John Brawley

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1345756588' post='16329'] I'm early in my Resolve adventure but it was impressive at first glances. However I don't get smooth playback of CinemaDNG in it. [/quote] Resolve is very dependent on the system / GPU you're running and HD speeds. If anyone hasn't looked at V9, you'll also notice from V8, they've added a lot of basic editing functions as well. Nice work Andrew. jb

You can actually import DNG's into FCPx but they don't look very good. The way the RAW image is *displayed* is highly variable and it doesn't mean you're getting the full DR of the image. But you can do it if you wish. I really encourage you to look at Resolve, even if it's only to transcode to your preferred codec. jb

[quote name='Bruno' timestamp='1345217808' post='15910'] and I hoped they would get it finally fixed, it's about time someone does! [/quote] It's not like it's difficult to fix. It's just expensive to fix. jb

[quote name='tobyloc' timestamp='1344463525' post='15164'] I really like the test footage and am really happy John has released us some more, much appreciated. I am also looking forward to the camera arriving but I am a little worried now, that noise in the car's shadow does not have a film grain to it, it's got lots of banding in it and looks pretty hideous. Looking at the file in quicktime player it's a bit brighter (qt gamma issue?) and more obvious, this is a screengrab: It's not in the other shadows so it is unusual, I'm not a techie but could that side of the sensor be overheating? This might be from the honest, sensor data with no noise reduction but noise reduction can't get rid of banding so I'd discount that. It's the kind of noise you might see on a 5D2 if you underexposed at high iso, and then raised in post, which worries me. [/quote] It's not the sensor overheating. You can usually see this kind of fixed pattern noise when you lift the blacks of the camera beyond normal. Now the camera has a wide dynamic range. You're seeing the point where the dynamic range is bottom out and intend of black you're getting the black calibration of the sensor. Now this CAN be exacerbated by very hot cameras and hot environments. I've seen it on Canon dSLRs when they've been on and operating contioniously. IN this case I DONT think this is what's happening. I think what you're seeing is where the blacks run out because the sensor has run out or DR and you're left with that kind of noise. It's no longer useful shadow information. In the grade I probably should have paid a bit more attention and crushed the blacks by half a percent till it disappeared. This shot is a very difficult shot. It's backlit and I'm trying to hold (largely succeeding) specular highlights, in an image that also has a lot of shadow. That's a huge ask of any camera. In a camera that was doing more processing in camera, you'd just have those values down there in the blacker than what the sensor can capture values turn to solid black. In a camera like this, you need to pay attention and remember to do it...or choose to leave it in for the marginal shadow information that's there in near black. That's as near as my LAY understanding of how it works. You get everything, including the marginal stuff normally truncated by other cameras. This is really a grading choice by me to leave more information IN than I probably should from a camera that gives you everything. Post is CRUCIAL to getting the most from this camera. jb

[quote name='jgharding' timestamp='1344355993' post='15057'] Hmmmm the plot thickens. . It could be Canon L lenses here as the image is pretty warm, and I usually find them kind of sterile. [/quote] Hmm. Not a single L series lens was used for this clip. Maybe you should read the post that gives this context. http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2012/08/07/some-more-blackmagic-cinema-camera-footage/ JB

[quote name='HurtinMinorKey' timestamp='1344368613' post='15071'] There is a difference between informal and sloppy. What we saw was sloppy work, for all the reasons I listed above. Last time I checked, a three man crew was enough to use a glidecam while someone else holds a reflector. After going to John Brawley's website, and looking at his reel (and seeing how good it was), I'm even more disappointed with what we see here. [/quote] Maybe you can go to the actual blog posting I wrote about this where I explain the production methodology and that the Steadicam shots are terrible and WHY I included them. http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2012/08/07/some-more-blackmagic-cinema-camera-footage/ Thanks for sharing your views.

[quote name='Matt Burton' timestamp='1344321092' post='15041'] What the hell is he doing shooting at ISO 800 in bright sunlight ?!?!?!?!?! is this camera really that bad in low light ? On the other hand this footage looks way cleaner than a 5D mkii at iso 800 but on a 5D you would need about 10 stops of ND lol [/quote] The camera has a native or natural ISO of 800. Although it has lower ISO settings and you do get a slight improvement on noise in blacks, you're basically trading highlights in for a lower ISO. So shooting at ISO800 gives the MOST amount of DR when shooting in ProRes. As far as the noise.... I've said this before. The camera doesn't do any in-camera noise reduction or image processing, even when shooting ProRes. That means the images are very honest and you get everything. Including noise that IS there with other cameras, but is usually masked by processes beyond your direct control as a user. jb