AJA KiPro is clipping the signal????
- Thread starter macgregor
- Start date
tom.wong
Well-known member
email back from SD
"Greetings Thomas,
As this feature is proprietary to this camera, the PIX will not support this upon initial release. We are well aware of this though and once we have time to evaluate this, we will be able to determine if this is something that could/should be implemented in a future firmware release. As of now we will just have to wait and see. Thanks."
So it's not like the companies don't know this is happening, but whether it's even in the realm of possibility is another issue...
"Greetings Thomas,
As this feature is proprietary to this camera, the PIX will not support this upon initial release. We are well aware of this though and once we have time to evaluate this, we will be able to determine if this is something that could/should be implemented in a future firmware release. As of now we will just have to wait and see. Thanks."
So it's not like the companies don't know this is happening, but whether it's even in the realm of possibility is another issue...
DDDD).This is where judgement and lighting control come into play. You have to decide what highlights to sacrifice, how much fill you need for the shadows, and where to set exposure and gamma curves for the best compromise. This is part of the skill set one needs as a DP.
The legal signal level limits of HD video between 0 IRE black clip and 104 IRE white clip as defined by REC709 give you effectively about 7 stops of recordable DR to play with. If you are recording or finishing to an REC709 compliant video codec, you have little choice in the matter. It doesn't matter what camera you are using. This is in fact what the various gamma curves available in camera are designed to do, raise black levels and compress highlights in a way that allows you to retain more of the camera's available DR without exceeding the limits of the recording format. But you still have to do your part. There are no magic solutions here. It is a hard physical limitation of current and past video signal standards that we have had to deal with as long as TV and video cameras have existed.
Best response ever...
harrisoncj
Member
+1
bulbs in shot are always hard to shoot. using dimmers on your practicals is the best solution.
bulbs in shot are always hard to shoot. using dimmers on your practicals is the best solution.
I can sympathise I assure you, I think I know exactly whats is going on in your brain as you typed that.
Actually really glad to find this thread. I was just viewing PBs link on his facebook to this http://philipbloom.tumblr.com/post/8051277761 and I was wondering about those highlights. All explained in this thread.
KyleProhaska
Veteran
What I find odd is my waveform in Premiere is showing me the non-clipped waveform you showed in the beginning of the thread...without any values above 100% like I posted a screenshot of, HOWEVER the way the shot actually looks in the viewer is clipped...at least I think it is. Hard for me to believe my viewer is showing me a clipped version when the waveform clearly has the highlights below 100%...
EDIT: If I turn on the "Chroma" switch in Premiere, I see values up to 110% showing clipping, which is in the sky. Some of the chroma in the sky is clipping but the normal values of the shot show it to be fine. That's the culprit, at least in why the software was showing it fine.
EDIT: If I turn on the "Chroma" switch in Premiere, I see values up to 110% showing clipping, which is in the sky. Some of the chroma in the sky is clipping but the normal values of the shot show it to be fine. That's the culprit, at least in why the software was showing it fine.
macgregor
Veteran
Check the RGB parade in my vegas waveform screenshot. Blue channel es clipped as Tom points out.
tom.wong
Well-known member
I think, though it's yet another compromise, no matter how you spin it, you still get light years better results than internal recording, with stock gamma curves. but as of now, there really is no cheap, easy, neat, tidy solution to get everything you want out of the f3 log. you'll need dual link recorders for that.
the adage never fails.
cheap, fast, good. pick any 2.
the adage never fails.
cheap, fast, good. pick any 2.
Matthew Bennett
Well-known member
the motion picture expert's group are rolling in their graves...
bruceallen
Well-known member
The answer is:
1. Use FCP to bring down the highlights for all of the clips and re-export
Or
2. throw ProRes in the lake, see if a recorder that records to DNxHD will work (Sound Devices PIX) and dump FCP for Avid
Or
3. stage an all-out assault on Apple HQ and refuse to leave until they make ProRes stop being so damn weird.
If we can get enough people together I am game for #3.
Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
1. Use FCP to bring down the highlights for all of the clips and re-export
Or
2. throw ProRes in the lake, see if a recorder that records to DNxHD will work (Sound Devices PIX) and dump FCP for Avid
Or
3. stage an all-out assault on Apple HQ and refuse to leave until they make ProRes stop being so damn weird.
If we can get enough people together I am game for #3.
Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
Or just get the Blackmagic Hypershuttle for $327.75 and a few SSDs.
Forget every codec problem forever and enjoy sheer uncompressed glory.
Frank
Forget every codec problem forever and enjoy sheer uncompressed glory.
Frank
Duke M.
Veteran
Assuming a 6:1 shooting ratio (not uncommon) on a feature length movie you'd need about 6 terabytes before you even start editing or adding FX, music, etc. Been there, done that, will never do it again. Transcode and you're in the same boat with more time lost.
Anyone I know that's used the Black Magic Intensity cards outputting uncompressed to a capture station, did it for awhile and gave it up. (Including me.)
Uncompressed isn't a solution (other than for short FX shots), it simply trades one problem for another.
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
Doesn't make sense to me.
6 TB is nothing - I have 8 in my NLE. Letting alone 2 Portable Raids with 8TB each . How much is a 2 TB HDD? About 100 bucks? So where is the problem?
Having a 120 GB SSD gives you about 12 minutes - about the same amount like a film magazine.
The whole industry worked with that for decades and nobody complained.
Buy 2 or even 4 of those and have the DIT loading them down on portable RAIDS, while you are shooting on the others.
On the other hand, how much minutes are you shooting on a day - even on a 6:1 ratio?
Probably you even can get away with those 4 SSDs (48 minutes) which is close to a 10:1 ratio.
So again, what´s the problem?
Frank
6 TB is nothing - I have 8 in my NLE. Letting alone 2 Portable Raids with 8TB each . How much is a 2 TB HDD? About 100 bucks? So where is the problem?
Having a 120 GB SSD gives you about 12 minutes - about the same amount like a film magazine.
The whole industry worked with that for decades and nobody complained.
Buy 2 or even 4 of those and have the DIT loading them down on portable RAIDS, while you are shooting on the others.
On the other hand, how much minutes are you shooting on a day - even on a 6:1 ratio?
Probably you even can get away with those 4 SSDs (48 minutes) which is close to a 10:1 ratio.
So again, what´s the problem?
Frank
It's cumbersome...
1. During the shoot I don't have to have change out a hard drive every 12 minutes. Its too frequent.
2. After the shoot I don't want to have to deal with 6 terabytes of data.
Maybe it's more about personal preference... I refuse to deal with that much data with this particular solution. If I'm going to go that route, the "Why don't I just shoot on RED" question creeps into my mind.
Duke M.
Veteran
Plus add in the time to copy the SSD drive to the hard drive. (Better not with USB2) Are you going to hire a DIT wrangler?
Then for most (not all) people who will want to transcode later.
The question is not whether it can be done, but why would you want to burden yourself that way if you don't have to? I have better things to spend my time and money on. Way back when they didn't have any choice about changing a film magazine every 12 minutes.
I had an Eclair 35mm movie camera before. What a hassle. You couldn't pay me enough to go back to film. As far as I'm concerned film is dead. The studios just have too much invested in it to let film die gracefully.
Then for most (not all) people who will want to transcode later.
The question is not whether it can be done, but why would you want to burden yourself that way if you don't have to? I have better things to spend my time and money on. Way back when they didn't have any choice about changing a film magazine every 12 minutes.
I had an Eclair 35mm movie camera before. What a hassle. You couldn't pay me enough to go back to film. As far as I'm concerned film is dead. The studios just have too much invested in it to let film die gracefully.