.

Yeah... It's the kind if shirt that can look horrible on screen even if there's no moire at all in the footage. It's a wardrobe change for sure.

Yes, I should have had him change shirts. But the problem here is this: if I can't trust what the on-camera monitor is showing me, why is it even there in the first place?

I just got done shooting some greenscreen stuff with the BMPCC 6K and while I was shooting, I checked the camera's monitor for moire. There was zero. None whatsoever. Not in the full view, and not when zoomed in to check focus.

I get back to the computer and load the footage in Resolve and my jaw hit the floor. The most horrendous moire I have ever seen showed up and it makes the footage completely unusable.

Here's an example:

Capture.PNG

The moire changes intensity based on project resolution and zoom level, but it never goes away and it never gets to an acceptable level. I even tried a project resolution of 6144x3456 which is the BMPCC 6K's native resolution and it makes no difference.

Any ideas why it didn't show up in-camera?

Any advice on how to get rid of it in post? I'd rather not re-shoot what we did today, if I can help it.

I'm seriously disappointed with the 6K camera. The first disappointment was last week, when I shot at 3200 ISO and the noise was outrageous. It's definitely not a "dual native ISO" if 3200 (which is supposed to be a "native" setting) has any noise at all. Look at the Panasonic Varicam for instance, at 5000 ISO there is ZERO noise. Because it's truly a dual-native ISO camera.

Now this. It would be one thing if the moire showed up in-camera and I ignored it. But it wasn't there at all, and now it's atrocious in post.

Thoughts?

.... I want that shirt!


Your problem is your internal monitor is incapable of displaying enough resolution to spot it. Do you have the option in post to better misalign the debayering of the sensor pixels to the work pixel, to hide this?

The problem with BRAW is that the debayering is done in-camera, not in post. So there's no option to change the sharpness or any other aspect of the debayering.

I get back to the computer and load the footage in Resolve and my jaw hit the floor. The most horrendous moire I have ever seen showed up and it makes the footage completely unusable.

Are you seeing this only in Resolve GUI or, are you seeing it in footage that's been rendered out of the deliver page?

There are multiple levels of performance settings in Resolve that will reduce the image quality in the Resolve viewer in order to improve playback performance when editing. Those performance settings can make it appear that there is moire in the footage.

Three settings to check:

1. In Project Settings, in the camera raw tab, make sure you have the "decode quality" set to "Full Res."

2. If you're on Mac, make sure to have the GPU processing set to Metal. I've seen issues with BRAW playback and rendering when GPU is set to OpenCL.

3. In the User tab of Preferences, under "Performance Mode" choose the "disable" option

If you do those things, do you still see aliasing in the image?

The moire shows up on footage rendered out of Resolve.

I’ll be honest and maybe this is harsh, but was that shirt absolutely necessary to be worn? It literally screams moire...If talent came in wearing that I’d probably send them back or put a softening filter on my lens.

Yeah... It's the kind if shirt that can look horrible on screen even if there's no moire at all in the footage. It's a wardrobe change for sure.

Yes, I should have had him change shirts. But the problem here is this: if I can't trust what the on-camera monitor is showing me, why is it even there in the first place?

Deleted as OP answered my question.

Steve

I’ll be honest and maybe this is harsh, but was that shirt absolutely necessary to be worn? It literally screams moire...If talent came in wearing that I’d probably send them back or put a softening filter on my lens.

Yeah... It's the kind if shirt that can look horrible on screen even if there's no moire at all in the footage. It's a wardrobe change for sure.

Not really. It looked awesome on the in-camera monitor! Both in the full-frame view and the 2x zoom for checking focus. Looked exactly like it did in real life. Which is why I'm so confused as to how there is such terrible moire in post-production.

Michael, the best advice I can give you is to return or sell your camera. I don't think this is for you.

Can't speak to the 6K, but the 4K is pretty moire-resistant, certainly compared to the BMPCC. I've tried stripped shirts, wool weaves, tweed, etc.

