4:2:2 from a 4k native 1:1 sensor (8.9M) is a process of de-mosaic. With raw processing this is done outside the camera and can be done at full or half resolution. In Resolve this is done one way, Sony method another but with 4k XAVC-I 4:2:2 it's done in-camera pre-compression. The readout method and debayer processing is proprietary just like XAVC but essential because without it, 4k 2x2 blocks that have 2 green samples for every red and blue would otherwise limit the full readout to 4:2:0 chroma resolution exactly as you stated. The non-super sampled cameras that I am aware of that include 4k 4:2:2 processing are the Sony F55, the 4k upgraded F5 and the FS7. Any 4k raw camera can be at least 4:2:2 depending on the debayer choice in post processing.
FS5: FS5 4K color and bit depth
- Thread starter naavt
- Start date
Scroll down to the section on bayer demosaicing for discussion on overlapping 2x2 arrays. http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-sensors.htm
At this moment I'm seriously considering what other users said about the FS700 + external recorder. That is one camera that can also be found used under our budget and it will make more sense than the F3. We have to consider all the accessories we are going to use with it and see if it can be a valid option. Other than that, I have no information whatsoever about the FS700 but I guess that I'm in the right place to start searching.
Grug
Veteran
Honestly, if your budget can't stretch to an FS7 and 4k XAVC, it won't stretch to covering the recording and storage of 4k ProRes over a three year project (the storage requirements are three times as high as 4k xavc, that's a LOT of extra harddrives).
So whatever you're looking into, I'd be vary of the data requirements of 4k without the efficiency of xavc.
So whatever you're looking into, I'd be vary of the data requirements of 4k without the efficiency of xavc.
Went over to the "drawing board" again after your post. For what I could see, XQD 2.0 and CFast 2.0 are about the same price when we compare both cards from Lexar professional media (they are backed up by BMD but don't know about Sony though).
The big difference is the Codec efficiency as you state. XAVC can store more media than even ProRes LT (if I did not messed up my calculations), only surpassed by ProRes Proxy. That's a big advantage but a quick internet search revealed some quirks about the editing workflow with Davinci Resolve, which is now our editing NLE.
From what you are writing here i would stay clear of the FS700+Odyssey/Atomos. That thing is unruly large and cumbersome! I hated it while i owned it, and getting a FS7 felt like a blessing, or relief. Finally i could shoot without handcuffs.
But i do miss the amazing monitor that the Odyssey 7 really is.
Also keep in mind what Grug says. It was not unusual to shoot a full terabyte of 4K ProRes on even minor corporate shoots with my FS700+Odyssey 7Q. XAVC is much more efficient.
But i do miss the amazing monitor that the Odyssey 7 really is.
Also keep in mind what Grug says. It was not unusual to shoot a full terabyte of 4K ProRes on even minor corporate shoots with my FS700+Odyssey 7Q. XAVC is much more efficient.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
What quirks of XAVC with Resolve have you found? I grade XAVC HD, 4K, and UHD in Resolve all the time and have had no issues. What have you heard? It is probably wrong.
Dan Abrams
Member
FS7 and FS5 owner here.
First of all, this seems a non-issue. 80% of the time the Slog3 8-bit 4:2:0 Long GOP from the FS7 holds up in grading. I do it ALL THE TIME. From what I've seen owning an FS5 for about two weeks, it's identical.
But even if it wasn't, my understanding is that 8-bit 4:2:0 4k can be down converted to 10-bit 4:4:4 1080p. I'm not an expert, but these guys seem to be: http://www.eoshd.com/2014/02/discovery-4k-8bit-420-panasonic-gh4-converts-1080p-10bit-444/
Unlike the A7S, I almost never see banding in the 4K 8:2:0 from the PXW-FS cameras (In fact, I can't say I've ever seen it in footage I've shot).
If I did have a shot that was falling to hell in the grade, I would simply do the tricky conversion process from the link above. If it was just light banding, I'd probably just try dithering it with some noise first. I've never had to do either of these on the FS7 (or the FS5, but I've only had it two weeks).
I also own a BMPCC. Trust me, it's got a great image, but either camera will be a step up for you. And the ergonomics on both are great. I have had shots fall apart in grading from the BMPCC...
I've yet to have to deliver 4K to a broadcaster, so I can't speak to that, but in 2K or 1080p, even 4:2:2 is only a requirement for some portion of the program, depending on what you're doing. For journalism, it's irrelevant, 1080p 4:2:0 is fine most of the time. For documentary or reality, they're going to want the majority of the program to be in 1080p 4:2:2 10-bit (which you can achieve from 4k 8-bit 4:2:0) and for scripted, high-end stuff, they're going to want All-I 4:2:2 at a minimum (more likely 4:4:4 over raw). I can't speak to portugal, but that's my experience in the US and with the BBC (and US broadcasters have been pretty forgiving with 4:2:0 in my experience). But if you're doing the high-end scripted stuff, even the FS7 is probably a non-starter.
