Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

The place for questions about shooting with Blackmagic Cameras.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostTue Apr 06, 2021 9:58 pm

This makes no sense as the file sizes are larger and should be higher quality. I found this from doing my dynamic range test between my Sony A7RIV and my BMPCC4K on a sunny day with dark shadows. I recorded at 12:1 on the P4K because it's the best file size I can work with considering it was 20GB for around 10 minutes of footage at 4K24.00. Any reasons for this? Because if I have to shoot at a much lesser compression to match the lack of blocky leaves of an 8 bit Sony (near bottom of the barrel for color grading) then I might need to look for another camera with a more efficient compression process. I do like the colors out of the P4K but I really don't like what it's doing with these bushes. Take a look.

In the comparison shot, Sony leaves on left, Blackmagic on right.
Sony leaves.png
Sony leaves.png (697.75 KiB) Viewed 2276 times

Pocket 4K leaves.png
Pocket 4K leaves.png (892.52 KiB) Viewed 2276 times

Sony vs P4K leaves.png
Sony vs P4K leaves.png (519.13 KiB) Viewed 2276 times
What will you create today?
Offline

JonPais

  • Posts: 119
  • Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:17 am

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 5:14 am

Nobody can draw any conclusions at all from those screen shots! smh
Last edited by JonPais on Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
https://daejeonchronicles.com
Offline

javier forza

  • Posts: 131
  • Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 12:34 pm
  • Real Name: javier forza

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 5:26 am

Braw needs NR Spacial or Temporal or both, depends your taste and distribution objetives. Even, could need some sharpness or contrast. If you have skills with color corrections there is multiple ways to get the results.

Easy way, not accurate, Luts.

If you want some image with pre processing you can try Pro Res flavors directly from camera.

8 Bits Sony Avchd mp4 has pre processing into the camera, NR, limiting alternatives in color post processing, but give you a final image. The advantages of Sony sensor are low light capabilities.
Online

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 10129
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 8:19 am

Yes, Sony is doing quite a bit of filtering in the camera.
Compare a RAW still out of the A7S with a video: at close examination it's worse.
And then, BRAW is an I-frame only codec, while the Sony is doing GOPs. You can't easily compare the file sizes.
Don't approach Resolve with your expectations from other NLEs! They are all different.
Resolve Studio 17.1.1 and Fusion Studio 17, macOS 10.15.7
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM, 32 GB RAM
2018 Mac mini 16 GB RAM, eGFX Breakway RX 580 MacOS 10.14.6
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 1:42 pm

javier forza wrote:Braw needs NR Spacial or Temporal or both, depends your taste and distribution objetives. Even, could need some sharpness or contrast. If you have skills with color corrections there is multiple ways to get the results.

Easy way, not accurate, Luts.

If you want some image with pre processing you can try Pro Res flavors directly from camera.

8 Bits Sony Avchd mp4 has pre processing into the camera, NR, limiting alternatives in color post processing, but give you a final image. The advantages of Sony sensor are low light capabilities.

I did sharpen the BMPCC4K and Sony footage as I have sharpening in the Sony camera set to -7. The sharpening only made the macroblocks more clear.
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 1:46 pm

JonPais wrote:Nobody can draw any conclusions at all from those screen shots! smh

Alright... I will get better stills from Resolve and also show the macroblocking that is happening on my hair.
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 1:47 pm

Uli Plank wrote:Yes, Sony is doing quite a bit of filtering in the camera.
Compare a RAW still out of the A7S with a video: at close examination it's worse.
And then, BRAW is an I-frame only codec, while the Sony is doing GOPs. You can't easily compare the file sizes.

IDK how filtering would make macroblocks look like detail. This is right out of DaVinci Resolve. No rendering. In the render the same phenomenon shows up. Will post more stills.
What will you create today?
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 1:57 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:
JonPais wrote:Nobody can draw any conclusions at all from those screen shots! smh

Alright... I will get better stills from Resolve and also show the macroblocking that is happening on my hair.

Are you sure this is 'macro blocking' and not aliasing / moire? The P4k is an 8mp sensor with no OLPF.
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 1:59 pm

John Griffin wrote:
Alexrocks1253 wrote:
JonPais wrote:Nobody can draw any conclusions at all from those screen shots! smh

Alright... I will get better stills from Resolve and also show the macroblocking that is happening on my hair.

