Jump to content

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K


Yurolov
 Share

Recommended Posts

Only in this case. I can see why users of cameras that don't have internal raw are interested.

But I don't see it offering much that BM already has, other than being able to print thise words on the side of the box. 

Like they said at NAB, they already have a great RAW workflow that uses open-source CinemaDNG. They have totally uncompressed and 2 differently compressed formats as well. Then Prores HQ 422 and LT. 

What will ProResRAW give them? A compressed version of something they already have. Cool.

I'm not saying it won't be nice to have the option, but I don't think it's a priority for them.

At the very least, they might hold onto if for 6 months and release a firmware update, renewing interest in the camera a year after it was announced.

 

EDIT: @John Brawley @jonpais and anyone else, can you take this bullshit somewhere else? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I've already seen cinematic looking footage. I was merely asking if readers thought the video I shared looked cinematic. The video has gotten lots of love online. I gave my reasons why it doesn't look cinematic  to me at all: reasons which I still continue to stick by.

 

Actually you were pretty harsh on the visual aesthetic and pretty judgy, calling out the filmmaker for being pretentious and daring to call their work a "film".  Not exactly collegiate and something that smacks a little of elitism. 

You weren't just merely asking for an opinion.  You assassinated the work first and then asked for an opinion.  You weren't merely calling for opinions on if it was cinematic.  You slammed the film and a bunch of creative choices that aren't anything to do with the camera it was shot with and asked for consensus on if this was a cinematic piece (and by extention implied if the camera was capable of cinematic work)

Then when someone else posted something you thought did look cinematic, you blew it off as not being the camera but the filmmaker. 

You're tying yourself up in knots a little trying to make a point that I'm not getting.

JB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

That is an unusual answer. It sounds as though the BMD expert is saying there is no such thing as ProRes RAW. 

Basically what Apple seems to be doing is putting the various flavours of RAW in its own wrapper and charging a fee for it. Adding no extra value to the RAW (most likely), causing issues with software (like DaVinci) recognising the kinds of RAW codecs, based on the various kinds of RAW programs and cameras that use these various codecs, unlocking them to their individual potentials. It's like a blanket standard with no individual specification to individual cameras. 

Basically it is Not a new RAW standard or codec. It basically is just a Alpha or Beta version of a new standard, which still has a very long way to go before it figures out what it brings to the table. I also suspect that it has some monopolistic practice involved in decoding this RAW that will affect all NLEs. And Apple is shamelessly assuming that they will get away with creating it. I see the other editing suites collaborating to get back at Apple (maybe isolate ProRes?). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

@jonpais that's not what I said and you know it. 

Prores Raw is great for cameras with no internal raw, but doesn't add anything for BM.

I wasn't addressing my comment to you, but okay.

I thought GP said at NAB that they might consider adding it at a future date, can't recall.

If the camera had ProRes RAW and you don't like it, you don't have to use it.

Plain and simple.

But it sounds like you've already made up your mind. Cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prores Raw does have advantages.  It can be edited natively in Final Cut/Premiere (hopefully) and it's extremely CPU efficient.  Cinema DNG not so much.  It would basically be similar to working with R3D files only a little larger in size which is the one thing that turns people away from RAW in the first place.

From what I understand there are some problems with it.  Firstly, I believe it's 12-bit linearly encoded which is awful.  12-bit linear encoding is what the original REDONE caputured.  Log encoded raw or 16-bit linear is much better for preserving color information.  Secondly, a lot of color science stuff is contained within the CinemaDNG format which likely doesn't translate over to ProRes raw.  

I could be wrong about those things, but it definitely would be a nice feature to have when you want the convenience of ProRes with raw data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is BMD were considering ProResRaw support during the NAB launch but may not anymore. First of all as mentioned, BMD already supports Raw & ProRes. Adding ProResRaw isn't as simple as just adding an extra codec to the camera. ProResRaw works primarily on the NLE side ( Demosaicing and processing are deferred to the time of playback and are performed by application software.). This means BMD would have to also develop and ensure full compatibility with Resolve, which they have just released a new version and probably aren't eager to mess with. I also suspect Apple have developped ProResRaw in an attempt to sell/convert more editors to FinalCutPro as the official ProResRaw white paper specifies: Final Cut Pro includes a streamlined and GPU-optimized demosaicing algorithm designed to meet the performance demands of real-time, multistream video editing. So it could also be BMD aren't eager to support a codec that may make their Resolve users switch to another platform and/or hinder current Resolve performance. Unlike other camera manufacturers, BMD's hardware is very tied to their software package. In addition there may be high licensing fees both for camera & software dev tools that BMD just aren't ready to deal with on both ends..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume ProRes Raw will mature with future updates to Pro Codecs and FCPX.

Re: Jon’s critique on that Pocket cam video...

Obviously, being a fan of the camera and owning a couple of them over the years, I’ve seen that video, and although it has some IR pollution, I really like that look. It’s very analog and reminds me of a very distinct “indie film” look that was popular for a while. So for grabbing a camera and a lens, I think the kid was very successful.

@John Brawley any chance BM is going to reduce the price of the Pocket or Micro... or maybe another Summer sale?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mercer said:

 

@John Brawley any chance BM is going to reduce the price of the Pocket or Micro... or maybe another Summer sale?

I have no idea.

As far as I recall, they only did that once with the pocket.

And I do love using the pocket / micro to get shots I can't get any other way.

 

TR-105_BTS4_GD0016

JB

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, John Brawley said:

I have no idea.

As far as I recall, they only did that once with the pocket.

And I do love using the pocket to get shots I can't get any other way.

 

TR-105_BTS4_GD0016

JB

 

That’s a cool little set up... what’s that rig/handle you’re using with it?

I’m hoping BM doesn’t discontinue the original Pocket or Micro but for the price of the Pocket2... it seems they may need a price decrease. 

Also since you posted it, I’m really enjoying your work on The Resident and it is pretty cool that you can use the Pocket in production... even if for close up/insert shots. What lens did you use?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Savannah Miller said:

From what I understand there are some problems with it.  Firstly, I believe it's 12-bit linearly encoded which is awful.  12-bit linear encoding is what the original REDONE caputured.  Log encoded raw or 16-bit linear is much better for preserving color information.  Secondly, a lot of color science stuff is contained within the CinemaDNG format which likely doesn't translate over to ProRes raw.  

It has been reported that ProresRAW bitdepth depends on what the camera sends. So for example it can be 12bit like with the FS5 or 14bit like the Varicam. While the linear 12bit signal is limited to 12 stops of dynamic range, one 12bit ProResRaw example from the FS5 looks great:

It appears that ProresRAW is very efficient both in the data rates and the playback performance. I am sure Resolve will implement it at some point and when that happens we will probably see an update of all BM cameras to support it as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those shots look amazing, but the shot on top of the ambulance, is that done with gopro?  Is it some sort of stock footage?  That's the only shot that looks different from the rest.

3 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

It has been reported that ProresRAW bitdepth depends on what the camera sends. So for example it can be 12bit like with the FS5 or 14bit like the Varicam. While the linear 12bit signal is limited to 12 stops of dynamic range, one 12bit ProResRaw example from the FS5 looks great:


If Blackmagic sends only 12-bit, then that's not better than the 12-bit log encoded DNG.  Plus a lot of Blackmagic's proprietary color science info is contained within their DNGs which might not work with Prores raw.    Long story short the only real benefit of Prores raw over Prores 4:4:4 is the ability to change white balance which is not a huge issue because a competent colorist can change the white balance of prores 4:4:4 quite easily.  Secondly, white balance is one of the easiest things to set correctly, so it's not a huge benefit in that area either.  There's nothing wrong with shooting Prores and then for shots where you think you might want to change white balance extreme amounts, to shoot Cinema DNG.  That leaves very little scenarios where Prores raw is helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Savannah Miller said:

Those shots look amazing, but the shot on top of the ambulance, is that done with gopro?  Is it some sort of stock footage?  That's the only shot that looks different from the rest.


If Blackmagic sends only 12-bit, then that's not better than the 12-bit log encoded DNG.  Plus a lot of Blackmagic's proprietary color science info is contained within their DNGs which might not work with Prores raw.    Long story short the only real benefit of Prores raw over Prores 4:4:4 is the ability to change white balance which is not a huge issue because a competent colorist can change the white balance of prores 4:4:4 quite easily.  Secondly, white balance is one of the easiest things to set correctly, so it's not a huge benefit in that area either.  There's nothing wrong with shooting Prores and then for shots where you think you might want to change white balance extreme amounts, to shoot Cinema DNG.  That leaves very little scenarios where Prores raw is helpful.

Well spotted.  Yes the shot of the ambulance lights is a stock shot.

DNG in most BMD cameras is actually 16 bit LIN, but it gets converted to 12 bit LOG to be recorded as a DNG, and then unpacks in Resolve as 16 bit linear again.

And yes. 444 ProRes is mostly what I’m shooting these days and is very very robust.

JB

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah.  I work in VFX and every show I've ever worked on is Prores 4:4:4.  Never had the luxury of an Arriraw show other than maybe a few Game of Thrones shots (not sure if they were raw) but I don't think it would make much of a difference.

The only real difference between RAW and Prores that I see is that you can adjust your exposure using linear sensor values which makes it generally easier to just slide up and down the exposure.  With log, it's a bit more tricky and using a color space transform to linearize helps too. But even then, that's not a huge issue unless you expose incorrectly which shouldn't happen.

Maybe if you have moire/aliasing you can change how you debayer to help hide some of that too, but I don't work in that area so I wouldn't know how much that helps.  Other people at work sometimes blame keying errors on the internal sharpening that some of our shows shoot with, but I haven't found it a huge problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Savannah Miller said:

 

Maybe if you have moire/aliasing you can change how you debayer to help hide some of that too, but I don't work in that area so I wouldn't know how much that helps.  Other people at work sometimes blame keying errors on the internal sharpening that some of our shows shoot with, but I haven't found it a huge problem.

I find ProRes tends to reduce the chance and incidence / severity of moire and aliasing.

JB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, John Brawley said:

I thought they’d already discontinued the pocket ?  Watch that become a cult camera if it isn’t already.

I think they’ll keep the micro going for some time.  It’s really a different camera.

In the photo above the camera has a wooden camera cage, a Noga arm and a BMD 5” VA as the operating monitor. On front is the SLR Magic 10mm T2.1.  I’m manually focussing myself, using peaking on the VA.  

By way of example almost all of this promo is either Ursa Mini Pro or Micro using that exact rig.

This whole scene is shot Ursa Mini Pro

 

 

I have used a LOT of Ursa Mini Pro and Micro in the resident.  Not just as an insert camera, but shooting whole scenes using only the Ursa Mini Pro.  Most scenes have a mix of Ursa Mini Pro and ALexa, and I’d estimate more than 40% of the show is Ursa Mini.

I tend to use the micro camera for these kinds of surgery shots where I can very easily reach into the scene and get super close before diving down to almost inside the surgical field, and then transitioning back to another actor. It keeps it very agile and alive shooting this way.  I’d anticipate the Pocket 2 will replace this rig for these kinds of shots.

JB

B&H still has the Pocket up for sale at its original price.

Nice promo. It’s amazing how well these BM cameras intercut with an Alexa.

So, it makes sense when you would use the Micro or the Pocket, but what makes you decide to use the Ursa over the Alexa? Is it a matter of crew size on the call sheet for certain days? Are you given carte blanche which camera you use, when you want to, or does the line producer have a say?

Sorry for all the questions, but it isn’t often I get the opportunity to pick the brain of an established cinematographer.

Btw, have you been able to use an Olympus on the show?

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...