Jump to content

What REALLY prompted Canon suddenly to get their act together with video?


Andrew Reid

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 329
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

...and posting no links to work or a reel. Does your first name happen to be Ebrahim?

Yes, in Egypt, right?

What you haven't heard? Canon Egypt gave the green-light for the R5 dentist undergrad beta test program! 🎬 🎬 🎬 

Posted Images

8 hours ago, rawshooter said:

I call you out as a fake and liar.

If you were a professional colorist, then you would know that in the age of RAW cameras, colors are what a colorist makes of them. A camera's out-of-the-box "color science" hardly matters to colorists if you work from 10bit/12bit Log or RAW; it only matters to quick turnaround-documentary and ENG video makers who rely on the camera's factory color profiles and do not have post-production colorists. 

Judging colors by YouTube videos, in highly compressed 8bit 4:2:0 Rec709, is ludicrous anyway. Any RAW cine camera today - even Blackmagic's $1200 Pocket 4K - covers more than the Rec709/sRGB color space. Difference in color gamut will only become visible in greater bit depths than 8bit, with better color subsampling than 4:2:0 and wider color spaces such as Aces, P3 and Rec2020.

I am certainly not a liar. 

If you knew or worked as a colorist then you would know that your job is not to capture footage but grade and correct it when needed.  You're given what you get and your job is to make it look better and get the most out of it.  Most P4k and P6k users don't shoot RAW because of file size and because they don't need to.

Footage might be record in RAW but by the time it's move from producer, down thru editing and into your hand you might only have ProRes  to work with.

Example #1 (already mentioned)

We crew I hired shoot with 2 BMP6K's and the footage was delivered in ProRes not RAW, the footage had massive IR pollution. I shot with a third camera that was not the P6K.  This was one example I gave.

Example #2 (already mentioned)

Big Agency that I worked with had production crew from all over the world go out and capture footage for a massive world wide project.  All footage delivered was not RAW, zero was RAW. It was shoot on RED, BM and down the line on Sony A7III because multiple cameras and crew were capture footage in different cities.  My job was to color correct / grade footage on an edited timeline.

Can you give us all an example and link of a A7III shooting RAW? And please share your RAW footage link with everyone.

Good luck correcting the IR footage in this link.  By the way.  I had to junk P6K footage from our shoot from two days and massively color correct P6K footage from multi day shooting because IR pollution was on all P6K footage.

 

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

I call you out as a fake and liar.

If you were a professional colorist, then you would know that in the age of RAW cameras, colors are what a colorist makes of them. A camera's out-of-the-box "color science" hardly matters to colorists if you work from 10bit/12bit Log or RAW; it only matters to quick turnaround-documentary and ENG video makers who rely on the camera's factory color profiles and do not have post-production colorists. 

Judging colors by YouTube videos, in highly compressed 8bit 4:2:0 Rec709, is ludicrous anyway. Any RAW cine camera today - even Blackmagic's $1200 Pocket 4K - covers more than the Rec709/sRGB color space. Difference in color gamut will only become visible in greater bit depths than 8bit, with better color subsampling than 4:2:0 and wider color spaces such as Aces, P3 and Rec2020.

Do you mean to tell me shooting RAW means each camera produces the same color science. What? And color profiles only matters to amateurs who don't know how to color correct? WOW.

Do you mean the color accuracy test we all click on was really an accuracy test for the default color profile from each camera.  WOW.

And that JPEG in the test had 16 million colors vs RAW 12 bit and 68 billion colors. WOW.

https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

this thread is getting bloated. Why not carry off topic ventures into to the realm of PM, at least after the 20th repost of ones own thesis on colour science. Why not rather shoot some footage with a GH1-5, Canon 550-750d, 5Diitoiv, fujis, nikons, BM cameras and so on. So much to be tested and discussed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Super8 said:

I am certainly not a liar. 

If you knew or worked as a colorist then you would know that your job is not to capture footage but grade and correct it when needed.  You're given what you get and your job is to make it look better and get the most out of it.  Most P4k and P6k users don't shoot RAW because of file size and because they don't need to.

Footage might be record in RAW but by the time it's move from producer, down thru editing and into your hand you might only have ProRes  to work with.

Example #1 (already mentioned)

We crew I hired shoot with 2 BMP6K's and the footage was delivered in ProRes not RAW, the footage had massive IR pollution. I shot with a third camera that was not the P6K.  This was one example I gave.

Example #2 (already mentioned)

Big Agency that I worked with had production crew from all over the world go out and capture footage for a massive world wide project.  All footage delivered was not RAW, zero was RAW. It was shoot on RED, BM and down the line on Sony A7III because multiple cameras and crew were capture footage in different cities.  My job was to color correct / grade footage on an edited timeline.

Can you give us all an example and link of a A7III shooting RAW? And please share your RAW footage link with everyone.

Good luck correcting the IR footage in this link.  By the way.  I had to junk P6K footage from our shoot from two days and massively color correct P6K footage from multi day shooting because IR pollution was on all P6K footage.

 

Dude, its the shooters fault. You know you need an IR filter to avoid situations like this. Its like shooting wide open at 1.2 in the sun without an ND filter and then complaining in post see everything is overexposed. Not sure why this comes into play into a color discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

this thread is getting bloated. Why not carry off topic ventures into to the realm of PM, at least after the 20th repost of ones own thesis on colour science. Why not rather shoot some footage with a GH1-5, Canon 550-750d, 5Diitoiv, fujis, nikons, BM cameras and so on. So much to be tested and discussed.

I agree.

Back to the Canon R5.  I will check in with my Canon contact and see when I can get my hands on a prototype for testing.

1 minute ago, zerocool22 said:

Dude, its the shooters fault. You know you need an IR filter to avoid situations like this. Its like shooting wide open in the sun without an ND filter and then in post see everything is overexposed. Not sure why this comes into play into a color discussion.

I know it was the shooters fault.  They had no clue and they own RED's and a ton of gear.  They are good guys and it never showed up on the directors monitor or on the back of the P6K.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure a lot of bad footage you see online from blackmagic cameras is from people not using IR cut filters.  All blackmagic cameras even the Pocket cameras need them. Another issue is just white balance that is off. Unless shooting RAW if you rely on a faulty auto white balance or simply don't manually white balance correctly you will have funky colors. I've seen plenty Canon footage that looks pretty whacky that I attribute to bad WB, same with Fuji. One of the huge advantages of RAW, probably the biggest for me at least. 

Honestly that is one of my big issues with Black Magic. Their reasons for not including IR cut filters built in are stupid. Thankfully you can install one in the Ursa mini without having to use ones you put infront of the lens. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Super8 said:

I agree.

Back to the Canon R5.  I will check in with my Canon contact and see when I can get my hands on a prototype for testing.

I know it was the shooters fault.  They had no clue and they own RED's and a ton of gear.  They are good guys and it never showed up on the directors monitor or on the back of the P6K.

Not that good it seems, there is no way it would not show up on the directors monitor or the back of the pocket 6k. They just didnt notice it. 

Then again shit happens, lessons where learned. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, zerocool22 said:

Not that good it seems, there is no way it would not show up on the directors monitor or the back of the pocket 6k. They just didnt notice it. 

Then again shit happens, lessons where learned. 

I agree, issues grading P4K or P6K are in most cases user error in capturing the footage in the first place.  I shoot BRAW with mine all the time as do nearly all other users whose work I see posted on Facebook and other forums.  With its range of compression presets, theres little reason to go ProRes in my opinion, unless handing over footage to people who don't use Resolve, or prefer ProRes.

I am interested in how RAW will be implemented in the R5.  I've heard conflicting stuff about Canon and RAW from cameras like the C200.  I'm not sure what to believe, over how useful a codec it is.

Most Canon fanboys though are going nuts over 8K.  I am more fascinated by RAW in 4K and the workflow using it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

I agree, issues grading P4K or P6K are in most cases user error in capturing the footage in the first place.  I shoot BRAW with mine all the time as do nearly all other users whose work I see posted on Facebook and other forums.  With its range of compression presets, theres little reason to go ProRes in my opinion, unless handing over footage to people who don't use Resolve, or prefer ProRes.

I am interested in how RAW will be implemented in the R5.  I've heard conflicting stuff about Canon and RAW from cameras like the C200.  I'm not sure what to believe, over how useful a codec it is.

Most Canon fanboys though are going nuts over 8K.  I am more fascinated by RAW in 4K and the workflow using it. 

Yeah that's the amazing thing about BM RAW as well as REDcode, you can get RAW files smaller than prores. That'll be the downfall for RAW on the R5 for many, probably huge files especially in 8K

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, zerocool22 said:

Not that good it seems, there is no way it would not show up on the directors monitor or the back of the pocket 6k. They just didnt notice it. 

Then again shit happens, lessons where learned. 

It wasn't showing up on the back of the P6k's in daylight. I trust these guys.  One P6K was worse than the other. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

I agree, issues grading P4K or P6K are in most cases user error in capturing the footage in the first place.  I shoot BRAW with mine all the time as do nearly all other users whose work I see posted on Facebook and other forums.  With its range of compression presets, theres little reason to go ProRes in my opinion, unless handing over footage to people who don't use Resolve, or prefer ProRes.

I trust the guys I used.  They had never had the IR issue with those P6K's.  They asked if Blackmagic knows about this issue and released the 6K this way. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Super8 said:

It wasn't showing up on the back of the P6k's in daylight. I trust these guys.  One P6K was worse than the other. 

Prolly other angle or different time. If they were stacked up it would be the same.
Tell me how it is possible that you cannot see the IR pollution on the backscreen but you can on your computer.

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...