Bioskop.Inc

Wow! So it's really that bad? Bummer!
So, if it is really meant to be a drone camera (looking that way isn't it), then I wonder if anyone has done any night drone camera work with it or is that never an option? (gives new meaning to flying blind at night!) I think this is where it all lies & BM didn't need to release a camera better than the Pocket, just a camera that could be used in daylight on a drone (hence the better battery power etc...).
The silverlining in all this? - BM haven't released a firmware update yet & when they do, i'm sure these things can/will be ironed out eventually.
Shit, my production values are really basic to zero - boost practicals with stronger better bulbs, use cheap China Balls, reflectors & the use biggest light source known to man as much as I can, the sun. I'm cheap & I love it
PS. Bet this never would have happened if the cameras were built in China or should that be Hong Kong

So many discussion about this - 4K too sharp sometimes.
Filters on your camera/lens - all sorts out there.
There's a really good topic/s on the RED/Scarlet forum, with lots of info from David Mullen:
http://www.scarletuser.com/showthread.php?t=5941
The next one is long, but sooo useful for a number of things:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?2714-Ask-David-Mullen-ANYTHING

As Jim said, you can edit ProRes but not the DNG files.
However, I use "Raw Photo Processor 64" (its a free download) to convert the DNG files to 16-bit TIFF files. RPP has the best Highlight retrieval of anything that i've used, it has 4 different curve types (Film-like, L*, Gamma & Colorimetric Gamma), Custom or Auto White Balance (which is v.accurate), a load of TruePaper & TrueFilm simulations and so much more. Oh, did I mention that its free!
So no need for Resolve...

As Jim said, you can edit ProRes but not the DNG files.
However, I use "Raw Photo Processor 64" (its a free download) to convert the DNG files to 16-bit TIFF files. RPP has the best Highlight retrieval of anything that i've used, it has 4 different curve types (Film-like, L*, Gamma & Colorimetric Gamma), Custom or Auto White Balance (which is v.accurate), a load of TruePaper & TrueFilm simulations and so much more. Oh, did I mention that its free!
So no need for Resolve...

they're a little heavier than authentic canon batteries and twice the weight of the usual aftermarket cells.  also being white you don;t get them mixed up with your inferior batteries and know which are yours if you;re sharing batteries with colleagues.   

Wow, nice heads up! Really need some new Pocket & Canon batteries - 2yr warranty, free postage & local too (for me anyways).

No I got lucky & bought a mint M42 copy for £100 from a guy in the UK. They have a little, single multi-coating & are almost macro lenses - amazing in either mount.
Buying from Russia is a bit like buying a lottery ticket. However, there are some good ebay sellers that have nearly always been spot on, nothing technically wrong with the lenses (good condition etc.) but their QC can be so off. But Russain lenses are cheap & you just buy another one.

Yup. At least I can recognize the problem. That's the first step. Now I've been thinking...
What would I do if I only had one lens?
So, I looked at all my footage. Used all my lenses that I love. Then looked at videos online. To be cliche, I watched a bunch of Kendy Ty's videos and thought...
No seriously what if I only had one lens?
Now I know I'll never be such a utilitarian to only have one lens. There's no reason to delude myself, but I think I could narrow it down to 10 or less and if I'm going to do that, I may as well go out with a bang and get a lens I've been admiring for a while... Voigtlander 25mm...
 

LMAO! Yeah, you've got it bad...

I have the 35 3.5 but then fell in love with f2 lenses. I patiently waited until I found a good price for the 35mm f2 and then 2 were listed on the same day... One for $90 and the other for $60. So I bought both, hoping one would be a good copy. I immediately fell in love with the lens, so I sold one of them but then the other day a brand new in box was listed for $250 or best offer.  Since mine was a little beat up, I figured I'd throw an offer out there of $150... Sure enough he accepted it. This is the stuff I do and why I have over 50 lenses. 

I've only gone for Super-Takumars, not the SMC ones: 24 f3.5, 35 f3.5 & 55 f1.8 (I had the 1.4, but the 1.8 is just as good & back then it was cheaper). The longer range ones are the pricey ones, or they used to be.
But as i've said, i've curbed my addiction - only 4 anamorphics & 10 lenses left.
Voitglander still sounds nice & the click to clickless aperture - well that might have sold me.

That Voigtlander does look very tasty, damn!
I inherited loads of lenses from my Grandad - kept them in a box for years until I started photography. Unfortunately, I became like you & in the end it becomes an addiction - I had too many & was spoilt for choice. Ended up selling stuff like crazy once I knew what sort of silly money things were going for: 3 Iscoramas (who would have known that they'd be worth stupid money years later!), full set of Contax Zeiss, full set of Nikon ai-s, both Angenieux zooms etc... The list was stupid in the end.
I kinda regret selling some things (Angenieux zooms!) & am now in a pickle about whether to continue with my Super-Takumar set or to go back to Nikon ai-s?
Got a lovely set of Russain glass, which I will not part with for love nor money.
Really loving the Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70mm more than I thought I would - so close to the Angenieux at a snip of the price. 

