PDA

View Full Version : Higher frame rates



bumkicho
09-12-2012, 10:22 AM
I heard somewhere that BMC is considering higher frame rates with firmware update.
Any more news on this? Perhaps 60fps raw is a bit too much to handle, but 60fps Prores should be possibility, no?

Peter J. DeCrescenzo
09-12-2012, 10:48 AM
This has been discussed since the BMCC was announced at NAB in April. No official word on the subject, except that John Brawley has strongly implied that "60p" (regardless of recording format) might be all but impossible, and that anything >30p is a remote but real "possibility" via a future firmware update.

So, yes, BMD is keenly aware people want it, but, no, there's no official word on the subject, yet.

yoclay
09-12-2012, 10:54 AM
The camera might be able to go to 48fps, but the real issue is not just heat, but whether the SSD's can sustain higher frame rates with that level of data and remain dependable.
I think quite honestly they have too many other priorities on their plate right now.

randyman
09-12-2012, 10:58 AM
While higher frame rates in RAW might pose insurmountable difficulties on the current hardware, I am hoping that lower frame rates - all the way down to time lapse - may be easier to implement. I have little doubt that they're working feverishly to deliver everything in firmware they possibly can; we know they're listening. We've seen the proof!

mbeck
09-12-2012, 01:06 PM
You know, while I would like to see higher frame rates.. having used the camera for a few days, there are much more important things that they need to fix. F stop on screen, audio VU meters etc. I think that If we see higher framerates, it wont me soon at all.

mhood
09-12-2012, 01:09 PM
You know, while I would like to see higher frame rates.. having used the camera for a few days, there are much more important things that they need to fix. F stop on screen, audio VU meters etc. I think that If we see higher framerates, it wont me soon at all.

Is it really a guess as to how much record time you have left on an SSD? That is a huge omission if true...as big an oversight as the VUs.

mbeck
09-12-2012, 01:17 PM
Is it really a guess as to how much record time you have left on an SSD? That is a huge omission if true...as big an oversight as the VUs.
Heh, oh yeah... that is a huge omission! it makes me sweat bullets!

Liam
09-12-2012, 06:53 PM
You know, while I would like to see higher frame rates.. having used the camera for a few days, there are much more important things that they need to fix. F stop on screen, audio VU meters etc. I think that If we see higher framerates, it wont me soon at all.

Whilst true, fixing those things that you've mentioned, from a technical stand point would be very minimal work compared to implementing higher frame rates. It will probably be near impossible at this point for them to put 48/60p in RAW but in ProRes, well......

Taikonaut
09-12-2012, 07:17 PM
This has been discussed since the BMCC was announced at NAB in April. No official word on the subject, except that John Brawley has strongly implied that "60p" (regardless of recording format) might be all but impossible, and that anything >30p is a remote but real "possibility" via a future firmware update.

So, yes, BMD is keenly aware people want it, but, no, there's no official word on the subject, yet.

Yeah, we also heard MFT mount was all but impossible too until recently.

Taikonaut
09-12-2012, 07:19 PM
Whilst true, fixing those things that you've mentioned, from a technical stand point would be very minimal work compared to implementing higher frame rates. It will probably be near impossible at this point for them to put 48/60p in RAW but in ProRes, well......

How about short burst say 15s so no risk of overheating?

mhood
09-12-2012, 07:24 PM
Yeah, we also heard MFT mount was all but impossible too until recently.

What we heard was that BMD was focusing their total attention on getting the BMC shipped with the features announced at NAB. Apparently, that wasn't totally true...

StephenM
09-13-2012, 12:48 AM
Whilst true, fixing those things that you've mentioned, from a technical stand point would be very minimal work compared to implementing higher frame rates. It will probably be near impossible at this point for them to put 48/60p in RAW but in ProRes, well......

Something to consider though, is that while the data rate to SSD would be less, the processor/cpu overhead for debayering/compressing the ProRes footage would be higher than raw. It may well turn out that higher frame rates in raw may actually be easier overall than ProRes. Just my 2 cents worth...

