Ibc 2018

S

S.Blanchardon

Well-known member
Hi there folks !

I think it's time to start a new thread about IBC 2018 as we are a little less than one month before it starts.

Are you attending ? Time flies because it will be my 11th year in a row since I'm going.

About new gear, what to expect ?

I think Sony will introduce a7S III but don't hold your breath.

Probably Pocket 4K everywhere on the BMD booth.


Maybe not a crazy year about new stuff, we already have amazing tools anyway, but still a pleasure to meet incredible people and discover new equipment. Plus Amsterdam is one of my favorite cities.


Cheers,
Steph.
 
Hey Steph, I'll be going. Third IBC for me.

I expect to see quite a few new things. It's a huge show as you know that encompasses a lot more than just cameras and lenses, which are my main areas of interest.

Sony introduced the A7s II at IBC 2015 out of nowhere, and it makes sense for them to introdcue the a7sIII at this year's IBC. or Photokina in Cologne two weeks after, but I am betting on IBC since the show has been a launchpad for the original FS7, FS5 and a7sII in years prior; Sony execs seem to like it so you can bet Sony will have at least one if not more new camera announcements at IBC, possibly new Fixed lens 1-inch camcorder or smaller handheld/handycam style camcorders.

I am also expecting new lenses, there are rumors of Samyang working on a budget Anamorphic, which can be a big deal for many. I won't be surprised to see new Cine lenses from established manufacturers as well. IBC is a suitable launch pad for them.

Canon may also surprise with a new EOS Cinema Camera, since the C300 II is getting old now and they may try and follow the success of the C200 by announcing a C300 III with Cinema Raw Light. This can be a major new S35 camera announcement and one that Canon have been really hush-hush about. This is of course, as all of the above only rumors and speculations.

For those of us in Europe it is our NAB. Can't wait to visit Amsterdam again, it's simply my favourite city.
 
combatentropy said:
At every event, and in between, I await global shutter.
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no reason we shouldn't have Global Shutter on every camera, by now. I've heard the excuses that it costs a stop of sensitivity or a stop of range. We have plenty of both in todays current cameras. Global Shutter is more important. Global Shutter was the MAIN reason I went with an F55 over the much cheaper F5. And why my "old" VariCam's are so great, with their CCD's.

Remember when no one talked about Global Shutter, because the word wasn't out there in our vocabulary, because we didn't know anything different than "global shutter" CCD's? Kind of like "parfocal lenses". We didn't know anything different in the TV world, because all our zooms were parfocal.
 
Run&Gun said:
I've heard the excuses that it costs a stop of sensitivity or a stop of range. We have plenty of both in todays current cameras.
Click to expand...
I see much more ugly blown highlights and noisy low light images than I ever notice rolling shutter in videos filmed with high end cameras, so priorities are where they are. For some cameras like the C700, you have the option of global shutter at a loss of dynamic range, but I think the vast majority choose to prioritize dynamic range and low light sensitivity. For those who prioritize global shutter, they have options.
 
Eric Coughlin said:
I see much more ugly blown highlights and noisy low light images than I ever notice rolling shutter in videos filmed with high end cameras, so priorities are where they are. For some cameras like the C700, you have the option of global shutter at a loss of dynamic range, but I think the vast majority choose to prioritize dynamic range and low light sensitivity. For those who prioritize global shutter, they have options.
Click to expand...

And the vast majority of that is the fault of the operator or crew, not the camera. We've been producing great looking images for years with cameras that didn't have 16 stops of dynamic range or the ability to shoot at ISO's in the five-figure range. If you can't produce a good looking image with a quality camera built in the last 5 to 10 years, the problem isn't the camera.
 
I wonder why ARRI and RED never explored a GS.

Cost can't be an issue as Blackmagic, Ikonoskop, Digital Bolex and AJA all had a camera with one...and all were capable of beautiful images.

The C700 GS is oddly only available in the PL mount.
 
NorBro said:
I wonder why ARRI and RED never explored a GS.

Cost can't be an issue as Blackmagic, Ikonoskop, Digital Bolex and AJA all had a camera with one...and all were capable of beautiful images.

The C700 GS is oddly only available in the PL mount.
Click to expand...

And obviously GS didn't hurt the F55's capabilities and performance. Just look at The Crown and Vinyl.
 
NorBro said:
I wonder why ARRI and RED never explored a GS.
Click to expand...

Arri hasn't explored any sensor at all since 2010. It's pretty amazing, either technologically or sociologically, that even though this camera is 8 years old that everyone still says it is the best, in fact anyone who comes along and claims that some new camera has finally beaten Arri gets doubted severely.

