F3 & External Recorder Possibilities

[tom.wong]

Has any one tried out BM Decklink Extreme,3D for recording yet? I am considering it as Gemini will take longer than the original schedule of CD?

through fcp, little funky and glitchy. haven't tried the BM capture software yet, but it might be more reliable since it's more of a dedicated piece of software. I've used the aja i/o express, and had some issues with it and fcp, but it's vtr exchange software is rock solid for capturing. if your productions don't mind being tethered to a laptop all the time or tower all the time, it's a good solution.

 

[JCummings]

So, can you share your experiences, configuration and workflow as pertains to the recorder you use?

Not much to share really. I hang a Nano off of two broadcast tape cameras I own. I've had a few problems with the recorder and lost some data, but fortunately I had tape handy to back me up. I will say that Convergent Design has taken extremely good care of me every time I've had an issue with their product...no complaints there, but I remain skittish about outboard recorders nonetheless. I plan on using the Nano occasionally with my new F3, but that camera is waiting on a quite a few new parts to come in before it makes its debut. As far as workflow, I don't have any...I hand the data off to my clients and off it goes.

 

[eddavid]

WRONG. Very WRONG.

Varicam 2700 (720p) & 3700 (1080p) record FULL RASTER 10 bit HD AVC Intra at 100 Mbps to onboard P2 cards. With a full load of cards in 720p 24 it is over 600 minutes of recording. Same goes for many other non Varicam Panasonic HPX models which record FULL RASTER, 1920x1080 or 1280x720 10 bit HD. Heck, including the new tiny HPX 250 at under $6,000.

I think AVC Intra produces better visual results at comparable data rates. It is more modern method of compression designed with HD in mind. Mpeg 2 is being stretched to handle HD and seems to fall apart sooner with artifacts like macroblocking, flat field color,etc. Some NLEs like Media Composer have had problems with Long GOP Mpeg2 at high data rates, so sticking to I frame nano flash variants are best.

The current Varicam and HPX cameras, like most since 2007-2008 are leaps and bounds better than the older DVCPRO HD gear that were tied to 8 bit, more heavily compressed recording. However, even the older cameras output 10bit HD-SDI from their spigots.

If I wanted 8 bit I would probably stay with the F3 on board long gop codec and live with the sacrifice of 4:2:0 as well. However, the difference between 8 bit and 10 bit combined with higher data rate of ProRes, DnxHD or Cineform is extremely dramatic for any gamma and really a prerequisite for S-log.

Any images shot with post production color correction or keying in mind will benefit greatly from 10bit color space, especially those with natural gradients like skies or reflections like on automobile metal. Subtle skin tone variations are better represented and there is less banding to challenge the codec in areas of subtle lighting patterns or large fields of flat color.

So my questions were about integrating something like a Ki Pro, Gemini, Pix or etc. However I suppose the same workflow questions exist for Nanoflash, being:

-Does it trigger off of proper HD-SDI embedded commands like the SR-R1 will or does it rely on a timecode trick that requires native media in the camera? Or must it be started independently?

-Is there a "video through" allowing an external viewfinder (not monitor) to be used for record indication confidence and mode info?

-Will it record 720p 24 and 1080p 24 natively without the need for pulldown removal?

-Will it record any true VFR such as 720p 48fps and how?

-Will it record at 1080p60 or 720p60 to sub for true VFR support?

-Do they support external power with D-tap or 4pin allowing one Gold mount or V mount to power the whole rig (camera, viewfinder, recorder) via accessories so when the recorder dies, everything dies? This would prevent a dead recorder surprising a DP with his head in the shot.

-Do they take long to "boot" or finish writing files? What happens to files being recorded when power is interrupted?

I don't think many, if any, external recorders deliver all or even most of the above. Therefore they are really not perfect substitutes for the flexibility and reliability of on board recording. However this first batch of affordable large sensor cameras require the use of a separate recorder to get the image quality availability in more traditional video cameras for years.

My quest is to the find the one which most closely approaches the mission critical, speedy workflow that many professionals have taken for granted since Sony delivered the first Betacam more than 20 years ago.

I'm not looking for a science experiment or wrestling with multiple points of failure.

This is one area where Alexa truly shines but at quite a premium.

If I had to buy something immediately it would be a KiPro Mini but here is to hoping these things continue to develop quickly and other alternatives come to market without its faults.

This time next year I bet Panasonic has a 35mm or 4/3rds one piece Varicam with on board AVC Intra or AVC Ultra, Sony will have unveiled a mid-line model between the F3 and SRW900 with at least 50Mbps on board 10 bit 4:2:2 and Cannon may even have something for us to look at.

In a few years we will look back and laugh at these external recorders as we now chuckle at luggable 3/4 VTRs that minicam operators used to haul around. (digital raw mags are another story)

I really prefer to stay in the Panasonic family but at the moment, they really don't have anything for me to buy.

