VENICE: Avatar 2 & 3

[Guest]

As nice as the 1DC was, it had no AF in C-Log and the C-Log was atrocious in the highlights. Extremely harsh clipping (Canon still struggles with this today, in 2018). Muddy colors too that required good grading (which is why I'm surprised with your thoughts on those RED skintones which look pretty normal...and no regular viewer would ever know what you're talking about, lol).

I quite liked the 1DC palette. Thought it did better in the highlights than the original C100/C300 cameras. Black magic pocket was much more MUDDY! colors so bad they were kind of stylized and great. And the BM4K had uglier highlights (though I only saw demos, never used it, so not a really informed opinion). The RED's are fantastic cameras overall. I think they did more to change the industry than Black Magic cameras did. Though, BM definitely put some pressure on the price point, their exploding batteries and white orbs kept them from being pro for a while. Not to say any other camera doesn't have their issues, and I am very glad that BMCC is a viable option. Also, BMC is high bit rate raw, so I suppose you can roll off the highlights as you please. But I ruled them out pretty early on. They can get good images when pushed. Maybe one day, I'll snag one.

The RED cameras are not bad cameras, I was mainly saying how those video examples you posted were not good examples of skin tone.
But I am curious about how you see images. RED isn't exactly the skin tone brand, but you can get great skin tones with those cameras.

Old 1DC Clog rolled off pretty gracefully, imho.

Colors equaled or bettered the A7sII. I found Clog on the 1DC to be easier to grade than Slog on the A7, because the 1DC already favored the highlights. In an 8bit world that is very important. The A7 wins out in the end because it has more latitude overall, but 1DC is still better straight out of the camera. At the end of the day, the 1DC was 11+ stops latitude in 8bit, so I am not particularly trying to convince you it is amazing. Just thought it was one of those cameras that did a good job all things considered, and still surprises me at times.
I thought it handled mixed lighting well too:

Perfect cameras for me personally are DSLRs/mirrorless' because of the way I work...the muscle memory as you briefly mentioned. I love being able to change the aperture with my thumb on the dial, and the shutter with my index finger, and having quick programmable buttons near by, and of course the small package, and usually the superb AF (in my case Canon/Sony).

Agreed, and will go a step further to say how nice it is to have a camera the size of a 1DC that is nice in the hand and sturdy without a cage or added on ergo handle.

Even though I don't like the size of either of these (and I once owned an URSA), I think the URSA 4K (you can include the URSA Mini 4K too) and the FS7 were the perfect cameras for their time. The Blackmagic community has their opinions. The RED community has theirs. All of the Japanese camera users will be fond of a system from one time or another...but I think nothing could touch those two cameras with the features they finally offered to people in late 2014 for the prices they asked for.

I've never been a specs guy. So, the GH series and the Black magic cameras never delivered for me. I really like what they are doing, and I agree they are helping push things forward. But the cameras that are the king os specs: GH4/5, BMC, Fs75/7, A7 have never really made me want to use them.

IMO, everything before then was either very expensive and/or a bit behind as far as where the world was going (HR, HDR, HFR, 10-bit, RAW, etc).

Totally agree with this! Some cameras are pretty much held back to stupid levels. There is a lot of room for improvement on IQ. We haven't even reached a baseline with the Alexa's yet. That is were digital starts to be ok. But that should be the bottom of the barrel in the latitude department.

 

[Guest]

What's interesting, with all our technical discussions, what ultimately makes everyone go WOW!, is how the images move us emotionally.

Specs aside, some cameras just work with our aesthetics. the 1DXmkII went somewhere with skin tones that other cameras haven't really. Definitely can see the appeal. Very vibrant, clean, and saturated while still remaining aesthetically pleasing.

Currently, I am really liking the F35. I want to hate it, because of the weight and 1080p, but I can't make this camera do wrong. Just putting my eye to the EVF, I like the images immediately. Can't say that about RED, Varicam35, F55, or VENICE. Eventhough all of those cameras are 'better'. Alexa is the only other camera that I get excited just seeing the image in the EVF. you can tell something is 'right', or 'more righter'. IDK.

