Haters gonna hate: RAW videos in your pocket!!!! - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 06:16 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Hi guys,

Blackmagic Camera v1.5 has just been released.

This update adds lossless CinemaDNG RAW support to the Pocket Cinema Camera.

We recommend the Sandisk Extreme Pro 64GB SD card if you're going to be recording RAW.

The lossless CinemaDNG RAW will work in DaVinci Resolve and applications from Adobe like Photoshop and Lightroom.

Most people have no idea how to grade a ProRes LOG video. They dont know how to recover color information, they don know how to increase the sharpness, how to create real blacks and whites etc.

Thats why we have a lot of crappy samples from the Blackmagic Pocket on youtube and vimeo.

Now you can shoot RAW videos, and its really easy to color correct RAW files. You can load them in Lightroom and play with them just like you do with your pictures.

So im afraid that now we will begin to see A LOT of great videos, even from the average users that have no idea how to post process videos.

In ProRes the Blackmagic was beating the 5DMK3 RAW in some aspects, can you imagine how good the RAW will be?

Im excited biggrin.gif
thedest is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 11:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 94
"The lossless CinemaDNG RAW will work in DaVinci Resolve and applications from Adobe like Photoshop and Lightroom."

You have my attention!

My understanding is that, as far as Adobe is concerned, CinemaDNG can be edited in Premier Pro or AfterEffects. Lightroom or Photoshop, I'm not so sure.

Time for some research smile.gif
bsprague is offline  
post #3 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 11:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 94
It didn't take long! (I don't know how I grew up and matured without Google!) I found a recipe for using Lightroom on CinemaDNG files.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/techniques/grading_cinemadng_in_lightroom.shtml
bsprague is offline  
post #4 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 11:30 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
You dont need to research.

You set the camera to shoot RAW. It will create a folder with all the frames in your SD card. You dont get a video, you get all the frames. You just load them in Lightroom, edit one of them like you edit your pictures, apply the same changes to the group. Export them and then open the pictures in your NLE. And thats it! Behold! A new era for consumer video makers! biggrin.gif

Here is a totally underexposed frame from the BMPCC if you want to start playing: https://www.copy.com/s/SE2Xb3SVlIC8/station.dng

Im starting to think that Blackmagic users may be the worst shooters IN THE PLANET. Those are the first RAW videos uploaded. You can see the potential, but it looks like the camera is in the wrong hands LOL

https://vimeo.com/79221074
https://vimeo.com/79212202
https://vimeo.com/79176495
thedest is offline  
post #5 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 11:50 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 999 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
For me, the issues are still no VF and extra work to achieve proper color balance. The lack of OIS on whatever lenses used in these videos shows up like a sore thumb. Sure you can add a VF, you can add a tripod, but I want portability and simplicity. I like the idea of coming home, popping out the SD card, inserting it in my BD player and I'm off to the races. This is certainly not a case of being a 'hater', it just doesn't fit my needs.

But hey, at least 2 of the videos above show better color than most of the abysmal samples I've seen.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #6 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 12:27 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
The Blackmagic asks for a viewfinder. Serious shooters like to use expensive screens. Since im NOT (biggrin.gif), an LCD viewfinder is the way to go. I use one of those in my Sony NEX, and its just a joy. It helps you to stabilize the shot and amplifies the screen. And they are also very cheap.



When shooting RAW, there is no extra work to achieve proper color balance. The only work is to adjust them in Lightroom (in a few seconds, just like you do with your pictures) and then you can create your video (in minutes). Some people are happy enough shooting JPEG pictures, some (like me) always shoot RAW pictures. The difference between a RAW video and an AVCHD video is bigger than the difference between a RAW picture and a JPEG picture, so thats a no brainer for me, since im all about image quality - not ease of use, although the BMPCC is not that hard to work with.

The bus video is indeed very shaky. He is using a 20mm lens (60mm in the Blackmagic). That may be lack of skill. I can shoot @ 100mm in my NEX handheld with no OIS. Anyway, you can always buy lenses with great OIS for the BMPCC.