Are you sure this is 'macro blocking' and not aliasing / moire? The P4k is an 8mp sensor with no OLPF.

This is macroblocking. Moire would bring false colors in and weird patterns that aren't like this. I will post more images, though PNGs are too large for here I guess.
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

roger.magnusson

  • Posts: 1730
  • Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 4:58 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 2:05 pm

It's as Uli explained, BRAW compresses each frame individually and the Sony calculates the differences between frames (an oversimplification for the sake of brevity) to achieve higher compression. There's tradeoffs to both methods once you decrease the bit rate. You should always use the appropriate bit rate for what you shoot.
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 2:18 pm

Here are some better frame grabs. Full PNG quality. In the comparison one, Sony left, Blackmagic right.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1WWcULoyJNSK0aiyND8KXcc0BGmI95CQ0?usp=sharing
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 2:22 pm

roger.magnusson wrote:It's as Uli explained, BRAW compresses each frame individually and the Sony calculates the differences between frames (an oversimplification for the sake of brevity) to achieve higher compression. There's tradeoffs to both methods once you decrease the bit rate. You should always use the appropriate bit rate for what you shoot.

I understand, but 100Mb/s hard to grade 8-bit 4:2:0 Sony IPB footage shouldn't outright beat the 272Mb/s All-I 12 bit 4:4:4 out of the P4K. I expect higher quality for higher file sizes. Plain and simple. If the higher file sizes bring worse quality, then they're not worth the higher storage cost associated with them.

I am seeing Bayer filter artifacts here too, but that is understandable given that it isn't doing any sampling and recording pixels 1:1.
What will you create today?
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 2:45 pm

Just looks like the difference between 1:1 sampling and subsampling from a much higher res to me. The obvious test of macroblocking as a compression artefact is to compare 12:1 with one of the higher bitrate options on the P4k. Ultimately the P4k is not a very suitable camera for resolving fine irregular detail like this.
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 14592
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 2:59 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:...
I did sharpen the BMPCC4K and Sony footage as I have sharpening in the Sony camera set to -7. The sharpening only made the macroblocks more clear.


Sharpening in a BMD camera is only intended to support Live Broadcast. If as ene needs enhancements, when you’re not live, best to do it with Resolve.
Rick Lang
Offline

smunaut

  • Posts: 350
  • Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2021 6:15 pm
  • Real Name: Sylvain Munaut

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 3:17 pm

First, minor point but BRAW is 4:2:2 according to their own patent on it.

I expect higher quality for higher file sizes. Plain and simple.


You expect wrong ... an full Intra coder always has a disadvantage on a static (or nearly so) scene.
The advantage it has are :
- No artefact / sudden loss of quality during fast movements
- Lower latency / Computational complexity / Memory requirements (for hw implementation)
- Independent frames allowing for better editing (and no quality loss during editing due to recoding)

The disadvantages is that it achieves a lower coding efficiency ...
Ryzen 3700X - AMD R570X / NVidia RTX2700Super (switching between the 2) - Linux
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 3:18 pm

rick.lang wrote:
Alexrocks1253 wrote:...
I did sharpen the BMPCC4K and Sony footage as I have sharpening in the Sony camera set to -7. The sharpening only made the macroblocks more clear.


Sharpening in a BMD camera is only intended to support Live Broadcast. If as ene needs enhancements, when you’re not live, best to do it with Resolve.

I did all sharpening in post. The footage is Braw 12:1 with 0.48 sharpening and a simple grade.
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 3:25 pm

smunaut wrote:First, minor point but BRAW is 4:2:2 according to their own patent on it.

I expect higher quality for higher file sizes. Plain and simple.


You expect wrong ... an full Intra coder always has a disadvantage on a static (or nearly so) scene.
The advantage it has are :
- No artefact / sudden loss of quality during fast movements
- Lower latency / Computational complexity / Memory requirements (for hw implementation)
- Independent frames allowing for better editing (and no quality loss during editing due to recoding)

The disadvantages is that it achieves a lower coding efficiency ...

My bad. I guess that all intra codecs don't seem to give too many benefits to me for what I need. My computer is beefy (I used to edit those crazy H.265 6K GH5 anamorphic files and the computer surprisingly kept up).