I believe that Anthony Bourdain's EXCELLENT show, No Reservations, has been shooting in 1080p 4:2:0 8-bit, in some variety of S-Log, for broadcast on CNN. And it's a gorgeous show!
I'm sorry this has become rambling, but the only other thing I can say is that I usually only us 10-bit 4K on the FS7 for commercials. Long form programming and interviews are shot almost exclusively in XAVC Long-GOP at my company, either in 4K or 1080p. This is for large, household-name brands or (occasionally) well-known broadcasters. And it looks fabulous on both cameras. XAVC-I uses a lot of cards fast, and a I lot of hard drive space, and a raw recorder will use even more drive space. The URSA footage looks gorgeous, but I can't imagine choosing a 4K Intra format for non-scripted long-form meant for broadcast. What kind of budgets are your broadcasters giving you in Portugal? Is that why you have so much gov't debt?
First of all, this seems a non-issue. 80% of the time the Slog3 8-bit 4:2:0 Long GOP from the FS7 holds up in grading. I do it ALL THE TIME. From what I've seen owning an FS5 for about two weeks, it's identical.
But even if it wasn't, my understanding is that 8-bit 4:2:0 4k can be down converted to 10-bit 4:4:4 1080p. I'm not an expert, but these guys seem to be: http://www.eoshd.com/2014/02/discovery-4k-8bit-420-panasonic-gh4-converts-1080p-10bit-444/
Unlike the A7S, I almost never see banding in the 4K 8:2:0 from the PXW-FS cameras (In fact, I can't say I've ever seen it in footage I've shot).
If I did have a shot that was falling to hell in the grade, I would simply do the tricky conversion process from the link above. If it was just light banding, I'd probably just try dithering it with some noise first. I've never had to do either of these on the FS7 (or the FS5, but I've only had it two weeks).
I also own a BMPCC. Trust me, it's got a great image, but either camera will be a step up for you. And the ergonomics on both are great. I have had shots fall apart in grading from the BMPCC...
I've yet to have to deliver 4K to a broadcaster, so I can't speak to that, but in 2K or 1080p, even 4:2:2 is only a requirement for some portion of the program, depending on what you're doing. For journalism, it's irrelevant, 1080p 4:2:0 is fine most of the time. For documentary or reality, they're going to want the majority of the program to be in 1080p 4:2:2 10-bit (which you can achieve from 4k 8-bit 4:2:0) and for scripted, high-end stuff, they're going to want All-I 4:2:2 at a minimum (more likely 4:4:4 over raw). I can't speak to portugal, but that's my experience in the US and with the BBC (and US broadcasters have been pretty forgiving with 4:2:0 in my experience). But if you're doing the high-end scripted stuff, even the FS7 is probably a non-starter.
I believe that Anthony Bourdain's EXCELLENT show, No Reservations, has been shooting in 1080p 4:2:0 8-bit, in some variety of S-Log, for broadcast on CNN. And it's a gorgeous show!
I'm sorry this has become rambling, but the only other thing I can say is that I usually only us 10-bit 4K on the FS7 for commercials. Long form programming and interviews are shot almost exclusively in XAVC Long-GOP at my company, either in 4K or 1080p. This is for large, household-name brands or (occasionally) well-known broadcasters. And it looks fabulous on both cameras. XAVC-I uses a lot of cards fast, and a I lot of hard drive space, and a raw recorder will use even more drive space. The URSA footage looks gorgeous, but I can't imagine choosing a 4K Intra format for non-scripted long-form meant for broadcast. What kind of budgets are your broadcasters giving you in Portugal? Is that why you have so much gov't debt?
mainstreetprod
Veteran
That's a bit like saying it's actually a 2.2K camera instead of 4K. I purchased mine for the express purpose of shooting a feature in 4K, scaling and reframing as needed and projecting in 2K. Saw it projected on a 40 foot screen last month and never noticed any resolution issues. I'm sure I was cropping as much as 30% at times.
Your answer is much appreciated.
A minor follow-up, if I may. Does the overlapping block feature explain a minor 4K supersampling - say, 11-13 MPX - of some cameras? In other words, a 1-for-1 requires a certain level of processing power but having an additional 2.2 MPX allows the demosaic algorithms to skip some blocks and still deliver a credible image quality?
PS. I stumbled onto a FS-5 vs. NX-1 comparison a few minutes ago. (it's on Vimeo) The tester says NX-1 is superior.
JMtheDP
Veteran
It's my personal opinion that if you think cropping frames is likely to happen, then there is no point shooting in 4K for a 4K finish. If you're shooting for a 2K or 1080P finish, then I am sure you can get away with a little bit but in my opinion most of the current "4K" cameras don't really resolve 4K (this is an age old issue), they certainly aren't on a per-pixel level of sharpness as many of the previous 1080P 3-chip cameras.
I highly doubt you are in danger of an overly sharp 2K picture from the FS5, just make sure you turn off any "detail" or "sharpness" settings, if it even has them (I am not familiar with the model)
Do you know what sort of lenses you are looking at using? That will also affect you greatly I would say.