Oh well, here is some Canon 80D footage that I like:

 

[Guest]

Also, random, I clicked on a link after my 80D video finishes, and this film maker has these films, none of which I would say are great examples of 'skin tone', because they are quite stylized, but I think they are pretty amazing! A little though to watch though. But very well done:

https://vimeo.com/laurelparmet

 

[NorBro]

haha...a good ole Sunday chit-chat.

At this point in my life, I see all cameras as food and I like all food.

I eat everything, you feel me?

I never talk skintones because I think it's crazy talk. I like them all. They can all be produced differently and it's INSANE in my opinion to say this one camera particularly does this better to the skin than this one.

Like...do we all understand how many of us are living on this planet and are viewing the world through our own chemically complex brains?

Sure, you can like cheeseburgers more than pizza, but does that make them the better food?

Maybe for you! ...and that's the point; totally an opinion.

---

As far as some of the other stuff...

The REDs massively changed the industry when you're talking about a camera like the one you're currently using was once priced at $250,000 and everything else that people were using back then like the Varicams and Sonys - which are now paperweights - were still priced more than $50K, etc. and here they were providing 4K cameras in 2007+ starting at $20K.

So yea, absolutely.

But eventually times changed and their prices never did (well, they did, but in the wrong direction).

If you've ever followed Blackmagic's history since their first camera release in 2012 (they've actually been around for 17 years or so), they truly disrupted the industry in so many ways. From all of their products to software advancements to business acquisitions.

This Pocket 4K will go down in history as the most sold cinema camera in the world. Let's bookmark this page and check back in 5 years, ha.

---

Also, just a note on this...(and I love all of this conversation):

Though, they definitely put some pressure on the price point, their exploding batteries and white orbs kept them from being pro for a while.

There was one case of an exploding battery and it was a bizarre fluke. No batteries from Blackmagic cameras ever exploded as if it were a common occurrence like some of their other issues. The orbs were black and they appeared in extremely hot areas like lamps and the sun. They were mainly a problem with the 4K sensor, which was the BMPC and the URSA Mini 4K. They did exist in the BMPCC but were solved with a firmware update. I don't remember anymore if the BMCC had them.

One other note about the BMPCC; it was muddy but that is because people didn't know how weak the IR filter was and lots of early material was brown and it's all that people saw. It's another misconception about the camera like the exploding batteries. The color science was also improved over time with all of their cameras via many of their firmware updates.

FPN and magenta were far worse than anything else, and those are the main issues BM cameras are known for, IMO.

What people also don't know about BM cameras (and other products in this situation) is that sometimes issues like this have to exist in order for them to provide us those kind of features at those kind of prices (especially back then).

If you know the REDs, you know how Jarred Land sometimes talks about how their sensors are made and how they have to "bake" and be perfect and the ones that fail are trashed, etc. Well, that costs money, and you're never going to get a $1500 4K/60p RED until they stop doing that (or want to make less money, ha). The Hydrogen is what it is, but not sure anyone knows its exact specs yet and/or the modules it may need.

I did love the 1DC. I drooled over Philip Bloom's travel videos. I just can't agree the roll-off was nice...but I did own a C500 at one point too (do you see how I'm crazy?) and it was probably more brutal so I can agree maybe the 1DC was better than those others.

 

[Guest]

The REDs massively changed the industry when you're talking about a camera like the one you're using now was once priced at $250,000 and everything else that people were using back then like the Varicams and Sonys - which are now paper-weights - were still priced more than $50K, etc, and here they were providing 4K cameras in 2007+ starting at $20K.

RED introduced the concept of a 3K for $3K, just panasonic and BM beat them to it. And the DSLR movement crowded the segment, so RED pivoted and gravitated towards high end. So, to say BM did as much, well, it was just the times.

This Pocket 4K will go down in history as the most sold camera in the world. Let's bookmark this page and check back in 5 years, ha.

Haha, I doubt we will care then, but it will be fun to see this thread again in 5years. Haha.

Also, just a note on this...(and I love all of this conversation).

There was one case of an exploding battery and it was a bizarre fluke. No batteries from Blackmagic cameras EVER exploded as if it were a common occurrence like some of their other issues. The orbs were black and they appeared in extremely hot areas like lamps and the sun. They were mainly a problem with the 4K sensor, which was the BMPC and the URSA Mini 4K. They did exist in the BMPCC but were solved with a firmware update. I don't remember anymore if the BMCC had it.

