Ed_David

The new lightweight portable URSA Mini has a much smaller screen and looks a bit like a DVX100.
New Blackmagic sensor is 4.6K, 15 stops.
New Blackmagic Cinema Camera is also to be announced at NAB.
Resolve 12 will be released shortly afterwards.

I think this is really pretty - you cpatured a really gentle mood. I love mist in the morning.
Keep it up - glad you had the courage to share!

I've always liked Kinefinity because the images from the camera have that much needed soul and tangibility. The BMCC has some of it, the Alexa has a lot of it, the D16 has a ton of it. Th emotional touch is worth so much!
I'll be keeping an eye on this thing and future products. 
With the news that the Blackmagic Water Tank Microwave 10" iPad URSA Bomb Disposal Camera has 150fps coming up, I hope this also means that the original BMCC will be replaced and that competition for products with soul gets very fierce!!

It's Kinefinity raw so their own format in-camera and with a simultaneous (and actually rather lovely looking) CineForm proxy.
Then you have a very speedy converter app to create the Cinema DNG on your PC or Mac.
Then it is into Resolve to grade or edit. What I did was grade in there then ProRes for Premiere.
But if you need a faster turnaround you can just edit straight off the card with the CineForm Proxy, then do one big render at the end off the raw.

Shot on the Sony F55 W Zeiss Ultraprime Lenses and Angeniux 25-250 lens
Filmworks was the local production company - shot in Dubai.
An amazing experience.
Why the F55? Because it's light - it can handle insane heat - it has a global shutter and native ISO is 1250 - good for overcranking at night! And I had it on a steadicam for a lot of the shoot - and did I mention it was 120 degree days and it weighs about 6 lbs?
Amazing production and team - this was a blast!

Shot on the Sony F55 W Zeiss Ultraprime Lenses and Angeniux 25-250 lens
Filmworks was the local production company - shot in Dubai.
An amazing experience.
Why the F55? Because it's light - it can handle insane heat - it has a global shutter and native ISO is 1250 - good for overcranking at night! And I had it on a steadicam for a lot of the shoot - and did I mention it was 120 degree days and it weighs about 6 lbs?
Amazing production and team - this was a blast!

​Yea those videos weren't really that impressive to me.  Andrew's flim and his articles convinced me.  Josephe Gordon Levitt is an amazing person and filmmaker - Don John is a great film - but yea, his little hit record short didn't really move me.

​I am not fine - I am out of my mind looney.  I want firmware updates every day, damn it.  Come on samsung, come on please.
You know what else isn't logical- life.  It's completely irrational and illogical.  Just like my other favorite thing - love.  I cannot say unsilly things to people - I am sorry Spock, I am.
Next time I will try harder with my forum reply.

​throw the nx1 into the trash and get another camera!  that's what I would do if I was upset like you.

Getting involved in a film vs. digital argument is a waste of time. They're both good for specific needs.
A year ago I built a wet darkroom. It's freaking magic in there. Photoshop and AE are pretty magical as well. Film is far from dead - Ilford stuck with it with their fingers crossed - they've been seeing sales growth and predict a healthy (though smaller than the past) market.
A good friend on mine said "it's like Vinyl vs. MP3 - and Vinyls' suddenly cool again..."

Arri was in the same mess - they made film cameras and lenses.  And now look at them - they adapted and I think are thriving.  Kodak had the first digital camera patent - if they knew what they were doing, they would have be at the forefront of the digital photography movement.  It was their game to lose and they lost big.
So did Sony and Panasonic and Microsoft.
Microsoft was number one for so long, Apple was about to go out of business.  
Then the iphone revolution happened.
And now look at Apple.
It's sad to watch film die, but it was inevitable.  Whatever is cheapest and most convenient always wins. And shooting film for stills - you just don't get that much of an advantage for the cost - film is clearly better, but how much is it worth it?