So to me IPB and All-I doesn't make too much of a difference other than taking up more space for a tiny quality improvement.
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 3:28 pm

John Griffin wrote:Just looks like the difference between 1:1 sampling and subsampling from a much higher res to me. The obvious test of macroblocking as a compression artefact is to compare 12:1 with one of the higher bitrate options on the P4k. Ultimately the P4k is not a very suitable camera for resolving fine irregular detail like this.

I tried Q5 on the same scene and the macroblocks went away, the file size went up to the rate of a bit above 8:1, and the Bayer artifacts stayed. I wonder if the A7SIII would show the same Bayer artifacts because of the near 1:1 pixel readout?
What will you create today?
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 3:51 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:
John Griffin wrote:Just looks like the difference between 1:1 sampling and subsampling from a much higher res to me. The obvious test of macroblocking as a compression artefact is to compare 12:1 with one of the higher bitrate options on the P4k. Ultimately the P4k is not a very suitable camera for resolving fine irregular detail like this.

I tried Q5 on the same scene and the macroblocks went away, the file size went up to the rate of a bit above 8:1, and the Bayer artifacts stayed. I wonder if the A7SIII would show the same Bayer artifacts because of the near 1:1 pixel readout?

File size is the price you pay for 12bit 4.4.4 ALL-I vs 8bit 4.2.0. long-gop
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 3:57 pm

John Griffin wrote:
Alexrocks1253 wrote:
John Griffin wrote:Just looks like the difference between 1:1 sampling and subsampling from a much higher res to me. The obvious test of macroblocking as a compression artefact is to compare 12:1 with one of the higher bitrate options on the P4k. Ultimately the P4k is not a very suitable camera for resolving fine irregular detail like this.

I tried Q5 on the same scene and the macroblocks went away, the file size went up to the rate of a bit above 8:1, and the Bayer artifacts stayed. I wonder if the A7SIII would show the same Bayer artifacts because of the near 1:1 pixel readout?

File size is the price you pay for 12bit 4.4.4 ALL-I vs 8bit 4.2.0. long-gop

Makes sense. Would you think 10-bit 4:2:2 would be a good compromise between file size and color quality?
What will you create today?
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 4:06 pm

Shoot ProRes on the P4k if you want to keep file sizes to a minimum. ProRes vs BRAW should be indistinguishable if you nail exposure and WB in camera.
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Offline

smunaut

  • Posts: 350
  • Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2021 6:15 pm
  • Real Name: Sylvain Munaut

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 4:10 pm

The intra vs gop is what's costing more, the coding efficiency advantage of being able to use temporaly redudant information is huge.

Try with the sony codec : put a cover blocking the lens, then very quickly remove it, then look at the footage and the quality of the _very_ first frame that's not covered. That's the frame it had to code without any temporal information.
Ryzen 3700X - AMD R570X / NVidia RTX2700Super (switching between the 2) - Linux
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 4:38 pm

John Griffin wrote:Shoot ProRes on the P4k if you want to keep file sizes to a minimum. ProRes vs BRAW should be indistinguishable if you nail exposure and WB in camera.

I have found ProRes to be larger than BRaw except 3:1 or Q0.
What will you create today?
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 4263
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 4:57 pm

Prores HQ is about as sharp on fine detail as 3:1 and Q0, but slighter sharper (on close examination) than higher compression braw ratios. You'll see the difference between Prores and 12:1, for example, if you look for it. But as you noted, Prores HQ file sizes are generally much higher and, in theory, for less bit depth. Not a great bargain.
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 5:32 pm

John Paines wrote:Prores HQ is about as sharp on fine detail as 3:1 and Q0, but slighter sharper (on close examination) than higher compression braw ratios. You'll see the difference between Prores and 12:1, for example, if you look for it. But as you noted, Prores HQ file sizes are generally much higher and, in theory, for less bit depth. Not a great bargain.

Yeah. I understand the benefits in theory of ProRes but it seems better to shoot in raw that is as large as it or just shoot something in a high bitrate H.264/5 than to worry about it especially since I can edit and playback 200Mb/s HEVC 59.94fps just fine on my machine.
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

rick.lang

  • Posts: 14592
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:41 pm
  • Location: Victoria BC Canada

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 5:18 am

Thanks for the clarification about where you applied sharpening. Good.
Rick Lang
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostMon Apr 12, 2021 3:17 am

rick.lang wrote:Thanks for the clarification about where you applied sharpening. Good.