So it may be an F3 with a recorder.

cant you use the panasonic p2 recorder AG-HPG20 with the f3 to get your avc-intra 100 recordings? I have 3 nanoflashes - have had zero issues with them. 8bit vs 10bit - Alister did some tests - there are other tests on the internet. yes for s log you're going to need the pix 240. but anyway i don't recommend s log for anything like Run and Gun veritie, doc style shooting at all - its for dramatic work.

Alexa is not a good choice either for shooting with your "longer recording times" - and its a great camera. it only gets 12 minutes i believe per card. If you want something to be like your beta cam cameras or your Varicam 2700 or 3700, just get the panasonic external recorder and connect it to your sony f3 then you can hot swap p2 cards galore . I think. of course i've never used the panasonic AG-HPG20 thingy - it's also pretty big.

really at this point i think nanoflash is the only way to turn your f3 into a high codec quality cinema doc camera. also, it still looks damn good. but hey as i said before, think that you can only shoot at 10 bit and keep waiting and waiting while i am going around shooting all willy-nilly all over town, everywhere, today yesterday and tomorrow pushing the f3 to the limits of whatever job i put it on.


-Does it trigger off of proper HD-SDI embedded commands like the SR-R1 will or does it rely on a timecode trick that requires native media in the camera? Or must it be started independently?
can be started independently, 4 ways to trigger it . check out the Nanoflash FAQ or instruction manual - http://www.convergent-design.com/

-Is there a "video through" allowing an external viewfinder (not monitor) to be used for record indication confidence and mode info? no viewfinder pass but there is yes screen tally light - creates a red bar on your external monitor that you can loop thru. does not send more data beyond this. but they probably could out that feature in - not a bad idea.

-Will it record 720p 24 and 1080p 24 natively without the need for pulldown removal? yes. from PSF signal you can tell it to record as progressive

-Will it record any true VFR such as 720p 48fps and how? yes it has overcrank mode

-Will it record at 1080p60 or 720p60 to sub for true VFR support? 720p60 yes - 1080p60 - don't think so. it won't be able to record s-log. you need a 10 bit recorder for that

-Do they support external power with D-tap or 4pin allowing one Gold mount or V mount to power the whole rig (camera, viewfinder, recorder) via accessories so when the recorder dies, everything dies? This would prevent a dead recorder surprising a DP with his head in the shot. yes can run off a D tap to hirose connector. you can buy the custom made parts at www.nanoflash.net

-Do they take long to "boot" or finish writing files? What happens to files being recorded when power is interrupted? take 2 secs to boot. lowest power consumption out of any recorder.... files are max 4 gb . write out on each clip takes about 1 sec. if you kill power before that - the clip is lost. so just be smart about your power supply. not too hard.

 

[Duke M.]

Only the Varicam 3700 is 1080p, not the 2700, and it runs around $60k new. For a third that you've got the F3 with a recorder. I have both the nano and the ki pro mini. They are entirely different beasts.

The nano spans cards, writes faster and runs longer. Its hands down the winner for documentary style shooting where the production has to be 422 and >50Mbps. I can run both on a D-tap, but the Nano uses a lot less juice.

I will say that the nano does even better with the F3 than my EX1 because with the EX1 it faithfully records any noise. The F3 has less noise in a given situation. I try to shoot with a PP to grade as little as possible but when I do have to grade a lot the ki pro mini can be pushed much farther.

 

[Barry_Green]

I try to shoot with a PP to grade as little as possible but when I do have to shoot the ki pro mini can be pushed farther.

That's an interesting statement. Shouldn't it be absolutely identical? Isn't ProRes ProRes? In any given scene, both recorders should record identically.

Interesting that you have both. Can you run a test for us? Can you run both recorders simultaneously, and post the differences you're seeing? Doesn't matter if it's from the F3 or the EX1 or whatever, just so long as you're able to demonstrate the differences. I'd recommend using a hand-clap or flash to sync up the frames, and run both recorders simultaneously, preferably with the Ki Pro on the SDI and the Nano on the HDMI (assuming both are available simultaneously, I think they weren't both available on the F3 initially but that was rectified with a firmware update, right?)

Could be quite interesting.

 

[Duke M.]

I don't understand your question. The Nano is MPEG2 Long GOP or i-frame. It can be MXF or MOV, but I don't think its ever ProRes because its 8 bit. The Sony hardware codec chips only run 8 bit and the MOV is only a container. (At least that's my understanding.)

The Ki Pro Mini is ProRes and 10 bit. From S-Log the 10 bits files should prove their worth, but from a nicely saturated contrasty PP you shouldn't see much difference.

That being said I don't mind doing a test if you can tell me more what you want to test.

