maxotics

HI Chrisso, Again, I'm not arguing the camera will become a consumer hit, only that it has the "potential" because, for the sake of argument, if there was a piece of software in the future that automatically graded the footage and put it on your TV, or computer, people would see a huge difference between it and what they currently get. You could make the argument for almost ALL photographic and video equipment that "Without quality ____ and instant gratfication" it won't sell. But DSLRs sell every day and are barely used within 5% of their capabilities. I couldn't agree with you more, "Ultimate quality has never been a great selling point". I think I've posted elsewhere on Betamax for example. Anyway, you already own the camera so I already pre-won this argument ;) And I own, so for all your reasons, also lost it ;) But let's talk about Mp3s! You're talking about listening devices, which depend on an industry to produce content, and another to play it. It isn't for "creative" use like a camera. Like many people, I remember the hatred I felt for the music industry when CDs were $18. Lots of forces at work there. Anyway, for music recording, the Zoom recorder was a hit. So is the whole MIDI industry. And musical instruments. What about the game Rock Band (or whatever it was called). Practical high dynamic range video is in its early stages here. Don't count it out. Don't count out high fidelity music either. It WILL come back, if you ask me. Even when I was young the quality moved around, LPs (good), 45s (crap), reel-to-reel (great), cassettes (bad), 8-track (laugh!), MD (great), CD (good), MP3 (Fucken' bullshit!), Next XXX (?) Again, no hit product from left field ever looks like a winner when it first comes out. Of course, there are new products every day, but do you really believe, for it's size, the BMPCC isn't just a little more different than just about any other video recorder since DV? or SD? Again Betamax (great), VHS (shit), Hi8 (great), DV (eh), AVCHD HD (great), 14bit color?

Hi Chrisso, that's the beauty of business, no one ever "sees it as a consumer product" until it's too late. IBM probably made the biggest blunder of all time with the PC. I'm not saying this will be the case here, only that it isn't as improbable as it looks. The GoPro is another great example. What we have to keep in mind is the man or the woman on the street with a Canon or Nikon DSLR want the same things we want. Inspiration, creativity, meaning, beauty... That's why hundreds of millions of those cameras are sold. You'd need to pay $1,200 to get a BMPCC setup now, but I wager many people paid similar to that for their first DSLR. (Anyway, prices will come down.). IF (and it's a big IF) the BMPCC eventually hits as a consumer camera, and Canon, doesn't catch up, it will be because the people at Canon no longer see these cameras the same way I believe all people see them--a way to pursue beauty. The BMPCC was built by people who LOVE, LOVE, LOVE film. Just like the Flip was built by people who really wanted video they could carry in their pocket. Keep in mind, Canon COULD have done a GoPro or a Flip. They didn't. Again, this camera may not look like a consumer cam. I see that. But it can deliver an image that may inspire people to want to buy it. Even if they can't use it. People spend extra money on everything in life, if it gives them a feeling of higher worth. I bought the BMPCC for what it CAN do. Whether I get there or not is not as important as feeling, today, that it is possible. I believe this is the same for everyone. And Andy, that new Canon camera is a case in point. Why would anyone buy it over a GoPro, or even a Sony? Too little, too late. You buy the camera that took the cool video your friend took.