Lets just wait for better samples!!
thedest is offline  
post #7 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 01:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
"You set the camera to shoot RAW. It will create a folder with all the frames in your SD card. You dont get a video, you get all the frames. You just load them in Lightroom, edit one of them like you edit your pictures, apply the same changes to the group. Export them and then open the pictures in your NLE. And thats it! Behold! A new era for consumer video makers!"

Yes, and that is just ONE clip. You have to do that for each clip, and opening the series of frames (individual pictures) in each clip in Vegas Pro, for example, is laborious - you have to tell it that the pictures are a sequence and specify the frame rate. Clip by clip by clip...

Only 20 minutes of RAW video per $119 64GB card, about 20 minutes per battery, a 2.88 crop factor, lousy audio controls and quality, low-resolution lcd.







But I am going to enjoy the challenge.
markr041 is online now  
post #8 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 02:48 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Well, in Premiere and DaVinci thats not a problem biggrin.gif

I like to use Lightroom because it has so many great features, like filters, brushes etc, BUT if you think thats too much work (I dont) in Premiere you can simply open ALL DNG files, and it will automatically create the video sequence, so its the same thing as any other video wink.gif

You dont have to convert your DNGs into TIFFs to load them in your NLE. You can load all the DNGs in one step.

If Sony Vegas is not supporting DNG files, im pretty sure it wont take too long to do it, since Premiere and Resolve can already do that!

Yes for the 20 minutes of RAW per card.
Nope for the battery life. You can get 50 minutes per battery (the new Blackmagic batteries).
Yes for the 3x crop, but I cant see that as a big problem. Add a speedboster and you have basically the same crop as a GH3 wink.gif I dont think its necessary though. My fav focal lenghts are 50, 85 and 100+
Yes for the audio that sucks biggrin.gif
Yes for the LCD biggrin.gif Thank God its just a reference. The real video will have a great resolution


Mark, honestly, I think you should buy one. It totally suits your style. Your videos dont need ambient sound. Just make your nice compositions and put a nice soundtrack!

The MARK-KIT biggrin.gif

Blackmagic pocket ............................................................................................... 1k
20mm f1.7 (shallow DOF + better low light than a full frame) ...................... 400 bucks
a kit zoom with OIS ........................................................................................ 200 bucks
2 batteries ........................................................................................................... 15 bucks
2 95MB/s cards .................................................................................................. 100 bucks
LCD loupe ........................................................................................................... 10 bucks

I can see you doing some awesome stuff with that kit biggrin.gifwink.gif
wink.gif
thedest is offline  
post #9 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 04:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,166
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
I like your customized 'Mark' kit (and it is exactly right). The 20mm f1.7 (will be about 60mm) is perfect, except no OIS (I have it). The 14-140mm with OIS (effectively about 40mm-400mm) is the most useful in bright light (I have it). Batteries are cheap (knockoffs for Nikon), but those sd cards are over $100 a piece. There is always Ninja 2 (ssd drives), which also has a better lcd, but there goes portability and more importantly, invisibility.

The Pocket Cam looks nice and amateurish by itself (and especially with that 20mm pancake). Even more inconspicuous than the EOS M (be nice if came in colors too).

One thing you forgot - a battery charger (cheap), otherwise you have to rely on the camera to charge.

Unfortunately Vegas Pro 12 cannot import CinemaDNG (yet). I have Lightroom, and it is necessary to use it to convert CinemaDNG to Tiffs, but then I can manipulate in that program just like for stills and just make a video with Vegas using the strings of TIFFS. I have experience using Lightroom and Vegas with the Canon RAWS (which first require conversion to CinemaDNG and removing pink dots!).

All the extra post work and the cost of the cards means short videos, so one must really be picky about what is shot! And it looks like giving up audio for a while.
markr041 is online now  
post #10 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 04:52 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
The Nikon batteries and generic batteries should be avoided. They work but you have no idea how much time you are going to get. Blackmagic has released an oficial battery that holds 50min of juice, and they are really cheap.