 

[Barry_Green]

Sorry, I had a brain freeze... I thought you said Ninja, not Nano. The Ninja and the Ki Pro are both ProRes recorders, so if you were encountering a difference with those two, then ... yeah, that'd be interesting. But of course the Nano and the Ki Pro are totally different animals, so ...

Never mind!

 

[C.A.Magid]

cant you use the panasonic p2 recorder AG-HPG20 with the f3 to get your avc-intra 100 recordings?

Well. The external P2 recorders are big and have some other drawbacks. While I do think AVC Intra blows MPEG2 away at equal data rates it is not as robust as ProResHQ, DnxHD 220, Cineform and of course uncompressed. Since we have done a lot of work in 10bit AVC Intra it is my desire to not regress to 8 bit Mpeg 2 acquisition. We would actually prefer to move up. You get used to the extra bits and forgiving compression.

anyway i don't recommend s log for anything like Run and Gun veritie, doc style shooting at all - its for dramatic work.

Think you may want to reconsider. S-long will add as many of 2 to 3 stops of lattitude. That can really help run and gun production by easing some of the burden of challenging lighting situations. You may even find yourself able to work with less light or trying some new things. Could probably move a little faster worrying a little less about windows, hotspots and underexposed areas. Its gamma (much like an improved FilmRec) is designed to preserve as much information from the field as possible, especially shadows and highlights. So less to worry about when the heat is on with clients and large crews. More range to play with when time is more on your side in the edit suite with coffee and a slice of pizza.

Run and gun for us is a production style, not a finished look. We squeeze a lot of setups into a day, some is narrative some is higher end documentary style. FilmRec via Varicam has really helped us a lot here mimicking an old school 16mm approach only minus the processing and transfer. We expect to use S-log or Log-C as such. RAW is a different story.

Alexa is not a good choice either for shooting with your "longer recording times" - and its a great camera. it only gets 12 minutes i believe per card. If you want something to be like your beta cam cameras or your Varicam 2700 or 3700

Its 15 to 20 minutes per card depending on 4:2:2 vs 4:4:4. Which demonstrates the potential of SxS. It is likely that USABLE 64 GB cards will be available sometime extending loads to 60 to 80 minutes. Long recording times are not mandatory if you have a robust, disaster proof data strategy. Using a device like a NexToDi instead of laptops can really help. So can having enough cards.

The charm and MAJOR ADVANTAGE of Alexa is that you already have a manufacturer provided viewfinder which like the viewfinders on many full size camcorders puts any aftermarket viewfinders to shame for focus. It is already in the right place for handheld or studio work and is powered off the camera. Alexa already has a shoulder pad built in and proper center of gravity. Depending on your lens choice it is ready to be handheld from the factory. It also has built in rosettes for extra pistol grips and even built in 15 LW rod mounts. Let's not forget about usable and widely accepted built in on board recording and multiple serviceable outputs. (XDCAM 35mb at 4:2:0 sticks out like a sore thumb and is flat out refused by many clients). It can record slow motion in its highest resolution. It requires no trickery to record and stop.

While the above sounds spectacular,it is not out of the ordinary for any users of broadcast grade video cameras or early generation digital cinema cameras like the F900, Varicam, SRW 9000 and etc. It isn't about a pissing match about features or codecs. It is about ease of use, flexibility, reliability and protection. Media is not lost with power failure with integrated P2 or tape recording. Everything gets along and reports status back to the user right where he needs it. Accidents happen and this sort of gear covers your tail.

However you typically don't get 35mm sensors in the traditional camcorder form factor (yet) or the dynamic range they offer. You can add a DOF adapter which sort of solves some of that and arguably produces more cinematic results than this latest round of super clean digital cameras. I may be silly, but I like grain and little lens junk (not noise). But DOF adapters do not deliver the detail and dynamic range of true 35mm gear. Heavy as sin too.

My point is that kitting out a F3 sacrifices a lot of what many professionals have grown accustomed to. We have already used one. There are great benefits to the camera in its stunning low noise performance and big dynamic range via s-log.

We can all agree that as-is with XDCAM 4:2:0, rear mounted viewfinder and poor ergonomic balance F3 is somewhat crippled compared to any of the previous mentioned technology. Regardless of individual opinions on makes and models, an external recorder must be added, along with a new viewfinder, shoulder pad, hand grips, battery plate, rod system and possibly lens support. Fine, for 25K or 30K we can work a little harder but the item worth protecting at any cost is reliability. Which for those kind of dollars I am used to getting.

It also erodes "the no surprises", WYSIWYG selling point of HD based electronic cinema acquisitions. Multiple failure points among cobbled together gear could deliver digital versions of hair in the gate, a bad loader or poor video assist.