Yeah, these were unfortunate, but they happened right when I was upgrading, and I ended up with a 1DC. And by the time BM had sorted everything out, and proven they were reliable, I had Sony's and RED's, which are better cameras aesthetically, technically, and usability wise. Not at all saying BM can't also get awesome images at a great price point with a free copy of resolve to boot!

I just can't agree the roll-off was nice...but I did own a C500 at one point too (do you see how I'm crazy?) and it was probably more brutal so I can agree maybe the 1DC was better than those others.

The 1DC was a different animal, and I have never liked the original C100/300 cameras. I assume the C500 was just as bad, but I never go to use it in 12bit, so I leave that one out of the discussion usually. But the 1DC was better than the other 8bit C line cameras. And while the 1DC wasn't worth the $14K I spent on it, I thought I was putting my money where my mouth was. I liked the concept a lot, and wish there was and up-to-date more true hybrid version. A truly ergonomic weather sealed beast that can fit in a small hip bag, would have been something with a built in EVF and 10bit video. These mirrorless cameras are not fun to hold. very uncomfortable and tiny buttons. They make the 60d seem large. Mirrorless is versatile. GH5 looks like a nice body. But the A7 style requires too many attachments and s*%t to get things rolling, and screws and rails don't really feel nice. Will have to test out an A9 if they ever get a 10bit or higher version. I just cannot go back to 8bit for a personal camera, ever. I hate 8bit so much. We have HDR tv's and REC2020 now. 10bit is an even more basic a need than it was 6years ago, and it was important then!

haha...a good ole Sunday chit-chat.

Yeah, haha, I am quite enjoying this.

 

[NorBro]

What's interesting, with all our technical discussions, what ultimately makes everyone go WOW!, is how the images move us emotionally. For me it started with the Canon 5D Mark II, and currently the VENICE is even more impressive to me than the Alexa LF (probably also because VENICE is the underdog challenger). I get the same feeling looking at the images James0b57 posted for Red ("acceptable quality...", no emotion) vs. the VENICE (Wow! Look at those colors! From Sony no less!).

Regarding the 1DC- it was basically a 5D Mark III with "4K" and CLog. Stock, the 1DX II doesn't look as good as the 5D Mark III (still have one for testing) or 1DC. With a highly tuned Picture Style, the 1DX II looks great straight out of camera, along with DPAF: currently IMO the best image quality for a smallish camera. Sony A7R III, A7 III have better detail, IBIS, but not as good AF (getting better) or skin tones (+ better DR on the Sonys).

1DX II with a custom picture style (Filmic Skin):

I think the VENICE color filters + color science can match or exceed this. Will be amazing if A7S III rumors are true.

P.S. jcs...this person could probably use your help as I'm pretty sure you've used both on the same shoot (even with green screens) --> http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?361053-Using-a-Canon-1DX-Mark-II-as-B-cam-with-a-C300ll

 

[Run&Gun]

If a tiny camera is created with pro level IQ, then a shoulder mount build option with real VF could easily be achieved as well. And since the camera would have a very effective IBIS, the entire system could be very light, causing no shoulder or back pain even after full day shoots. Perhaps a modular system similar to what's going on with the VENICE, except without the tether (full camera works without the shoulder-body).

But the camera, at least for me, still needs to be a certain size so that you can interact with buttons and dials and switches and have them in the right places and the right size. I don't want remote, touchscreen controls when I'm shooting ENG/Run & Gun/Doc style. Could my current favorite body be lightened up some? Sure? Would it be appreciated? Sure. Could the size be reduced some? Sure? Would it be appreciated? Sure. But it still needs to be of a certain size to make it easy for a person to use effectively. And for me, 90% of the time, that is not something DSLR sized or even C300 sized.

And if it is possible to "put a Venice into a DSLR sized body", why haven't they yet? I'd argue that if it is truly possible and the industry wanted it, we'd have it, but the market where those types of cameras are aimed apparently doesn't want it. At least not on a scale to justify actually building it.

 

[jcs]

Specs aside, some cameras just work with our aesthetics. the 1DXmkII went somewhere with skin tones that other cameras haven't really. Definitely can see the appeal. Very vibrant, clean, and saturated while still remaining aesthetically pleasing.