Yep! No matter what camera I'm using, it is the first option I turn as far down as possible, just like in camera NR (wish Sony would allow me to turn off its NR. DaVinci's is better...)
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

Eugenia Loli

  • Posts: 309
  • Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 6:47 am
  • Location: Spokane, WA, USA

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostMon Apr 12, 2021 8:49 am

I understand, but 100Mb/s hard to grade 8-bit 4:2:0 Sony IPB footage shouldn't outright beat the 272Mb/s All-I 12 bit 4:4:4 out of the P4K. I expect higher quality for higher file sizes. Plain and simple. If the higher file sizes bring worse quality, then they're not worth the higher storage cost associated with them.


This is not an accurate statement. The Sony gives you h.265 (or h.264) which are highly optimized codecs, and require hardware acceleration to decode. Basically, you do get smaller filesizes, but to decode them, you need to sacrifice a goat. You don't see that, because every GPU today can decode these formats. So for you, you get the impression that it's a "normal", "run of the mill" codec. It's not. It's HIGHLY dependent on hardware acceleration. Without it, you will be getting 1 fps.

BRAW on the other hand, it runs with minimal hardware decoding needs (it does use the GPU, but not for everything). And it gives you 12bit and 4:4:4 (which by themselves they REQUIRE more bits in order to fit in that bitrate).

So yes, the macroblocking you're seeing, is correct. A less hardware-dependent codec at 12:1, with added bonuses of 12bit/raw (which are bit-hungry), will perform LESS well than any modern codec at a lower bitrate, should that codec is highly hardware-dependent.

Basically, you trade size for hardware acceleration. Unfortunately, you can't create a new codec (like BRAW) and still get FULL hardware acceleration on every level like h.264 does, because that requires the GPU chip to be specifically designed for your codec. And nvidia/AMD/Intel don't care about BRAW (they barely care about Prores either). So, what you're seeing, is correct, and to be fully expected.
Collage artist, illustrator, filmmaker: https://vimeo.com/eugenia
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 14, 2021 3:45 pm

Eugenia Loli wrote:
I understand, but 100Mb/s hard to grade 8-bit 4:2:0 Sony IPB footage shouldn't outright beat the 272Mb/s All-I 12 bit 4:4:4 out of the P4K. I expect higher quality for higher file sizes. Plain and simple. If the higher file sizes bring worse quality, then they're not worth the higher storage cost associated with them.


This is not an accurate statement. The Sony gives you h.265 (or h.264) which are highly optimized codecs, and require hardware acceleration to decode. Basically, you do get smaller filesizes, but to decode them, you need to sacrifice a goat. You don't see that, because every GPU today can decode these formats. So for you, you get the impression that it's a "normal", "run of the mill" codec. It's not. It's HIGHLY dependent on hardware acceleration. Without it, you will be getting 1 fps.

BRAW on the other hand, it runs with minimal hardware decoding needs (it does use the GPU, but not for everything). And it gives you 12bit and 4:4:4 (which by themselves they REQUIRE more bits in order to fit in that bitrate).

So yes, the macroblocking you're seeing, is correct. A less hardware-dependent codec at 12:1, with added bonuses of 12bit/raw (which are bit-hungry), will perform LESS well than any modern codec at a lower bitrate, should that codec is highly hardware-dependent.

Basically, you trade size for hardware acceleration. Unfortunately, you can't create a new codec (like BRAW) and still get FULL hardware acceleration on every level like h.264 does, because that requires the GPU chip to be specifically designed for your codec. And nvidia/AMD/Intel don't care about BRAW (they barely care about Prores either). So, what you're seeing, is correct, and to be fully expected.

Fascinating. I guess Braw isn't really right for me until I (hopefully if ever) get into a paid production environment. I make YouTube videos on a small (very (312 subs)) channel and not many people even watch them so the size requirements to match the quality of HEVC footage on say an A7Siii or a Fuji X-T4. Having the ability to change ISO, WB is nice, but to me it isn't worth the sacrifice in speed when it comes to using the camera in run-and-gun scenarios and makes it feel really out of place since I never have the budget for a production environment or a 5:1 compression ratio. I know that algorithms will be improved in the future, but by that time, I will be probably in a production environment where they can afford to use terabytes on a single film. Thank you for the insight though Eugenia!
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

Eugenia Loli

  • Posts: 309
  • Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 6:47 am
  • Location: Spokane, WA, USA