Did you use a speed booster? A notoriously sharp lens like the Sigma 18-35?

You might want post a link to a sample of the footage.

As for noise, the camera definitely is dual-native ISO. Compare 1000 to 1250, and you'll see. Any ISO, when underexposed, including iso 100, will be noisy. It's true this camera isn't the equal of a Varicam, but was that really your expectation?

Michael, the best advice I can give you is to return or sell your camera. I don't think this is for you.

It's not my camera. I shoot with Sony cameras exclusively. And I never have problems like this.

Can't speak to the 6K, but the 4K is pretty moire-resistant, certainly compared to the BMPCC. I've tried stripped shirts, wool weaves, tweed, etc.

Did you use a speed booster? A notoriously sharp lens like the Sigma 18-35?

You might want post a link to a sample of the footage.

As for noise, the camera definitely is dual-native ISO. Compare 1000 to 1250, and you'll see. Any ISO, when underexposed, including iso 100, will be noisy. It's true this camera isn't the equal of a Varicam, but was that really your expectation?

Yes, the lens was super sharp. Canon 50mm f/1.2 at f/4.

A dual-native ISO has two electrical circuits coming off the sensor instead of one. This allows for two "native" ISO settings that have identical noise levels. Therefore if this were truly a dual-native ISO camera, as Blackmagic claims, ISO 3200 would have the same noise level as ISO 400.

Here's a handy illustration for you:

And an explanation from PremiumBeat.com: "Let’s say our imaginary camera now has a second ISO rating of 3200. As we gain up from 400 ISO, we see an expected increase in image noise. A strange thing happens once we pass 3200, however — the noise disappears. At 3200 ISO, the second circuit’s native capacitor takes over, resetting the noise in the image (or the “noise floor”)."

https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/dual-n ... -standard/

I overexposed by 1 stop at 3200 to ensure there would be no noise. However, there was a lot of noise in the shadows which required noise reduction to eliminate. After switching to ISO 400, and still overexposing by 1 stop, there was no noise at all. This should not be the case on a camera with dual-native ISO.

What does comparing ISO 1000 to 1250 have to do with anything? The two native settings are 400 and 3200, which means they should be identical in terms of noise.

Who defines dual-iso in the way you do? BMD never claimed 3200 has the same noise as 400. Does any other manufacturer make that claim?

"Native iso" is no more than the company's recommendation for the best compromise between noise and sensitivity. The point of comparing 1000 and 1250 is to reveal that there really are two distinct circuits. The fact that it doesn't operate in strict symmetry as you demand doesn't mean it isn't there.

Who defines dual-iso in the way you do? BMD never claimed 3200 has the same noise as 400. Does any other manufacturer make that claim?

"Native iso" is no more than the company's recommendation for the best compromise between noise and sensitivity. The point of comparing 1000 and 1250 is to reveal that there really are two distinct circuits. The fact that it doesn't operate in strict symmetry as you demand doesn't mean it isn't there.

Yes, that's literally the textbook industry-standard definition of dual-native ISO. If Blackmagic is advertising dual-native ISO, it has to mean this or it's false advertising.

https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/dual-n ... -standard/

"Let’s say our imaginary camera now has a second ISO rating of 3200. As we gain up from 400 ISO, we see an expected increase in image noise. A strange thing happens once we pass 3200, however — the noise disappears. At 3200 ISO, the second circuit’s native capacitor takes over, resetting the noise in the image (or the “noise floor”)."

I don't think "Premium Beat" qualifies as a textbook. And has its definition actually been adopted by the industry?

'Dual-ISO' is a marketing term, just like "low light sensitivity".

The moire shows up on footage rendered out of Resolve.

Are you certain that the debayer was set to full in project settings before you rendered the file?

I don't think "Premium Beat" qualifies as a textbook. And has its definition actually been adopted by the industry?

'Dual-ISO' is a marketing term, just like "low light sensitivity".

John, you're wrong. Plain and simple. Dual-native ISO means there are two separate native settings. Plain and simple. Blackmagic advertises dual native ISO settings of ISO 400 and ISO 3200. There is no other way to describe this besides false advertising.

