F35: F35 vs Digital Bolex

Yeah well, we're passing through a huge bubble in classic and exotic cars. Prices are going crazy. My gt3 is wirth the same as new right now...
 
No i tweaked red one white balance. Overall still red has this red color vs f35 orange. But tweaking to get there. Highlight handling on red is **** of course. Not smooth
Also test was flawed caused used leica r glass on red and bolex but s*%tty sony pl glass that came w f3 on f35. That glass is crap. Sure ill post ungraded dngs soon.
 
cineon saved my life - finally discover this

with f35 - just practicing -still294_messingwithcineon.jpg

giving the f35 in my eyes so much more power
 
Ed, it looks like you are getting the cyan-magenta curse that also limits the dynamic range of the camera to well below what it is actually capturing. This problem is that the D16 captures a far greater colorspace than rec709 can support. So, if you convert the footage improperly from whatever it is in to rec709, everything gets twisted and looks like it was shot on a LOMO with expired film. Maybe someone with better tech chops can chime in and explain that a little more astutely.

The D16 gets 11.3/4 - 12.5 stops if exposed and properly graded, which is pretty much on par with the F35.


The D16 is the closest thing I have seen to the F35 CCD look. The D16 Kodak / Truesense CCD is very impressive and came out of Kodak. The dyes used in the color filter array are of a very high quality and deliver an image unlike anything else out there.

At the moment the biggest problem with the D16 is that the post processing pipeline is incomplete and very poorly documented. As a result 95% of the footage you see out there is improperly 'developed' and has that ugly cyan/magenta cast with the pink highlights and compressed DR. Apparently Bolex is working on solving this with the next firmware update and hopefully the camera will be able to live up to its full potential.



Have a look at these links:


First off is iaremrsir who is working on a color pipeline for the D16 and has done a lot of work and testing:

https://iaremrsir.wordpress.com

Dynamic range test

https://iaremrsir.wordpress.com/2014/12/14/digital-bolex-d16-preliminary-dynamic-range-tests/

"The D16 operating at its unity gain, ISO 200, has a total dynamic range of 112⁄3stops. Youwill see the total usable dynamic range decrease when changing the analog gain. Whenusing the D16 at unity gain, but lighting for ISO 400, an increase of dynamic range wasexperienced, resulting in 121⁄3 stops."


REC2020 has enough attitude to cover the colorspace captured by the D16.

https://iaremrsir.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/using-rec-2020-as-a-starting-point-in-davinci-resolve-11/

=====================

Big thread on the Bolex Forum about the color grading dilemma

http://www.digitalbolex.com/forum/shooting-on-the-d16/the-d16-digital-intermediate-dilema/

=====================
The current process (until the firmware update arrives)

http://www.digitalbolex.com/normalizing-d16-color-space/

=====================

Razz16 was kind enough to share his Resolve setting with me and I hope he doesn't mind me posting them here:

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7593/16635890559_c04ed8f45a_o.jpg

1. Camera DNG color space setting is BMD film with either standard or BMD 4k gamma.
2. Project input 3D lut is BMDfilm or BMD4k to linear
3. Project output 3D lut is linear to delivery color space, SRGB for web or REC709 for cable/broadcast. In my case I'm grading on a calibrated 8-bit SRGB computer monitor or a 10bit deep color consumer TV, not using a 10 bit broadcast SDI monitor path.
3. Resolve color space is the standard 32 bit YRGB.
4. All corrections and grading are done on a color page timeline using the scopes, including the DNG raw menu.
5. First node is for DNG raw menu adjustments only in LAB color space. Basic image corrections: white balance/tint, exposure, highlight and shadow recovery, color sat, midtone detail and sharpness. Lift, gain and contrast only if needed to balance exposure and shadow settings for best noise performance.
6. Second node is Neat Video noise reduction if needed. I initially followed suggestions to put this node first, but found that it doesn't play well in the raw space.
7. Any subsequent nodes are grade for look in RGB color space for SRGB or YUV for REC709.
 
I did these settings - I did on the DB16 - brought in with REC 709 and BMD Film gamma and color - and it's not color I care about it's resolution loss and lack of dyanmic range in shadows - and the resolution is too low for me to use it commercially and just how the camera is set up doesn't make it able to be rented on commercial gigs for me - so it's a $4000 toy to me. And I can't justify that kind of purchase.

also it's heavy and has that low res screen on it and a weird wind up crank on the side that makes it feel like a toy for rich people to buy at urban outfitters.