So I've had the BMPCC and a cold for the past couple of days. https://vimeo.com/80026814 This camera may wake Canikon up to Andrew;s arguments. For more reasons than enthusiasts, young film-makers, or professional buying this camera for personal use. BM may have shrewder plans. Yes, for anyone who knows anything about video, or uses it professionally, the BMCC and BMPCC are good niche products. Many executives at Cankon can argue, if the BMPCC makes it in the professional sphere, fine, no real biggie, small market. If they gain any traction with the retail market, then it wouldn't take too much to add raw-type capabilities to our cameras (as I've found out, the latest two models and the EOS-M can shoot very good 720p raw). History, however, always seems to repeat. No matter how much money large corporations have, it's hard to beat really motivated and smart competitors who have got a lead on you. The problem is Canikon is not actually moving forward, but one could argue, almost moving backwards. I'm sure there must be executives at these companies who argue that their corporations have gone to hell in a hand basket. How could some uppity Australians come out with such an innovative camera? Because really, what video person wouldn't want or love this camera? Forget what's coming out tomorrow. Forget the 5D3. This is more camera in your pocket than Lucas had to shoot "Attack of the Clones" only 11 years ago! In your pocket. Doesn't even have to be a big pocket! I'm not trying to pitch this camera. Or say it's the best thing since sliced bread. I am saying this camera has the potential to be truly disruptive in the retail marketplace. It has certainly changed how I view consumer video. I should go to bed, so let me shorten my points. 1. With additional software, consumer could get this video automatically adjusted to blow away the quality they get from their DSLRs--ALL OF THEM! Forget DNGs. If the public reaches that conclusion using this camera the name "Black Magic" will be synonymous with quality High Def video. 2. There is NO CURRENT PUBLIC perception of what is the Bentley/Gucci/Mazarati/etc of true color video cameras. If this camera claims that spot, just like the Palm Pilot, iPod, Blackberry, Nokia (all products from companies that were nobodies at the time), Canikon may catch up, but will not overtake. 3. No one in the current market wants to admit/recognize that their current video cameras doesn't measure up. Same happened with American TVs, cars, etc. The one day, the market has changed. No one knew exactly when it happened. You just woke up one day wanting a Toyota. 4. It would be smart for BM to let the early adopters work out the bugs with this camera and continue to build their distribution channels and name recognition. 5. This camera could easily take photos. I don't believe BM is preventing this for engineering or purist reasons. If I was them, I wouldn't tip my hand. I would recommend this camera to any friend with money to spare. This is not some difficult to use piece of equipment. It's the post-processing that's difficult, and I can tell you, from my experience in software development, that is cheap to fix. BM can create a plug-in for iMovie, or an app for Macs, with little expense (compared to camera making). Everyone looking at the shortcomings of this camera are way too jaded. I look forward to using this camera during Thanksgiving. The 50d made me want to give up H.264 and adopt RAW. This camera makes it a reality.

1. I open a DNG in Photivo and, under "Camera", set the Demosaicing to "Bayer Pattern". The default box will say DCB. I will also set the output to the highest JPG setting at 4:4:4. 2. I create a batch proceess to save all the DNGs in that folder to jpg (but you can save to TIFF etc.). 3. I then use a DOS/CMD script that calls ImageMagick that crops out a section of each JPG and scales it back up for %%f in (M*.jpg) do (convert %%f -gravity Center -crop 170x90+0+0 +repage -scale 600%% crop170_%%f) for %%f in (M*.jpg) do (convert %%f -gravity Center -crop 85x45+0+0 +repage -scale 1200%% crop85_%%f) I then create clips of the various JPG series and put together in NLE and render. At some point I hope to do a better version, where it would show something recognizable, like someone's face, in the expanded crop.

In a perfect world, you'd want each pixel to have a perfect green or blue reading. But they don't. Only half of them have green values and a quarter blue. AFAIK, in practical terms, after interpolation, chroma keys works perfectly. Theoretically, one might reason that green screens should be more accurate. I don't know. A take away is that, even in RAW video, each pixel is not completely accurate. In video compression, a lot of color information is being thrown away. If it's properly exposed, that's usually not a problem. It's when you need to bring up "green" values from the RAW data that you're in a bind. It wasn't perfect in the first place and now you've lost much of that.

Half the things I try with RAW end up no-where--just can't figure it out. Then one day it clicks. Last night I was finally able to create a video that shows the bayer pattern recorded in RAW, before debayering. I hope to do more in the future. I wish I had seen a video like this early on, so I would have visually grasped the importance of what de-bayering algorithm is used. Also, would see why one dead sensor pixel is insignificant. https://vimeo.com/79857693

That clip (with its scantily clad women) reminds me of an interview I read of a producer of pornography. He said, the interesting thing about porn is if you go out and shoot the worse piece of porn ever recorded, with the ugliest person and worst production values SOMEONE WILL BUY IT. He said no matter how much porn is created, that doesn't change.