Currently, I am really liking the F35. I want to hate it, because of the weight and 1080p, but I can't make this camera do wrong. Just putting my eye to the EVF, I like the images immediately. Can't say that about RED, Varicam35, F55, or VENICE. Eventhough all of those cameras are 'better'. Alexa is the only other camera that I get excited just seeing the image in the EVF. you can tell something is 'right', or 'more righter'. IDK.

Oh well, here is some Canon 80D footage that I like:

The 1DX II example is using a custom picture style- that's how Canon should ship these cameras as the default look! With the 5D Mark III, I was able to just tweak default settings to get a decent look (Filmic Skin also makes the 5D3 look better- a non-log method which helps pleasingly boost shadows and preserve highlights (along with color tweaks)). All my examples have saturation pushed to the max. That's my litmus test for great skin tones: do they hold together when super saturated. It's easy to dial back saturation if desired (not easy going the other way if the color science isn't holding up).

For a travel/vlogging camera, the 80D is still a great choice. I bought one after selling all the Sony gear for testing Filmic Skin on an entry level camera. It's great for 1080p YouTube etc. The 1DX II is vastly superior in every way for IQ, especially low light (FF and 4K + 4K60p. The 1DX II also supports line level audio input; pretty cool if using an external preamp). The 80D wins for being super tiny, flip out screen, won't draw any attention, easy to use on a single hand gimbal, and of course cost. I keep the 18-135 Nano on the 80D almost all the time. Fairly quiet for video (though not silent as with Sony lenses).

 

[jcs]

But the camera, at least for me, still needs to be a certain size so that you can interact with buttons and dials and switches and have them in the right places and the right size. I don't want remote, touchscreen controls when I'm shooting ENG/Run & Gun/Doc style. Could my current favorite body be lightened up some? Sure? Would it be appreciated? Sure. Could the size be reduced some? Sure? Would it be appreciated? Sure. But it still needs to be of a certain size to make it easy for a person to use effectively. And for me, 90% of the time, that is not something DSLR sized or even C300 sized.

And if it is possible to "put a Venice into a DSLR sized body", why haven't they yet? I'd argue that if it is truly possible and the industry wanted it, we'd have it, but the market where those types of cameras are aimed apparently doesn't want it. At least not on a scale to justify actually building it.

Look at the trend- number one rental is Alexa Mini. Give Red credit for leading the way to smaller pro cameras. The VENICE is much smaller than the prior flagship, the F65. I think it's business/marketing: they're saving smaller cameras with IBIS etc. for future improvements. Coming from the software / embedded hardware space I can tell you that there's no reason they can't provide 10+ bit RGB 444 or ProRes RAW (or wavelet/JPG2000 RAW etc.) in an A7 or slightly larger body in 2018. 5 years ago I was doing complex filtering and alpha compositing using the GPU on the iPhone 5S (along with real-time DSP audio effects). Without a fan the 1DX II handles 800Mb/s to CFast 2.0 (which runs kind of hot), so with decent thermal management (and/or using the new SD Express cards (985MB/s (that's a big B for byte instead of bit. Plenty of bandwidth)) all the latest 10+ bit codecs can be supported (including compressed RAW).

@NorBro- thanks I'll help them out.

 

[Guest]

The 1DX II example is using a custom picture style- that's how Canon should ship these cameras as the default look! With the 5D Mark III, I was able to just tweak default settings to get a decent look (Filmic Skin also makes the 5D3 look better- a non-log method which helps pleasingly boost shadows and preserve highlights (along with color tweaks)). All my examples have saturation pushed to the max. That's my litmus test for great skin tones: do they hold together when super saturated. It's easy to dial back saturation if desired (not easy going the other way if the color science isn't holding up).

Canon's 1D line is in a league of it's own.

Your thoughts about adding more sat up front is good. I had a picture style thread going for a bit, called something like "Adventures in PSE". My personal preference was to keep things saturated and reduce in post, seemed to help with anomalies. Either way, I love what you are doing with color!

 

[Guest]

I never talk skintones because I think it's crazy talk. I like them all. They can all be produced differently and it's INSANE in my opinion to say this one camera particularly does this better to the skin than this one.

