Cinemartin goes bankrupt

The Debate

Building a camera is/isn't easy.

Two basic concepts:

1. A philosophy of a constructive mindset to build anything, without regard to challenges present. "While it's challenging it's quite fun and that makes it worthwhile- wait till you see what's coming next!" vs. "It's not easy and progress is slow, maybe you'll see a firmware update next year, maybe not. Sorry for the delay".
2. What makes a great camera or product?

Let's start with Red (since I believe they own this forum?). Out of the gate wild, positive claims of amazing performance. Years later, while it's still over-complicated and has other issues (e.g. not quite reliable enough yet), many people love that camera system and no one can argue that it doesn't produce fantastic quality imagery now, even for skin tones (the most challenging aspect of color science).

Black Magic- similar story at a much lower price point (starting at $3k).

Z Cam- they're just getting started, and at an even lower price point ($2K).

See the pattern- as DLD noted next will be around $1K (and it won't stop there).

What is a camera?

Sensor + computer (hardware + software) + storage + power, and minimally a button to start/stop recording. A lens isn't even needed, a pin hole works. Power can be switched by plug/unplug battery (anyone remember the NanoFlash haha).

Right now I (and anyone with the right software and hardware skills) can purchase an Ambarella A9 development kit: https://www.ambarella.com/uploads/docs/A9-product-brief.pdf , the sensor of their choice (up to 4K), a battery, lens mount, lens, literally some cardboard and duct tape (a la Google cardboard for VR), a switch/button and an SDXC memory card (and a few more minor items) and can build a real, working camera in just a few hours total working time.

Is that easy? From my point of view that's super easy. You can customize it to your heart's content to make it better. Imagine Sony selling you a Venice sensor (provided it can interface with that board), you work with a friend who has a 3D printer and/or has access to a vacuum+oven to make carbon fiber components, and the body can be super sexy, strong, and lightweight, any form factor you can image. Next you can add a simple LCD for settings. What do you really minimally need? ISO, WB, shutter, framerate (start with all manual lenses). Add a WiFi/Bluetooth chip and you can control with iOS/Android and full touch-screen GUI, remotely. Over time you can develop it into exactly the perfect camera. For YOU!

This is the future of cameras. Just like with PCs, it will be possible to use COTS (common off the shelf components) to build an ultra powerful, completely customized camera for anyone's needs. This pattern also happened with cars. In the beginning most people bought factory cars (vs. building them), later people began to modify them, and now we've got many small companies (and some getting bigger: Tesla) building cars that would never be possible if only the 'big boys' were in charge (and the big boys have, and still are, providing a lot of friction to slow down the little guys).

EDIT: already possible to build a tiny modular camera with an HDMI camera+lens ( e.g. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1382660-REG/aida_imaging_uhd_100_uhd_4k_30_hdmi_1_4.html ) and e.g. Atomos recorder. For pro use external monitors are already common. Future pro camera with IBIS, usable AF (gimbal, or working fast- docu work etc.) and monitor+recorder and there's your custom camera in a tiny package. Swap out the sensor over time as need or per shot / available lenses. Looks like full frame sensors may be hard to source by themselves for a while. Camera can be controlled via HDMI (technically possible- can be done in the future). SDI is of course better: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...dmft_uhd_mr_micro_studio_c inema_camera.html . That market will continue to grow- look forward to seeing S35, FF, phase detect AF, IBIS, etc. That's the future for those needing highly configurable camera systems (pro use etc.): tiny camera block+lens mount and you can use any recorder/display or VF per your custom, personal needs. All in a tiny, lightweight package. Sure, BM has work to do re: design and quality, would love to see Sony etc. develop something like this (Canon has a similar camera though not priced in the same ballpark: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod..._me200s_sh_multi_purpose_camera_cine ma.html ).

Most pros could work with this camera's quality (that's the closest I could find to their Micro Studio Camera 4k- similar tech/look?):


USB 3.1/Lightning is fast enough to send compressed Bayer to a phone (4K and more). Phones with GPU and AI hardware have plenty of power to do some amazing processing, today (even more tomorrow). So building a custom camera with a killer full frame sensor package with IBIS with an EF mount (or m43 take your pick) which can plug into iOS or Android would make building customized cameras ultra easy. This could create a new market for sensor vendors, as well as folks providing cases/cages to hold the phone and sensor block + lens. People can write their own camera control software for iOS/Android, or purchase one from the store (if this were to become a market). Just like plugging a USB camera into a PC/Laptop and using software to capture/control.