Sorry, if you have a better camera and you're not using it you're only hurting yourself. I like my blacks, black and my whites white. There are no blacks in the film you posted, only grays. Does that ruin the film? No. Would my wife notice? No. Do I notice. Yes. Does it bother me? Yes. It looks fake to me. Should I lie about that, not mater how good the story is? (Andrew started a thread where we can/have discussed general aesthetics). I get annoyed when I watch old movies on my LCD TV and they get that over-contrasty video look (which wasn't in the film). If a better TV comes out, should I leave it in the box just because that's what everyone else has? If you like that look, and that's what you want, by all means, use whatever camera you need to get it. But in 10 years, when everyone forgets exactly when these new high dynamic range cameras came on the market, don't blame us if your video looks 20, not 10 years old :)

Very nice! And you refrained from making a stupid ending!

I just ordered a BMPCC a couple of hours ago. BH has a special where you get Vegas 12 Pro for free. Wow! Like you Axel, I'm a bit nervous. However, a 5D3 is $2,300 more AND as far as I know you need expensive CF cards AND glass, etc. AND it's big. In photography I'd say bigger sensor wins every time. Yes, the 5D3 footage looks really nice. However, I don't see anything I don't like about the BMPCC. I've looked at tons of videos from all RAW cameras. The color and the dynamic range is simply beautiful. Totally unexpected, I think I finally went for it after seeing Andrew's photos from RAW. Not bad! When I want to take a photo maybe I'll take a few seconds and choose the best frame. I just looked at this BMPCC footage night. Not my kind of thing (I like people), but the detail in the shadows! https://vimeo.com/79478553 No H.264 camera comes close, not by a country mile. Finally, I don't trust ML, sorry. I'm going to keep working with it, but as Bioshop said, shooting ProRes out of the box will get me to the fun part again, shooting, editing and posting!

Absolutely. Always follow the money :) Last night I was screwing around with encoding some video screen captures (using BB Flashback--highly recommended, has freeware version http://www.bbsoftware.co.uk/BBFlashBack_FreePlayer.aspx.) The ProRes was pretty blurry. The Xvid, set on the highest quality setting, looked like uncompressed! For RAW video editing, ProRes would be better, but my experience shows what you're talking about--compression strategies make a huge difference. You really have to know what you're doing. I wish I knew more. Andrew, I'm pretty sure if you did a guide to compression strategies for video (that would also show what those Panny hacks give you and, and don't give you), you'd have a nice line at the check-out counter.

To be really excited about the benefits of H.265 you have to believe some engineer got out of bed one morning and figured out how to compress moving images better than the thousands of engineers before him. Maybe I stepped on a Lego too. Whatever trick there is will depend on parallel processing and that will mean chips and fancy software/firmware. As for Magic Lantern. The firmware only "redirects" what the internal electronics are doing. It doesn't do much computing. Even if they got something to work, I wouldn't trust it for a second, that it would do it when I needed it ;)

I have to say I've change my thinking on this. I used to think they'd protect their high end, but after a few months with ML, I can see that there is no real threat of consumer, or even semi-professional cams, from affecting the high end market. I've written many posts on the ML forum trying to create I, I don't know what to call it, a more professional environment. One of responsibility to the film-maker. Nada. ML will remain a small sub-culture of DSLR experimentation. Nothing wrong with that! But there are really few people using it. Not enough to enter Canon's marketing Anyway, even if the C100 was identical to the EOS-M, but only had a bunch of extra nobs and a higher price, most people would still buy it! Of course, it is different. The bigger problem with video is the amount of work that goes into it. Most of my friends won't even put in the time to edit their photos...so video! What's interesting to me is Nikon didn't put video into that new camera. I don't believe they should, but easily could have. I also believe they're not as dumb as some would make them out. The fact is, and I think this is what is so frustrating to all, especially Andrew, it wouldn't take too much additional effort for the camera makers to put better video in these cameras. From my experiments with the EOS-M, I can tell you it would be very easy to create crop-mode 720p raw from that camera. ML already does it. To Canikon we're nobodies.