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostThu Apr 15, 2021 7:00 pm

If you're shooting for a small youtube channel, then yes, it makes more sense to use a consumer camera than a cinema camera. Consumer cameras will let you change all the parameters you need too, it's just that you won't have RAW or more connectors. Sell the BMPCC 4k, and for the same money, consider getting the Fuji X-S10 with its kit lens (and set the focus limiter on it, in order for its AF to not jump all over the place).
Collage artist, illustrator, filmmaker: https://vimeo.com/eugenia
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 21, 2021 2:41 pm

Eugenia Loli wrote:If you're shooting for a small youtube channel, then yes, it makes more sense to use a consumer camera than a cinema camera. Consumer cameras will let you change all the parameters you need too, it's just that you won't have RAW or more connectors. Sell the BMPCC 4k, and for the same money, consider getting the Fuji X-S10 with its kit lens (and set the focus limiter on it, in order for its AF to not jump all over the place).

I will consider that, but on testing the X-T4 right now, I can't say I like the exposure jumps while zooming in manual mode with a constant aperture lens. I haven't seen this on any other system.

My budget (since I am selling the Olympus lens too) will be around $2K, so its really between the X-T4 (no zooming because of the exposure flashes and questionable AF but beautiful colors and brilliant dynamic range), the Lumix S5 (Panasonic's laughable autofocus and expensive lenses but unlimited recording in 8 bit when I need it and better low light), or saving up for the A7SIII/waiting for the A7IV (Sony never giving true 24p and never letting me turn off NR in video but most wide lens selection and autofocus nearly on par with Canon at this point).

Or I could do the crazy unthinkable, sell my A7RIV and jump straight for the Sony A1, downscale the 8K to use for Cinema 4K, and have the good photo specs still there, but jeez $6500 sounds like Leica price territory...
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

carlomacchiavello

  • Posts: 1427
  • Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:04 pm
  • Location: italy

Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostSat Apr 24, 2021 10:59 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:
Eugenia Loli wrote:If you're shooting for a small youtube channel, then yes, it makes more sense to use a consumer camera than a cinema camera. Consumer cameras will let you change all the parameters you need too, it's just that you won't have RAW or more connectors. Sell the BMPCC 4k, and for the same money, consider getting the Fuji X-S10 with its kit lens (and set the focus limiter on it, in order for its AF to not jump all over the place).

I will consider that, but on testing the X-T4 right now, I can't say I like the exposure jumps while zooming in manual mode with a constant aperture lens. I haven't seen this on any other system.

My budget (since I am selling the Olympus lens too) will be around $2K, so its really between the X-T4 (no zooming because of the exposure flashes and questionable AF but beautiful colors and brilliant dynamic range), the Lumix S5 (Panasonic's laughable autofocus and expensive lenses but unlimited recording in 8 bit when I need it and better low light), or saving up for the A7SIII/waiting for the A7IV (Sony never giving true 24p and never letting me turn off NR in video but most wide lens selection and autofocus nearly on par with Canon at this point).

Or I could do the crazy unthinkable, sell my A7RIV and jump straight for the Sony A1, downscale the 8K to use for Cinema 4K, and have the good photo specs still there, but jeez $6500 sounds like Leica price territory...
I had also xt4, and there is not a exposure jump if you zoom with fixed aperture, if you have fixed aperture zoom... I had sigma 18-35 1.8, canon 17-55 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and I can zoom with all of them without aperture jump.
Are you sure that you not have some auto value that change in zoom action?


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostSun Apr 25, 2021 8:55 am

Another option is to keep your A7rIV and add an external recorder like the Ninja V. This way you get 8 bit but in a much higher quality codec which is much easier to edit on basic spec hardware and free from artefacts like banding and macroblocking which are actually the result of compression rather than bit depth.
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostSun Apr 25, 2021 5:10 pm

John Griffin wrote:Another option is to keep your A7rIV and add an external recorder like the Ninja V. This way you get 8 bit but in a much higher quality codec which is much easier to edit on basic spec hardware and free from artefacts like banding and macroblocking which are actually the result of compression rather than bit depth.

That is an interesting option but since the Sony would still be outputting 8-bit to the external recorder and the difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 is less apparent than 8 bit vs. 10 bit when color grading, it wouldn't be worth it unless I were to get a camera later on that does 10-bit or Prores RAW later on (which I wouldn't be able to edit in DaVinci, thanks Apple).