I'll try to regrade with your settings - but I think I did everything you said - BMD film and and went into REC709 color space. Ididn't send to linear color space - I don't know what that is.

I'm not going to use neat video on any camera - that defeats the purpose of a test.

Sorry man I'm sure you may love it, but it's just not for me. I tried it - I spent $200 to rent it because of how passionate you and others are, and why not be - you spent $4000 on it - I would be passionate too and upset if people don't like it just like I am upset if I shoot something on the f35 and people don't like it. I understand.
 
eddavid said:
I did these settings - I did on the DB16 - brought in with REC 709 and BMD Film gamma and color - and it's not color I care about it's resolution loss and lack of dyanmic range in shadows - and the resolution is too low for me to use it commercially and just how the camera is set up doesn't make it able to be rented on commercial gigs for me - so it's a $4000 toy to me. And I can't justify that kind of purchase.

also it's heavy and has that low res screen on it and a weird wind up crank on the side that makes it feel like a toy for rich people to buy at urban outfitters.

I'll try to regrade with your settings - but I think I did everything you said - BMD film and and went into REC709 color space. Ididn't send to linear color space - I don't know what that is.

I'm not going to use neat video on any camera - that defeats the purpose of a test.

Sorry man I'm sure you may love it, but it's just not for me. I tried it - I spent $200 to rent it because of how passionate you and others are, and why not be - you spent $4000 on it - I would be passionate too and upset if people don't like it just like I am upset if I shoot something on the f35 and people don't like it. I understand.
Click to expand...


Ed, mon cheri, I'm a little bit too old and have been in this business a little too long as a professional to become 'upset' like some childish fanboy, because someone didn't like my toy. By the way, a little introspection may be worth while here.

I own multiple cameras, both film and digital and use the one that is most appropriate for getting the job done. The D16 is an interesting tool that has a lot of potential, if Bolex got their act together. It is nothing more, and nothing less.


Have a great day.
 
Feli, believe me - if I could get out of my head I would.
but I am camera agnostic and I didn't find the digital bolex imagery pleasing to my tastes nor the ergonomics of it to be considered more than a failed home brew project, much like the ikonoscope. They tried to do something really amazing but in the end, in this day and age, they should have entered an easier realm - like action sports rigs or making custom glass or something - I don't know. Trying to make a cheap camera nowadays seems like the most difficult market to get into.

Even the optics of the iphone are insane - and like the a7s and the samsung nx1 -

I wish small companies try to follow the redrock micro model - start small, make support gear, then medium, then move and move into niche and if continued grow bigger. like smallhd too. or marshall or convergent design.

That's what Arri did. They started making medical machinery. Oh well, I wish Digital Bolex the best. They captured a lot of people's hearts before Black magic came in and kind of smooshed them away.
And believe me, I'm all for the little guy.

Another interesting failed Kickstarter project is the Ouya - a videogame machine that kind of burned out really quickly. It's sad because the DB16 seems like a really great idea, but at the end of the day, if for the majority of people who care to buy a camera around 4k for their eyes, the imagery out of it can't compete with a camera half its price, then it's game over. And that's what happened. I wish it was the killer camera it could have been. I think they should have improved the ergonomics - made it offload to Cfast cards or ssd and had a better LCD and sold it for 8-10k and it would have been a better contender. They went cheap with the build, and that was a fatal flaw. Bye bye!
 
Last edited:
Hi Harry/Ed,
I am interested in the D16 too,
Would you guys mind posting a single raw unprocessed still frame from the D16 to play with?
As it's a Kodak CCD chip with so much film history... I gotta believe they know what they're doing in terms of chip fabrication.
The native CIE LAB color space is pretty large, would like to see the type of color transformations needed to make it look good.

Thanks,
Manuel
 
Last edited:
Somewhat OT but I wanted to mention I met these guys at NAB (https://www.apertus.org) super nice btw- they had some working prototypes and while still very experimental and not finished- it would be a really cool project to see happen because if you were looking to get a certain sensor or tweak that sensors motion rendition- you could. Make your own "d16".
 
Not wishing at all to derail the topic (maybe worth starting a new one on the Apertus), but I am put off by the line on their site about their sensor:

"The image area is larger than Super35 and thus perfect for a digital cinema camera at 4K resolution."