The DIY trend in this first batch of large sensor cameras like the AF100, FS100 and F3 is disturbing. I'm pretty stunned that outside of the sensor, these cameras are HORRIBLY DESIGNED in almost every fashion. The cheapest one may actually have the best layout. The manufacturers know exactly what they are doing because they know fellas like me value mission critical performance and will pony up 40K to 50K to get it in this type of camera. And that will be the next round of gear.

I also think that developers of this first batch of external recorders have been a little cavalier with safety and not very creative when it comes to trigger methods or confidence check.

I haven't lost one clip, one take or one piece of media since I started in this business in 1989 (until tomorrow). I've also never had a deal breaker mechanical failure in the field. It is kind of amazing, considering we are tough as heck on our overused gear but we are also careful and conservative in our workflow.

My goal is to add something like an F3 to our roster of cameras and do so in the most reliable way possible without tumbling backwards into some sort of Frankenstein experiment or reducing quality from the 10bit 4:2:2 we shoot now.

really at this point i think nanoflash is the only way to turn your f3 into a high codec quality cinema doc camera

Record Tally is HUGE. But in many other ways the nano flash doesn't seem any safer than the Ki-Pro Mini, which is 10 bit 4:2:2 at 220Mbps. Also seems to have the same triggering restrictions requiring media in the camera. Am I missing anything?

You seem pretty emphatic. Why is nanoflash better than KiPro Mini? Its size? Power consumption? Curious as to your take on this.

but hey as i said before, think that you can only shoot at 10 bit and keep waiting and waiting while i am going around shooting all willy-nilly all over town, everywhere, today yesterday and tomorrow pushing the f3 to the limits of whatever job i put it on.

Well we still get plenty of mileage from our other gear. Keeps us more than busy. But tomorrow I may be in my pool. Shooting ain't everything. Have fun! Post some clips if you can. And thanks for you answers.

 

[Duke M.]

Think you may want to reconsider. S-long will add as many of 2 to 3 stops of lattitude. That can really help run and gun production by easing some of the burden of challenging lighting situations. You may even find yourself able to work with less light or trying some new things.

The charm and MAJOR ADVANTAGE of Alexa is that you already have a manufacturer provided viewfinder which like the viewfinders on many full size camcorders puts any aftermarket viewfinders to shame for focus. It is already in the right place for handheld or studio work and is powered off the camera. Alexa already has a shoulder pad built in and proper center of gravity. Depending on your lens choice it is ready to be handheld from the factory. It also has built in rosettes for extra pistol grips and even built in 15 LW rod mounts.

Let's not forget about usable and widely accepted built in on board recording and multiple serviceable outputs. (XDCAM 35mb at 4:2:0 sticks out like a sore thumb and is flat out refused by many clients). It can record slow motion in its highest resolution. It requires no trickery to record and stop.

However you typically don't get 35mm sensors in the traditional camcorder form factor (yet) or the dynamic range they offer. You can add a DOF adapter which sort of solves some of that and arguably produces more cinematic results than this latest round of super clean digital cameras. I may be silly, but I like grain and little lens junk (not noise). But DOF adapters do not deliver the detail and dynamic range of true 35mm gear. Heavy as sin too.

My point is that kitting out a F3 sacrifices a lot of what many professionals have grown accustomed to. We have already used one. There are great benefits to the camera in its stunning low noise performance and big dynamic range via s-log.

We can all agree that as-is with XDCAM 4:2:0, rear mounted viewfinder and poor ergonomic balance F3 is somewhat crippled compared to any of the previous mentioned technology. Regardless of individual opinions on makes and models, an external recorder must be added, along with a new viewfinder, shoulder pad, hand grips, battery plate, rod system and possibly lens support. Fine, for 25K or 30K we can work a little harder but the item worth protecting at any cost is reliability. Which for those kind of dollars I am used to getting.

It also erodes "the no surprises", WYSIWYG selling point of HD based electronic cinema acquisitions. Multiple failure points among cobbled together gear could deliver digital versions of hair in the gate, a bad loader or poor video assist.

The DIY trend in this first batch of large sensor cameras like the AF100, FS100 and F3 is disturbing.

I also think that developers of this first batch of external recorders have been a little cavalier with safety and not very creative when it comes to trigger methods or confidence check.

My goal is to add something like an F3 to our roster of cameras and do so in the most reliable way possible without tumbling backwards into some sort of Frankenstein experiment or reducing quality from the 10bit 4:2:2 we shoot now.

Record Tally is HUGE. But in many other ways the nano flash doesn't seem any safer than the Ki-Pro Mini, which is 10 bit 4:2:2 at 220Mbps. Also seems to have the same triggering restrictions requiring media in the camera. Am I missing anything?

Wow, what a long post. Even trying to trim it to essentials it's still long.

You are obviously much more experienced than I, and I respect your opinions, but I must disagree on a few points.