The only situations hard for the Sony currently are very low light temporal artifacts from NR (due to not being able to disable NR on Sony cameras), and snowy situations which happen 1-2 days a year where I live. Personally it would be better to save up to get a more substantial upgrade but thanks for the advice.
What will you create today?
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostSun Apr 25, 2021 5:59 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:
John Griffin wrote:Another option is to keep your A7rIV and add an external recorder like the Ninja V. This way you get 8 bit but in a much higher quality codec which is much easier to edit on basic spec hardware and free from artefacts like banding and macroblocking which are actually the result of compression rather than bit depth.

That is an interesting option but since the Sony would still be outputting 8-bit to the external recorder and the difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 is less apparent than 8 bit vs. 10 bit when color grading, it wouldn't be worth it unless I were to get a camera later on that does 10-bit or Prores RAW later on (which I wouldn't be able to edit in DaVinci, thanks Apple).

The only situations hard for the Sony currently are very low light temporal artifacts from NR (due to not being able to disable NR on Sony cameras), and snowy situations which happen 1-2 days a year where I live. Personally it would be better to save up to get a more substantial upgrade but thanks for the advice.

It's not 4.2.0 vs 4.2.2 but the compression difference between ProRes (not RAW so it's fine in Resolve) and Sony H.264.
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Offline

JonPais

  • Posts: 119
  • Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:17 am

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostMon Apr 26, 2021 8:01 am

John Griffin wrote:
Alexrocks1253 wrote:
John Griffin wrote:Another option is to keep your A7rIV and add an external recorder like the Ninja V. This way you get 8 bit but in a much higher quality codec which is much easier to edit on basic spec hardware and free from artefacts like banding and macroblocking which are actually the result of compression rather than bit depth.

That is an interesting option but since the Sony would still be outputting 8-bit to the external recorder and the difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 is less apparent than 8 bit vs. 10 bit when color grading, it wouldn't be worth it unless I were to get a camera later on that does 10-bit or Prores RAW later on (which I wouldn't be able to edit in DaVinci, thanks Apple).

The only situations hard for the Sony currently are very low light temporal artifacts from NR (due to not being able to disable NR on Sony cameras), and snowy situations which happen 1-2 days a year where I live. Personally it would be better to save up to get a more substantial upgrade but thanks for the advice.

It's not 4.2.0 vs 4.2.2 but the compression difference between ProRes (not RAW so it's fine in Resolve) and Sony H.264.

And just to expand on that point, I transcode ProRes RAW to ProRes 4444 in Compressor then import into DaVinci and get better control over color than I ever could in Final Cut Pro.
https://daejeonchronicles.com
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostTue Apr 27, 2021 3:21 pm

John Griffin wrote:
Alexrocks1253 wrote:That is an interesting option but since the Sony would still be outputting 8-bit to the external recorder and the difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 is less apparent than 8 bit vs. 10 bit when color grading, it wouldn't be worth it unless I were to get a camera later on that does 10-bit or Prores RAW later on (which I wouldn't be able to edit in DaVinci, thanks Apple).

The only situations hard for the Sony currently are very low light temporal artifacts from NR (due to not being able to disable NR on Sony cameras), and snowy situations which happen 1-2 days a year where I live. Personally it would be better to save up to get a more substantial upgrade but thanks for the advice.

It's not 4.2.0 vs 4.2.2 but the compression difference between ProRes (not RAW so it's fine in Resolve) and Sony H.264.

That makes sense. I really wish Sony would let us disable Noise Reduction so that I could have a very clean image from the Sonys with DaVinci Resolve NR. I'd rather have a noisy image straight out of camera than a soft image which I can't resharpen.
What will you create today?
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 2965
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: Los Angeles California

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostTue Apr 27, 2021 6:20 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote: I'd rather have a noisy image straight out of camera than a soft image which I can't resharpen.


Dirty secret.

Noise reduction is why the image compresses so well and to such a small size.

It DRASTICALLY affects the ability to compress / file sizes.

JB
John Brawley ACS
Cinematographer
Currently - Los Angeles
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostTue Apr 27, 2021 6:50 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:
John Griffin wrote:
Alexrocks1253 wrote:That is an interesting option but since the Sony would still be outputting 8-bit to the external recorder and the difference between 4:2:0 and 4:2:2 is less apparent than 8 bit vs. 10 bit when color grading, it wouldn't be worth it unless I were to get a camera later on that does 10-bit or Prores RAW later on (which I wouldn't be able to edit in DaVinci, thanks Apple).