EDIT: examples of USB 3.1 cameras currently on the market, with On and Sony sensors: https://www.lumenera.com/products/high-performance-usb-3.html
On Semi full frame 35mm 6.5K global shutter sensor and active EF mount! Too bad FR is a bit low (perhaps sending Bayer/Raw to a phone would be possible at 24fps?): https://www.lumenera.com/products/high-performance-usb-3/lt29059h.html
lt29059-nir_2.jpg


A great camera is very personal to one's needs and point of view. The opportunity to custom build a camera for any desired purpose means soon everyone can have their perfect camera if they want to do the extra effort to build one. The market for pre-made cameras isn't going anywhere for the mass market wanting something good enough with the least hassle (and increasingly built into phones). Using an external sensor + lens with a phone seems like the best bang-for-buck in the near future, curious why no one's done that yet.

That's my point of view for taking the position that building a camera is easy.

Is it "cheating" to build cameras this way? Depends on your point of view. Are all the divisions of large camera companies really a lot like many small companies working under the same name? Is ARRI cheating using On Semiconductor sensors, Xilinx (most likely) FPGAs and a myriad of other IC and electronic components, none if which they themselves manufacture? The Japanese camera cartel cameras are produced mostly in China!

Making a great camera or any product takes iteration. The rate of iteration depends on many factors, and reducing friction increases the convergence rate to what a market would call a great product. It's starts with consciousness and how leadership thinks and leads their teams. Freely available technology increases speed (a lubricant) and patents, politics / blocking tactics from competitors, and non-constructive team thinking reduces speed (friction).
 
Last edited:
The Micro Studio only outputs a 4K/30p or HD signal (no internal recording) and it's about 4 years older than the new Pocket.

But it does indeed have a similar image because it's a Blackmagic. However, they didn't put 'FILM' DR into it limiting it.

There's also a Micro Cinema but it's only HD.
 
Right- doesn't matter if using an external monitor+recorder: makes sense to use with a recorder vs. spending money on a full camera and only using the video output. Looks like they added raw output in 2017: https://www.cinema5d.com/blackmagic-camera-update-raw-sdi/ , so should get max possible DR now? Super16 is tiny; still useable if that form factor is important.

Too bad iOS doesn't currently support USB camera input. I could build a "cinema camera" with my iPhone X and a decent sensor + EF mount over USB 3.1. Video capture and GPU processing on iOS is super easy (compared to e.g. Windows DirectShow (working on a project with that right now, as well as ffmpeg builds on Windows), GUI all touch screen; relatively easy to create and update vs. physical buttons. Might be possible with a custom Lighting to USB 3.1 piece of hardware and perhaps convince a sensor/camera block vendor to output raw, which should be easy as a high resolution monochrome image (would also need a license to a good GPU accelerated Debayer*, probably need to store in H.265 (hardware accelerated)- quality would be amazing).

Currently working crazy hours on tech/codecs/video and now I really want to get out and do creative work, not build a camera system (though thinking about how it could be done (easily haha) is fun :) ).

* EDIT: or maybe not- could do cheap Debayer on GPU for live view, then save raw via max bitrate in H.265 as monochrome, then Debayer in post. Could write a tool to convert H.265 into a raw format for further processing. Sure, a bit complex but could be fun if the final quality was better than what's currently available on the market. Only issue is would need at least 10-bits in raw (might not be possible in iOS/H.265). "Hello Apple, would you guys mind adding 10 to 16-bit support to your H.265 codec, we want to turn the iPhone into a cinema camera component. Yeah, sure, Soderberg sent us haha."
 
Last edited:
What is a camera?

Sensor + computer (hardware + software) + storage + power, and minimally a button to start/stop recording. A lens isn't even needed, a pin hole works. Power can be switched by plug/unplug battery (anyone remember the NanoFlash haha).

Right now I (and anyone with the right software and hardware skills) can purchase an Ambarella A9 development kit: https://www.ambarella.com/uploads/docs/A9-product-brief.pdf , the sensor of their choice (up to 4K), a battery, lens mount, lens, literally some cardboard and duct tape (a la Google cardboard for VR), a switch/button and an SDXC memory card (and a few more minor items) and can build a real, working camera in just a few hours total working time.

Is that easy? From my point of view that's super easy.