LINK: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/994420-REG/blackmagic_design_bmpccass_batt_pocket_cinema_camera.html

There are some alternatives to the SD card. Some guys are using:

- Sony UHS-1 (30 bucks for 32GB)

- Transcend 600x (58 bucks for 64GB or 120 bucks for 128GB)

- PNY Elite (25 bucks for 32GB)

They have been tested and worked well for ProRes. I woudnt buy them though. I would rather play safe and buy only the Sandisk 95MB/s. I use the Sandisk even in my NEX.

Here is a list with SD cards suggestions (I dont recommend testing that for yourself): http://www.blackmagicuser.net/topic/445-which-sd-cards-to-use-with-the-blackmagic-pocket-cinema-camera/

And COME ON!!! You have some of the best m43 lenses!!! If I had those lenses I wouldnt think twice. My main concern with the BMPCC is to get into a new system. I have no m43 lenses!
thedest is offline  
post #11 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 05:08 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
DL Watson has some experience with the GH3, the 50D RAW and the RED.

I remember he was talking bad things about the BMPCC because he loved his GH3. So he bought the BMPCC. What happened? He sold his GH3, he says that the ProRes from the BMPCC looks better than the 50D RAW and says that the BMPCC RAW looks better than the RED footage (apart from the artifacts) biggrin.gif


Anyway. Check this out. We already know that in ProRes mode, the BMPCC is better at low light than the 5D RAW and has more dynamic range (almost 2 stops!). So DL Watson compared the ProRes with the RAW, and guess what? The RAW makes the ProRes look shy!! DAAYYYUUUUMMMMM!!!!!

LINK FOR THE PRORES X RAW COMPARISON: https://vimeo.com/79231766

After that, watch that video, and sing along biggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

.

.

As a side note: his color correction is not good - in the ProRes and in the RAW - but you can see the potential!
thedest is offline  
post #12 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 05:16 PM
Member
 
notkevin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11

Damn it! If I had more money I'd pick one of these up for sure.

notkevin is offline  
post #13 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 05:24 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
First RAW video posted by Fenchel & Janisch. Probably the first decent video posted!

.
thedest is offline  
post #14 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 05:28 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by notkevin View Post

Damn it! If I had more money I'd pick one of these up for sure.

The sandwich or the camera?
thedest is offline  
post #15 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 05:37 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 999 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

First RAW video posted by Fenchel & Janisch. Probably the first decent video posted!

.

Man oh man oh man, I must be missing something. If that was the best my camera produced, it would be flying back to where it came from. confused.gif

I am trying so hard to understand why some are excited by this, I really am. I guess it's just a 'look' that doesn't do it for me.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #16 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 05:49 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Yep Ken, those examples are not good if you cant see whats behind them.

Unfortunately we are limited to the skills from the people who post those videos. I can see the potential, but maybe that exercise will help you to understand the drama.

.

.

That video was made with the 5D in RAW mode. What can you expect from the BMPCC? It has more dynamic range than the 5D and it has better low light performance. Can you see how much potential you have with RAW with those videos? The BMPCC can do a little bit better! wink.gif
thedest is offline  
post #17 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 06:29 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 999 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
So here's my problem. First off it tells me something very significant when not one owner from all the posted videos seems to know what they're doing. If this was as easy to do as you seem to think, don't you think someone would have gotten it right? Someone? Anyone? Wouldn't someone have stumbled on to something approaching 'correct'...whatever that is? You know the old story about the blind squirrel? Apparently nobody has yet found the nut. Is it not odd that nobody seems to get it even close?

To me this is akin to shuffling through the internet, while researching a given camera's videos that you are considering buying, and finding miserable video after another miserable video from one shooter to the next. At some point you say "hey, maybe this camera is not all that it's cracked up to be". On the other hand, you search for another camera and find one great clip after another from a myriad of different owners. At that point you say "hey, this looks to be a really nice camera".

In your grading example above, yes, it's hard to miss the difference between the before & after color grading. However with that said, I still don't like the very stylized, consistently 'over the top' look of these clips. Yes, I'm sure they can be toned down if one is striving for the look of 'reality', but it seems exceedingly difficult to find anything from this camera that before or after grading comes remotely close to the output of a good quality camcorder or DSLR (sans the dynamic range).

I can appreciate the extra dynamic range, I really can, but just as there's more to PQ than sharpness, to me this camera shows there's more to great videos than just extra dynamic range. Maybe I'm 100% wrong (and I know some would vehemently disagree), but I see absolutely no consistency from anyone that owns this camera. None. To my eyes the output of a good quality DSLR or camcorder look far better than almost anything I've seen from the BMPCC.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #18 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 06:44 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
I understand you, but you dont understand me biggrin.gif

Check out that video. It was graded and uploaded by me. The image quality is stunning. The composition is not great, since they are just test shots. It was not hard to grade them. None of the cameras that I've tested can give me that kind of quality.

.

.

The fact that most of the videos look bad, its not a problem with the camera. Its just doing its job. The problem is the format, the codec, the depth. If tomorrow panasonic releases the GH4 with RAW video and ProRes, people will have the same trouble. Technically speaking, the BMPCC is giving you more stuff than the other cameras. If the final video is not good, the problem is the shooter.

There are lots of great examples out there:

Thats a comparison between the BMPCC and a 5K RED EPIC: https://vimeo.com/75646236

That channel has some great BMPCC videos:

.

.

The examples I post are enough for someone used to work with ProRes and RAW to see the potential wink.gif
thedest is offline  
post #19 of 170 Old 11-12-2013, 07:10 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 999 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
Thedest, what can I tell you, I just don't see it. You've posted these clips many times and for the life of me I don't see it. I've looked at them time and again. I've shown them to my wife and her response was 'what happened to that video?'. I still see colors that don't look right and I still see images that don't look like how I see the real world. I've gotten (IMO) better, life-like imagery out of a number of cameras I've owned and without any extra work. No color grading, just realistic looking images. Heaven forbid, I was far more impressed with Steve's amusement park video from the RX10. Heresy, I know, but to me that looked far more 'real world'. And yes, I fully understand the concept of the extra dynamic range of the BMPCC. But that in of itself is apparently not enough to satisfy me...not given what I've seen.

Where you and I probably differ is I'm always striving for video that looks as close to how my eyes saw the scene as possible. I simply don't see it with the overwhelming majority of clips I've seen...including most of the ones you've shown.

I suspect you like a stylized type of imagery. Almost everything I've seen from this camera smacks of 'stylized'. There's always a place for that IMO and I've done it myself. But for me the norm is simply not to stylize a video. Given what we see coming from Hollywood these days, I'm sure I'm the exception, but I know what I like and what I see from this camera, in general, doesn't knock my socks off.

As I said, 'what can I say'. We'll agree to disagree. But with all your raving, I can't understand why you don't own this thing yet. wink.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #20 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 01:39 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Well biggrin.gif

RAW pictures are not for everyone. I can understand that RAW video wont be either. If you like the kind of image you see on movies, the BMPCC is the closest that you can get for that price. If you search for ARRI ALEXA, RED EPIC DRAGON etc on youtube, you will see the same "unrealistic" images that you are seeing in the BMPCC.

Open that video and start watching from 0:35 to see some low light RAW footage and compare it to the RX10 low light video. If you cant see the advantages, I rest my case biggrin.gif
Make sure to watch until the end - that traffic shot at 1:18 is ridiculous biggrin.gif

.

.

I dont own one yet because im trying hard not to get into a new system. I have a lot of Canon and Sony lenses here, plus some camcorders. Imagine getting into a 3rd system. Im waiting until the end of the year to see if someone (panasonic or sony) releases an answer to Blackmagic. If they dont, I'll end up buying one =/
thedest is offline  
post #21 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 03:23 AM
AVS Special Member
 
brunerww's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,005
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 31
It looks even better on Vimeo:



He says he didn't do much grading. All he did was boost the saturation.
brunerww is offline  
post #22 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 05:01 AM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 55
I agree, for the most part that raw video from the BMPCC looks outstanding. Some of the scenes were overexposed, but many scenes are better than anything we've yet seen from the RX10.
hatchback is offline  
post #23 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 06:43 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 999 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
Those were the best I've seen from the camera yet. But, many of the scenes I strongly feel could be duplicated by a good quality camcorder or DSLR. The scene at 1:19 was very impressive, but after that, yawn, I don't see it. The shot of the train coming in at the beginning, very nice, but again other cameras can do it. In fact, I'll stand by what I said before, the amusement park video from the RX10 looked better to me than some of the night scenes in this video. Colors were more saturated and not blown and sharpness was pretty much on par with the BM. Look at the scene beginning at :56. There the Caesars sign is blown out with an obvious loss of color saturation. Honestly, I've seen that kind of scene on many cameras and they're as good or better depending on the camera.

What can I say? A lot of work for a result that more often than not, looks no better to me and often quite a bit worse than a good quality camcorder/DSLR. Just my opinion and obviously some will disagree. I'm not one to get swept away in hype. If my eyes don't see what looks to me to be a consistently superior image (and for a whole lot more work than a regular camera which has a VF, better ergonomics, audio, convenience and a longer battery life), no amount of 'selling' is going to convince me.

Each to his own, that's what choices are all about. smile.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #24 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 07:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 999 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post


I dont own one yet because im trying hard not to get into a new system. I have a lot of Canon and Sony lenses here, plus some camcorders. Imagine getting into a 3rd system. Im waiting until the end of the year to see if someone (panasonic or sony) releases an answer to Blackmagic. If they dont, I'll end up buying one =/

But you know, feeling as you do about this camera, I don't see why you don't sell your lenses and at least some of your camcorders to get this thing. If I felt the way you do about a camera, that's what I'd do. With your enthusiasm for this camera you should work for the company and ask for a loaner! biggrin.gif

I finally woke up one morning and looked at all the cameras & camcorders I've got laying around (never used) and decided it was time to sell sell sell. I've been so happy with the GX7, I knew I wasn't going to use the other stuff. smile.gif
Ken Ross is offline  
post #25 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 07:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 94
My video habit only started 3 years ago. 1080p60 was a struggle. My computer, although new, made editing painful. It got better when I added memory. I travel a lot and spend several months living in a motorhome. I needed a laptop with some serious strength or I would give up on video. I found an i7, 16GB, SSD, 1920x1080 17" display with a Blu-Ray burner. It weighs a ton!

Video editing is still slower than I dream for. Yesterday, it took a couple hours to process, fix mistakes and upload a sequel to my day on the beach in the thread I started about what do do with a three year old camcorder.

Unless I'm missing something, we are a few years away from being able to efficiently edit RAW video with anything under $2,000.

Don't put me in the hater group. If RAW video is anything like RAW photos in Lightroom, I would love it.

Bill
bsprague is offline  
post #26 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 08:07 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,978
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 999 Post(s)
Liked: 1083
I'm not a hater either Bill. I just don't see why I'd want to do all the extra work when most of the results don't look as good to me as so many other cameras without grading. I know thedest always says these posters don't know how to grade, but I certainly sit up and take notice when it appears nobody knows how to grade. That screams out to me that it's not that easy to achieve the desired results. I just find it head to believe everyone is so lame. wink.gif

This says nothing about all the issues the camera itself has. I'm sure the next version will be much improved and offer more features. Who knows, maybe even a VF?
Ken Ross is offline  
post #27 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 08:08 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Those were the best I've seen from the camera yet. But, many of the scenes I strongly feel could be duplicated by a good quality camcorder or DSLR.

Your feeling is wrong. Mathematically speaking is impossible for an 8-bit 4:2:0 low DR camera to produce a similar image. Saying that is like saying that a cheap grape juice can taste like an expensive wine. biggrin.gif

4:2:0 will never be 4:4:4
8 stops of DR will never be 13 stops of DR
8-bit AVCHD @ low bitrates will never be as detailed as a 12-bit RAW @ 2.5MB per frame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I'll stand by what I said before, the amusement park video from the RX10 looked better to me than some of the night scenes in this video. Colors were more saturated and not blown and sharpness was pretty much on par with the BM.

.



.

