So if we're still in this same position come, say, December, are you going to be as forgiving?
Bolex D16: RAW, 16/Super 16 sensor size, costs less than MkIII
- Thread starter underpressure
- Start date
So if we're still in this same position come, say, December, are you going to be as forgiving?
I seriously doubt that will be the case. When the BMCC was announced last April, I said then that the D16 was likely a year behind them in the development process. That is proving to be about right.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
There were ship dates, August of last year was the first one, then they emailed everyone saying November of last year, then they said the first quarter of 2013. But that's neither here nor there...delays will happen, and I don't doubt people will enjoy the cameras...never said they wouldn't.
My whole point is about the many mistakes they have made along the way, and recognizing these does require any sort of defense of the project as a whole.
They have done good things:
1.) Listened to their forum members/backers.
2.) They chose a good sensor and CCD/global shutter is something people really desire.
3.) The design is interesting and appeals to a lot of people.
4.) The overall features and camera are very nice.
5.) They are very friendly and welcoming as a group. Joe is especially active on the forums..that is pretty refreshing.
They have done some bad things:
1.) Saying they shot footage with a "prototype" in the early stages was misleading, and a bit of a fiasco.
2.) Focused too much on periphery items.
3.) Did not have a better plan in place for getting the sensor functioning as they wanted.
Again, if people say those periphery items don't take resources away from the camera being ready...I couldn't disagree more. Unless they have an infinite amount of cash, then hiring people to do other things (that they don't need for the release of the camera) takes away resources. It's just common sense. If a team of people had been focused on getting the camera done first, working round the clock ...increasing the resources in that area if need be...it would have a much greater chance of being done.
I've heard that there are other companies working on the mounts/lenses/etc...doesn't matter. Setting up those partnerships takes time, takes money, takes people, takes air travel, takes meetings, and the list goes on. These things are nice additions, but they easily could have set up those partnerships as an expansion AFTER camera release. All of that could have been funneled into a better, more experienced team for camera development and completion.
Again, I wish them all the luck in finishing and many of my points are moot considering where they are in the process. But I do honestly believe there are lessons in these discussions for D Bolex and other companies moving forward.
My whole point is about the many mistakes they have made along the way, and recognizing these does require any sort of defense of the project as a whole.
They have done good things:
1.) Listened to their forum members/backers.
2.) They chose a good sensor and CCD/global shutter is something people really desire.
3.) The design is interesting and appeals to a lot of people.
4.) The overall features and camera are very nice.
5.) They are very friendly and welcoming as a group. Joe is especially active on the forums..that is pretty refreshing.
They have done some bad things:
1.) Saying they shot footage with a "prototype" in the early stages was misleading, and a bit of a fiasco.
2.) Focused too much on periphery items.
3.) Did not have a better plan in place for getting the sensor functioning as they wanted.
Again, if people say those periphery items don't take resources away from the camera being ready...I couldn't disagree more. Unless they have an infinite amount of cash, then hiring people to do other things (that they don't need for the release of the camera) takes away resources. It's just common sense. If a team of people had been focused on getting the camera done first, working round the clock ...increasing the resources in that area if need be...it would have a much greater chance of being done.
I've heard that there are other companies working on the mounts/lenses/etc...doesn't matter. Setting up those partnerships takes time, takes money, takes people, takes air travel, takes meetings, and the list goes on. These things are nice additions, but they easily could have set up those partnerships as an expansion AFTER camera release. All of that could have been funneled into a better, more experienced team for camera development and completion.
Again, I wish them all the luck in finishing and many of my points are moot considering where they are in the process. But I do honestly believe there are lessons in these discussions for D Bolex and other companies moving forward.
combatentropy
Veteran
This latest blog post makes me even less likely ever to try building a camera myself: http://www.digitalbolex.com/image-improvements/
And it's nothing against Digital Bolex. Red and Ikonoskop's many delays showed the same thing: the last 20% takes 80% of the time.
And it's nothing against Digital Bolex. Red and Ikonoskop's many delays showed the same thing: the last 20% takes 80% of the time.
Ikonoskop just resolved their sensor calibration IQ issues with the last firmware update in April. Took them 3 years to finally get it dialed in. Looks like a different camera now.