The only situations hard for the Sony currently are very low light temporal artifacts from NR (due to not being able to disable NR on Sony cameras), and snowy situations which happen 1-2 days a year where I live. Personally it would be better to save up to get a more substantial upgrade but thanks for the advice.

It's not 4.2.0 vs 4.2.2 but the compression difference between ProRes (not RAW so it's fine in Resolve) and Sony H.264.

That makes sense. I really wish Sony would let us disable Noise Reduction so that I could have a very clean image from the Sonys with DaVinci Resolve NR. I'd rather have a noisy image straight out of camera than a soft image which I can't resharpen.

NR on the A7rIV will also be a product of the subsampling from 60mp and not a specific NR process.
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Online

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 10129
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostTue Apr 27, 2021 9:37 pm

Well, if you compare the video out of Sony Alpha cameras with the RAW stills out of the same model, it's obvious that a lot of NR is going on. But it's true that good downsampling is also reducing noise to some degree.
Don't approach Resolve with your expectations from other NLEs! They are all different.
Resolve Studio 17.1.1 and Fusion Studio 17, macOS 10.15.7
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM, 32 GB RAM
2018 Mac mini 16 GB RAM, eGFX Breakway RX 580 MacOS 10.14.6
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 28, 2021 7:24 am

Uli Plank wrote:Well, if you compare the video out of Sony Alpha cameras with the RAW stills out of the same model, it's obvious that a lot of NR is going on. But it's true that good downsampling is also reducing noise to some degree.

There's actually NR going on in RAW on Sony cameras if you look at fine detail. Downsampling is a significant NR process in itself and not just 'some degree' esp when starting at 60mp.Noise is not a big issue with Sony camera anyway as they have class leading DR.
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 28, 2021 2:13 pm

John Griffin wrote:
Uli Plank wrote:Well, if you compare the video out of Sony Alpha cameras with the RAW stills out of the same model, it's obvious that a lot of NR is going on. But it's true that good downsampling is also reducing noise to some degree.

There's actually NR going on in RAW on Sony cameras if you look at fine detail. Downsampling is a significant NR process in itself and not just 'some degree' esp when starting at 60mp.Noise is not a big issue with Sony camera anyway as they have class leading DR.

I just wish Sony would give us an option to turn video NR off so I can do a better job myself in post at higher ISOs.
What will you create today?
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 28, 2021 4:43 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:
John Griffin wrote:
Uli Plank wrote:Well, if you compare the video out of Sony Alpha cameras with the RAW stills out of the same model, it's obvious that a lot of NR is going on. But it's true that good downsampling is also reducing noise to some degree.

There's actually NR going on in RAW on Sony cameras if you look at fine detail. Downsampling is a significant NR process in itself and not just 'some degree' esp when starting at 60mp.Noise is not a big issue with Sony camera anyway as they have class leading DR.

I just wish Sony would give us an option to turn video NR off so I can do a better job myself in post at higher ISOs.

High ISO is not a strong point of the A7rIV so then gain of having no NR would be small and as said earlier noise eats up data so it would be difficult to achieve without losing image quality elsewhere.
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Offline

John Brawley

  • Posts: 2965
  • Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:57 am
  • Location: Los Angeles California

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostWed Apr 28, 2021 10:50 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:I just wish Sony would give us an option to turn video NR off so I can do a better job myself in post at higher ISOs.


Bur then you won't get the small file sizes.

JB
John Brawley ACS
Cinematographer
Currently - Los Angeles
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostSun May 02, 2021 5:38 pm

John Brawley wrote:
Alexrocks1253 wrote:I just wish Sony would give us an option to turn video NR off so I can do a better job myself in post at higher ISOs.


Bur then you won't get the small file sizes.

JB

Noise reduction in camera has nothing to do with file size. On other cameras such as the GH5 you can change sharpening and NR with no effect on file size.
What will you create today?
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostSun May 02, 2021 5:40 pm

John Griffin wrote:High ISO is not a strong point of the A7rIV so then gain of having no NR would be small and as said earlier noise eats up data so it would be difficult to achieve without losing image quality elsewhere.