Yes that part is easy.

You've just described what FRAN is.

That's my point. You don't know what you're talking about.

Plugging in a sample sensor and making an image. That part is the easy part. Same as what the open source axiom project is doing. They can all get to this part and be seduced by simplicity of making an image from a sensor. Making an image as a one off is easy.

The next stage is a higher magnitude of difficult. To refine that image into something that passes expectations.

Making nice pictures that cinematographers LIKE that are free of imaging defects and are consistent copy to copy is very very difficult.

Making a sensor behave the way you want. Sensors aren't like engines you plug into a car. They have to be tuned and configured very specifically, even for off the shelf ones. Most sensors have many different operating modes that alter their performance and change what bit depth they work in, what clock speed they run at, the integration speed which also affects performance.

It's exceptionally misleading to describe ANY sensor as "off the shelf" because none of them are. Some imaging decisions are made already sure, but many havn't been. And they are riddled with imaging defects sensor to sensor copy as well as inconsistencies that make every sensor very nearly unique in their imaging performance.

Sensor to sensor consistency is also very tricky. Arri's sensor rejection rate is something near 80%.

Add to that the CFA, the microlens array. All things that interact in unexpected ways with the sensor when each sensor responds slightly differently. Normalising sensor to sensor performance is probably the most difficult task of all. (and please don't BS us all with some crap about a software code you could run to sample the deviations)

Nice pictures. That DP's like. That goes to SUBJECTIVE taste. That isn't a LUT. That isn't a RAW workflow issue. That's subjective human decided taste. "I like that Yellow, but the blue is too cyan"

If you think cameras are optimized to reproduce accurate colours then you'd also be wrong. No one really wants that.

Most people think of RAW as being unprocessed images straight from the sensor. it's not at all. It's way more processed than many realise through both hardware choices and subjective colour processing choices that all affect how NICE your pictures are.

Nice pictures.

Something that's intangible and hard to define. Think of the way DPs and photographers describe the differences between film stocks. It's the same with sensors. None of them work the same way as the human eye. None of them are accurate in any scientific way, and the ones everyone love the most tend to be coloured and biased in certain subtle ways.

(As an analogy, think of the way people covet vintage lenses for having a unique look over the blandness of modern lens perfection.)

These are all choices. Not choices you decide by coding and engineering. You decide based on taste.

That's why cameras like Fran are derided. And Z cam (I own one) and they can do one type of job well, but as a general imaging tool, there are much better choices because they don't make nice pictures.

*By the way, you still don't understand how the Arri story / dual gain works. There have been TWO different companies that have made the SAME sensor for Arri to Arri's design. Many BMD cameras also have dual gain architecture and have sensors made by an entirely different company. Yet another example of your lack of true understanding and why I keep holding you to account when you make flippant nonsense claims that have no basis in truth other than what you THINK is an easy task.

** BMD's price point for their "pretty nice pictures" 4K is a lot less than the price you quoted.

JB

*bound by NDA but sometime test pilot for BMD and Olympus Visionary and was around when JPB was struggling to make Penelope a reality. I've been through this with several camera companies and I'm not an engineer. I've been living it with my close friendship with the BMD team especially. You're mostly talking out your arse from some coding experience at myspace as far as I can tell. You still can't even get the basics right beyond what a google search will tell you about what's involved.
 
Right- doesn't matter if using an external monitor+recorder: makes sense to use with a recorder vs. spending money on a full camera and only using the video output. Looks like they added raw output in 2017: https://www.cinema5d.com/blackmagic-camera-update-raw-sdi/ , so should get max possible DR now? Super16 is tiny; still useable if that form factor is important.

Yea, but no software exists that can unpack it...not even Resolve.

This came out a few weeks ago but it's too late as 99% won't bother: https://www.fastcinemadng.com/info/bmd/blackmagic-micro-studio-4k.html

It was one of the more questionable updates.

And an output can make a big difference with potential offerings.
 
*By the way, you still don't understand how the Arri story / dual gain works. There have been TWO different companies that have made the SAME sensor for Arri to Arri's design. Many BMD cameras also have dual gain architecture and have sensors made by an entirely different company. Yet another example of your lack of true understanding and why I keep holding you to account when you make flippant nonsense claims that have no basis in truth other than what you THINK is an easy task.

You didn't answer any of the questions from the prior post, why not?