The Bolex team has done in a little over a year what most companies would take three to accomplish. They have been proactive about getting outside help when it is needed and fortunate to get the advice of some of the highest level engineers that used to work for Kodak digital. One of them developed and patented the Bayer filters used on the sensors, another was the chief technical officer of Kodak's digital cinema division. He cleared up some sticky calibration issues the first day he was there.
It looks like the poor man's Ikonoscop: S16, raw video, but much cheaper recording media.
I really like the DII, but you can tell the design is over 3 years old. If they decided to update it, I can see them going to cheaper and non-proprietary media cards, an OLED EVF, perhaps the ability to also record to ProRes 422 internally. Hmmm...sounds like the BMPCC (minus the EVF).
I really like the DII, but you can tell the design is over 3 years old. If they decided to update it, I can see them going to cheaper and non-proprietary media cards, an OLED EVF, perhaps the ability to also record to ProRes 422 internally. Hmmm...sounds like the BMPCC (minus the EVF).
resonance_image
Active member
The Ikonoskop is an amazing camera, I own one and love it and I don't think its dated at all since its just now that we are talking about mass produced RAW capable cameras. They won't do a Pro Res version I don't think, they value image quality and creative control over mass market appeal. They are like Aaton, artists who's adherence to their vision may make prevent them from being popular.
Everyone complains about proprietary media being so expensive and I wish the cards were cheaper but they are bulletproof, milled from solid aluminum and are going to last. I had mine in the Congo in extremely harsh conditions, heat, humidity and never had a problem with the camera.
I could see the Ikonoskop getting a new sensor in 2yrs or so when theres a s35mm CCD that could be retrofitted to the existing body. I don't see them doing a low cost camera though, they are handbuilt in Sweden not outsourced to Asia.
Last edited:
With the latest firmware update for the DII Ikonoskop is really getting their color science dialed in at last and the most recent posted footage is looking really gorgeous.
I agree, the DII and the Digital Bolex are both purpose built as 16mm film camera replacements, aimed at artists who want as much creative control over their images as possible. They are not intended to be mass market video cameras.
resonance_image
Active member
Yes definitely, and shooting raw forces a film like workflow which is fine with me though the hardest part is looking at a H.264 version up on Vimeo and comparing it to the original. Cant wait for a next wave video hosting site that can actually do these new camera's justice.
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
Good point. For now, only the editor is able to see the quality in full glory.
HKO
Well-known member
I came to appreciate how relatively bad normal encoders are in NLE packages . If it matters to you and you want the best representation then you need to note about how you render and encode your final master. Perhaps try to encode an uncompressed master using the pro version of Microsoft expression encoder. ( If uncompressed is not an option - Cineform and then mp4). It does screen capture and most think that is all it does but the mp4 encoder is absolutely top notch and rivals many of the dedicated encoder tools costing hundreds or thousands - yes just for encoders. Expression has a free version but that is only wmv I think. You will feel happier about the download option from Vimeo and also understand why professional DVDs and Blu Rays look as good as they do. There is actually a guy whos job it is to do just do encoding - they are called compressionists I believe and are paid a tidy sum. But 'expression' can look mighty close to your master. You can choose your bit rate in the smallest of steps and with ultra high bit rate as well. The sweet spot is around 35 - 40 mbps for HD in my past experience ( a while ago ) but you can go really high although CPU then becomes an issue. There are other free tools but they generally have hoops you have to jump through - may not be worth the hassle.
resonance_image
Active member
Thanks for that, I am not satisfied at all going from 12 bit 8 bit via Premiere or Resolve and need to spend some more time on really nailing settings that can cope with the fine gradations that look amazing in the master but always seem to be plagued with banding after transcoding.
pulpfiction007
Veteran
March 2012 - Announced, was to be released in summer of that year.
November 2012 - Looking at "early 2013" release
January 2013 - 100 changes to the body. Looking at "spring time" release.
February 2013 - Final camera body. All the boards are working, getting a signal from the sensor. "tweaking to get a nice image". No quadrant problem according to Joe in a discussion called "have you addressed the quadrant problem?"
March 2013 - SXSW festival. Cameras with internals and GUI. No image...said to be a firmware problem getting the sensors image to the LCD, problem has "since been crossed"
April 2013 - Cameras at NAB, no image again....quadrant problem. Which was said to not be a problem 2 months earlier.