That sentence alone is so wrong, on so many levels - it is crap like that which causes so much mis-information at the entry level of cinematography.
 
eddavid said:
Feli, believe me - if I could get out of my head I would.
but I am camera agnostic and I didn't find the digital bolex imagery pleasing to my tastes nor the ergonomics of it to be considered more than a failed home brew project, much like the ikonoscope. They tried to do something really amazing but in the end, in this day and age, they should have entered an easier realm - like action sports rigs or making custom glass or something - I don't know. Trying to make a cheap camera nowadays seems like the most difficult market to get into.

Even the optics of the iphone are insane - and like the a7s and the samsung nx1 -

I wish small companies try to follow the redrock micro model - start small, make support gear, then medium, then move and move into niche and if continued grow bigger. like smallhd too. or marshall or convergent design.

That's what Arri did. They started making medical machinery. Oh well, I wish Digital Bolex the best. They captured a lot of people's hearts before Black magic came in and kind of smooshed them away.
And believe me, I'm all for the little guy.

Another interesting failed Kickstarter project is the Ouya - a videogame machine that kind of burned out really quickly. It's sad because the DB16 seems like a really great idea, but at the end of the day, if for the majority of people who care to buy a camera around 4k for their eyes, the imagery out of it can't compete with a camera half its price, then it's game over. And that's what happened. I wish it was the killer camera it could have been. I think they should have improved the ergonomics - made it offload to Cfast cards or ssd and had a better LCD and sold it for 8-10k and it would have been a better contender. They went cheap with the build, and that was a fatal flaw. Bye bye!
Click to expand...


For the record Edward

A) Arri was founded in 1917 and from their inception, they produced movie cameras. If you ever make it to Munich look them up. There is a wonderful display on the second floor with some of their original cameras. Just prior to WWII they introduced the first spinning mirror reflex camera that continued on in to the 1970's and was in wide use until about 10-15 years ago. I have a lovely example of an Arri Iic sitting right here on a tripod next to my desk.

Arri has a medical imaging division, but that didn't come in to existence until 2013. Prior to that they did sell some modified Iic bodies for X-ray work etc, but from what i remember they did not come from a separate division.


B) Black Magic was selling cameras quite some time before Bolex ever got to market or anyone was even aware that they existed. That would be the original 2.5 Digital Cinema Camera.
 
For the record Feli:
1. don't believe everything you read on wikipedia. I saw a poster at arri new orleans and it said medicial tech was how they started.
 
eddavid said:
For the record Feli:
1. don't believe everything you read on wikipedia. I saw a poster at arri new orleans and it said medicial tech was how they started.
Click to expand...


Well, I wouldn't believe everything I hear or see in New Orleans. It's a lovely town, but things are not always as they appear to be.

Arri started out making a film printer in 1916. I'm not exactly sure if the printer was used exclusively for movie production, but there wasn't a whole lot of medical imaging going on back in that era. Lights and cameras followed very shortly after that. There is no record anywhere that Arri started out in 1916 making medical equipment.

Here is a nicely illustrated history of the company from the Arri site. It's even in English, so have a gander.

http://www.arri.com/fileadmin/media/arri.com/downloads/About_ARRI/Picture_Chronicle_2012.pdf




Maybe you are thinking of the Arriscope, which is a product of the Arri Medical division and evolved from the Alexa.

http://www.arrimedical.com/index.html

There always is the possibility that Arri Medical had some prior digital imaging system, from which the digital cinema division benefitted, but I have never heard about that and obviously that would be fairly recent.

Prior to that they did make the Arritechno35, but that was in the 1970's.

http://www.arrimedical.com/about_arri.html




Hope this helps.
 
Film Scientist said:
Hi Harry/Ed,
I am interested in the D16 too,
Would you guys mind posting a single raw unprocessed still frame from the D16 to play with?
As it's a Kodak CCD chip with so much film history... I gotta believe they know what they're doing in terms of chip fabrication.
The native CIE LAB color space is pretty large, would like to see the type of color transformations needed to make it look good.

Thanks,
Manuel
Click to expand...


Here are some frames for download from Geoff Boyles' CML test

http://www.cinematography.net/D-Bolex-uwe-2015.html

I think he is running another test shortly. Unfortunately he shot this one with an old Switar lens, but the next one will be done on professional PL glass. Bolex is about the update the color science in the next firmware update, so hopefully Geoff will have that also.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top