The best lens I have ever bought was $30.  The Fujian c-mount TV lens.  So you need a c-mount adapter.  I shot many of these photos with that lens on my EOS-M last week.(all photos with blurry background).   It has a 1.7 f-stop, which means you get thousand-buck blur for pennies.  On the downside, few markings on lens, no electronics, and the image is distorted at higher f-stops.     http://www.flickr.com/photos/maxotics/sets/72157637618422775/

  Yeah Andy, if only you could shoot this well! ;)  Seriously, a very watchable short, don't know why.  Looks like midloch has a girl, a dog and a g6.  He's living!   On the AVCHD, as nigelbb pointed out, AVCHD is saved in a the bluray file structure, something like that.  MP4 is really for people who want to email a clip, or shoot something that will appear in their DCIM folder.

Here is roughly the same part of the image, only showing the bayer image. You'll see the same odd lines of hot pixels, that match the image above. I've tried every de-bayering algo on similar stuff and though some are better, none are able to deal with these lines of chroma distortions, which, until now, I thought was only the outcome of line-skipping. My guess is that the BMPCC will show little of this, and, as you say, good de-bayering will probably remove almost all of it for that camera. I just find it interesting to see the same thing I'm getting from the line-skipping RAW I get out of the Canon ML cameras.

Thanks PeterF. The aliasing on the windows is interesting because it's what I see in Magic Lantern RAW, when shooting in normal mode (not crop, where there is no line skipping). I would think there is no line-skipping in the BMPCC, so curious why this effect is showing up. Does anyone know? Here is a blow up of your image.

I'd happily pitch into a beer account for citizenkaden! Some of us definitely need to drink more! And @Michael Ma. Us Americans need space in our bags for McDonalds burgers (at least 2), fries, and our Venti No-Foam Cappucinos. We can't be carrying around the BMPCC AND DSLRS! That's way TOO MUCH camera stuff and not enough FOOD. Or beer! Seriously, those stills are much better than I expected. I won't repeat what citizenkaden said because it was perfect.

@Citizenkaden, I've been developing software (mostly financial) for almost 30 years. That and more time than I should spend! My original goal was/is to find a portable RAW quality video camera to match my SigmaDP1 and SigmaDP2s (I hope to eventually get the Merrill versions of these cameras). The BMPCC is the best solution. However, an EOS-M could also double as a very good all-around shooter. The Sigma cameras are very limited to either ISO 400 (and under), or BW in high ISO. And they are slow. I can put on a Canon Flash onto the EOS-M, put in P mode, and shoot any event with great results. The H.264 is also very good from the EOS-M. LIke you say, you can't find the most stable build of any ML build (in Alpha for RAW). I asked nicely, prodded, lectured, etc., on the forums, all to no avail. I believe the core dev is taking a break. I haven't seen him recently. BTW, I have the same problem with this site. I couldn't be more impressed by the work Andrew does. He does studies that corporations pay $10,000 a shot to do ("Figure out which camera and platform we should buy globally, etc.") We get it for FREE! However, he gets off track. HIs starting a thread about the Nikon DF, which doens't shoot video, is a distraction and raises my level of anxiety. I know that sounds odd, but I suspect many feel the same. If I want to socialize about cameras dpreview does a great job. But there is only ONE EOSHD! :) I see no indication whatsoever (if anything the reserve) that ML Video RAW will only be a "home" video RAW solution for advanced hobbyists and professionals. @ScreensPro, I don't know about your family, but my family will run from an F3 :)