You may like what you see, but that is not better than the BMPCC. And forget about the BMPCC, just think of any other 12-bit RAW camera. Saying that a JPEG picture is better than a RAW picture is a BIG nonsense. But saying that an AVCHD @ low bitrates is better than a 12-bit RAW is even worse.

You say that the image of the RX10 is better most of the time and that the BMPCC is not that much better in some scenes. You are all excited about the image quality of the RX10. How much better the RX10 is compared to an iphone? Because the difference between the RX10 and the BMPCC is higher than the difference between the RX10 and a 1080p cellphone.

More saturated colors is not an advantage. Its personal taste. Or do you think that the AVCHD can be more saturated than a RAW? Nope. You can saturate the hell out of the RAW. And the RX10 is saturaded with artificial colors.

Sharpness is not important. It can be added as much as you want. The important part is the amount of detail that you have to be sharpened. The RX10 will NEVER have the same amount of detail of a RAW video. It wont even come close to the ProRes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Look at the scene beginning at :56. There the Caesars sign is blown out with an obvious loss of color saturation.

Funny you say that. Its blown out because the shooter did it like that. He could have underexposed a little bit if we wanted to. No other camera under the price of a car could have handled that shot better, with more shadow detail and less blown out highlights. Simply no other camera. Complaining about blown out highlights in the BMPCC is simply nonsense again, because no other ordinary camera (and many pro cameras) can do better than that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

But you know, feeling as you do about this camera, I don't see why you don't sell your lenses and at least some of your camcorders to get this thing.

Unfortunatelly I dont live in the US, where everything is cheap as hell, and its really easy to sell used gear. Where I live, there is no way to sell old gear, you die with them or throw them in the trash.

And a BMPCC + the new system would cost me something about 6 thousand dollars, so I have to think well before buying it. If I could buy a camera for 1k like you do, I would buy a new one every month. wink.gif

Just for you to have an idea I paid 2k USD for a Sony GW77.
thedest is offline  
post #28 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 08:13 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post


Unless I'm missing something, we are a few years away from being able to efficiently edit RAW video with anything under $2,000.

Don't put me in the hater group. If RAW video is anything like RAW photos in Lightroom, I would love it.

Bill

Bill, editing RAW is easier than editing AVCHD, since AVCHD has a higher compression. I can easily edit RAW videos on my notebook.

RAW video is exactly the same thing as a RAW picture. Its a simple unlimited burst of RAW pictures, so you can do the same things. Do you get the drama? wink.gif

JPEG shooters wont.
thedest is offline  
post #29 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 08:22 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

I know thedest always says these posters don't know how to grade, but I certainly sit up and take notice when it appears nobody knows how to grade. That screams out to me that it's not that easy to achieve the desired results.

This says nothing about all the issues the camera itself has. I'm sure the next version will be much improved and offer more features. Who knows, maybe even a VF?

Again, it looks like you dont understand the difference between a CAMERA (thats a hardware) and a FORMAT/CODEC (thats software). If you set a GH3 to shoot ProRes and RAW, the challenges will be the same. People are learning how to use those formats. People that are used to work with cameras like the RED, ARRI etc can grade those videos without looking.

Dont expect more features in the new version. Dont even dream about a VF. Cinema cameras dont have that. They are made to be mounted. They are not a consumer point and shoot.

.



.

The concept of the BMPCC is the same one of the camera above.

.

And those 2 videos were made with an ARRI ALEXA

.

.

Do they remind you of a particular camera? biggrin.gif Do you think they look bad? wink.gif
thedest is offline  
post #30 of 170 Old 11-13-2013, 08:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,919
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedest View Post

Bill, editing RAW is easier than editing AVCHD, since AVCHD has a higher compression. I can easily edit RAW videos on my notebook.....

In post #3 above, I put a link to using Lightroom. At that website, there was a link to download some sample RAW video footage. When I get to a better internet connection, I'm going to try "grading" some footage in Lightroom and exporting to Premier Elements.

I'm still not sure I have the disk space and computer power to do more than very short clips.
bsprague is offline  
Reply Camcorders

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off