May 2013 - Getting an image? Tweaking once again to make it look good? They were getting an image before...or weren't they. Lots of contradictions. None of them implied, all right there in the Bolex Forums.
June 2013 - Who knows. lol
November 2012 - Looking at "early 2013" release
January 2013 - 100 changes to the body. Looking at "spring time" release.
February 2013 - Final camera body. All the boards are working, getting a signal from the sensor. "tweaking to get a nice image". No quadrant problem according to Joe in a discussion called "have you addressed the quadrant problem?"
March 2013 - SXSW festival. Cameras with internals and GUI. No image...said to be a firmware problem getting the sensors image to the LCD, problem has "since been crossed"
April 2013 - Cameras at NAB, no image again....quadrant problem. Which was said to not be a problem 2 months earlier.
May 2013 - Getting an image? Tweaking once again to make it look good? They were getting an image before...or weren't they. Lots of contradictions. None of them implied, all right there in the Bolex Forums.
June 2013 - Who knows. lol
pulpfiction007
Veteran
There has been ZERO footage. The footage shot and on their blog is from a proscilla industrial camera with the same sensor.
Joncarr
Well-known member
According to the link below
"ONE SMALL STEP is the first film shot on the new Digital Bolex D16. The film was shot on the camera prototype in November/December of 2011"
Link
https://vimeo.com/41309513
pulpfiction007
Veteran
Nope....that was one of their earlier mistakes (saying it was a prototype...but not really) Then someone from here actually pointed out it was the proscilla camera they shot with. It's in this thread...lol, way way back.
Page 18, post 171.
Page 18, post 171.
The engineering group has connected with some very high level engineers that used to work for Kodak, one of whom was the inventor of the RGB Bayer filter that is used on these sensors. They have had these engineers, as well as some from Truesense coming in regularly as consultants as they get to particular stages of sensor tuning. What's the old saying about the last 10% of development taking 90% of the time?
To put this in perspective, sensor tuning delayed the Ikonoskop by more than a year and it is only with the last firmware upgrade in April, 3 years out, that they are finally getting the IQ this sensor is capable of. Tuning a CCD sensor is far more complicated than CMOS since it is a 100% analog device. On top of that DB chose to implement the most complex and refined multi-stage analog front end as part of the camera, greatly complicating the task but offering opportunities for a more refined image. Where standard analog front ends are tunable only in increments of 3dB, this one has a 3dB coarse stage and a 1/10th dB increment fine stage.
They have solved the issues to the point where they are getting proper color images, but the sensor still has to be tweaked for each ISO speed and each shutter speed at each ISO speed for best results.
They have the parts in house to build the first 100 cameras for the Kickstarter sponsors. But I think Joe's decision to not show any footage until the tuning process is completed is a wise one.
The sensor is not outdated. Kodak CCD's are the first choice in many scientific imaging applications where maximum quality data acquisition and refined images are essential, like the Mars Rovers for instance. It is a perfect choice for a raw digital cinema camera to replace a 16mm film camera.
To put this in perspective, sensor tuning delayed the Ikonoskop by more than a year and it is only with the last firmware upgrade in April, 3 years out, that they are finally getting the IQ this sensor is capable of. Tuning a CCD sensor is far more complicated than CMOS since it is a 100% analog device. On top of that DB chose to implement the most complex and refined multi-stage analog front end as part of the camera, greatly complicating the task but offering opportunities for a more refined image. Where standard analog front ends are tunable only in increments of 3dB, this one has a 3dB coarse stage and a 1/10th dB increment fine stage.
They have solved the issues to the point where they are getting proper color images, but the sensor still has to be tweaked for each ISO speed and each shutter speed at each ISO speed for best results.
They have the parts in house to build the first 100 cameras for the Kickstarter sponsors. But I think Joe's decision to not show any footage until the tuning process is completed is a wise one.
The sensor is not outdated. Kodak CCD's are the first choice in many scientific imaging applications where maximum quality data acquisition and refined images are essential, like the Mars Rovers for instance. It is a perfect choice for a raw digital cinema camera to replace a 16mm film camera.
Last edited: