Jim Giberti

On 4/20/2018 at 9:50 PM, Savannah Miller said:

  Not good enough for you?

No.

2 hours ago, cantsin said:

2 hours ago, cantsin said:

 highlight roll-off seems to be clearly harsher if the test footage gives any solid indication. 

There is no test footage. There's nothing to base that assumption on.

10 hours ago, Philip Lipetz said:

EDIT:  this information was covered by a prior post in this stream.   No need to read this,

 

The rumored is that Atomos has a period of exclusive use. Hence Apple cannot license ProRes RAW to BM. 

ProRes Raw is defintely not exclusive to Atomos.

9 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

Blackmagic have always used ProRes, so why would Apple stop them now?

Agree this makes no sense. ProRes is a pretty primary feature of all BM cameras and it has the other flavors now.

Plus FCPX is about to release the new update w/ ProRes RAW. I can't imagine they don't want to encourage as many cameras and users as possibe to use it.

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

From what I have read and seen looks like Atomos is the Only one that Apple has let utilize it yet. Is in in FCPX even yet?

 

FCPX is getting a big update end of April that will bring it.

7 hours ago, Luke Mason said:

Olympus 12-40 f/2.8

I think it's interesting that in all of the promo shots and in all of Grant's interviews the Pocket2 always has an Oly 24-40mm on it

I understand their choice from an aesthetic perspective it looks good on the camera...almost like a system.
But I have one pretty much always mounted on one of our Micros.
It's kind of a perfect "all around" lens for the new camera - a relative 25-83mm 2.8, it will allow for push AF and has great two stage manual focusing and it's the sharpest zoom I've shot with.

I've heard from one experienced dealer that he expects to see them before Sept. That date is intentionally conservative.

I never pre-order cameras. I pre-ordered this one.

3 hours ago, jonpais said:

 

You can see a slight shake, so it pays to use a good tripod or to use a light touch when pressing the LCD screen.

Great look you're getting with the GH5.

1 hour ago, Jon Jacobs said:

Sorry folks but is this really what this site has become? A bored retiree blah, blah...

What a shitty thing to think. The need to write it publicly is something you'll have to work out with whatever dark god you worship.

In the meantime, go take an exuberantly youthful selfie with your latte and shut the fuck up.

1 hour ago, cantsin said:

As an avid BM Pocket user (since 2013 when the camera came out), I hope that my theory will be wrong, btw.

Don't worry, you are

12 minutes ago, cantsin said:

one with the old 1080p sensor for people who favor dynamic range and low light over pixel resolution, and one with the 1" 4k sensor of the Micro Studio Camera with the tradeoff of 2 stops less dynamic range and half the native ISO (400 vs. 800). 

This will never happen.

A BM cinema camera by definition is about DR and color science.

The Studio Cameras are rec 709 burned in signals.

This is the next gen Pocket meaning cinema DR and color science in 4k. That's a given.

47 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

So essentially, you're saying PRR is better than DNG solely because it provides a better workflow for FCPX users?

I didn't say this at all. I said most producers shoot in ProRes and so ProRes Raw will be a great codec for any camera - like Arri BM etc.

It will, of course, be great for FCPX editors who don't want (as most don't) to go through the extra step of debayering and inital grading in Resolve as they do now if they want to have the unique gradeability of the RAW file.

53 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

In that case, wouldn't it make more sense just to give FCPX native DNG support?

Those decisions are a bit above my pay grade but I think we can assume that ProRes is a next gen codec that improves on DNG in ways that will appeal to some and perhaps not to others.

It seems all good to me though.

3 minutes ago, MoonCannon said:

Honestly, if it was the ursa mini 4.6k sensor (in terms of color and DR) but 4k and small enough to be a "pocket" I'd be over the moon

It will be something just like that.

5 minutes ago, markr041 said:

But do wish you could answer whether or not Apple software can work with Cinema DNG RAW.

Oh, that I can answer no problem (pretty sure I did earlier.)

No - FCPX cannot work with DNG RAW files. Shooting RAW requires Resolve (for most of us) to debayer and utilize the purpose and power of shooting in RAW.

But do keep in mind that most producers (even shooting ARRI, BM etc.) don't shoot in RAW specifically because of the workflow requirements.

They DO shoot in ProRes specifically because of the ease of the workflow.

Because we now know (little sparrows...not formally because NDAs exist everywhere - sorry if that upsets you) that it will provide the power/post capabilities of true RAW - it is better than Cinema DNG because of everything I just wrote.

Relax a little. Stop shouting hype and zero content.

Life is complex and doesn't always happen the way you want it to. Just wait a few days and you'll know everything you need to.

It won't be the old 4k sensor.

BM isn't doing anything old. It took this long to deliver because it took this long to figure out how to capture the mojo of the Pocket (still pretty revered in most circles) in 4k.

They don't go backwards, so it will have their Gen4 color science and as much DR or more than the original - that's why we've been waiting.

It will be a great compliment to the Ursa Mini Pro.

12 minutes ago, markr041 said:

Sorry, you do not seem to understand the issue.

I'm sorry I don't understand your issues.

But I do understand that ProRes Raw will be pretty breakthrough for a lot of producers.

If you spend a little time on the BM forum right now you can get a better sense...or maybe not, I can't know what is meaningful to you.

But I do know it's very meaningful to a top DP/producer that's demoed it. He knows his shit and while under ND, he considers it a really big deal.

That's all I have for you. And I'm sure it's not enough.

1 hour ago, markr041 said:

So, what's so good about this new Apple product? This is not an anti-Apple question.

What I can tell you should be obvious but I'll tell you anyway.

It delivers (I "know" this 2nd hand but from the best 2nd hand) the capabilities and post controls of RAW that so many of us would love to utilize regularly but are restricted from using because of busy produciton workflows. And it will deliver it to hundreds of thousands of FCPX suites and editors to incorporate those strengths going forward.

It's a pretty big deal to a lot of us for those reasons.

If it is for you, great.

if not...still great.

Here's the thing that makes ProRes so slick for us (and I'm guessing many people.)

Shooting in ProRes HQ delivers a really solid "negative" that plays back in real time even on small MBPs in the field - and it's really fast to edit.

There's someone here that's ranting about Apple and ipods and whatever makes them see Mac as a scary clown face thing, but really they just deliver solid creative tools for a lot of professionals.

And with that, I'm off to lunch.

12 minutes ago, markr041 said:

Fine. I won't quibble with you on what "fool" implies. But - so is ProRes RAW better than the open CinemaDNG Raw or not? Do you know? If it's not better in some way, what's the point?  why the hype? Apple could just as well as made their software work with CinemaDNG for their users who would like to shoot RAW. 

 How could anyone possibly know what it is or isn't - it's just an announcement...and thank you for not quibbling.

I have several stations running FCPX and several cameras shooting raw.

We all hoped they'd implememnt support for BM cameras directly in FCPX but I don't think it falls into the category of conspiracy. Just what a company decides to do or doesn't, and In this case raw is simply not used in the vast average amount of editing seats.

The fact that they're building on their pretty awesome ProRes standard that their systmes are optimized for just sort of makes sense to me. But I'm vested in that universe.

For others who aren't', I'm sorry if they feel left out, or denied or whatever happens at times like this.

To me it's just a codec that I haven't used yet.

18 hours ago, Damphousse said:

Apple's business is marketing expensive consumer electronics... Well two pieces of consumer electronics in their history to be exact.  First the ipod and then the iphone.   Everything else has been a side show.

So anyone being surprised at the neglect for the professional world is delusional.

Wow, my accountant is going to be shocked that we've spent all these years as part of a delusional side show.

Man am I glad I read your post.

20 minutes ago, markr041 said:

So what exactly is better about Apple's so-called RAW compared with CinemaDNG RAW? The cameras named by Atomos that can take advantage of ProRes RAW already can use CinemaRAW - same resolutions and frame rates. Is this just the same thing with a proprietary component so that Apple can fool people into thinking they need to buy Macs? 

It could even be a conspiracy to steal young children but more than likely it's a new codec that bridges raw acquisition and editing in FCPX.

Why is everything always so tribal and conspiratorial? We've got enough of that crap in the political world.  

Apple has a shit load of FCPX seats around the world and most of them don't want to use Resolve in order to process raw footage and most production companies turning out most of the work don't deal with the raw workflow either.

So the logical conclusion is that Apple has developed a new codec for Their users to (potentially) utilize the strengths of raw in their current, preferred workflow.

The word "fool people" suggests people are so stupid that they'd use something they don't need or that Apple is working with Dr Evil to deceive the masses with their nefarious new codec.

I'm pretty sure it's just a new option aimed at serving their users (free update for us) and dear god don't let this be true - perhaps even increase their market share.

It reminded me of a spot I did recently. This is the Micro w/SB, Sig 18-35mm, Hoya ProND. I think your actor may have been calling mine

Yeah, it is a pretty great compliment to it especially if you're down resing the UM to 1080 which is the case with most delivery in my world.

The 60p is a big plus but it's also the new processing that get's that much more our of the sensor - and the sensor tweaking done for the BMMCC.

With skin tones it skews a bit green compared with the Pocket - an easy tweak in post  and there's a great LUT that we use with the Micro that gives it a great starting point.

Amazing little camera that is still way beyond any DSLR/mirrorless from Sony /Panny etc. for solid HD look, DR, color and grading.

2 hours ago, graphicnatured said:

Having used this camera a ton, I have to say I actually prefer it to the Pocket that I also own. I shot with the Micro and the Ursa Mini 4.6k Pro on a shoot last month and they looked fantastic together. The only reason I hold on to the Pocket is it is easier to use with a pistol gimbal if I don't want to use the Ronin. I'm not a review guy so I leave that to those so much more knowledgable than myself. 

Great looking shot. What sets the BM look apart IMO. What was your lens for this?

What I can tell you is there will be no more 2.5 or anything other than 4k in new BM cameras.

They've spoken to it and the issue is specifically heat while trying to get something like a crop of the 4.6 sensor into a Micro type body or even perhaps an enhanced Pocket system.

I'm sure it's coming in one of those iterations eventually, the big question is if they've solved the color science, DR, 4k small form factor and heat thing for this NAB.