That Voigtlander does look very tasty, damn!
I inherited loads of lenses from my Grandad - kept them in a box for years until I started photography. Unfortunately, I became like you & in the end it becomes an addiction - I had too many & was spoilt for choice. Ended up selling stuff like crazy once I knew what sort of silly money things were going for: 3 Iscoramas (who would have known that they'd be worth stupid money years later!), full set of Contax Zeiss, full set of Nikon ai-s, both Angenieux zooms etc... The list was stupid in the end.
I kinda regret selling some things (Angenieux zooms!) & am now in a pickle about whether to continue with my Super-Takumar set or to go back to Nikon ai-s?
Got a lovely set of Russain glass, which I will not part with for love nor money.
Really loving the Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70mm more than I thought I would - so close to the Angenieux at a snip of the price. 

That Voigtlander does look very tasty, damn!
I inherited loads of lenses from my Grandad - kept them in a box for years until I started photography. Unfortunately, I became like you & in the end it becomes an addiction - I had too many & was spoilt for choice. Ended up selling stuff like crazy once I knew what sort of silly money things were going for: 3 Iscoramas (who would have known that they'd be worth stupid money years later!), full set of Contax Zeiss, full set of Nikon ai-s, both Angenieux zooms etc... The list was stupid in the end.
I kinda regret selling some things (Angenieux zooms!) & am now in a pickle about whether to continue with my Super-Takumar set or to go back to Nikon ai-s?
Got a lovely set of Russain glass, which I will not part with for love nor money.
Really loving the Tokina AT-X Pro 28-70mm more than I thought I would - so close to the Angenieux at a snip of the price. 

Peaking a complete waste of time when you're using the Bolex as a focus through, especially @ f4  - viewfinder is the way to go. You need to get used to focusing by eye - TBH i've never liked focus peaking, just don't trust it at all, for anything. I use a cheap £10 one from amazon - there are more expensive ones out there, its your choice.
A tip: if you're doing a lot of racking, then its best to use a lens with a long focus throw.

Never shot a timelapse on the BMPCC, let alone in ProRes. Experimented in upscaling some of the footage by 100%, in order to zoom in - its possible but has its limits.
Looks Ok on a phone or tablet, but you'll notice the zoomed in bits on a computer.
Oh, wasn't mean to look too sharp - just in case any sharp freaks watch this!
 

My computer slows down to a snails pace with the plug-in version, but I edit everything first and then either add it clip-by-clip (if its short enough) or more recently I use an adjustment layer - having already done exposure on each clip via FCPXs colour settings.
I started with the trial Stand Alone version & just thought it would be easier to have everything in one place. Not sure what to recommend for you - correct first & then edit? You could always do minor tweeks to exposure/colour etc.. in FCPX if needed. Or just re-do the clip/s if need be & replace. It might not be practical to do it the other way round (edit & then cc).

Just seems like filmmaker anxiety about competing with VR. Not needed in my opinion. I connect with characters and stories, not the tech, especially if it makes me nauseous. Obviously if the projection or camera detracts, then that's a  problem, but what I think needs fixing are the scripts/ideas, not the frame rates.

The problem with 3D is the framing - if you cut/clip the top of someone's head it just kills the whole aesthetic. The Hobbit was horrible in every single way, it just looked shit - in normal 24fps (non-3D) it was acceptable and still then they messed with the story so much that it still didn't appeal. The only film in 3D that I thought was passable was Prometheus - 3D works really well when it enhances the depth of field of a scene. But it is a gimmick that has had 5 different incarnations over the years & i've vowed to never be hoodwinked again.
I might consider Ang Lee's new film, since he seems to have understood that you need to really rethink how you make a film, but still I don't hold too much hope that it will work.

I haven't finished this cut, but here are some screens from a dance film I shot in a few months back which I test-graded. I tend to like the grain and flare. This was pre-firmware update. mostly shot on the cine nikkor 10mm and a small agne zoom. Hopefully I'll have some time to finish the edit soon...
also attached is a screen of my setup. as you can see it's pretty minimal, basically nothing. the d16 with grip and cine nikkor 10mm. I attach a small sony shotgun to the top sometimes, and I have one of those rapid straps attached to the base so I can wear the camera if needed. The strap comes with a plate which has an extra screw mount I sometimes attach a monitor/magic arm to, but generally I shoot just by judging the exposure and focus from the (very bad) lcd screen. 

Man, you can wash your blacks out a little bit - don't listen to these idiots, since taste is absolutely subjective.
And your footage always looks nice...

Man, you can wash your blacks out a little bit - don't listen to these idiots, since taste is absolutely subjective.
And your footage always looks nice...

All the same. 135mm, on 2x crop at 120fps.
No resizing. All captured at 1080p.

I have had lots of 4K cameras and even 4K Raw cameras and the screen to watch it. And I agree. As soon as you put it on youtube you might as well upscale HD. Same goes for Vimo. And as pointed out, TV is 720p at best.
DR and color is much more important to make an audience like it.
And reframing isnt my thing either. Ive done it on for example an interview where the space was to cramed for two cameras. So yes it can be a life saver. But for me its an emergency tool, not SOP.
All IMO of course.

Its a very interesting grade, as she looks very natural, whilst it also highlights the warm colour in all the lights.
Yes it always amazes me when people talk about great DR and then don't ever use it to full effect - they just stick a LUT on it & go wow look at this.
Its like people who think they need a 4K camera & don't realise that hardly anyone has the capability to actually view it - compounded even more by the fact that no HD TV channel is actually broadcasting in Full HD & streaming can be/is an even bigger joke. Once you point this fact out, they come back to you with "well, now i have the ability to re-frame" - which is basically admitting they can't frame properly in the first place. Or, they talk about pretending they can downscale & somehow miraculously convert 8-bit into 10-bit.
Each to his own, i suppose.