C100: BMC vs C100 vs Scarlet
- Thread starter RZE
- Start date
AndreeOnline
Veteran
I'd like to see a somewhat busy shot with as good glass as possible at around 20-24mm or so to see how much they resolve compared to each other. I would prefer an outside shoot in available light. And if shooting can be extended into dusk—so much better.
Make each camera look as good as possible (as far as you know how to) and let's then take a look at the 1080p frames. Feel free shoot at higher res and downscale with the other cameras. Sharpening and noise reduction is fine, but I'd like to see what comes out of the cameras as well.
And... please don't expose the C100 so that you need to lift the midtones in post with a gamma push.
Price and workflow of the cameras are different and not important. As operators we will need to inform ourselves beforehand. But it would be cool if you then describe the steps, or time it takes, to reach the end goal with each camera.
Make each camera look as good as possible (as far as you know how to) and let's then take a look at the 1080p frames. Feel free shoot at higher res and downscale with the other cameras. Sharpening and noise reduction is fine, but I'd like to see what comes out of the cameras as well.
And... please don't expose the C100 so that you need to lift the midtones in post with a gamma push.
Price and workflow of the cameras are different and not important. As operators we will need to inform ourselves beforehand. But it would be cool if you then describe the steps, or time it takes, to reach the end goal with each camera.
squig
Veteran
And please move the camera as you do this. If I see another static camera test I'm going to blow my brains out. These are MOTION picture cameras! My 5D MKIII blows in underexposed movement due to the fixed pattern noise, it's important for us all to see how these cameras fair with movement and changing light sources. The rolling shutter I've seen from the BMCC looks somewhere between the D90 and the 5D MKII but there's so much hope for this camera nobody is talking about that. Stress them out, then we'll see what's what. I don't really see any point in properly exposed controlled lighting skin tone tests except for serial peepers, you can get good skin from a $500 camera so what's the chance you can't with these 3? If you can get your hands on a hyperdeck or a ninja that would put the C100 on a more even playing field.
S. Matthews
Well-known member
document light set up and intensity, any shot done replicate all variables as close as possible for each camera (lens, exposure...) and document. If you have actors or actresses don't make them smile in one shot and not the others, all not smiling, or all smiling... no indicating a feeling for one shot or the other.
Test out all shooting modes for at least one colourful scene with a wide range, pro res, raw, slog....
Biggest thing, provide raw/native frames from each shot from each camera, always a nice touch and a surefire way to avoid "the post wasn't handled properly" remarks. Could even do a whole get the most out of these shots on the forum and see who can get the best grade in the shortest time and all the time they need, then compare that to looks you could achieve in camera or out of the box(gamma profiles, looks on red...)
As long as you don't make sweeping declarations about this camera or that one, you try your best to be scientific in the testing while still having some fun with it, and leave it to the viewers to make the conclusions, I think you should be fine.
Good Luck!
Test out all shooting modes for at least one colourful scene with a wide range, pro res, raw, slog....
Biggest thing, provide raw/native frames from each shot from each camera, always a nice touch and a surefire way to avoid "the post wasn't handled properly" remarks. Could even do a whole get the most out of these shots on the forum and see who can get the best grade in the shortest time and all the time they need, then compare that to looks you could achieve in camera or out of the box(gamma profiles, looks on red...)
As long as you don't make sweeping declarations about this camera or that one, you try your best to be scientific in the testing while still having some fun with it, and leave it to the viewers to make the conclusions, I think you should be fine.
Good Luck!
J Davis
Veteran
I believe we are entering an age of cameras where detail no longer matters - they all gather lots of detail, the new frontier is skin (and color science). Red is a perfect example, look at how much their color science has improved over the years. Canon is the old hand in the skin game.
really? Nikon has always had nicer skin tones in photography (imho), and the BMC seems to have nice colour science in moving image (imho)
starcentral
Veteran
Wow I went to sleep after my post and woke up to all this .... :huh:
For the latitude test I suggested (if you're still interested in doing it) your best bet is to stick a grey card in the scene and measure 50%IRE on it with each camera. The C100 and BMC don't have a waveform monitor built in or even a spot meter so I would strongly suggest to see if you can get an external monitor that has one built in for this test. It would really help make everything more equal.. ie. using zebra stripes on a grey card can be subjective and may not be as accurate. Be careful on the Scarlet if planning to use an external monitor as what you see or read with it can actually be deceiving because RED allows you to adjust the image output without adjusting what you record! (Double check under the LOOK menu that things are reset). I've seen people get burned exposing using an external monitor not realizing someone else before them has altered the settings. On the Scarlet your best bet is to just use the FALSE COLOR feature and read GREEN on your grey card.
To really test the latitude I suggest setting up the camera indoors in a dark room or if outside under a large overpass or bridge, then also include an area of your image directly under the sun in your shot as well. It could be buildings in the background if you're under a bridge, or it could be a view out a large window if you're inside. Mix a bit of both dark and bright in the shot and just worry about securing that grey card once you found a spot that will give you 50%IRE on it. :happy:
I feel the aperture setting on the lens is really important too for conclusive testing. Most people would stop up and down using the lens for such a test but that alters the depth of field and also changes the characteristics of the glass. Me, I would pick f4 to f5.6 and use 2 stops ND filters as the "baseline" and then add/remove additional ND filters to get -2, -1, 0, +1, +2 stops. Indoors you might need additional lighting to get your grey card to 50%IRE and be sure to throw some light splash on a nearby wall and get some gradients going.