There are dimensions other than resolution to be explored. The C300 will be viable for delivery to 95% of clients for a very very long time, but when it becomes dated, it won't be because of its lack of resolution. The 1080p out of that thing looks sharper than the Alexa's 2.8k, which is already sharper than 35mm film, which is already sharp enough. Of course the ability to reframe that 4k provides is pretty nice.
2k is already sharper than the human eye can see on any tv screen less than 80" (at normal viewing distances) and any seat not in the first third of a theater. There's a reason the leap from SD to HD was huge but not from HD to 4k except when you look closely at the screen as you do with an iPhone or laptop. We've already gone about as far as we can go toward matching the human eye's spatial resolution.  Retina screens caught on because of how close you hold them but for theatrical exhibition and televisions, 2k is good enough. Completely. Not for IMAX or whatever, though, or for massive home projectors or 80''+ tvs. There's a market for which 4k matters, it's just not big. Ironically, if it catches on anywhere it will be on computers phones. Small screens held close. Not big.
Spatially, the eye can see about 60fps before it all blurs together and everything looks equally smooth. 24fps has caught on aesthetically, but slow motion is quite popular and HFR may catch on after Avatar 2. This is a dimension that might be explored further and that the C300, for instance, can't really push far into. 
We can see gobs more DR than any camera or tv currently produces or captures. This is somewhere more worthy of exploration than the jump from HD to 4k.
FF/Vistavision isn't just great for using cheap vintage still lenses and cheap still lenses in general. It also provides a large enough sensor to shoot proper anamorphic, something currently only the higher-specced Alexas and A7S can do properly.
rec709 is a very tiny gamut. This is another dimension that is worthy of being expanded upon. rec2020 is coming.
Low light will just improve more and more. Skew decrease more and more.
There are much more exciting things than the jump from 1080p to 4k on the horizon. And closer than most realize...
Again, I'm just saying if your finger is hovering over that F5 or FS7 buy button and you don't need it for a project in the next month...
 
...hold off a little longer. It's worth it.

​I am the king of off topic!
 
Just f35, v mount adapter in the back, d tap to 4 pix xlr to hook up to interface box and the odyssey 7q - and you are good to go
2 hd-sdi cables into the odyssey 7q and boom you are done.
so it's about 10 lbs - you have an amazing monitor and recorder and just a top handle on it
if you are serious email me at ed.david@gmail.com I can help you find the camera on ebay and boom go for it.

​I have heard that one so many times.
It was the Red Epic.
then the red dragon.
then the blackmagic cinema camera.
once a camera is announced, then it takes about 12 months for the firmware to get the camera up to to speed - so it's about a 2 year process.
so why not just own an older camera that has all its problems figured out.  and then get that brand new camera one year later, used, for cheaper, with its problems figured out.  Not just be a beta tester for something that isn't perfect.
 

​I have heard that one so many times.
It was the Red Epic.
then the red dragon.
then the blackmagic cinema camera.
once a camera is announced, then it takes about 12 months for the firmware to get the camera up to to speed - so it's about a 2 year process.
so why not just own an older camera that has all its problems figured out.  and then get that brand new camera one year later, used, for cheaper, with its problems figured out.  Not just be a beta tester for something that isn't perfect.
 

RED Weapon, Alexa, F65 etc are not at the top of the food chain. It's the person behind the camera and whatever is in front of it.  At the least, that's how I like to think of it.

Part of ​ARRI's secret sauce is their camera ergonomics and menu system: very easy to use and widely praised. Compare the Red menu system: great for technophiles, but with so much complexity, it's not easy to use. I've seen very experienced Red operators hunt around for menu settings. These seconds and minutes add up during production while everyone waits- time is money and it also gets on the cast & crews nerves waiting for something that really shouldn't require waiting. Capturing a scene without highlight or shadow clipping with maximum flexibility in post is the most efficient workflow: ARRI is currently the best. ARRI's ProRes files easily compete with Red's raw files and are much faster & easier to work with in post. ARRI now provides 50Mbps 422 MPEG2 for broadcast work! Smaller files are faster to work with and cheaper in the long run. Sony's XAVC (H.264 422 10-bit) available from the FS7 and up is very efficient and useful. H.264 with 444 12-bit would be another useful option. H.265 provides twice the efficiency of H.264 and can also support 444 and 10+ bits. Even without using a GPU, current H.265 decoders easily run much faster than real-time on current computers. The trend is clear, even at the high end, compressed codecs are replacing raw (which is Red's case is lightly wavelet compressed Bayer data).
In terms of image quality vs. resolution, for Skyfall's 4K they could have shot Red 5K and scaled down, instead they shot on Alexa and scaled up from ~3K. ARRI has years of experience with film cameras and digital film scanners: their cameras produce the most film-like images possible. That said, the F65 is less film like and more... something else- addictive color for the eyes, perhaps different in the way Technicolor 3 strip was compared to Kodak film:

The F65 is of course different from Technicolor 3 strip; the point is the color rendering makes you stare at the beauty of it. ARRI, Canon, Red, Sony, Panasonic (even the NX1!) can produce this kind of color, however Oblivion & Lucy (even After Earth's F65 shots) look different than other cameras (perhaps not better if wanting a film look, but the color is amazingly addictive).

Hey guess what - let me make
1.  a test video
2. make it in slo motion!!!
http://vimeo.com/123435623
 
 
thanks to convergent design - now you can go 60 FPS into their odyssey 7q - and plus - this makes it such a small camera to do this - no giant recorder anymore
this is amazing news....for the 6 people who own the f35!!!  so it can do 12 bit dpx files RGB and 60 FPS in 1080p - do you need much more than that out of a camera - with CCD, global shutter, and all this for under 8k!!!
 
well the lighting is crap - but hey, it's the sony f35 via dual link into the odyssey 7q in 60 FPS!! HOW ABOUT THAT??? 50mm sony lens.
look at that noise - that's the f35 - not adding film grain - noisy - 
so everyone please expose your footage correctly!

Arri was in the same mess - they made film cameras and lenses.  And now look at them - they adapted and I think are thriving.  Kodak had the first digital camera patent - if they knew what they were doing, they would have be at the forefront of the digital photography movement.  It was their game to lose and they lost big.
So did Sony and Panasonic and Microsoft.
Microsoft was number one for so long, Apple was about to go out of business.  
Then the iphone revolution happened.
And now look at Apple.
It's sad to watch film die, but it was inevitable.  Whatever is cheapest and most convenient always wins. And shooting film for stills - you just don't get that much of an advantage for the cost - film is clearly better, but how much is it worth it?

Arri was in the same mess - they made film cameras and lenses.  And now look at them - they adapted and I think are thriving.  Kodak had the first digital camera patent - if they knew what they were doing, they would have be at the forefront of the digital photography movement.  It was their game to lose and they lost big.
So did Sony and Panasonic and Microsoft.
Microsoft was number one for so long, Apple was about to go out of business.  
Then the iphone revolution happened.
And now look at Apple.
It's sad to watch film die, but it was inevitable.  Whatever is cheapest and most convenient always wins. And shooting film for stills - you just don't get that much of an advantage for the cost - film is clearly better, but how much is it worth it?

Is they some way to do a search and set it to show you the newest videos for that search as it opens..
Bugs me that when i do a search it shows all old videos and i have then click on by date to see the new stuff ..can i change that in my account someplace to show the new stuff all the time??
As for it VS youtube the Vimeo quality is so much better i can upload the same video to both and Vimeo is by far much better quality. I hate even watching youtube videos as the quality is so bad on most things. For me most youtube videos are out of focus and yuck looking for around 15 to 30 seconds till it all of a sudden pops in to the better quality it dose this on 3 PC we have here and did it in two other locations we were at on vacation..
 
video social-media site    lets do it.

I've been on Vimeo from close to the beginning.  I pay the $60 a year.  My gut feeling is they're not making enough money to keep up with current technology.  I first noticed something wasn't right when Search often timed out, or didn't work altogether.  Next, Vimeo stopped working on my Roku 2.  I ended up getting a Roku 3, which it works for, but that's not real solution for the market.  Someone with deep pockets will have to buy them.  What I'm saying is I believe they'd love to do everything Ed David said, they just don't have the money.  Also, their "pro" level of pricing makes little sense to me.  I don't care how much they love video, they have to deliver a service people want to buy... like Canon

Also because my stuff never got seen on vimeo and got 50,000 views on youtube. Haha

I stopped using vimeo years ago.. The playback and quality is just to poor for my standards.. 

AND update their codec!
I export in Premiere with 1080p VIMEO setting, and still when looking at it on vimeo it looks nothing like it. It's completely crushed with tons of artifacts, harsh gradation and blocks.