Like...do we all understand how many of us are living on this planet and are viewing the world through our own chemically complex brains?

Sure, you can like cheeseburgers more than pizza, but does that make them the better food?

Maybe for you! ...and that's the point; totally an opinion.

These are my opinions on cameras in regards to skin tone.

What I have seen from Arri, is that they seem to push anything close to skin tone into a more simple color. Forcing similar colors into something more mono or ideal. The benefit seems to be getting something pleasing even in tough situations. The trade off is subtlety and nuance in color variation in the skin. Also, I believe that is a part of why Alexa's skin look slightly plastic or clay like.

Canon vs Nikon was always a fun topic. Canon skewed Rosey or a slight magenta tint in the skin to liven things up, Nikon went more neutral tone, with muted magenta/reds in the skin range. Both looked great, and some people might prefer one over the other depending on the day or subject, but both had very good skin tone reproduction, with a lot of nuance and subtly. Canon's color science seems to really come into a different league in their 1D line. May just be my imagination. I haven't really followed these two in a few years, may have changed.

Red and Sony seemed to both go in their own technically accurate colors. Never seemed like they ever singled out skin tone till recently. Sony's Venice and Red's PP2 are very wonderful. I am not really sure how to describe Venice, but I am seeing a bit more golden tones, if that makes sense. Very subtle, nothing that would interfere with the idea of accurate colors. I've not seen enough of PP2 to have a reliable opinion, but I am liking the highlight roll off.

Panasonic, they claim to be "kicking Arri's butt" in the skin tone game, but I am just not entirely sure how they mean that. That is a quote from a Panasonic employee, btw. I am not quite comfortable with the Panasonic colors yet, but I don't see any problems really, and I like that they have a smooth highlight roll off. I keep meaning to test out a Panny 35. Maybe this week I'll set up an appointment. I met a guy from Panasonic at Cinegear, and really appreciated his passion for the Varicam line. This poor camera gets starved of light a lot, because of its capabilities, so it often gets put in the toughest situations and that make it difficult to form an honest opinion with out any testing. the only up and close I got with it was on a film that took place all at night. But I have seen awesome stuff from it, and think i prefer its look over the F55, but the F55 is so damn good on battery life. I could be way off, but it reminds me of a super clean Kodak Vision3 5219 (based on a couple movies i've seen, but minus the filmic highlights)

Black Magic does pretty good here on their newer cameras from what I can see. they seem to push skin tones into a simplified palette like Arri does, but not with the same sophistication. They also seem to skew some blues toward cyan. But I've not seen a BMCC that I prefer over a Red yet, except in highly controlled environments. It just doesn't't have the latitude, and falls apart in the highlights. The original pocket was some of the worst color science I have scene in a designated "cinema" product, but it definitely was fun in the style department.
Here is the black magic showing how it skews blues into cyan and skin tones more towards the yellow side. Whereas as ole' MX is skewed rosy magenta. The tonal range of the MX makes me prefer it over the BM ursa, but there is something nice about the BM on certain days:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI1ax3oxaBc&t=67s

Sony F35, colors are great on this camera. Seems to do something different than the others. Skews warm in Daylight WB, but the Tungsten is pretty awesome. Similar to how Canon/Nikon handle colors, in that everything looks aesthetically well defined and accurate, but with less hyped skin tone, more natural. There is a slight lift in the darker midtones that is more similar to how we see with our eyes, and it helps with the shadows on the face to not be so dark. Used to be only Arri and to a lesser degree the 1DC in C-log that had this, but Varicam35, Red's PP2, and possibly the VENICE seem to do it in their own way now. Glad other cameras are picking up on this. Hopefully it will spread into other cameras and phones.

Do you guys have similar perception of the color science in these cameras and brands?

 

[jcs]

Do you guys have similar perception of the color science in these cameras and brands?