I have read that some users are having problems importing XAVC files into Davinci Resolve 12, and that they have to transcode the files over to Resolve's native editing codec or ProRes.
That's good to hear. I'm looking to conduct some tests on the FS5 regarding all aspects of image acquisition and post workflow. The downconversion you've mentioned is a very interesting subject. I'll give it a try once I have the camera for testing but nonetheless, downconverting will put aside any chances of reframing shots. The unique reason we are planning to shoot 4K.
Ergonomics apart we never had any issues when grading ProRes 422 HQ from BMPCC. On the other hand, we remember the big improvement on that front when we migrated from Sony's EX3 XDCam EX 8-bit 420 to the BMD cameras.
You probably are going to laugh now but the saddest thing is that the majority of our biggest budget fiction film productions won't pay the catering of an Hollywood film. The Sky-high budgets for fiction films is 600.000€. And that sum is only reserved to a couple of our notorious filmmakers.
I was DPing a project that started some years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-Vt1s42N8c
It was a kind of "National Geographic mini series" with 12 episodes centered on the country's wildlife. We have began shooting with a sub 100.000€ budget for a more than a year project and ended up in the drawer with 5 episodes shot when the main financiers gnawed at the rope.
We expect this new project to have a budget around the 300.000€ mark. That is including gear, all crew members paychecks, travelling (which will be a lot), food, accommodation and so on. It's not an easy task as you see. It's 100.000€/year on a 3 year project.
We had numerous popular demonstrations in the past years, requiring the government to stop non funding politics related to all aspects of art making. Most national theatre actors, sculptors, filmmakers, painters and so on are living bellow poverty line. The last feature I've DPed was at beginning of 2013 (so almost 3 years now). I've leaned over to commercial DPing to make a living outside the feature film industry.
Last edited:
Thank you for your insight. That's certainly one other thing I'm going to test once I can put my hands on the FS5. We have a set of 6 ZF Zeiss primes, 18-35 and 150-600 Sigma zooms.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
I can't address other people's experiences but I have had no problems at all working with XAVC in Resolve 10, 11, or 12 on a MacBook Pro. So I would have to say that they are doing something wrong and then making it worse by spreading false rumors. My advice is to get your hands on some original XAVC footage and test it for yourself so you can come to your own conclusions before making decisions based on some bad advice.
That is a really good advice. Thank you for your feedback and suggestion. I'll do that. Today is national holiday here but I expect to put my hands on a FS5 this week or at least the next one. At that time I will make a bunch of tests to determine all things considered.
This is a Sony forum, however just want to mention I saw a quality I really liked in some of the Ursa/Mini 4.6K test footage on Vimeo. Obviously I have never shot with the camera, nor I have I shot with BM cameras- just have a positive suspicion about that sensor. Only a test will verify- cannot emphasize enough we all have to do our own tests- which does get expensive at times. I am of course talking about the 4.6K sensor NOT the 4K sensor.
If BM releases the cameras soon, and they work- the bit rates and codecs offered are interesting at that price point. No external recorder needed. Ursa mini is pretty small. Low light- well, you may want to carry an A7Sii or whatever for low light.
Just a thought if the cameras release before production starts.
If BM releases the cameras soon, and they work- the bit rates and codecs offered are interesting at that price point. No external recorder needed. Ursa mini is pretty small. Low light- well, you may want to carry an A7Sii or whatever for low light.
Just a thought if the cameras release before production starts.
Dan Abrams
Member
In my experience, you'll find grading the FS5 in Slog far closer to grading the BMPCC than the EX1/3. I've dealt extensively with all three and I'd argue that in the real world, FS5 looks best, even after intensive grading. Perhaps you can push BMPCC slightly further, but I think the difference is probably negligible, especially given the extra resolution of the FS5 or FS7 LongGOP.
I don't laugh at these budgets. While I would appreciate hollywood catering budgets (If I could keep my crews the same size, we could have food cooked for us by the world's greatest chefs every single meal on those budgets!), I could absolutely find myself trying to fulfill such a project at such a budget. 3 years is a long time for a project of this size, but not impossible.
At the budgets you outline, which are definitely tight, I don't know, I feel like the extra $2500 you'll spend on the camera, and maybe extra $1000 you'll spend on slightly bigger batteries and cards on the FS7 shouldn't be a determining factor. Shooting in XAVC-I or URSA Mini you're going to be generating something like 2.5-4x as much data, and given that this is a long term project, you're going to need lots of backup. You'll also need more cards, and XQD or CFast cards. Plus, you know, salaries are expensive...
And let me point out that traveling with an FS5 is much more a pleasure than an FS7. It fits in a Cinebags backpack (the smaller one), which slides under the seat in front of you on most planes, giving you an entire carryon for lenses, batteries, small LED lights, etc.
Would you like me to shoot something that you think will be a particular stress test for the 8-bit 4K codec, and send the footage to you? Let me know what you'd like me to test and I'll send you the file and you can have your colorist play with it and try different things.