Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

upscale the BMCC (2.5k) and BMMCC (1920). Best Method?

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

  • upscale the BMCC (2.5k) and BMMCC (1920). Best Method?

    Hello Everyone,

    I have shot a bunch of footage RAW and prores with the URSA mini pro (4.6k), the old BMCC (2.5k) and the BMMCC (1920). I want to bring them all into a 4k (16:9) timeline and export 4k (16:9). My question is what is the best way to upscale the BMCC (2.5k) and BMMCC (1920)? Is it okay to just allow resolve to conform the footage through timeline settings or is there a way that produces better results? I would really love to hear if anyone has a method they feel works best?

    Thanks in advance,

    GSK

  • #2
    i would test "superscale" in the media pool for the HD sources, that's a pretty good up rez scaleing, presents to the system as a UHD source
    and again worth a test with the 2.5, it would now be seen as a 5k source, and you would then have to scale back down to UHD, but may give a better resualt than scaleing in the edit page
    another option is BCC's "MagicSharp" scaeling engine
    the issues are most likely to be aliasing on fine detail, and there the adjsutable filtering in BCC is handy, no such option in Resolve's native scaeling., only a lightswitch softer/sharper and nothing inbetween

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks dermont shane,

      I will test the superscale function in the media pool and actually did not know it existed. I am curious to see if it is different algorithmically than either timeline scale settings or edit page image zooming. When I test it I will post results here for all to see. I have not had good results in the past with BCC's "MagicSharp" or other Red Giant plugins but will also look towards that as well.
      best,
      GSK

      Comment


      • #4
        After watching Steve Yedlin resolution Demo Part 2 I would downscale to a 1080p timeline.

        http://www.yedlin.net/ResDemo/index.html

        But if you have to upscale.... just upscale. There might be some slight differences but
        it can also look like digital sharpening. So IMHO upscaling by default is just fine.

        Comment


        • #5
          S_Berger - Thanks for the link to the Steve Yedlin Demo. It was really great and I like his style. I remember years ago a video from him describing how to get the best sound out of a zoom recorder. His points on perceptual sharpness and clarity are right on. The reason I have been wanting to upscale is 3/4 of the footage I shot for the film was 4.6k and I will be screening the film on a true 4k cinema projector. I would like to take advantage of the extra pixels in this case and can say from tests with the projector that in my opinion the perceptual sharpness and clarity of the 4.6k shots on this projector look much better than the BMCC (2.5k) and the BMMCC (1920).

          I tested the "superscale" function vs setting the timeline to upscale the images and honestly cant see much of a difference. Actually both look very good to my eyes. If I find a better method I will post it here. Again thanks for the input.

          Comment


          • #6
            If you watched "Steve Yedlin resolution Demo Part 2" from start to beginning you will understand that you donīt have to upscale to 4k. A 4k, 5k, 6k, 8k, or 12k image downscaled to 2k will exactly look the same. because of the distance to the monitor, laptop, or cinema screen. You wrote: "I would like to take advantage of the extra pixels". There IS 0 advantages. Unless you are doing 3D or Virtual Reality or something. But for cinema screen a 2K projection will look the same as a 4k projection. Because once the pixels are small enough there is no need for 4k or 6k or whatever.

            I am talking about delivery. I suggest to master it as 2k.

            About clarity and cameras. Yes. Recording 4k or 4.6k is much much better than 2k. Because of photsites in sensor. You are not really recording 1080p with a Pocket. More like 720p if you are going in depth. That is why cameras with 2.8k exist. or 4.6K.

            You should do your own tests. I asumme you have a 4K Monitor.
            So take the 4k image. or 4.6 image and scale it down to 2k. Render it out as DNxHD. 1080p.
            After that bring the 1080p (2k) footage back into your 4k timeline and scale it up.
            Just with inspector. No fancy upscale routine. So place the original 4.6k in the timeline
            and also the 1080p upscaled version in the timeline. And do a split screen, or turn
            the video layer on and of. And watch it at 4k. The thing is: You will see absolutly NO different.
            Even if you are going very very close to the monitor.

            This is exactly what Steve Yedlin did.
            I suggest to watch the video again... and do some tests. And rethink if you really want to master in 4k.
            Another thing is. In 2k you can put in a higher bitrate. So 2k might look better than the 4k image.

            Comment

            Working...
            X