Hypothesis:
Couple things about working with raw linear gamma encoded formats; you can almost always over expose by 2-4 stops and still pull out an image the will look "perfect" and "normal" so I wouldn't expect anything bad to come out of the over-exposure tests on the BMC or RED but it would be interesting to see the C100 in comparison to show us the limits of log or standard gamma vs linear.
The under exposure test will be a little more interesting however because as you lift the images in post back to where they should be we will really start to see the differences between cameras where the darker regions of the image start to break up, get muddy or noisy.
With this type of test there are a few caveats with the Canon: If you do the test in C-LOG mode the 50%IRE will drop to 32% and that is normal for C-LOG mode and you MUST keep it there! In post you will push it back to 50%. Also as a DP in "real life" shooting with a C100/300/500 you would never purposely under-expose the Canon to help preserve highlights (as you would do on film or possibly other cameras) then later in post have to push the grey tones back,,, Canon has a wicked feature that simply allows you to adjust the ISO of the camera in C-LOG and it will automatically increase/decrease the dynamic range over or under middle-grey depending on what you want to protect. So it means you ALWAYS just shoot for 50% IRE and the camera does the rest for you in-camera!
RZE - still up to the test?
Yup still up, I paid for the rental! Monitor is no problem, I'm a colorist on the side so I have an FSI CM170, waveform, vector scope, so its all good and I have converter to get hdsdi out of the c100. I don't believe 50 IRE is best, Red recommends 44-47 IRE and I've shot there most of the time. I'm well aware of the 32 IRE on the c100, It definitely is not a rule to keep middle grey there so what ever IRE the scene would benefit from thats probably where I'm going to put middle grey. And I still am figuring out the BMC. Seems like people have using zebras to expose by not clipping the sensor. I don't like the idea of relying on RAW manipulation contrast ratios are relative to middle grey and I need where thats supposed to be for how I like to operate, but each camera has its own workflow, I'm still looking into the exposure.
I got my actor and my studio space, and my lenses are still a little up in the air. I could borrow some from the studio I work at but I have given them two weeks notice yesterday so its up to them.
I'm thinking that I'm going to do a color chart test to see where the color matrix mapping is with relation to one another.
starcentral
Veteran
Sounds like you're all good to go, I hope my post was a little helpful.
I only recommended 50% to keep all things equal across the board for the baseline, its definitely not a rule as I always shoot my middle grey around 40-44%. Anyway I don't think 5%IRE with 16-bit linear gamma is going to make any difference at all.
Exposing BMC is going to be no different then RED. They are both linear gamma and you can expose so the screen is almost entirely all white and still pull out a typical 5-stop scene out of it.. but if you're doing an exposure test then you will have whites clipping when doing the test, that is the point of it.
Anyway have fun be sure to write stuff down as you go, and best of all be sure to post your findings!
I only recommended 50% to keep all things equal across the board for the baseline, its definitely not a rule as I always shoot my middle grey around 40-44%. Anyway I don't think 5%IRE with 16-bit linear gamma is going to make any difference at all.
Exposing BMC is going to be no different then RED. They are both linear gamma and you can expose so the screen is almost entirely all white and still pull out a typical 5-stop scene out of it.. but if you're doing an exposure test then you will have whites clipping when doing the test, that is the point of it.
Anyway have fun be sure to write stuff down as you go, and best of all be sure to post your findings!
J Davis
Veteran
nikon was not mentioned in this test, nor have they entered the large sensor camcorder arena
I have yet to see bmc skin tones that I like and believe me I've been searching (because I wanted to believe in the newcomer, the underdog). I gave up, so somebody post something with decent skin please. Back when it was just John Brawley posting tests the only thing I saw that came close to decent was the girl playing pool. Everything else I've seen the skin looked plastic
starcentral
Veteran
With digits?
Do you like F35 skin or Alexa?
It's such a subjective thing, everyone seems to have their definition. My own standard for digital is Alexa and now F35. I know first hand that Blackmagic matches F35 in color realm. And I've seen side by side private Alexa and Blackmagic tests, they match out of the gate.
So maybe it's a matter of some people liking the way Canons look and some liking the way Sony CMOS looks, some High End Sony, some Alexa etc.
Last edited:
Erik Naso
Veteran
Nope.
AndreeOnline
Veteran
Not actually written out, but the lines are there. Of course they could have put digits on there, but they would probably have been ridiculously small on such a small monitor.
But the lines work. It's not like the waveform is flowting in free space...
AndreeOnline
Veteran
And... I don't think it's a good idea to shoot the cameras the same, or make them use the same settings.
Quite the opposite: use whatever settings you think make each camera shine. It's about the image, not the setting. The two constants are the scene and the lens.
Quite the opposite: use whatever settings you think make each camera shine. It's about the image, not the setting. The two constants are the scene and the lens.
J Davis
Veteran
please don't keep it to yourself, you're welcome to pm, fb, or email me a link if you can't post it on the thread.
I want to be a bmc believer but I have become disillusioned by what I saw posted on vimeo.
in order alexa, canon , sony
Heres my exposure plan for the BMC, In an initial test I'll shoot a grey card and a white card. Gradually increase light on the white card until it just clips the sensor, and then see what IRE the grey card falls and repeat for ISO range. Calibrate my meter and go based of that. But someone can save me the trouble if they know where what IRE levels middle grey is commonly exposed at, also how many stops up from middle grey is clipping.
I gotta work with middle grey, my contrast ratios are always in relation to middle grey, I don't want to gauge exposure just based on clipping.
I gotta work with middle grey, my contrast ratios are always in relation to middle grey, I don't want to gauge exposure just based on clipping.