Leaderboard

inder olden times dayz dem camera folks put der 16mm film camera on a tripod and framed stuff. i like heads and legs even plastic tripods are nice. 16mm kodak film is nice.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jshPPVOJDb8

If this is the kind of "realistic" footage a person ends up with, then they either don't have a clue on how to shoot, or they're an editor/colorist working on an undergrad student film.  :P   And I understand that JB is busy, but seriously.  I'm not expecting a huge RED production with all the glitz and glamour, but a little effort would not go unappreciated.  I've had one preordered from day one, but I'm up for ordering several more if quality footage exists for me to convince the investors with...  it just doesn't make sense to put out footage like this.

https://vimeo.com/71787060   The original footage was very flat and neutral, which was nice for grading, but there was little to no highlight recovery possible in this prores file.  Grading was nothing too special:  7-8 minutes messing around in AE with levels and curves.  No sharpening and no noise reduction.  I might spend some more time tinkering tomorrow in Resolve, but I may just hold out for raw footage or for my own camera's delivery.   And I agree with how shoddy this footage is.  You are charged with revealing a highly-anticipated camera's first footage to the world and this is what you come up with???  Is JB instructed by BM to make the footage as amature and boring as possible?  I guess the footage provided us a good test of dynamic range, but if that's the goal, then I'd much rather have a few seconds a raw instead. 

I'm sorry to say it, but all John Brawley's videos look like s.....   Why the hell Blackmagic gave him a test camera?

John Brawley posted a link to more downloads:   https://www.copy.com/s/74tnqvQo4hwM/SLRMagic_35mm_1.4_MK2    

Hey guys, I found this new anamorphic lenses ... information here:   The Servicevision Booth was directly across from ours at NAB. Managing Director and Cinematographer Andres Valles surprised me on opening day with a preview of a set of 13 Scorpiolens anamorphic primes to be introduced at IBC in September. He also introduced me to the lens designer, physicist and optical engineer Cristina Alcaide. The Scorpiolens anamorphics are all 2x squeeze, and all have a slender front diameter of 95 mm. They are T2.0 from 24 through 100 mm. 130 to 260 mm are T2.8. The 300 mm is T3. Average length of the lenses is a mere 6.3 inches. The 24, 28, 150, and 200 mm are 7.5 inches long. The 260 mm is 8.3 inches, and 300 mm is 9.6 inches.     More info: :o   http://www.fdtimes.com/2012/04/29/scorpiolens-anamorphic-prime-lenses/       The Scorpiolens 2x anamorphic lenses are expected to exhibit practically no breathing and very little distortion, even at close focus. They will cover up to ANSI Super 35 Silent aperture (31.14 mm diameter). Feet and meter scales can be exchanged. Internal focus keeps the lens a constant length. Telecentric and multi-aspheric design, high resolution, and consistent optical performance are planned over the entire focus range. Servicevision is the largest motion picture rental house and manufacturing facility in Spain. Offices in the US are in North Hollywood. - See more at: http://www.fdtimes.com/2012/04/29/scorpiolens-anamorphic-prime-lenses/#sthash.jTi2HrSd.dpuf

  If it's magenta or not is hardly any reason to say that it's 'badly graded'. In the end, as long as the flesh tones convince (which they can even do without following the 'flesh line' in the vectorscope, for example at sunset, when these shots seem to have been taken), it's a matter of personal taste if I grade darker, brighter, more or less saturated or with the colors left unchanged like in this auto-balance-screenshot from Color (midtones lifted though a bit):   I don't like the way Brawley grades, but again, that's my problem. I also don't like the opposite of magenta, green, when there was no plausible source of light where this cast could have come from:     But it's Lee's decision, I don't depreciate his effort, for if this is about achieving a neutral and scientifically correct image, i completely misunderstood the whole purpose of grading. Have a go with the clips yourself and explain why your grading is better.   Or, watch again, the camera has poor resolution. Actually, it looks like a combination of oof, terrible lenses and a resolution around 720p. There is no sharpness in the images to begin with. But one shouldn't mistake softness for poor resolution. Generally. But here, we know the lenses from the Lumix. It's true, they have sharpness added and distortion corrected by the system. But adding sharpness doesn't improve resolution and to de-squeeze the distortion really costs resolution. But nobody ever complained. With this in mind, study areas of the images that strike you as 'sharp' or 'well-defined'. How many are there? Look at the hairs and the fabric of the clothes. The crossing with the red house left: Look at the bricks.      I don't see clipping, if this means that values are cut off abruptly. When you look at the luma waveform. On the other hand, you are quite right: There is not much definition in the highlights nor is there in the shadows. I'm not sure, maybe this is because there is also not much resolution in the midtones. Couldn't this have been shot with any AVCHD camcorder in 8-bit? Sharper though and out-of-the-box? (deliberately exaggerating, a bit). But of course: We haven't seen raw yet.     Now I am relieved.   richg101:       I like the many versions you did. The upsizing also shows that there are not many artifacts which usually become visible then.   I don't know. I hope I'm wrong with the bad resolution.  

My attempt...   https://vimeo.com/71726506

http://vimeo.com/71785015   uprezed to 4k and cropped

  Him and a small army...   But he is legit. He does seem to throw up some random clips.

this footage is actually quite nice. i was seeing some of the grades out there and they've looked atrocious. and some of the stuff i was hearing really had me going for a minute.  for me, the camera seemed to grade just fine imo. and i bet could do very well with a few nodes in resolve. i was able to recoup highlights easily with tonalizer. and much sharper than most 5D3 stuff i've edited at the wide end of the lens anyway-   https://vimeo.com/71781899

Here is my take.    https://vimeo.com/71782779   I'll take whatever JB gives me and like it, but geeez.

7D on the way!   Will likely get the anti-aliasing filter for it too. Image is so sharp, it just needs that tiny bit of low pass filtering to be flawless yet still very sharp.

This what I came up with

It made Engadget. Well done Florian :)   http://www.engadget.com/2013/08/05/first-canon-7d-raw-video-shown-courtesy-of-magic-lantern/   How much interest is there in 7D raw video coverage on EOSHD? It is quite an old camera now (over 4 years), still a lot of users around?

the 1DX is an important piece of tool for me to make my business running, as every professional has good tools, it's not a hobby! the good thing is I can photograph and film with the 1DX, and yes it very good in video. 

Hi, I am Ebo Fraterman ( photographer ) and new @ EOS HD, I am learning to film/edit since 1,5 years now. I also downloaded the files from the BM pocket camera and worked on it a little in FCPX, I was not blown away by the quality ( after reading many blogs about how good this camera will be ) especially sharpness was a bit disappointing, I am used to shoot on the canon 1DX in flat mode, curious to see work from others and hopefully they can handle it better then me.

With this recent price drop in BMCC, buying a 2.5K camera seems relevant again. Especially since it has one extra stop of dynamic range over the 4K version, and with the metabones speedbooster it actually has similar form factor regarding the DOF. And It could be a great B cam once you decide to get a 4K version (or if finances are low, get a pocket version as a B cam for 2.5K) Now my question is, would I need to buy a metoabones speedbooster for each of my lens types as I have contax yashica, Leica, Nikon, EF, etc... (which would be extremely expensive), or could I only get the EF to MFT version (once it comes out) and use the C/Y, Leica, etc... to EF adapter? Thanks a lot for your responses.

OK for on set I understand. But for other "not time constrained" projects, why not grade first? which would be pretty easy with DNGs in AE or photoshop. All you have to do is grade one frame and AE will apply it to the rest of the sequence, then export your graded footage to ProRes for editing. The point is, for grading, ProRes just does not have the shadow/highlight recovery flexibility of RAW dng. I think though that Cinema DNG is the way to go for ML.

If this is in relation to showcasing the raw hack I have one complaint, why is everything shot on a tripod, no moving, no steadycam run and gun, it's like those promotional videos for a camera where you see static gorgeous footage but as soon as you buy it and you start using it is not the same, I want to see some fast action and how it looks. Let's see how it handles fast action.