Interesting point but doesn't that mean that the internal NR of the camera is already eating up data? I'd rather have the raw noise to clean up with the more powerful NR of DaVinci rather than getting the mediocre quality NR with temporal artifacts that happens in the camera itself.
What will you create today?
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 1067
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostSun May 02, 2021 5:57 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:
John Griffin wrote:High ISO is not a strong point of the A7rIV so then gain of having no NR would be small and as said earlier noise eats up data so it would be difficult to achieve without losing image quality elsewhere.

Interesting point but doesn't that mean that the internal NR of the camera is already eating up data? I'd rather have the raw noise to clean up with the more powerful NR of DaVinci rather than getting the mediocre quality NR with temporal artifacts that happens in the camera itself.

Noise is random single pixel data that needs to be stored so it eats up data. Even when you turn off NR in the GH5 it's still applying it via subsampling although it's pretty benign and non intrusive. I haven't used my A7rIV for video but when I used my A7r II ( in APS-C mode) and A7s I wasn't aware of excessive or intrusive NR artefacts. Can you share some footage or screen grabs where this is a problem for you?
i7 6950x, 64gb RAM, GTX1080ti.
Offline
User avatar

roger.magnusson

  • Posts: 1730
  • Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 4:58 pm

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostSun May 02, 2021 6:13 pm

Alexrocks1253 wrote:
John Brawley wrote:
Alexrocks1253 wrote:I just wish Sony would give us an option to turn video NR off so I can do a better job myself in post at higher ISOs.


Bur then you won't get the small file sizes.

JB

Noise reduction in camera has nothing to do with file size. On other cameras such as the GH5 you can change sharpening and NR with no effect on file size.

While both the GH5 and Sony A7SIII records at a variable bit rate, maybe the GH5 has a smaller range of min to max bit rate.

In a camera where you set a target quality instead of a fixed bit rate there should be a significant increase in file size if there is little or no noise reduction.
Offline
User avatar

Alexrocks1253

  • Posts: 95
  • Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:15 pm
  • Location: Washington, DC
  • Real Name: Alexander Crocker

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostTue May 04, 2021 4:05 pm

Noise is random single pixel data that needs to be stored so it eats up data. Even when you turn off NR in the GH5 it's still applying it via subsampling although it's pretty benign and non intrusive. I haven't used my A7rIV for video but when I used my A7r II ( in APS-C mode) and A7s I wasn't aware of excessive or intrusive NR artefacts. Can you share some footage or screen grabs where this is a problem for you?

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1J7IwxvbhNt-2kQzFzP5IujL6OtZE5K_U?usp=sharing
The temporal artifacts. If you look at my shirt or me moving out of the shot at the end, you can see there is an outline of my shirt from the previous frame. I see the same artifact when I turn Temporal NR all the way up on the Faster setting in DaVinci, so it is temporal. Artifacts of Spatial NR are simply softening, but temporal has much worse artifacts when overdone, which the internal NR seems to do.
What will you create today?
Offline

JonPais

  • Posts: 119
  • Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:17 am

Re: Macroblocking at 12:1 on BMPCC4K but not on 8 bit Sony?

PostSat May 08, 2021 11:35 pm

I’m a Sony owner myself, I’ve got the a7s III and before that I had the a7 III. There is simply no comparison between an 8-bit 100M XAVC file from any of Sony’s mirrorless cameras and BRAW in terms of being able to grade an image. No one serious about video would choose a camera that only shoots 8-bit 4:2:0 100M IPB in 2021, with no ability to shoot log, RAW or HDR. Presumably you’re shooting the Pocket because it has awesome colors, and BRAW is going to give you greater flexibility in post production – white balance, NR, highlight recovery and so on. It’s a fact of life that RAW is going to take up more space than Sony’s silly 8-bit 4:2:0. I always shoot ProRes RAW HQ because I require the highest quality. I did not buy the a7s III to record low quality video, and I’d expect anyone shooting with the Pocket to understand that there’s a price to pay for the highest quality in terms of storage space. Those are the sorts of things most of us research prior to investing in a system. To me, over 250GB/hour is worth it, provided the footage looks amazing. I transcode the files to ProRes 4444 prior to working with them in Resolve, which further increases their size. Not for anything in the world would I return to 8-bit 4:2:0!
https://daejeonchronicles.com

Return to Cinematography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Csaba Nagy, Google Feedfetcher, Jamie LeJeune, Uli Plank and 34 guests