Red prioritizes resolution above all, way beyond my requirements, and a close second is staying neck and neck with Arri's dynamic range. There's no room for global shutter.

Since I am not doing this professionally anymore, I don't have to chase some spec just to please a buzzword-driven customer. So my minimum system requirements are mostly low by comparison these days, with one major rare feature (ahem, global shutter):

2K
12 stops
60 fps
global shutter
GH5 body and ergonomics, buttons, XLRs, etc. (they really hit this out of the park)
$2,000 - $3,000


There are some cameras with some of those features, but no camera with all of those features.
 
Run&Gun said:
And the vast majority of that is the fault of the operator or crew, not the camera. We've been producing great looking images for years with cameras that didn't have 16 stops of dynamic range or the ability to shoot at ISO's in the five-figure range. If you can't produce a good looking image with a quality camera built in the last 5 to 10 years, the problem isn't the camera.
Click to expand...
Or the fault of movies with limited time and budget for lighting, which is every movie ever. Even wide shots on Avengers ($500 million budget) they couldn't light the whole thing. I know this lighting guy from Avengers who said one day they were filming and it was overcast, then the sun came out in the middle of filming, and they had no choice but to continue filming and essentially hope the audience wouldn't notice the sudden change in lighting on the actors. When you have thousands of people relying on a camera to capture good images in challenging situations, you can't just tell everyone, "Sorry, but the poor dynamic range of this global shutter camera requires us to spend a few hours relighting everything."

As far as low light, I'm sure you've seen Charles Pappert's posts praising the Varicam LT and 35 and how it's helped on good size budget productions by being able to reduce the amount of lighting needed.

I don't think it's accurate to imply that a DP is unskilled because they prefer to work with tools which make their job easier. Not every DP values global shutter over dynamic range and low light capability; I imagine most don't. You do sports which has lots of fast action, so it would make sense for you to value it more than others. But it just doesn't seem right if you're saying everyone should have these same priorities as you.

Speaking from my own work, I haven't noticed rolling shutter as an issue since I was using Canon DSLRs. I still notice low light and lack of dynamic range as an issue.


Run&Gun said:
And obviously GS didn't hurt the F55's capabilities and performance. Just look at The Crown and Vinyl.
Click to expand...
Eh, I'd hardly consider the F55 as having as good of an image as an Arri, so there clearly are compromises. The Crown was a Netflix show so their 4K requirement was likely a large part of the reason for choosing the F55. I'm not sure the Varicam was available yet and Reds tend to be a pain. The F65 has a better image than the F55 but has a mechanical shutter, and the F35 is generally regarded as having a better image than the F55, has a global shutter, but is limited to 1080.

Considering how little movement of actors or fast camera movement there was on The Crown, I'd image it hardly benefited from global shutter.
 
Last edited:
Eric Coughlin said:
"Sorry, but the poor dynamic range of this global shutter camera requires us to spend a few hours relighting everything."
Click to expand...

Let's get down to the brass tacks.

I have a hypothesis that 12 f-stops is all you need, in fact more than enough, even in rushed lighting situations, even in non-lighting situations.

Crazy, right? But my hypothesis is that some other factor (in-camera overprocessing, namely) is actually what is limiting the image in cameras that you thought were limited by dynamic range.

Let me trot out my evidence.

Wait, before I do that, let me say that this could be solved definitively if anyone had the right test equipment. The best I have is an app on my phone, which is not very reliable. If anyone has a professional-grade spot meter, or some kind of scientific-grade light-measuring equipment, we could put this to bed.

So the question is, what is the dynamic range of a typical difficult shot, where you think one camera would succeed while another fails? Suppose there is a man in white suit in direct sunlight, and another man in a black suit, in the shade. I mean isn't that like the situation described?

this lighting guy from Avengers who said one day they were filming and it was overcast, then the sun came out in the middle of filming, and they had no choice but to continue filming
Click to expand...


EXHIBIT A

So I measured this and got 8 stops. I had to split it up, because my app could not span 8 stops. The difference between a white piece of cloth and a black piece of cloth is 5 f-stops, if they are both under the same light. So on a perfectly evenly lit day, like one that is overcast, you would need just a 5-stop camera to capture everybody, no matter the costume. That sounds like too little, doesn't it? But that's what I measured. Let's go on.

