New Blackmagic Camera July 16th?

[Amulet Man]

For myself, I'm more interested in the capabilities of a camera's rec 709 profile since I shoot rec 709 on 65% of my shoots.

That's fair. There are few different rec709 profiles, I tried a few of them out but don't remember the details since I would just using Log C for my own work. But there are a few that are better than others if I remember correctly. Not sure any are better than Canon's Wide DR, but I remember one I tried was pretty good.

 

[ahalpert]

Andree makes great points as always. But I agree with Eric about this. This is the flaw of DR testing, even using Cinema5D's Imatest methods, there is no way to account for s/n discrepancies that originate from in-camera noise reduction schemes.

I agree that cinema5D's testing is flawed or at least difficult to standardize properly. And you can't blindly trust the reported number. But they do talk about the noise reduction and always analyze what's happening with the noise floor and show the behavior on the waveform monitor. There's nuanced info there, I just wouldn't stop reading after the reported stops.

 

[John Brawley]

\

This may be the case in theory, but I've never found it was true in practice. Except for the F5, which I rate a bit slower and notice most people do, too, I've found 95% of content is shot at base ISO and that manufacturers choose base ISO to provide the best balance of image quality (subjectively, not as measured) and highlight detail.

I've wondered this as well.

I think it's because of the non-lineararity of the camera.

Take a 444 12 bit ProRes file from an Alexa where it's "not clipping" but everything is NEARLY clipping, but nothing is in RED for the false colour.

So theoretically nothing is lost of clipped, but it looks TERRIBLE especially on skin tones if they are right up the top of the exposure when you normalise it.

Why ?

I think because the curve assumes your most important information is in the middle and effectively allocates more "bits" there and less up top (and bottom) so, you have a non-linearity.

The log curve we love because it jams all the DR in, doesn't mean we have infinite recoverability....

JB

 

[ahalpert]

I did a shoot where the producer brought his S1H to use as the b-camera to my C300 Mark II. I did not set the in-camera picture profile for the S1H and have not used it aside from on that shoot, but essentially both cameras were set to a rec 709 style profile (Wide DR on the C300) and judging by the LCD screen on each the C300 Mark II has considerably more detail in the highlights as shown in the LCD photos below.

I've never shot the S1H but I guarantee you that you can get a better performance than that. What if you shot your C300 in Standard and not Wide DR? Every camera is capable of shooting a high-contrast image...

 

[John Brawley]

Also, on the FF camera test you posted... what's lens C? I really like that one.

Those are the delicious Arri made DNA primes.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...lenses&p=1986825339&viewfull=1#post1986825339

JB

 

[John Brawley]

Also, I downloaded the sample footage, can't play it back in either Resolve or braw player 1.6. I am on a Mac.

Did you download the current Resolve Beta ?

JB

 

[ahalpert]

Take a 444 12 bit ProRes file from an Alexa where it's "not clipping" but everything is NEARLY clipping, but nothing is in RED for the false colour.

So theoretically nothing is lost of clipped, but it looks TERRIBLE especially on skin tones if they are right up the top of the exposure when you normalise it.

This. A thousand times this. That's why I'm not a big ETTR guy and just a protect-highlights guy. Having discernible detail is not the same as having beautiful color and gradient

 

[ahalpert]

Those are the delicious Arri made DNA primes.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...lenses&p=1986825339&viewfull=1#post1986825339

JB

Christ this is cool. You must have to pick a specific set of DNAs. I don't understand how there's any standardization here:

"DNA is a completely new concept in lens development, pioneered by ARRI Rental in collaboration with visually ambitious cinematographers. Sourcing vintage optics from different historical periods, we embrace unusual image attributes that arouse an emotional response.

Selected optics are rehoused into modern lens casings, with the manufacturing carried out in-house at ARRI Rental. Each lens has its own personality, often customized for individual filmmakers, allowing stories to be told with a new visual boldness."

 

[Tom Roper]

I don't understand what you mean. Do you mean you can place middle gray arbitrarily so the dynamic range figure is meaningful but over/under is meaningless?

Middle gray is used in the context of a gamma curve, i.e. C-Log/S-Log3/Log-C. The exposure indices is a set of gamma curves for each ISO. Middle gray is a point on the curve. What the gamma curve does is apportion roughly equal number of shades to each light stop in the linear region of the curve. The gamma curve has only one middle gray point. You can expose your scene above or below this point to change the latitude remaining. The over and under chart is informational.

 

[Amulet Man]

Did you download the current Resolve Beta ?

JB

Not sure, where is it? 16.2.4 I have I think. I was just downloading the Lite version, not studio. That could be the issue. I don't have a full license installed on my laptop.

I actually find the Alexa more "linear" than other cameras but I've tried pushing more than pulling. You wrote something imo spot on elsewhere, which is that the Alexa's noise texture looks good. Outstanding highlight detail aside, the technical dynamic range and "aesthetic" dynamic range are different stories with that camera. Atlanta, for instance, I think is pushed two stops in post. The Alexa does not have clean shadows, but it has a good texture. I own an EVA1, which has relatively organic noise, but the finer grain looks less organic to me than the Alexa's does. I wonder how the 4K+ S35 Alexa will look. I suspect it will look too "clean" for my taste. Then again, I'm an optimist–I'm also hoping it will drive 4:3 Plus XR prices down so I can finally afford an Alexa...

Have you tried pulling an overexposed image from ArriRAW? Not sure it would be better as ArriRAW is 12 bit log, I think, like Canon Raw Lite. I have no experience with ArriRAW personally, but have been curious about it.

The DNA primes look great. I was hoping C was K35 since the closest thing I own or could ever hope to afford are super speed FDs, which are in theory similar optically. I really like the DNA look. I wonder what those lenses were originally before Arri got their hands on them...

 

[Amulet Man]

Middle gray is used in the context of a gamma curve, i.e. C-Log/S-Log3/Log-C. The exposure indices is a set of gamma curves for each ISO. Middle gray is a point on the curve. What the gamma curve does is apportion roughly equal number of shades to each light stop in the linear region of the curve. The gamma curve has only one middle gray point. You can expose your scene above or below this point to change the latitude remaining. The over and under chart is informational.

Ah, okay. In practice I typically rate cameras at base ISO as a starting point and find they often look best there. So the over/under information is useful to me nonetheless. But, as I mentioned, I found the F5 and A7S, for instance, a bit too noisy and will over expose with them a bit.

What do you mean by "exposure indices is a set of gamma curves for each ISO." Aren't EI and ISO interchangeable terms? If we're discussing digital ISO in the context of where a sensor places middle gray (18%) based on linear output, rather than where it's mapped, I think every sensor would have 2.5 stops of highlight detail.

 

[Eric Coughlin]

Every camera is capable of shooting a high-contrast image...

Arri cameras are not capable of shooting a high contrast image with the single stock 709 LUT that comes with the camera; the beauty of simplicity. You'd have to go out of you way to download a crappy LUT which I think works in Arri's favor. Or, you might be able to mess with the image parameters to increase contrast without downloading a new LUT, but again, that's really going out of the way to do so. But yeah, like I said with the C100, it had a crappy profile available as one of the seven profile options. I haven't messed with all the C300 profiles, and I'm not aware of one that is as contrasty as what the C100 had, but it might have one.

 

[John Brawley]

Not sure, where is it? 16.2.4 I have I think. I was just downloading the Lite version, not studio. That could be the issue. I don't have a full license installed on my laptop.

I actually find the Alexa more "linear" than other cameras but I've tried pushing more than pulling. You wrote something imo spot on elsewhere, which is that the Alexa's noise texture looks good. Outstanding highlight detail aside, the technical dynamic range and "aesthetic" dynamic range are different stories with that camera. Atlanta, for instance, I think is pushed two stops in post. The Alexa does not have clean shadows, but it has a good texture. I own an EVA1, which has relatively organic noise, but the finer grain looks less organic to me than the Alexa's does. I wonder how the 4K+ S35 Alexa will look. I suspect it will look too "clean" for my taste. Then again, I'm an optimist–I'm also hoping it will drive 4:3 Plus XR prices down so I can finally afford an Alexa...

Have you tried pulling an overexposed image from ArriRAW? Not sure it would be better as ArriRAW is 12 bit log, I think, like Canon Raw Lite. I have no experience with ArriRAW personally, but have been curious about it.

The DNA primes look great. I was hoping C was K35 since the closest thing I own or could ever hope to afford are super speed FDs, which are in theory similar optically. I really like the DNA look. I wonder what those lenses were originally before Arri got their hands on them...

RE arriraw, I find it's the same. I've not done that EXACT experiment though.