You complain about having to have media in the F3 in order to trigger the external recorder, as well as the safety issue caused by connecting a recorder by cables. You are ignoring the safety added. If a power cable or video cable were to get pulled loose the camera media gives you an instant back up.

I have had my nano for a long time, and the Ki Pro Mini for a short time, but the time code trigger is exceptionally nice in that you don't need to do anything with the recorder. It triggers automatically as though it were a part of the original camera.

Sure, its good to keep track of everything but its more of a 'set it and forget it' situation (other than checking remaining time on the cards.) Neither H-rose (power on the Nano), 4pin XLR (on the KPM and F3), nor the BNC connections usually don't pull out unless you have a real disaster.

The advantages of the Nano over the KPM are lower power consumption, card spanning, hot swapping, media run times, size, weight and higher bit rates in I-frame mode. However, the Nano is never going to be more than 8 bit. Choose your poison.

 

[C.A.Magid]

You complain about having to have media in the F3 in order to trigger the external recorder, as well as the safety issue caused by connecting a recorder by cables. You are ignoring the safety added. If a power cable or video cable were to get pulled loose the camera media gives you an instant back up.

Excellent point. We have though about that. A little turned off that it will be lower quality. And we still have to have a data strategy for card backup. And we have to duplicate purchases of SxS and CF media. But it is nice to think about.

I really like the NanoFlash idea. I still see benefits to high quality compressed media over uncompressed. So Gemini is actually a turn off. But a Nano like device, recording to 10bit Mp4 or ProRes would be excellent and a no brainer. I have no need for a recorder with a built in monitor, weight and etc. The record tally-passthrough video feature of NanoFlash is a must have that all manufacturers should include on external recorders.

Appreciate your answers and sorry for the long posts.

 

[eddavid]

pro res HQ is 220 Mbits a second. nanoflash works damn fine at 80 or 100 MBits a second. that's over 50 to 60 percent more efficient. Yes s log is wonderful and fantastic for challenging doc situations if it really gives you 2 extra stops - that sounds great. but the post end of it is a lot more frusterating - that's what I meant - will take more time - will have to grade. Will have to get expensive plug ins, etc.

Of course the Alexa is a better camera - it's the best digital camera around right now argueably. Go buy it. what's holding you back? it's ready to go, everyone loves it - Roger Deakins loves it.

The F3 is not in the same league at all and if you have the infrastructure to support the Alexa in post - why would you even consider the F3?

For me, the F3 is the greatest $13000 camera I have ever had. Its ergonomics are fine - I don't use the viewfinder, I use an on board monitor. But if you want a EVF, you can start to get them. also other companies are making lots of parts for it like a great top handle just as lots of companies went in and cleaned up like the power situation with the Red One or tricked out the Canon 5d Mark II to use PL lenses. you can at the end of the day get amazing results with the F3 - and if you are shooting some doc where at the end of the project you'll have 200 hours of footage - and you're working on a low budget doc - this is incredible.

However you can shoot a Doc or promo or anything on the Alexa and you should - if you have the budget why would you even try to compare the F3. it's not trying to beat the Alexa. It's not trying to beat the Varicam 3700 or 2700. It's for a different crowd. they went cheap on things like the EVF because they are saving you thousands of dollars. yea maybe the viewfinder should have been closer so you can handhold it easier, or maybe you can get a zacuto rig and make it work.

Every day on set - i have to problemsolve and tricking out the F3 took no time. I kind of like making things work instead of just speculating about it and wishing for the next big thing.

Sure also the nanoflash isn't 10 bit and 220 MBits per sec i frame but it works, its easy to use, hot swap, very little power, and you don't really have to worry about it. it has never failed me and I have shot with it in Dubai to the Caribbean to Alaska to Hawaii to Brazil to China. It's never failed. My camera failed in Hawaii but the Nanoflash saved my butt. it was able to record off the sdi signal and we kept shooting. It just keeps working. I'm not getting the KI PRO mini which I was originally going to get - I'm getting the PIX 240. I feel like Sound Devices already has made solid state recorders and to me, it's important to also get good sound - and their solid state recorders just work really really well.

But I'm not stopping all my projects to wait so I can have 10 bit out of the camera. Yea maybe it would be nice - but maybe instead I'll just master shooting really great stuff in 8 bit and not feel bad.

 

[Duke M.]

Excellent point. We have though about that. A little turned off that it will be lower quality. And we still have to have a data strategy for card backup. And we have to duplicate purchases of SxS and CF media. But it is nice to think about.

I really like the NanoFlash idea. I still see benefits to high quality compressed media over uncompressed. So Gemini is actually a turn off. But a Nano like device, recording to 10bit Mp4 or ProRes would be excellent and a no brainer. I have no need for a recorder with a built in monitor, weight and etc. The record tally-passthrough video feature of NanoFlash is a must have that all manufacturers should include on external recorders.

