PPNS

getting things right in camera is one of those things im not sure how to interpret. Ive posted this still before on here, to put it in context, it was shot around blue hour, but it wasnt quite as blue as it was here. I maxed out the white balance, to get it this blue. is that getting it right in camera or am i being a hack?

goddamn it looks bad in 24fps, but it looks truly dogshit in 60

I would still like to see the 2 forum members who were fairly dismissive towards my suggestion their video work or ideally their reels. I’ve seen some stills of Tom’s work and here and he is more than able to produce great images, so I think his opinion is definitely worth reading. to clarify my suggestion, which imo, I shouldn’t have to do to this extent, my reasoning is simple: - op was considering an fx9 originally, and i think ironfilm recommended an fx6 at some point. - We know that the p4k uses a sensor from the same family of sony dual iso options, and that they perform about the same in non raw codecs (and you can easily find that on cined too). - braw has a highlight recovery option, which can yield you an extra stop of highlight data, which means its actually better performing than both those (and i can actually speak from experience. Way easier to blow a highlight on an fx6 than a pocket cam). The DR argument is now invalid - in regards to rolling shutter: from what i’ve read, the p4k performs about the same as the c70 from what ive read. The fx6 performs better, and the rolling shutter on the fx9, which is what op originally considered, performs way worse. so what’s the point of bringing this argument up? - what is the point of a bigger sensor if you want more reach and don’t care about super shallow dof on wide angle lenses? Its easier to get those results on mft. - why are you already thinking about upgrading to different lens mounts? This person might quit within the year? What end result is a potential upgrade going to bring? i dont have any experience with canon cameras. Im sure the c70 is great, but it seems like a waste of money unless you’re a docu DP who already has a bunch of bigger canon cameras and you needed a slightly smaller one as a bcam.

^ in that case i can still safely recommend a pocket 4k

im not yelling? i could make the argument that this consumerist driven attitude is more toxic? i think the 50/100k arri/venice setups are actually necessary for the context theyre made for, and i think there’s a decent argument to be made in regards to getting those and making a profit from renting those out. Almost every camera now performs almost exactly the same. this means that theres no little to no difference in image quality between the lower budget options (pockets, fx30s) and the mid tier (canon c-whatever, fx9, red). you’re not going to see that price difference in the end result. if you’re going to be shooting basic stuff in nature where you dont need a bunch of bells and whistles, you might as well get the lower cost options that let you record in a good or decent codec, which also happen to be light. your back will be much happier afterwards. you can save some money with which you could buy a decent set of lenses, nds and a great tripod.

you are also doing that (and judging quite poorly imo). i can only find your stills which is why i’m asking for your reel of moving images. i think spending more than 4000 on a camera is a bad decision for people who make money using cameras, so i think that decision is even worse for those who dont do it professionally. Theres literally millions of things in life on which money could be better spent.

lets see your reel @gt3rs

If this helps, you technically wouldn’t be using the full potential of the pocket 4k either, you would just be wasting less money.

i think anything more than a pocket 4k will be overkill for you

i’m dit-ing a european co-produced feature rn. Theyre shooting on an A35. Almost every feature and tv show here is being on this thing now from what ive heard. The last commercial i was pa-ing on was miniLF.

just an interesting sidenote: basically every belgian dp agrees that the standard arri r709 conversion is way too tame. thats why they always shoot with a custom lut (usually per project)

damn completely misremembered that i guess.

I dont disagree with you either here kye, i think we’re both somewhat in a camp of having the most image quality for the money. i’m not entirely sure if i technically paid off my p4k, lenses, etc with freelance work for example. at the same time, 10-15 years ago something like an fx3 seemed pretty crazy to imagine probably. I think the first bmcc came just out for slightly more money (without adjusting for inflation even)?

i guess prosumer is more correct, but its kind of an arbitrary distinction imo. its a technically ‘good video camera’ that you could buy in most camera stores for not that much money. Ive never had a pleasant time using it, but some people made a movie with it, so my opinion is irrelevant.

its a marketing stunt obv, and nothing will change because of this movie, but it’s still a cool accomplishment to shoot an ambitious feature length film with a consumer camera. I wish i was shooting features.

seems pretty large, but cool that mft is still going. might get a 8 year old olympus or panny for photos at some point

https://vimeo.com/860191315/ Shared the stills of this a while ago

this project ended up not being graded and ended up discarding some of my favorite parts. Here are some of my favorite screengrabs from that though.

If the rumor site cant even get the sensor brand right lol… i dont get why people yearn this much for new gear. If it happens, it happens.

thanks guys!

here it is, a rejected music video for a demo of my band's song: pw: buster luckily that's not what i said. i said that it's not that much work to match two cameras shooting at least 10 bit log 422 files in a rec709 color space if you know the right technical transforms and have some grading proficiency, in case you're shooting the same scene. i said that it's also not hard to make a display lut for a monitor to give you an image that is more similar to the og bmpcc on the 4k and 6k if you figured that previous step out. depends on the production. of course an arri would be nice, but i'm not going to turn down a shoot if that's the last minute change in a camera package. they say that, and i'm sure they've had a huge hand in designing it, but i find it hard to believe, especially since the sensor dimensions match the komodo's exactly, and it's not exactly easy to become a sensor manufacturer. exactly. the bmmcc was made as a crash, drone, or awkward angle cam, with an ok sensor, and 2 good for the time codecs that made it possible to get a close match to better cameras of the time. but if you really think the image you get out of that is per definition better than any of the newer bmd cams combined with a good colorist? that I think, is a bit naive too.

i dont really want to turn this into an annoying self repeating argument, and frankly i dont have a lot of experience with most of the cameras mentioned here. bmd sensor wise, i do know that you missed the ursa mini 4.6k, the ump and ump g2, which are made by the same sensor company as the og bmpcc and bmmcc. The 12k might be canon, and a belgian company did the dogshit sensor for their global shutter cameras. i do have some experience with both the original pocket as well as the 4k (and the 6k for that matter), and from what i can tell is that the original just has the kodak 2383 characteristics embedded in its luts/color space transfers in resolve. You can very clearly tell that, while the 4k and 6k dont, they have a way more neutral r709-ish starting point. That doesnt mean that they cant look like that, you just need to apply the cst to cineon (or gen 1) + kodak lut in resolve, and add some extra grain, to basically get the same result. You can even export that look as a lut, and embed it in the 4k and 6k to have it displayed while its shooting. The data is all there, you just have to know how to finesse it to get it to look right to your eyes. what this means to me, is that those older cameras are just less flexible if you ever do want to get a more neutral look out of them, or go for something different. They might have some digital noise that may remind you of film grain, but it is pretty clear that they just perform worse imo. When the ursa minis were updated to gen 4, they also had a more normal r709-ish looking profile that matches the look of the 4k and 6k more closely. Give me a while and i’ll post something that was shot on a sony sensor, and was graded by me to look a bit more like how i wanted it to. Let me know what the concrete “sony sensor characteristics” will be please.

some moving images for once.