Jump to content

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K


Recommended Posts

I tested ProRes vs CDNG when I first got my P4k  last year and I could see no DR advantage to RAW. Infact unless you used NR in resolve the usable DR on RAW was less. Other differences between RAW and Pro Res exist and have been debated at length but both codecs get the the full DR from the sensor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My dear erstwhile member can you please stop attacking John Brawley now. I have long since given up on camera forum arguments so might not be completely up on who is right and who is wrong-evil /

I like the pictures. A lot.  This camera will probably replace the micro cinema camera for me as it’s not much bigger and is much easier to work with.  I didn’t feel as strongly about the 4K

What a shame. Who are these "deep state" BMD insiders that are here pushing an agenda ? Myself and Hook.  Who else ?  What do you guys think, there's a plot and conspiracy ?  You guys don't wat t

Posted Images

10 hours ago, MeanRevert said:

Yeah, I've shot in bright sunlight so need a lot of ND.  It's there so IR Cut or that SLR Magic IE filter.

If I use an ND filter (which I am planning to do anyway) is there less IR, or it is completely irrelevant?

If I have to use ND, do I have to put ond of those aforementioned filters before or after the ND?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

If I use an ND filter (which I am planning to do anyway) is there less IR, or it is completely irrelevant?

If I have to use ND, do I have to put ond of those aforementioned filters before or after the ND?

1. I'm afraid there is more IR with ND filter.

2. I think it is irrelevant where to put IR filter.

(If you in aesthetic choice chase for little bit of vintage look, IR pollution actually might be useful.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Kisaha said:

If I use an ND filter (which I am planning to do anyway) is there less IR, or it is completely irrelevant?

If I have to use ND, do I have to put ond of those aforementioned filters before or after the ND?

IR is always there but when you put on an ND, it cuts light except it doesn't cut IR. So when you do that, IR is more easily seen by the sensor. 

I use the SLR image enhancer and put it in front of the ND. 

There's a post somewhere with John Brawley saying that the Pocket 4K has an IR Cut but it's slight as to not affect image quality. So BM is leaving it up to us to decide. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Shirozina said:

I tested ProRes vs CDNG when I first got my P4k  last year and I could see no DR advantage to RAW. Infact unless you used NR in resolve the usable DR on RAW was less. Other differences between RAW and Pro Res exist and have been debated at length but both codecs get the the full DR from the sensor.

I think the 12bit color depth gives the perception of more DR. Take a shot of a tree in CDNG and ProRes HQ and the texture of the tree bark in Raw will look more realistic and defined due to the extra shades of color. I also notice it with it skin as well. That isn’t measurable DR but it definitely looks better to the eyes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

I haven't used the Pocket 4k only the OG pocket. With Highlight recovery in resolve it gets more dynamic range. 

Can you post some side by side examples as this has not been my experience unless the Resolve has misinterpreted ProRes as Video range and clipped the highlights.

12 hours ago, mercer said:

I think the 12bit color depth gives the perception of more DR. Take a shot of a tree in CDNG and ProRes HQ and the texture of the tree bark in Raw will look more realistic and defined due to the extra shades of color. I also notice it with it skin as well. That isn’t measurable DR but it definitely looks better to the eyes.

Can you post some side by side examples of this as I've not seen it in my tests.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shirozina said:

Can you post some side by side examples as this has not been my experience unless the Resolve has misinterpreted ProRes as Video range and clipped the highlights.

Just to note or remind: in case of additional (and crucial) highlithts recovery possibility (that thebrothersthre3 mentioned in post) there's no need for examples: with RAW you can do it on rec.709 timeline, with ProRes you can't. As simple scenario, shot same scene with both, intentionally making clipped highlights. With ProRes you can't bring them back. With CDNG do such settings in Resolve CameraRaw menu

Decode Using: Clip

WB: As Shot

Color Space:  Rec.709

Gamma: Gamma 2.4

... and picks of highlights are coming back from void (and such view has metaphysical impact on me), so you can further mold distribution of DR as you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, anonim said:

Just to note or remind: in case of additional (and crucial) highlithts recovery possibility (that thebrothersthre3 mentioned in post) there's no need for examples: with RAW you can do it on rec.709 timeline, with ProRes you can't. As simple scenario, shot same scene with both, intentionally making clipped highlights. With ProRes you can't bring them back. With CDNG do such settings in Resolve CameraRaw menu

Decode Using: Clip

WB: As Shot

Color Space:  Rec.709

Gamma: Gamma 2.4

... and picks of highlights are coming back from void (and such view has metaphysical impact on me), so you can further mold distribution of DR as you wish.

You are saying that if there is clipping at the sensor level with RAW then you can fix this in Resolve? This would be highly worthy of posted examples.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, MeanRevert said:

IR is always there but when you put on an ND, it cuts light except it doesn't cut IR. So when you do that, IR is more easily seen by the sensor. 

I use the SLR image enhancer and put it in front of the ND. 

There's a post somewhere with John Brawley saying that the Pocket 4K has an IR Cut but it's slight as to not affect image quality. So BM is leaving it up to us to decide. 

i might investigate this. i have a couple of inferred filters, a 680 and 720 nm from memory and one ir modified digital still camera. i should be able to fit something to the front of the bmp4k and see how responsive the camera is to inferred.  its already a given that it would have an ir filter as pretty much all cameras have ir cut because, well infered red looks odd or weird even peculiar in photos. not that i have anything against inferred. i think the issue is our eyes aren't accustomed to seeing inferred and when we do it tends to stand out. if its a sunny day i'll try to get some footage with and with out filters then you can judge for yourselves

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shirozina said:

You are saying that if there is clipping at the sensor level with RAW then you can fix this in Resolve? This would be highly worthy of posted examples.  

I believe that what is being referred to is "super whites" where the output signal is above the white point by default, but can be brought back as the data is in the file.  The XC10 does this.  I suspect that if you're recording in prores then the conversion that happens may clip those super whites and they wouldn't be recoverable.

I could be wrong, but I've seen super whites myself, and this clipping behaviour is very similar to the way that still images are processed with RAW / JPG files.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Shirozina okay let’s backtrack a bit... your footage is noisy? Why? I thought the P4K sensor was supposed to be pretty clean?

In fact, there are only two reasons why it would be noisy...

1. You’re underexposing it. Are you using ETTR?

2. You’re not shooting at base iso.

As far as DR between raw and ProRes... I think I may have some side by side examples from some old Micro or Pocket footage... I’ll have to check my drives. Although, I would think the extra bit depth with Raw would make the idea of “perceived DR” pretty simple to understand.

As far as Highlight Recovery I’m Resolve... have you ever used the Raw Panel? Bring in Raw footage that ETTR’d and you should see it completely overexposed with the Rec709 default... change it to BM Film and your waveform will drop but in many instances the highs will still be flat (slightly clipped) click Highlight Recovery and you get the top end back... it’s one of the best features in the Raw Panel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shirozina said:

You are saying that if there is clipping at the sensor level with RAW then you can fix this in Resolve? This would be highly worthy of posted examples.  

Yes... and no. What the "Highlight Recovery" setting does with RAW is find areas where one channel (say, red) is clipped, but another (say, blue) is NOT clipped.

Resolve then fills that red channel with information from the blue channel.

In ProRes, this info would just be "clipped", and come out as white. But in RAW with Highlight Recovery, that detail appears... but with a caveat. That detail is basically black and white. Because the actual red color info is gone, the best Resolve can do is kind of guess the color, and it defaults to desaturating (it used to make that detail pink, which was pretty ugly).

So usually what this means is, instead of a window being blown-out flat white in ProRes, in RAW, you can barely see the frame of the window panels. It's not gorgeous, but it is kind of nice. More importantly, in a hot spot on someone's skin, RAW can bring back a bit of (desaturated) texture in the skin, which CAN be kind of a big deal.

It's up to you whether these subtle differences in the extreme highlights are worth the trouble or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mercer said:

As far as Highlight Recovery I’m Resolve... have you ever used the Raw Panel? Bring in Raw footage that ETTR’d and you should see it completely overexposed with the Rec709 default... change it to BM Film and your waveform will drop but in many instances the highs will still be flat (slightly clipped) click Highlight Recovery and you get the top end back... it’s one of the best features in the Raw Panel.

Well if you use REC709 then yes you may have clipped highlights but who has this setting if you are shooting RAW?. Again I've not seen any hidden DR above clipping in RAW. Highlight recovery is a bodge to clean up highlights when one channel has clipped. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Thanks, test confirm me my one experience: difference is pretty obvious even in exposing just one snapshot. RAW has noticeable better 3d definition, more details in the ground, more DR in left part of the clouds which seems to keep same form and position through shots. Watching footage flow without web compression makes difference even more pronounce.

Prores HQ might be sufficient for somebody, not enough sufficient for someone else. For me, personally, having possibility of RAW shooting is exclusive quality and reason why to choose BM cameras instead others with better ergo, IBIS etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shirozina said:

Well if you use REC709 then yes you may have clipped highlights but who has this setting if you are shooting RAW?. Again I've not seen any hidden DR above clipping in RAW. Highlight recovery is a bodge to clean up highlights when one channel has clipped. 

Re-read my comment you quoted... I didn’t say to use Rec709... Rec709 is the default in the Raw Panel... or maybe it’s SRGB... either way, I was trying to explain how Highlight Recovery can give you a little more dynamic range in Raw than you would have in ProRes. This function is particularly useful if you have a light in your frame... especially the sun.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My pocket has finally returned from assistance (pixel burned on the monitor).

My first test .. Every criticism on the color is welcome (I'm studying).. The lasts shots are too dark and noisy.. Sorry

PW: ISOLA

BRAW 12 downconverted to HD

Metabones xl 0.64

Tamron 24-70 2.8 ef

Canon ef 100 2.8 macro usm

Canon 70-300 4-5.6 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...