The Nano didn't have all those features when it first came out. Creative Design worked diligently on the firmware over a few years. I'm hopeful that AJA will be diligent and that the KPM will mature as well.

Many people are recording to class 10 SDHC cards with an adapter like the MxR. Since using an external recorder gives a simultaneous back up I personally don't see a problem with that and it saves money buying some SDHC high capacity cards instead of SxS. SDHC can be copied with cheap USB3 adapters for decent transfer times so many different devices.

I've been considering a NexTo to copy CF cards and SDHC cards on the set. That way you don't need as many cards.

 

[C.A.Magid]

pro res HQ is 220 Mbits a second. nanoflash works damn fine at 80 or 100 MBits a second. that's over 50 to 60 percent more efficient.

This is beginning to sound like defensive hot air from a jilted fan rather than objective evaluation of technology. What are you talking about? File size? That is really not all there is to efficiency unless visual quality and processing overhead is factored in. Even then it goes further than that. "Damn fine" is not a measured unit of evaluation.

Mpeg 2 is not producing the same visual results. It is not equal and therefore not doing the same thing. Any "efficiency" is arguable.

You are going to be hard pressed to find anyone that agrees Mpeg 2 looks superior to ProRes, DNX HD or AVC Intra at 8bit or 10bit at the data rates applicable to this discussion. And remember ProRes and DNX HD are post production codecs being adapted for field use, meaning they are optimized to edit. They are primed to hold great image quality through multi-generational processing and are easily decoded yielding higher performance on cheaper editing hardware. Images in those codecs are robust through color correction, effects and keying.

XDCAM takes more CPU muscle to playback. A situation which worsens with Long Gop varieties. That means fewer realtime streams. It does not hold up through multi-generations and does not key or color correct as well. Some folks may actually have to transcode XDCAM/Mpeg2 to another more edit friendly codec to circumvent some of those issues. That takes time and drive space. Not real efficient.

Even though I prefer 220Mbps for 10bit, DNXHD and ProRes are also available with acquisition quality 1080 data rates as low as 145 Mbps (most suitable for 8 bit). Even at the lower rate they still yield better results than Mpeg2 with far less macroblocking and artifacting. Even lower data rates may occur depending on the material being shot because some flavors of ProRes are VBR. DNXHD's data rate is optimized for payload and can still produce better looking 720p/24 at rates as low as 95Mbps.

There isn't much if any real efficiency edge to I frame Mpeg2 at 100Mbps. It is inefficient at high data rates. You get less and less back in quality as you increase data rate compared to other more modern codecs. Long Gop Mpeg 2 is going to have its lunch eaten by AVC/mp4 based compression every time.

Yes s log is wonderful and fantastic for challenging doc situations if it really gives you 2 extra stops - that sounds great.

Well some folks smarter than me estimate s-log adds 3 stops. It is more than just exposure latitude. It is a gamma profile which preserves as much image data as possible saving highlights and preserving shadow detail.

but the post end of it is a lot more frusterating - that's what I meant - will take more time - will have to grade. Will have to get expensive plug ins, etc.

For starters there are no expensive plug ins needed. Heck, NO PLUG INS are required at all. Grading is a relative term. There has been very little shot in any gamma with any camera that we didn't want to tweak in post, unless it was some sort of deadline driven news thing or satellite VNR.

All major NLEs are capable of grading s-log back to 709 as they ship. Applying a s-curve in any Avid product is super simple and quick. So you get back to baked in cinema gamma looks with the valuable addition of control when you need to adjust problems shot by shot or finesse a visual element . That can save you bacon and actually be a lot less frustrating.

Of course you can dive in as deep as you want using more of the tools in your NLE's native color corrector. Avid Symphony is very capable here as are others including FCPX (strictly talking about color effects here). If you wish you can add inexpensive plug ins to your NLE like Magic Bullet Looks, Magic Bullet Colorista or BorisFx modules for around $399. You can also go whole hog crazy with more expensive plugs in like Baselight at $900. Or move your work into Color or DaVinci Resolve Lite FOR FREE.

A step beyond that would be full blown color grading through a stand alone DaVinci, Scratch, or Baselight system.

For the work we are talking about you can stop at step one. FREE. And it is up to you how much time you spend.

Applying a user created manual preset as aLUT type correction can be done to an entire sequence in a matter of minutes. So its QUICK. And most NLEs will shortly have auto applied LUTs for this type of thing making it automatic and instant. Ready for you to tweak if and when needed.

If you are creating your masterwork, then take the time to color with precision and craftsmanship.

Thats the beauty of the whole thing. It scales. If you don't want to shoot log, shoot another gamma. Since my company posts most of our own stuff we nearly always do Filmrec or a log equivalent.

The F3 is not in the same league at all and if you have the infrastructure to support the Alexa in post - why would you even consider the F3?

Do you know what you are talking about? The Alexa requires ZERO post infrastructure. You got an NLE on a laptop or iMac? You are set.

Is that the best way to work? NO. Its just like XDCAM, ProRes, DNXHD or regular uncompressed video. A faster CPU or better system will benefit them all.

ARRI's whole point is DIRECT TO EDIT...DTE.

For me, the F3 is the greatest $13000 camera I have ever had. Its ergonomics are fine

The F3 has one heck of a sensor. The ergonomics are poor. If you want to make that a matter of opinion fine. You are in the minority. As is, it cannot be handheld for any stretch of time with control or comfort. Put nice glass on it and it only gets worse.

Someone is buying and begging for all the rods, rails, grips, pads, counterbalances, viewfinders, recorders and etc they can get. Back ordered, out of stock, coming soon, etc.

Can you solve F3's problems, YES! Then it becomes 16K to 24K camera. There are plenty of sub 16K cameras with real viewfinders, grips, shoulder pads, audio inputs and a real filter wheel in the right place. It is not a money thing. It is called poor design.

if you have the budget why would you even try to compare the F3. it's not trying to beat the Alexa. It's not trying to beat the Varicam 3700 or 2700. It's for a different crowd. they went cheap on things like the EVF because they are saving you thousands of dollars. yea maybe the viewfinder should have been closer so you can handhold it easier, or maybe you can get a zacuto rig and make it work.

So if I am spending the money on accessories how am I saving it? So the viewfinder isn't in the right place?

I need critical focus. Hard to do with an LCD up your nose or looking through a peep hole low res rear end viewfinder, stretching to reach the front of a zoom lens. With a battery plate and external recorder you may not even get a peek.

The comparison to Alexa had nothing to do with dollars. Arri was smart to apply the same design sensibilities that has gone into traditional Video and 16mm cameras for years. There are plenty of cameras which do this as well starting at about $8,000 and going all the way up to $85,000.

Every day on set - i have to problemsolve and tricking out the F3 took no time.

What accessories do you trick your F3 out with?

I kind of like making things work instead of just speculating about it and wishing for the next big thing.

Its called honest evaluation. If we let feelings get in the way of facts it destroys credibility and helps no one.

Your posts have been filled with errors and incorrect assumptions stated as fact. Makes me discount any opinion you may have and makes me want to post corrections for the record. For example:

People should not think contemporary Varicams are thin raster 8bit, they are 10bit full raster HD formats 1920x1080 or 1280x720. Some even output 4:4:4 RGB.

Readers should not believe Alexa needs special post infrastructure, it simply does not. It some cases it requires LESS.

Folks should not be skeptical that s-log does not expand latitude by at least 2 stops, it is in its very nature to do so.

No one should think s-log must have expensive tools to grade.

Those believing that 10bit is only a minor improvement over 8bit and that 100Mbps Mpeg 2 is "DAMN GOOD" compared ProRes, DnxHD or AVC Intra are misled.

If people believe those things it will harm their own evaluation of their gear and workflow.

Folks also need to be prepared to spend a little money to get the most out of the F3. It is an impressive camera but those not ready for tinkering a bit, customizing,building and compromising may be disappointed. That will hurt the reputation of the camera.

-----

We are going to buy an F3 because of its low noise and dynamic range. By the time we get done it will be over 23K without lens (s-log, recorder, rig, evf). I am not going to kid myself about what it is and how it works. I am not going to pretend to be thrilled with its flaws. Just like I am about other gear. Honest.

When the next big thing does come out, we may just jump on it. We also may get Alexa because they are so difficult to rent due to their popularity. But it is not going to be working on lower budget jobs. However, don't be surprised to find out that the F3 may have a lower noise floor. Noise is my pet peeve.

Since I don't already own an outboard recorder, I came here seeking reasonable advice. Waiting a few weeks for Sound Devices or some other company to get their act together isn't a lot of wishing.

I'm not getting the KI PRO mini which I was originally going to get - I'm getting the PIX 240. I feel like Sound Devices already has made solid state recorders and to me, it's important to also get good sound - and their solid state recorders just work really really well.

Now why would you want to do something silly like that?

If 8bit Mpeg2 rocks so hard why complicate your life will all the problems, issues and compromises you've told me about with 10bit higher bandwidth recording? Why even consider the Ki Pro Mini or PIX240?

I asked about those and its been Nanoflash or bust since. Just doesn't seem genuine.

The Nanoflash is interesting and suits the needs of some, but seems you are seeking something better as I do?

Which makes this a bunch of circular logic.

But I'm not stopping all my projects to wait so I can have 10 bit out of the camera. Yea maybe it would be nice - but maybe instead I'll just master shooting really great stuff in 8 bit and not feel bad.

Thats why we have our other gear. Thats why we rent stuff too. Been a busy year and a not much of a summer break.