It seems like your primary focus is to convince yourself that I don't know what I'm talking about with more ad hominem and aggressive language and zero facts or response to my polite questions. Is this how you conduct yourself in a professional environment? Why are you irritated if I'm unqualified in your eyes?

You're not an engineer? Do you understand that ARRI's (On Semiconductor) dual gain system does a simultaneous sensor readout which is summed into a single output, resulting in lower noise and higher DR (still industry leading look)? Do you understand that this is not the same thing as dual ISO (one or the other voltage but not both at the same time)? Can you provide a link to another sensor manufacturer that does exactly the same thing as described in On Semiconductor's patent claims?

Here's two of my published patents related to cameras and image processing. While a law firm did the patent prosecution, I wrote most of the claims as well as description etc. (I also wrote 100% of various provisional patents):
https://patents.justia.com/patent/20140328574
https://patents.justia.com/patent/8823745

Can you provide evidence that you have any experience in technology to support any of your assertions? Do you understand how to construct a logical proof to disprove anything I have stated?

I've provided proof of experience with camera systems and image processing, as well as creative material I've shot as a filmmaker (feel free to be a critic- it's art). While I'm happy to continue this discussion with you John, I won't respond to any more of your posts if you continue in an unprofessional manner.
 
The Micro Studio only outputs a 4K/30p or HD signal (no internal recording) and it's about 4 years older than the new Pocket.

But it does indeed have a similar image because it's a Blackmagic. However, they didn't put 'FILM' DR into it limiting it.

There's also a Micro Cinema but it's only HD.

Also, it's a different sensor and has much less DR than the HD versions.

JB
 
Just gluing a sensor to an Amberella chip is certainly the easy part, I doubt their demonstration software is refined enough to really make a decent camera out of it. I can glue the pieces together with ease, but calling that a camera without the software would be a travesty. If I thought I could do it, and do it properly, I probably would have tried it already. The development boards are pretty pricey which would be one thing to stop me in my tracks, they have also been a difficult company to work with in the past, not sure if they would be easier to work with now (for what might be a single device). 8mm lenses are still fairly cheap, things like lenses for the old Bolex cameras, but not sure the resolution is really there to bother. There is a guy making one off Bolex conversions, I've looked at the video and it's really "vintage" looking, else I'd have bought one of his cameras by now. I guess that proves that you really can make a camera if you want to invest enough time getting it working, but for most intelligent people, this is a stretch unless you have the resources to hire talent to pull it off.

https://www.facebook.com/nomislabs/
 
Also, it's a different sensor and has much less DR than the HD versions.

JB

2 stops...it's a lot but not much less like the typical 8-9 you may see in a non-LOG modern camera.

Surprisingly, BM is claiming 11 stops for it (vs. BMPCC/BMMCC's 13).

And I guess for anyone who doesn't know it's of course different as the Pocket/Micro Cinema have a 1920 x 1080 chip.
 
Just gluing a sensor to an Amberella chip is certainly the easy part, I doubt their demonstration software is refined enough to really make a decent camera out of it. I can glue the pieces together with ease, but calling that a camera without the software would be a travesty. If I thought I could do it, and do it properly, I probably would have tried it already. The development boards are pretty pricey which would be one thing to stop me in my tracks, they have also been a difficult company to work with in the past, not sure if they would be easier to work with now (for what might be a single device). 8mm lenses are still fairly cheap, things like lenses for the old Bolex cameras, but not sure the resolution is really there to bother. There is a guy making one off Bolex conversions, I've looked at the video and it's really "vintage" looking, else I'd have bought one of his cameras by now. I guess that proves that you really can make a camera if you want to invest enough time getting it working, but for most intelligent people, this is a stretch unless you have the resources to hire talent to pull it off.

https://www.facebook.com/nomislabs/

Many people like to build things. The first step is imagination. The next is seeing what's out there. After that constructing a plan, then start building, doing whatever is necessary to finish it. Enthusiasm is contagious, others will help! :)
 
My sincerest apologies to Mitch, John, Paul, Andrew, Josh, nothing, and everyone else I may have irritated or offended. I was a bit a lawyer technologist in a previous life. That's not who I want to be anymore. There's something else I think is important to talk about and work on. Will start a thread in the Cafe.
 
Last edited:
Great- we agree this thread is silly. Agreed about the product quality from the beginning. Agreed that skill is required to build great products.

henryford1_11575150.jpg
 
Back
Top