Do your own research. Read an actual cinematogrphy textbook. Here's a good one: https://ebookduck.com/product/digital-c ... gLi9PD_BwE

By the way, I learned about dual-native ISO from the author of that book. He's the head of the ASC Camera Subcommittee and consults for most major cinema camera manufacturers. So he knows what he's talking about. What are your qualifications here?

The moire shows up on footage rendered out of Resolve.

Are you certain that the debayer was set to full in project settings before you rendered the file?

Yes.

I am sorry, but are you really using the premiumbeat blog as a quotable source here?

If you want help or advice, then please post your footage for others here to examine and see if there is a problem with the camera or your workflow. You said it is not your camera and you normally shoot Sony. So there is a chance this is just an user error.

So please:
Post a sample of the greenscreen footage showing the insane moire
Post a sample of footage you shot with ISO400 showing no noise and a sample with ISO3200
Please be specific in your used setup, setting, lens, light levels and workflow to assess the results.

Otherwise nobody here knows what is going on.

John, you're wrong. Plain and simple. Dual-native ISO means....

Dual-native ISO means whatever a manufacturer says it means, not what it means ideally or what a camera consultant says it means.

Are there two circuits, or aren't there? The answer is, there are, and with distinct advantages to the shooter. The fact that it doesn't operate to your satisfaction is a measure of camera performance, like any other. *Nothing* satisfies ideal expectations at this price level, any more than every 4K camera resolves 4K resolution.

Per your sample, Robert has explained what's needed if you really want help.

I am sorry, but are you really using the premiumbeat blog as a quotable source here?

If you want help or advice, then please post your footage for others here to examine and see if there is a problem with the camera or your workflow. You said it is not your camera and you normally shoot Sony. So there is a chance this is just an user error.

So please:
Post a sample of the greenscreen footage showing the insane moire
Post a sample of footage you shot with ISO400 showing no noise and a sample with ISO3200
Please be specific in your used setup, setting, lens, light levels and workflow to assess the results.

Otherwise nobody here knows what is going on.

I already posted a sample of the greenscreen footage in my first post.

Here it is again:

Capture.PNG (75.91 KiB) Viewed 16422 times

Here's a comparison of ISO 3200 and ISO 400:

3200 vs 400.jpg (346.91 KiB) Viewed 16422 times

Setup: camera on tripod, LED lighting. At 3200 I was at f/11, at 400 I was at f/4.

Moire was with camera at 400 and lens at f/4.

Resolve is set to full-res decode of BRAW footage.

What else can I share that would help diagnose? I hope it is user error that can be fixed because it's inexcusable to me that this wouldn't show up in-camera yet be such a problem in post.

John, you're wrong. Plain and simple. Dual-native ISO means....

Dual-native ISO means whatever a manufacturer says it means, not what it means ideally or what a camera consultant says it means.

Are there two circuits, or aren't there? The answer is, there are, and with distinct advantages to the shooter. The fact that it doesn't operate to your satisfaction is a measure of camera performance, like any other. *Nothing* satisfies ideal expectations at this price level, any more than every 4K camera resolves 4K resolution.

Per your sample, Robert has explained what's needed if you really want help.

John, you must have been a marketer in a past life because you think a company can simply make up their own definition of a term that is already established within an industry. SMDH.

I am sorry, but are you really using the premiumbeat blog as a quotable source here?

If you want help or advice, then please post your footage for others here to examine and see if there is a problem with the camera or your workflow. You said it is not your camera and you normally shoot Sony. So there is a chance this is just an user error.

So please:
Post a sample of the greenscreen footage showing the insane moire
Post a sample of footage you shot with ISO400 showing no noise and a sample with ISO3200
Please be specific in your used setup, setting, lens, light levels and workflow to assess the results.

Otherwise nobody here knows what is going on.

I already posted a sample of the greenscreen footage in my first post.

Here it is again:

Capture.PNG

Here's a comparison of ISO 3200 and ISO 400:

3200 vs 400.jpg

Are you trolling me? Those samples are absolutely useless for examination.

I am sorry, but are you really using the premiumbeat blog as a quotable source here?

If you want help or advice, then please post your footage for others here to examine and see if there is a problem with the camera or your workflow. You said it is not your camera and you normally shoot Sony. So there is a chance this is just an user error.

So please:
Post a sample of the greenscreen footage showing the insane moire
Post a sample of footage you shot with ISO400 showing no noise and a sample with ISO3200
Please be specific in your used setup, setting, lens, light levels and workflow to assess the results.

Otherwise nobody here knows what is going on.

I already posted a sample of the greenscreen footage in my first post.

Here it is again:

Capture.PNG

Here's a comparison of ISO 3200 and ISO 400:

3200 vs 400.jpg

Are you trolling me? Those samples are absolutely useless for examination.

Are you always an *******? If you want something more specific, be more specific.

John, you must have been a marketer in a past life because you think a company can simply make up their own definition of a term that is already established within an industry. SMDH.

I think I'm just realistic. Here's an excerpt of a review of the EVA1, with its dual 800/2500 ISOs:

"Is the EVA 1’s 2500 ISO as clean as the 800? I’m not convinced. While it does a pretty good job and it’s impressive technology, I don’t think it’s the same at 2500 as it is at 800. Again this is my personal opinion from the testing I did."

https://www.newsshooter.com/2017/11/01/ ... on-review/

So what does it mean that this camera also fails to produce an ideal result? That Panasonic is engaged in false advertising, or that the camera has less than ideal performance, as it will in many other respects?

Provide us original BRAW files

What else can I share that would help diagnose? I hope it is user error that can be fixed because it's inexcusable to me that this wouldn't show up in-camera yet be such a problem in post.

Put a link to a BRAW frame that exhibits the problem for people to inspect.

Here's how to export a BRAW frame from the raw tab in the Resolve color page

Image 9-5-19 at 11.30 AM.jpg (67.11 KiB) Viewed 16377 times

I just got done shooting some greenscreen stuff with the BMPCC 6K and while I was shooting, I checked the camera's monitor for moire. There was zero. None whatsoever. Not in the full view, and not when zoomed in to check focus.

I get back to the computer and load the footage in Resolve and my jaw hit the floor. The most horrendous moire I have ever seen showed up and it makes the footage completely unusable.

Here's an example:

Capture.PNG

The moire changes intensity based on project resolution and zoom level, but it never goes away and it never gets to an acceptable level. I even tried a project resolution of 6144x3456 which is the BMPCC 6K's native resolution and it makes no difference.

Any ideas why it didn't show up in-camera?

Any advice on how to get rid of it in post? I'd rather not re-shoot what we did today, if I can help it.

I'm seriously disappointed with the 6K camera. The first disappointment was last week, when I shot at 3200 ISO and the noise was outrageous. It's definitely not a "dual native ISO" if 3200 (which is supposed to be a "native" setting) has any noise at all. Look at the Panasonic Varicam for instance, at 5000 ISO there is ZERO noise. Because it's truly a dual-native ISO camera.

Now this. It would be one thing if the moire showed up in-camera and I ignored it. But it wasn't there at all, and now it's atrocious in post.

Thoughts?

.... I want that shirt!


Your problem is your internal monitor is incapable of displaying enough resolution to spot it. Do you have the option in post to better misalign the debayering of the sensor pixels to the work pixel, to hide this?

The problem with BRAW is that the debayering is done in-camera, not in post. So there's no option to change the sharpness or any other aspect of the debayering.

However, to shift the rendered image should still be possible, and braw is supposed to preserve Bayer data in it, which should be able to be rendered our to normal video to reconstruct the Bayer from the spatial noise reduction hassles things.

At this point allow this thread the BRAW so it can be downloaded.

The moire looks terrible, but just seems like a perfect storm of insane sharpness and a poor wardrobe choice. I’ve never shot with the 6K, but if it can be fixed the footage will be needed.