Subject to change.

Oh? Which true 10bit formats do you have worked with?

 

[C.A.Magid]

I've been considering a NexTo to copy CF cards and SDHC cards on the set. That way you don't need as many cards.

That sort of device is the only way to fly. Leave the laptop at home. We have a NexTo 2525 for our P2 cards, it also does SxS and CF. It is quirky but it is fast, verifies as it copies and can make a backup copy at the same time.

Think if you are just working with CF and SDHC there may be other device to look at too.

I think you are right about convergent. They have the right idea. Would very much prefer a nano like 10bit device that could scale to ProRes 4:4:4 with its footprint and tally feature. Uncompressed is a little bit of overkill at this point for me.

Fast Forward video is pushing the SideKick pretty hard. Its available now. Looks real flimsy and certainly does not have loop through status. But it is small and does do ProRes and DnxHd is on the way.

 

[Duke M.]

Even though I prefer 220Mbps for 10bit, DNXHD and ProRes are also available with acquisition quality 1080 data rates as low as 145 Mbps (most suitable for 8 bit). Even at the lower rate they still yield better results than Mpeg2 with far less macroblocking and artifacting.

CD claims 100Mbps as the sweet spot between file size and IQ with the Nano. My experience is that the Nano is visually lossless at 140Mbps when in Mpeg mode. On top of that it can do I-frame up to 280Mbps (I-frame recording storing one frame at a time) is lossless. You're really talking about no macroblocking or artifacting. There is no generational loss that way.

Prores is a good editing codec, but you have to keep the data rate up as its not real compression efficient. In my view the codecs themselves are very comparable until you get into a really heavy color grade then 10 bit shines.

Still, I think the Nano will be around for a long time as it has more features and shoots longer than anything else out there right now. Choose the right tool for the right job.

 

[eddavid]

C.A. - I never said 8 bit long gop is better than 10 bit PRO RES HQ in terms of image quality - it's not as good but it's 60% more data efficient. less file space. but it's damn good enough when i need a system for doc. I have a PIX 240 on preorder...i'm going to shoot pro res or Avid DnxHD. but not on my doc jobs.

I thought S log doesn't just go into your NLE. you need to bring it into after effects first and process it or get baselight that is coming out soon for FCP. That was my understanding. It can't understand it how it is. Maybe I'm wrong.

Yes I'm putting my emotions into this argument - filmmaking for me is an artform and its more fun to have emotions instead of pretending to be a scientist. We are not arguing about Molecular Biology. We are arguing about ways to make pretty pictures.

 

[SPZ]

Maybe i'm wrong but slog is just a curve that strips out during capture the constrains of broadcast compliant signals like rec 709. You get vanilla, max detail and dynamic range that you could tweak with something like Magic Bullet looks or Colorista, which could have as a template a look that maximizes the gains of using slog capture. Basically slog image is seen as it is in any editor- An Image that doesnt have broadcast constrains. Not Unlike what you get from the 5D with Cinestyle.

 

[arturrito]

Any questions about PIX 240 data storage options,

1. can I trigger pix 240 from camera rec/stop button?
2. SSD vs CF options, I have doubt about right options to choose,

1 32Gb CF + 1 SSD plus caddy,
2 32 CFs,
2 caddies + 2 ssd
I have to find right point between cost and performance.

 

[Barry_Green]

The PIX 240 is at least two or three months away, so if you need it sooner, it's not an option. And until it's released, we won't know the definitive answers to the questions you've asked.

 

[tom.wong]

Any questions about PIX 240 data storage options,

1. can I trigger pix 240 from camera rec/stop button?
2. SSD vs CF options, I have doubt about right options to choose,

1 32Gb CF + 1 SSD plus caddy,
2 32 CFs,
2 caddies + 2 ssd
I have to find right point between cost and performance.

triggering record via timecode over sdi is a pretty common feature among off board recorders. don't think they'll neglect to implement that
I have my pix on order, hopefully it comes out by Sept, and no more delays. price per gb wise, SSD is the way to go. I have 2 caddies on order and gonna buy ssd's in the 120 gb range. Gonna wait for a list of qualified ssd's first before I make my decision on which brand. It's most likely gonna end up being intel 320 series since they have the lowest failure rates out of any ssd. and I plan to get 1, 32gb cf card for roll over recording or emergencies (lightest config possible, etc.) but CF cards in general I find a terrible technology for higher bandwidth video. it will never be cheaper than larger computer based media, it's slow to have a reliable increase in speed, sustained rates are very poor, and I don't feel like they are in any way future proofed. We might be at our absolute limit with speed on CF technology right now, and companies might have to come out with a whole new generation of CF to accomodate that may not be compatible with legacy components. at least a hard drive or ssd you can just make it a internal or external drive for personal use in the long run...