Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pieces. A new selection of footage.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • t.p.
    replied
    yaeh i also think this is chromatic aberration made by the lens
    but also in my opnion screencapturing a still from vimeo , and choosing the widest shots and the most distant details in the background , and enlarging it by 300% doesnt qualify for me as testing the camera or even pixel peeping

    this would mean something if it was taken from the original prores file of the camera , but its not

    Leave a comment:


  • vladnik
    replied
    it looks more like lens chromatic aberration ...
    and that wide shoots are probably done with canon 15-85 ...

    Leave a comment:


  • mattbatt
    replied
    Looks wonderful, thank you John! I appreciate your hard work and great skill! I am so happy mine is on the way!

    I hope I do not frustrate or offend too many people - again, I'm going to be using this camera and my money is already on pre-order - but we do have an issue with moire. Not so much aliasing however, which is cool. The interesting thing with the moire is that is did not move or sparkle, so that is really cool!

    I took some simple screenshots of the HD version, full screen in Vimeo, then zoomed to 300% for some in Photoshop, then took a screenshot of that, then compiled them (I did not want to uprez to change anything).

    First look through, I saw it at 100%. The moire is blue and orange on fine detailed horizontal and vertical lines.

    [Edit] John confirm as well, these are on the wider shots which were done with the EF-S Canon lens. The shot at 3:40 in the cafe - was that also on the EF-S? I say that because this almost looks like a mutated form of chromatic aberration (again, especially since the moire does not sparkle or move) and I did not see moire on the CP lens shots. ON my 5dmkII RAW 22 MP shots, on wide angles with the L 16-35, I have seen similar, not orange, but typical blue or green and more solid lines. Again, these are patterns of blue and orange.



    Last edited by mattbatt; 08-07-2012, 09:47 AM. Reason: Added infor about lens

    Leave a comment:


  • rawCAM35
    replied
    Originally posted by Brian@202020 View Post
    I bet if you take a poll the majority are Mac users. .
    Both users should be supported without buying extra software to format the drive, Mac is less than %14 of the computer sales, our company post is all Avid on PCs, a total of 28 AVids and 300 desktop PCs, the point is not the battle between Avid, FCP, PC or Mac, I think both should be supported, and I will end it right here.
    Last edited by rawCAM35; 08-07-2012, 09:53 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • lsorensen
    replied
    My only complaint is that I was getting into this scene and wanted to hear the dialogue. Any chance you may release the finished scene in the future, my curiosity about the what they were chatting about is killing me, lol. Otherwise blown away as usual.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter J. DeCrescenzo
    replied
    Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
    The original test that had ISO320 was actually the setting the eventually became ISO 400.

    The camera is 800 ISO native. These ISO setting only apply to ProRes and DNx.

    When shooting RAW the ISO doesn't apply, EXCEPT, that it affects how you EXPOSE the camera....sort of. I know that sound's obvious but it affects how you monitor the exposure. Your "intent" is then recorded as Metadata and this is what's taken as a starting point in Resolve or Photoshop. But you can also choose to ignore those ISO settings and use something else.

    I've never really subscribed to the ETTR or ETTL theory. I've always exposed video / digital cameras by protecting the highlights. Generally speaking, most cameras have more shadow range in terms of stops than highlights. So by underexposing, I can "trade" some shadow range for highlight range. So this is a bit like ETTL

    So I like to have a way of indicating exposure clipping. In this case, the zebra @ 100% works well. I can then open the exposure until i see clipping indicated. i can then choose to "protect" those highlights by then dropping the exposure till they are just under clipping. Or, depending on the subject and what's important, I may also choose to let those particular highlights go and clip, because another part of the range is MORE important to me.

    So in the 35mm wide shot of Ian and Ella sitting at the table at the cafe, I set the exposure of the clouds. I wanted to try and HOLD that cloud info AND Ian and Ella who were sitting in shadow. BUT when you look at the close up of the same scene, you'll notice the exposure is lifted a fair bit.