First of all, like the rest of the BMD cameras, the new Dual ISO Picket 4/6K Cameras are ISO invariant, and no actual analog gain is added when you go from ISO 100 to 1000. A dual ISO sensor, is actually a dual gain sensor, it has two analog gain settings, one at lower ISO (100-1000 for the PC4K) and a second gain stage for the second setting (1250 and up). So the base or native ISO of 400/3200 match how the dynamic range be of the sensor is distributed in the gamma curve (highlight/shadow above and below the 0 line. Nothing to do with matching sensor noise levels.

Their is no industry standard on how ISO invariant sensors are implemented in a camera, or requiring the two “native” ISOs to have matching noise levels. On the contrary, when you apply analog gain to a video camera sensor circuit, you increase the “video noise” in the sensor, which is most noticeable in dark areas of the scene. Overexposing the Pocket 4/6K Sensor, just pushes the dynamic range range of the sensor 1/3 stop down to increase exposure latitude in the shadows (below the 0 line). Underexposing pushes the curve up to increase highlight latitude and crush shadows.

Some camera makers, apply noise reduction in their cameras to compensate for the increased noise in the second stage of the dual ISO sensor, like Sony, Panasonic snd Nikon. ISO invariance or Dual ISO is not a measure of how good a particular camera or sensor is. It simply means that a lot of the exposure is generated with the image processor rather than in the sensor. It's simply a different approach to low light photography. So how much of this processing is done in camera or in post depends on the camera. BMD cameras are in the latter camp, doing most of the processing in post, like noise reduction. That is why BMD bundles Resolve with the camera, so you have to tools to process the image the way you want to, instead of it bing done in camera.
Cheers

After all the back and forth, still no footage posted. What a waste of time. If you want help from the community, and people are asking for footage of this problem and genuinely want to help you, you should post the footage.

Are you always an *******? If you want something more specific, be more specific.

You are right. In my last 2400 postings I have been the biggest ******* on earth, as everyone here will tell you. I am not the one looking for help, consuming free time and knowledge from other people.

You will find here a lot of knowledge from lots of people around the world, willing to dedicate considerable time to help other people they have never seen or heard before. It is a bit selfish to expect them to drag it all out of you, if you just could have better prepared the information and some raw footage (what else) beforehand.

So if that has not been obvious to you, I apologize.

No worries, Robert. I think ••••••• is a quick way of saying TEACHER.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Pocket 4K & 6K cameras' magnify view mode ("+") is pixel to pixel. It's showing 1-to-1 each pixel of the sensor. If there's no moire when viewing magnified playback on the camera, then there's no moire in the recording, period.

After that, it depends on how you handle the file in post resulting from settings in editing/viewing app, monitor settings, and so forth.

In OP's defense, it looks like he had no idea what he was being asked for. Which is okay, but if there's that much confusion about what's required to assess camera footage, you probably want to be more cautious about instructing others.

Anyway, post your braw samples, and all is likely forgiven. There's suspicion that something went wrong in post, because that level of moire is not commonplace with these cameras.

Here's a link to a short BRAW clip from the shoot:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tLEoj7 ... sp=sharing

In OP's defense, it looks like he had no idea what he was being asked for. Which is okay, but if there's that much confusion about what's required to assess camera footage, you probably want to be more cautious about instructing others.

Anyway, post your braw samples, and all is likely forgiven. There's suspicion that something went wrong in post, because that level of moire is not commonplace with these cameras.

Thank you. Sorry if I came off as an asterisk-laden adjective. Yes, I had no idea anyone wanted the BRAW footage, because they're typically in the tens or hundreds of gigabytes and there's no way (as far as I know) to trim down a BRAW clip. Luckily I had a short clip that's only 500 MB and shows the problem.

Here's that link again: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tLEoj7 ... sp=sharing

Well, it's pretty bad. I've never seen anything like that on the 4K. Unless you can get him to change his shirt, I think you need another camera for that shot. Or at least a different lens.