Liam
09-13-2012, 12:51 AM
Something to consider though, is that while the data rate to SSD would be less, the processor/cpu overhead for debayering/compressing the ProRes footage would be higher than raw. It may well turn out that higher frame rates in raw may actually be easier overall than ProRes. Just my 2 cents worth...

yeah true, maybe a 15 second burst like mentioned would be a possibility.

yoclay
09-13-2012, 01:01 AM
I think 48 fps would be the outer limits of what the camera is able to do. I actually had a discussion with the product manager for the camera about this. But it would be a huge amount of work for them and there are just too many other priorities right now.

nickjbedford
09-13-2012, 02:20 AM
I'd be happy with 40fps, which is what John Brawley suggested it could handle.

That would give me in PAL land 1.6x slow motion.

And also, one Blackmagic rep mentioned they have been working on higher fps.

RyGuy
09-13-2012, 04:44 AM
I'd be happy with 40fps, which is what John Brawley suggested it could handle.

That would give me in PAL land 1.6x slow motion.

And also, one Blackmagic rep mentioned they have been working on higher fps.

Same here. Lately I've been shooting 30p and slowing it down to 24p for glidecam work, and it can look lovely. But now my stuff needs to be finished at 30p. 40p slowed to 30p would be still have a nice effect.

Tzedekh
09-13-2012, 07:27 AM
Something to consider though, is that while the data rate to SSD would be less, the processor/cpu overhead for debayering/compressing the ProRes footage would be higher than raw. It may well turn out that higher frame rates in raw may actually be easier overall than ProRes. Just my 2 cents worth...
Most likely the data rate would still be too high. CineForm RAW might be a good compromise -- it has data rates comparable to ProRes' but requires less processing power. Plus it would allow you to work in raw.

jindrich1
09-20-2012, 12:48 AM
You can not apply for a higher framerate Thunderbolt?

Soeren Mueller
09-20-2012, 05:24 PM
Yeah Cineform RAW sounds like a perfect "codec" candidate for the camera... but I guess there are a bunch of other priorities for them right now ;)

By the way what do you guys think about something like.. a firmware update sometime in the future that would add one or more features that are really hard work for them to implement - like higher framerates etc - which would require a considerable amount of engineering in form of firmware development/programming. And thus it would either be "too much work with no pay off so we can't do it" or (just an idea) "we offer you a firmware upgrade with new features xyz for amount of $$$". Would you be willing to pay?

I can only say for myself that I most definately would. I don't expect a hardware device to get a bunch of new features/functionality for free. I want to be payed for work thus of course I pay for other people's work too.
Just like I donated for Magic Lantern (the 5D firmware "addon" from third party developers)

As in the end it's still much less expensive than buying a completely new piece of hardware...

mhood
09-20-2012, 05:37 PM
By the way what do you guys think about something like.. a firmware update sometime in the future that would add one or more features that are really hard work for them to implement - like higher framerates etc - which would require a considerable amount of engineering in form of firmware development/programming. And thus it would either be "too much work with no pay off so we can't do it" or (just an idea) "we offer you a firmware upgrade with new features xyz for amount of $$$". Would you be willing to pay?

Some things (higher framerates, other codecs, etc.) yes but there are some things I don't consider features (i.e., VUs, exposure settings, remaining SSD capacity, etc.) Some things are more like "oversights" or "omissions" than features and should be in the camera at no additional charge.

Soeren Mueller
09-20-2012, 06:43 PM
Some things (higher framerates, other codecs, etc.) yes but there are some things I don't consider features (i.e., VUs, exposure settings, remaining SSD capacity, etc.) Some things are more like "oversights" or "omissions" than features and should be in the camera at no additional charge.

Of course ;) .. I was only talking about "real" features that would be added. Everything else you listed - agreed, that's just "basics" which have to be implemented first. From my understanding they were/are planning to have most of these basics in the firmware included when the camera will be "mass shipped". (remaining SSD capacity, sound levels etc)