    Now in the grade I tried to lift the exposure of the first wide frame so I could see as much of Ian and Ella as I could without making it too mikly. But you can clearly see they are right on the edge of what you can recover from the shadows. But this is a VERY difficult shot. I didn't meter the difference but it's CLOUDS lit by SUN and holding information in the SHADOWS and trying to make them look almost normal. A huge ask of any camera. You can see how much better the image is in the close up once the exposure is more health.

    Now, I don't know how you would apply an ETTR or ETTL theory to metering or judging exposure for these scenes...

    Now middle tray at 37 IRE on Alexa ? Where do you get that from ?


    jb
    Thank you so much for this post, John! What you describe here is similar to my understanding of how this sort of thing works. It's a great comfort to see my level of "knowledge", such as it is, validated.

    In your case, "I'm sure you've forgotten more than I'll ever know". Thanks for your work here & elsewhere. Cheers!

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian@202020
    replied
    Originally posted by rawCAM35 View Post
    ...I still can't understand the logic behind the SSD formatting, why not offering NTFS option, the majority are using PCs ??
    I bet if you take a poll the majority are Mac users. But besides that, HFS can easily be written and read on a PC via MacDrive for $50-$70 depending on the version. As far as I know the only decent reliable way to write NTSF on a mac is NTSF-3G which can be a pain to implement for the average user. Also the BMCC is partially based on the Hyperdeck Shuttle 2, which I believe was made before NTSF-3G. I think they figured HFS would cover all people even the average computer users and not have to completely rewrite code since some of the code came from the Hyperdeck Shuttle 2.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abobakr
    replied
    Originally posted by rawCAM35 View Post
    Thanks John for taking the time to do this, it is a great help for all of us while waiting for the camera's arrival, did you light the inside left corner ( beside the practical lamp ) in the cafe scene at 03:44 looking out the window.
    Great footage, can't wait to see some raw.
    One more thing, I still can't understand the logic behind the SSD formatting, why not offering NTFS option, the majority are using PCs ??
    all available light << http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/201.../#comment-1945
    Nick says:
    August 7, 2012 at 10:47 am
    Now we’re talking! Thanks so much John. The footage looks great. For a $3K camera, the dynamic range and sharpness are jaw dropping. I’m assuming this was all natural light with maybe some bounce?

    johnbrawley says:
    August 7, 2012 at 2:18 pm
    No bounce. All available light. And creative staging.

    Leave a comment:


  • rawCAM35
    replied
    Thanks John for taking the time to do this, it is a great help for all of us while waiting for the camera's arrival, did you light the inside left corner ( beside the practical lamp ) in the cafe scene at 03:44 looking out the window.
    Great footage, can't wait to see some raw.
    One more thing, I still can't understand the logic behind the SSD formatting, why not offering NTFS option, the majority are using PCs ??

    Leave a comment:


  • Cornelius
    replied
    Originally posted by Jeff Wood View Post
    By handheld, do you mean literally in your hand or did you use something for stability. You couldn't hold a 5dIII like that without microshakes.
    I'd be very impressed if that was handheld. You're totally right and the smaller, cheaper DSLR cameras like the T2i are even worse. I know the BMC is heavier than a 5d so that would reduce the shakey somewhat.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fabián Matas
    replied
    Love the stuff, I don't see any rolling shutter issue however I'm not really good seeing It.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jeff Wood
    replied
    By handheld, do you mean literally in your hand or did you use something for stability. You couldn't hold a 5dIII like that without microshakes.

    Leave a comment:


  • vladnik
    replied
    maybe because it is shot in uncompressed DNG ....

    Leave a comment:


  • adam777
    replied
    Does the Leah footage look sharper than this footage due to controlled lighting and the opportunity to get tack sharp focus as Leah wasn't moving?

    ... and I really like both the videos.

    http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?66-Leah-footage

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewDeme
    replied
    Reckon the yellow halo hoop at 2:28 is kinda funky as well.......Ella is of course an angel no doubt.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X