Lite version works fine. Go download the public beta of 16.3 here

Alexa has very large photo sites, 8.8 microns from memory. That make the noise very nice....

It's interesting that Arri seem to be struggling to deliver a 4K s35 camera. That's exactly the issue. They have to go to smaller photo sites and that becomes harder to deal with other issues....

JB

 

[Tom Roper]

Ah, okay. In practice I typically rate cameras at base ISO as a starting point and find they often look best there. So the over/under information is useful to me nonetheless. But, as I mentioned, I found the F5 and A7S, for instance, a bit too noisy and will over expose with them a bit.

What do you mean by "exposure indices is a set of gamma curves for each ISO." Aren't EI and ISO interchangeable terms? If we're discussing digital ISO in the context of where a sensor places middle gray (18%) based on linear output, rather than where it's mapped, I think every sensor would have 2.5 stops of highlight detail.

Botched that explantion a bit. Here's how Arri words it:

The Log C curve actually is a set of curves for different exposure indices. Each curve maps the sensor
signal corresponding to 18% gray to the Log C value of 0.391, which is 400/1023.

Example:

You change ISO from 800 to 400. The picture becomes darker. You open the iris 1 stop. The brightness returns, but because you are now putting 1 more stop of actual brightness onto the sensor, you lose one stop of actual highlight latitude. That's what the over/under charts inform you about.

 

[Amulet Man]

You change ISO from 800 to 400. The picture becomes darker. You open the iris 1 stop. The brightness returns, but because you are now putting 1 more stop of actual brightness onto the sensor, you lose one stop of actual highlight latitude. That's what the over/under charts inform you about.

Ah, okay. Yeah, I know that. I guess in practice I just usually end up rating at base ISO because it looks best to me most of the time. So for me the over/under charts are useful, if only as a starting point, whereas X stops of dynamic range doesn't seem to correlate consistently with anything to me in practice.

Also I'm just used to this way of thinking as it carries over from shooting film. But that's true, in theory if all were equal the dynamic range would tell the story regardless of how it's distributed in the default log curve and default ISO.

 

[Tom Roper]

It's an interesting way to look at it. If you were shooting film and it was very bright, you'd want a slower film (100 ASA) so you could open up the iris more. But with digital, to capture more highlights you would choose 400 ISO and add 2 stops ND.

 

[Ken1212]

I’d be very surprised if the Komodo has more than a single stop of DR over the BMPCC6K or ZCAM. Also, the PL mount on the UMP12K shows exactly who their target is, and it’s not anyone wanting an RF Mount. I’m willing to bet that this camera will steal the crown from Red in the VFX world.

Each definitely have their own uses and strengths. What I like about the RF mount on the Komodo is Red's Phase Detection AF. If it's as good as Canon's or close to it this camera will be hot.

 

[DLD]

... It's interesting that Arri seem to be struggling to deliver a 4K s35 camera. That's exactly the issue. They have to go to smaller photo sites and that becomes harder to deal with other issues....

JB

I wonder if they're running into any patent issues on their dual gain sensor - technically, they shouldn't - which makes it difficult to use the same design on their new projects. The technology has moved a lot in the decade since the original ALEV.

Of course, they're raking it in from the LF's too.

 

[John Brawley]

I wonder if they're running into any patent issues on their dual gain sensor - technically, they shouldn't - which makes it difficult to use the same design on their new projects. The technology has moved a lot in the decade since the original ALEV.

Of course, they're raking it in from the LF's too.

I don't think there's any overlap ? They've had dual gain since their first camera. Arri and BMD are actually very close behind the scenes...The communicate a lot for things like post and workflow...

Dual gain sensors are really really hard. You're trying to merge two different images and it's hard to make it seamless where there are transitions between those two. Arri do it well but they also have the same issues...not that many notice..

JB

 

[DLD]

I'm guessing that the design patent for ALEV - talking about the whole sensor - may be shared by several companies and Arri can't merely duplicate it in something completely new but can in the double LF and triple 65. In other words, it's not just the dual gain but wiring, manufacturing, etc. I am speculating because it seems a little odd that they have not come out with an entirely new sensor altogether in over a decade.

I assume they have tested a bunch of various projects but rejected them, given the cash cow that is LF.

PS. It also remains to be seen if the expected s35 4K camera is going to dip into the "affordable" sub-$40,000 territory. The high end market for the $100,000 LF's will run out of steam ... eventually.