Most scenes are not perfectly lit under the same intensity, so then you just measure the difference between the darkest spot and the lightest spot. For example, the difference between direct sunlight and right under a tree is about 2-3 f-stops. So 2 or 3, plus 5 to account for differences in costume, equals 7 or 8. Let's add 1 stop, just in case someone is wearing a glossy fabric. 9 f-stops. Okay, let's add a few more. If you go further into the shade, like not just under a big tree but way into the brush, it can be 4 or 5 stops difference between direct sunlight and the deep shade you now crouch within. Okay so, 5 (for difference in lights) plus 6 (for difference in clothing, including glossy white) equals 11.

So 11.


EXHIBIT B

Roger N. Clark did a similar measurement and got 11 stops too, although his black thing in shade is not in very deep shade, http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/dynamicrange/


EXHIBIT C

The Canon 5D is rated at "just" 11.7 stops and normally its dynamic range is not that impressive. But if you apply the Magic Lantern conversion, and shoot RAW (still 11.7 stops) then the results are pretty impressive. https://vimeo.com/search?q=5d+raw (I think)


Could it be that 12 stops is plenty, and the cameras that were underperforming were doing so because their manufacturer hobbled their dynamic range, perhaps not intentionally?

I just think that looking at one camera and saying, "Its images look good. How many stops does it have? 13? Okay, well then I need 13." is not the worst tactic in the world, but it is not rigorous and scientific.

Anyway, there are sensors from Sony now (for industrial cameras) that are 4K, global shutter, and 13 stops. The Blackmagic Pocket was 13 stops, and everybody thought it was the bee's knees. "Alexa Lite," I think somebody called it. Wait, that's old news because years ago Sony came out with the F55, which is 4K, global shutter, and 14 stops.
 
Last edited:
Not sure what your point is. Just a few days ago I was filming an interview, large window backdrop, Litepanels Gemini as key (pretty bright light), didn't have the resources or time to ND the whole window, so the result was that some of the background clipped on my waveform. You could blame the clipping on not having a bright enough key or not being able to ND the windows, but you could also blame it on the C300 Mark II not having enough dynamic range. The idea is to have tools that make our job easier, not harder. A global shutter C700 would have had even more clipped highlights in that interview scenario while offering no noticeable benefit to a sit down interview with the global shutter feature.

I've run into plenty of such situations where having more dynamic range in the camera would have made my job easier and resulted in a better final product.

There could be a potential argument for saying cameras should have limited dynamic range to help simulate the human eye, which also has limited dynamic range. From what I've read cameras are still pretty far off from having the same dynamic range as the human eye. Then there's also highlight rolloff, for which Arri is king, well, behind the human eye and film. But I suppose you could argue that cameras having limited dynamic range is good because seeing blown highlights sometimes does look better than seeing detail in the highlights.
 
NorBro said:
I wonder why ARRI and RED never explored a GS.

Cost can't be an issue as Blackmagic, Ikonoskop, Digital Bolex and AJA all had a camera with one...and all were capable of beautiful images.

The C700 GS is oddly only available in the PL mount.
Click to expand...

All those Global Shutter cameras came with significant trade offs, which isn't for everyone.

Also cameras like Sony VENICE have such very fast rolling shutters that they might as well be almost global shutter cameras

Run&Gun said:
And obviously GS didn't hurt the F55's capabilities and performance. Just look at The Crown and Vinyl.
Click to expand...

Indeed, if a person wants a top tier camera with global shutter then the Sony F55 or F35 are the best choices.
 
Last edited:
I also find myself relatively often struggling with dynamic range, and rarely if ever worried about rolling shutter

I do agree that in-camera image processing is killing a big chunk of the sensor's dynamic range in most cameras. If you measure the DR of a 5D with a wedge chart and counting steps in a waveform, it will come at around 11 stops (my own test) but if you test with something that has fine texture and demand that this texture is visible, it has only 6 stops (again, my own test). Shooting RAW stills, this latter test shows 9 stops of DR with that same camera. The pocket does great in this test because it's recording uncompressed RAW video.

On a sunny day, open shadow areas are usually 4 to 5 stops darker than sunlit areas, so I try to put my sunlit background at +2.5 and my talent at -2.5. Even my RX100IV can deal with that. But a not-so-open shadow can be two stops darker or more, and then anything below $5k just won't be enough, you need at least an FS7 / Ursa Mini / C200. Which is not too bad if you've got the budget, but even then, you can still find yourself in situations where you'd need more DR, such as the interview with window mentioned above.
 
Funny how this IBC 2018 thread became a Global Shutter thread !

EDIT : I's obviously an interesting talk but can we maybe please get back on the subject ? Thanks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top