My college degree is Cognitive Science which is the study of human cognition (in my case to create artificial intelligence applications). So I get the comments regarding how each of our brains can perceive reality in different ways (neural networks in the math sense but much more complex in the quantum entanglement sense). That said, most human beings prefer the look of ARRI for skin tones, as a base metric of likeability. When developing Filmic Skin, I used mirrors to compare my perception of my skin tones to what the camera and computer display was showing, and found it wasn't even close. Thus I don't really agree that any brand is actually accurate, and thus "looks bad" compared to other brands which "cheat" to make skin tones look better. Thus, I used a simple photon-bouncing mirror as a reference for perception vs. the "Modulation Transfer Function" of lens + camera + color chip charts + display device. Interestingly, when looking at a model then at the viewfinder/display, the difference doesn't appear as dramatic. Try the mirror test yourselves! We have a long way to go before cameras and display systems match a simple photon-bouncing mirror. The first step is to create a complete end-to-end calibration system. This hasn't been an issue for most film productions since as long as people look reasonably "normal", there is no issue with acceptance and people just get into the story/subject matter and don't think about color (though unconsciously color is affecting their emotions- a useful tool for storytelling).

Other factors are 8% of men and .4% of women have some form of color blindness, and some people respond more deeply to color than others, the same with music and sound, art vs. science, etc. Since current camera and display systems aren't accurate relative to a mirror, I think it's mostly an emotional (non-technical) response to a camera system's color performance that makes it likeable or not. For me that's ranked: VENICE*, Alexa LF/65, Canon/Nikon, Red, BM, Panasonic. From the technical perception I'd switch Alexa LF/65 to the top position (though very close to the VENICE from demos seen so far) and BM to the bottom position.


* this is a VENICE thread

 

[Guest]

We have a long way to go before cameras and display systems match a simple photon-bouncing mirror. The first step is to create a complete end-to-end calibration system.

So much in agreement with this! Cameras have so much farther to go!

This hasn't been an issue for most film productions since as long as people look reasonably "normal",

you say it much better. This is more in line with what I meant when I said 'all the major brands were accurate'. I meant they could all achieve the "reasonably normal".

Other factors are 8% of men and .4% of women have some form of color blindness, and some people respond more deeply to color than others, the same with music and sound, art vs. science, etc.

Good point, beyond recognition of colors is the connection to emotions that varies a lot.

Since current camera and display systems aren't accurate relative to a mirror, I think it's mostly an emotional (non-technical) response to a camera system's color performance that makes it likeable or not. For me that's ranked: VENICE*, Alexa LF/65, Canon/Nikon, Red, BM, Panasonic. From the technical perception I'd switch Alexa LF/65 to the top position (though very close to the VENICE from demos seen so far) and BM to the bottom position.
* this is a VENICE thread

Let's go demo a VENICE! I'll bring my F35!

 

[jcs]

Let's go demo a VENICE! I'll bring my F35!

If it's possible to demo a VENICE in Los Angeles and take footage with us that would be super cool! Maybe we can get ahold of an Alexa LF and Canon C700 FF at the same time for a 3-way full-frame shoot-out!

In the meantime, here's some VENICE compressed raw frames (can edit with latest Resolve): http://www.xdcam-user.com/2018/03/sony-venice-a-close-look-at-the-dynamic-range-and-noise/
Looks great with just a 1D SLog3 = > 709 LUT (+ basic raw edits in the raw tab). No aliasing, super clean and detailed. I can see for some applications adding grain and/or diffusion would be desired since it's so clean (on lens or in post). Seems like they must be doing some kind of color space transform too, since the final result looks correct regarding color and saturation. Premiere Pro CC (latest) also works, raw control is limited to selecting Rec709, SLog2, and SLog3. Looks like deBayering isn't as good (moire on chart upper right), colors are not nearly as good as Resolve, and while Resolve is smooth/real-time to edit, PP CC takes a second or so to react to changes.

 

[Guest]

I have two possible Venice hookups. Do you think you could get a hold of an LF or 65?

Perhaps we could throw some White Point optics in the mix?

 

[jcs]

Would probably take someone like Shane Hurlbut (cool guy, met him once but don't know him) involved to get access to an LF/65 and/or C700 FF given the rarity of these cameras. https://www.thehurlblog.com/category/equipment/camera-tests/ . He's also really good at camera tests, based in LA, and there's ARRI and Canon offices in Burbank. Add a Red VV camera to the mix and it would be a very popular story, helpful to all 4 brands, along with a professionally produced test and commentary. Maybe get other directors and DPs involved. Make it an event- go big or bust haha.

 

[Guest]

i'll start the kickstarter campaign