Thread: Farewell BMPCC

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24
  1. #11  
    Senior Member shijan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Odesa, UA
    Posts
    772
    Yep, sad news. I hold Pocket Camera in my hands only few days, but decide move to Micro Camera. I still keep those first RAW samples downloaded from EOSHD article. I mostly learn on the footage captured from Pocket a lot before i get my own camera.
    If Pocket 4K sensor don't allows similar dynamic range and Expose flexibility, probably i'll skip any camera with similar Sony sensor.

    BMPCC RAW, ISO800




    BMPCC RAW, ISO800, EXP 3, Gain 0.85, Contrast 1.1, LogC timeline.

    Last edited by shijan; 04-16-2018 at 08:21 PM.
    All my custom made accessories for BMMCC/BMMSC now available here https://lavky.com/radioproektor/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    256
    I sold my fairly unused B cam pocket 2 days before the announcement. In hindsight should have sold my A cam Pocket for a little less now that I think of it haha. Will be keeping my worn out A cam for when I need to go spy mode
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    62
    Big Hollywood Production can shoot on Super 35. But sometimes Super 16 is fine.
    For Example "Carol", "The Wrestler", “mother!”, "Black Swan", "The Hurt Locker", "The Squid and the Whale", "Steve Jobs" (part of it), etc...
    I donīt want to compare analog to digital. But I will keep my BMMCC.
    raw 3:1, 60fps, 13 Stops Dynamik Range, 1080p (close to 2K). The form factor is great. (just a box) It is super leightweight and with a cage pretty solid. I love the image that cames out of it. I definitly keep it and will use it.

    Soderberg and other directors are using fucking phones.
    They should tell young directors to get a BMMCC and shoot with that
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    482
    Quote Originally Posted by S_Berger View Post
    Big Hollywood Production can shoot on Super 35. But sometimes Super 16 is fine.
    For Example "Carol", "The Wrestler", “mother!”, "Black Swan", "The Hurt Locker", "The Squid and the Whale", "Steve Jobs" (part of it), etc...
    I donīt want to compare analog to digital. But I will keep my BMMCC.
    raw 3:1, 60fps, 13 Stops Dynamik Range, 1080p (close to 2K). The form factor is great. (just a box) It is super leightweight and with a cage pretty solid. I love the image that cames out of it. I definitly keep it and will use it.

    Soderberg and other directors are using fucking phones.
    They should tell young directors to get a BMMCC and shoot with that
    Absolutely, I'm in no position atm to handle 4k raw files so I'll keep on with 3:1 1080 raw! I'm never a fan of selling one tool to purchase another.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    231
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex.Mitchell View Post
    if you toss an OLPF in there and keep shooting RAW it’s still a totally usable camera.
    I find the current Pocket produces an excellent image even without an OLPF. In a couple dozen projects, only one shot had very minimal moire.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member DPStewart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    The Puget Sound
    Posts
    3,352
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Simon View Post
    I find the current Pocket produces an excellent image even without an OLPF. In a couple dozen projects, only one shot had very minimal moire.
    Indeed.
    And it can usually be minimized in post, and especially in narratives it will usually even be missed by the viewer.
    There are tons of YouTube video compilations from major films of shots that have a glaring flaw in them but that passed right by the viewers. Point being really nobody even noticed them.
    Cameras: Blackmagic Cinema Camera, Blackmagic Pocket Camera (x2), Panasonic GH2 (x2), Sony RX100 ii, Canon 6D, Canon T2i,
    Mics: Sennheiser, AKG, Shure, Sanken, Audio-Technica, Audix
    Lights: Every Chinese clone you can imagine
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    593
    I have had good luck re moire as well, but have only shot ProRes, I guess it is worse in raw? There was a scene in a screen porch that had to hold action outside. The moire was just singing on the camera screen, but fine in the recorded image. Love the little camera and will never give it up as long as it works. As stated by others it will be fine on 4K productions for inserts and close ups, I will be sticking with HD unless dictated by the job, and there better be a proper budget. Even whenthe new one comes I'll probably shoot mostly down sampled HD, taking advantage of the larger sensor and lowlight capabilities.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by dop16mm View Post
    I have had good luck re moire as well, but have only shot ProRes, I guess it is worse in raw?
    Strangely, yes. It seems as though there are different debayer algorithms in camera and in Resolve, and the one in camera avoids maze artefacts that are visible in exports from Resolve. It’s a really bizarre scenario...

    [Edit] Just as a reminder of what I would run in to with the BMPCC on a regular basis... Left is stock, right is OLPF.

    Last edited by Alex.Mitchell; 04-18-2018 at 07:12 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Atlanta Georgia
    Posts
    2,851
    Alex, I think it’s because ProRes has to get “pre filtered” into larger blocks before being compressed and I think this averaging of each macro block means it doesn’t show up as readily.

    I was also talking to an industry insider a couple of days ago about OLPFs. This is someone that works with a company you all know and he measures OLPFs regularly using an interferometer. He told me there are lots of issues with many OLPFs, especially when it comes to making them flat.

    I’m reluctant to say more because it will hurt some feelings but he very much left me with the impression that OLPFs are even harder to make well than I previously thought and when they’re not well made they also create other big problems. Flatness was just one of the issues.

    I know you admanently advocate for them and I know why you do but for every great reason to have them there are also downsides that are in evidence when you know what to look for.

    IF you’re going to have an OLPF it better be really really well made or there’s no point AND a lot of them, both after market and factory, aren’t very consistently made (according to this source who looks at them for a living)

    JB
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by John Brawley View Post
    Alex, I think it’s because ProRes has to get “pre filtered” into larger blocks before being compressed and I think this averaging of each macro block means it doesn’t show up as readily.
    Could be. I wonder what explains the different ProRes output from Resolve and camera given that they’re both working with nearly identical images and are being rendered out to identical codecs. Either way, I’m still a pretty adamant CinemaDNG advocate.

    Quote Originally Posted by John Brawley View Post
    I know you admanently advocate for them and I know why you do but for every great reason to have them there are also downsides that are in evidence when you know what to look for.
    You know, I apologize if I’ve been a real pain in the ass. I don’t mean to vex the good people of BMD or this forum by sounding like a broken record. I’ve just beset by aliasing and moire since the the 5D Mk.2 and cannot WAIT for it to be a thing of the past.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •