Jump to content

Blackmagic casually announces 12K URSA Mini Pro Camera


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Jerome Chiu said:

Linus Tech Tips has pre-ordered six (6) of them, and I sorta understand their reasoning.  

 

Honestly they are the target audience. They are RED users that use the resolution heavily in their edits for cropping and zooming, also have been heavily critical of the RED ecosystem in the past.

Big reasons they are switching:
- In camera backup to 2 cards.
- Ability to use common media instead of RED mags, which is HUGE for their storage costs. 
- Every editor in their office now has a fully featured copy of Resolve.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 251
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yet you still hear people complain about the Alexa green cast, the Red yellow wash and the pinkish skin from canon colours. Put a Zeiss lens you get a blue cast, put a canon or a Cooke you get ye

My 12K URSA arrives in two days and I’m beyond stoked to play with this thing. Honestly it has a lot hype to live up to (for me personally)

Some gorgeous shots by Note. This camera is the most interesting of all the new releases imho, am bored of the overheating mess that is Canon, and the disappointingly video like images of the A7s

Posted Images

22 minutes ago, androidlad said:

This is the CFA pattern of the URSA 12K sensor:

yzPCf0I.jpg

6x6 block instead of traditional 2x2, 18 RGB pixels and 18 white/transparent pixels, which improves SNR a bit but reduces resolution.

So the optimal shooting mode will be 4K (full RGB info without interpolation from 3x3 pixel-binning), 8K will be softer, 12K 1:1 will be very very soft.

 

All Bayer Pattern CFA is way lower than the stated resolution, Regardless.

You get Only 1/4th the actual stated Pixel resolution. And then the OLPF/OLF reduces this by another 15-30% (though to be fair, without it, the image would be a mess, or have resolution reduction by algorithms even if wasn't exactly as much). Not to mention the light loss.

Only multiple lab tests would show whether this has less resolution than a regular Bayer CFA (for the same number of states pixels) and if yes by how much. 

28 minutes ago, androidlad said:

So the optimal shooting mode will be 4K (full RGB info without interpolation from 3x3 pixel-binning), 8K will be softer, 12K 1:1 will be very very soft.

 

How did you arrive at this? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great blog post from Brawley - as close to the source as we possible can get. At least he is not speculating but actually reporting.

The price of the camera means that it will be pretty economical to rent as too.

good times.

I like the braw codec and how davinci makes my computers feel almost new again. At least comparing to premiere.


 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, techie said:

Sad trolling.

This is from BM BMUM12K page.

"The IR filters have been designed to filter both optical wavelengths and IR wavelengths evenly to eliminate IR contamination of the images from which many ND filters can suffer."

 

Everyone is talking about the BMUM12K getting BM into big production theatricals and taking productions from RED.   I'm pulling for them but you can't have magenta cast issues when you have specific built in ND's that are suppose to eliminate IR contamination.  BM is basically saying "look we addressed this" and then it shows up in promoted test footage.  Yes skin tones look the best every from a BM camera.  From a BM camera is key.  Color balance affects everything.

This video does not have magenta cast in the black grey areas.   It starts with GH5 footage and then shows shots from the P4K - Gen4 and Gen5 color. 

Great information about Gen4 / Gen5 and another color issues is discussed. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Color science must be damn hard to figure out as no one seems to be able to get it right besides Arri. 

It's always a balancing act between between being accurate / being pleasing to the eye / being "filmic". 

Even in the video above the guy critiques a neon green power tool not being true to life. Well, when would I ever want that color to be the focus of my footage? One of the aspects of digital sensors is that green from plants always seems to bright, and I usually use a qualifier to adjust that if it's part of my shot. Things shot on film usually have very dark greens. So I'm glad for the non-accurate change.

But again, that's me personally. What I prefer for narrative and interviews, someone doing nature documentaries or travel videos might not like that change.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Geoff CB said:

It's always a balancing act between between being accurate / being pleasing to the eye / being "filmic". 

Even in the video above the guy critiques a neon green power tool not being true to life. Well, when would I ever want that color to be the focus of my footage? One of the aspects of digital sensors is that green from plants always seems to bright, and I usually use a qualifier to adjust that if it's part of my shot. Things shot on film usually have very dark greens. So I'm glad for the non-accurate change.

But again, that's me personally. What I prefer for narrative and interviews, someone doing nature documentaries or travel videos might not like that change.  

Yeah it confuses me. People say Arri has really pleasing skin tones but they also say Arri color science is very accurate. How can it be both?

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Yeah it confuses me. People say Arri has really pleasing skin tones but they also say Arri color science is very accurate. How can it be both?

I think some feel that if colour is pleasing, then it's also accurate.   I feel that's not always the case, but then colour science is one of those areas that can be subjective, yet many try to pin their personal preference as facts.  

I personally don't always like the Arri look.  People post videos and say how wonderful it is, and yet it does little for me.  

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

I think some feel that if colour is pleasing, then it's also accurate.   I feel that's not always the case, but then colour science is one of those areas that can be subjective, yet many try to pin their personal preference as facts.  

I personally don't always like the Arri look.  People post videos and say how wonderful it is, and yet it does little for me.  

I was just watching Top Gun yesterday. Damn beautiful color from I am guessing Super 35 film. But I like very saturated and contrasty stuff in general. 

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

I think some feel that if colour is pleasing, then it's also accurate.   I feel that's not always the case, but then colour science is one of those areas that can be subjective, yet many try to pin their personal preference as facts.  

I personally don't always like the Arri look.  People post videos and say how wonderful it is, and yet it does little for me.  

A big part of it was that in the early days of ARRI if it was being used it was being professionally color graded. 

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

Color science must be damn hard to figure out as no one seems to be able to get it right besides Arri. 

Colour science is incredibly difficult.

I'm the first to admit that i'm rubbish at colour grading, and this is why I am attracted to it and spend a lot of time doing experiments and trying to learn.

We've previously seen that Sony has the most accurate colours when tested scientifically, but they are regarded by many as aesthetically displeasing, so the secret is in the sauce, as they say.

I've been on a mission to understand what is in that sauce, and so far have attacked this in a few ways:

  • I've reverse-engineered a couple of the film-emulation LUTs in Resolve using standard grading tools
  • I've bought the GHAlex LUTs and reverse-engineered them using standard grading tools
  • I've bought a BMMCC and a colour chart and done indoor and outdoor comparisons trying to match the GH5 to the Micro
  • I've reconstructed most of the node graphs from the Juan Melara videos to understand what he is doing and why
  • I've done numerous side-by-side tests with my GH5, Canon 700D, Canon XC10, GoPro and iPhone matching the colours in various combinations to each other
  • I've also graded real footage that I shot and struggled through trying to repair the vast quantity and variety of cruel and unusual mistakes I made while shooting, effectively putting myself through the colour grading equivalent of a special forces training (It's still uncertain if i'll complete the course alive, i'll let you know....)

The reason I say all this is as a prelude to say this - what I have found is a pandoras box of craziness.

There are colour tweaks inside the cameras we talk about, inside the LUTs from manufacturers and highly skilled colourists, in the colour space transforms, and elsewhere that are tiny, numerous, complex, and often make no sense.  They take place in colour spaces that have probably never been mentioned on EOSHD, they do things that are not possible in FCPX or PP, and maybe not even possible in Resolve or Baselight.

I have developed a relatively solid ability to reverse-engineer a grade given side-by-side footage.  Not perfect, but solid.  But I am absolutely no-where when it comes to making adjustments in the service of making a shot look great.  Let alone strange and parallel-universe type adjustments.  But even that isn't enough.

Manufacturers are in the business of making these parallel-universe mind-bending transformations in service of making every shot look nice.  Even when filmed by people they've never met in locations they've never been.

It's taken me everything I have done over a period of years to get to the point of realising just how much there is I don't know about colour.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2020 at 7:06 PM, maxmizer said:
On 7/17/2020 at 2:02 PM, Nikkor said:

Maybe you are one of those guys proudly shooting 48megapixels photos with his cellphone.

hahaha no little boy

On 7/18/2020 at 1:00 PM, Nikkor said:

I totally agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2020 at 6:09 AM, Video Hummus said:

You act like they have to shoot in 12K. 

Adding to what you are saying. Marvel adopted 8K RED cameras on Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 and have been shooting 8K ever since. This was when people were loosing their minds over the idea that anyone would ever possibly need 8K. Additionally, RED released the Helium an 8K s35 camera and people rambled about "Better Pixels", but can't apply the same reasoning to Blackmagic who has set out to create Cinema oriented Cameras from day one, while still paying attention to their indie customers. They gave us the P4k and P6k, now they are innovating something new for high end cinema.

The answer to the common question "who is this camera for" is a simple "not you" .this is why people are upset. 

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...