Some more observations.  I've been trying to make the EOS-M a nice portable RAW camera (720p), as an alternative to the BMPCC.  One of the obstacles are the focus dots that appear in the raw frames.  They generally turn into pink dots after debayering (because most are in the red pixels).  Someone created "PInk Dot Remover" in Java which is certainly a very slick and effective piece of software  However, it doesn't get all the dots (interpolate around the "hot" focus pixels).  The first dev is no longer around, nor the second guy who took it up.  I also wanted something in Windows, just to make my workflow easier.   Anyway, I use a C# project open-sourced by g3gg0 (one of the lead rock stars) to get me going.  It has a function to read pixels from the RAW files, but not to write them.  I ask him if he can do it and he says he's too busy.  No problem.  I figure it can't be too hard.  Well, it takes me hours upon hours, and I can't do it..  I finally go back to him and another developer and ask them what the format of the RAW data is.  They don't seem to know!  Seems incredible to me.  How can they not know the basic format of pixel data in RAW files?  I believe the answer is that they took routines from elsewhere and modified them a bit without knowing exactly what these routines do (lots of bit-wise arithmetic).  They were able to get each pixel's value into a ushort and that was it.  As smart as they are, they are overloaded by technical stuff, which I believe even they can't get completely on top of.   I finally figured out that the data was encoded as a 14-bit stream where each other byte was swapped with the one before it.  If I had known the original format I could have figured this out easier.  The point of this story is that as much as the devs seem to know, the stuff is monstrously difficult on so many levels.  Knowing what I know now, I'm amazed ML continues to move forward.  However, if one or two of those key guys quite that would be the end, or severely slow down the development of ML.  I believe this is not unlikely.  Because...   Video is a narrative medium.  Yes, it's fun to take some RAW video of your garden, kid, tugboats, etc.  After that, no one wants to watch a video that doesn't tell some kind of story.  Story requires scripting, editing, actors, lighting, audio, etc., etc.  I don't know if this is heresy, but I can't see why someone would use a 5d3 to shoot a film when they could use a BMCC or any of the other dedicated cameras for that purpose.  Now that the BMPCC seems to get in stock I"m thinking, I have $850 in a used 50D (CF card+10-20mm) to shoot RAW, what am I thinking!  I've already watched 2 people on the ML forum sell their 50ds, or try to.  I may be next.  The other thing about narrative video, VERY FEW people actually do it.  That is a VERY SMALL market.  And many of them, like Andy, don't have the time or need for any kind of RAW-type workflow.   Yes, I believe the 5D3 is a better value than the BM cameras, but only if you're going to spend the time/effort to get the most out of the RAW feed.  If you just need basic improved dynamic range, the BM cameras make so many things easier.  And they will continue to improve.   Because the devs won't try to make ML stable on these cameras, or even allow the general public discussion of a to-do list, I can't see it growing beyond a "cool" hack.  Maybe I'm too close to it.  Familiarity is starting to breed contempt ;)

I get large ziplock backs and put cameras, and chargers into them, and then into plastic, rolling bins like QuickHitRecords.  The ziplock bags keep everything somewhat separate, but parts together, and also keep the dust out, etc.  One nice thing about buying used cameras on Craigslist is people are always throwing in camera bags.  I have no shortage of those!

As much as I love ML, and I've been working with it intensively for 3 months now, it is NOT a professional hack and I have no sense that it ever will be.  Each devs work independently to implement cool features that HE wants to work on; they work together only by chance.  There are conflicts and rivalries beneath the surface.  There is no ML leader, I can see, who sets priorities or goals.  However, yes, if you're happy with a build and it shoots fine there is no reason it won't work forever.     It appeals to me because video is a hobby and I love photography.  I get the sense from other posters that followers are either old farts like me (relatively speaking) or young aspiring film-makers who can't afford professional equipment.  This isn't to say people aren't using it professionally; they are.  But you want to be realistic.  If you're shooting something important enough where you have actors showing up, grips, lighting, an audio person, etc., you're going consider renting equipment, or going with something like the BM cameras that are designed for this purpose.   As great as the video is from the 5D3, it remains a STILLS camera designed for stills.     In short, the 5D3 on ML "CAN" do professional video, but you may not want to.   The real benefit I think you'd see from getting a 5D3 and doing RAW on it is the learning experience.  I've learned more about photography in the past 3 months wrestling with RAW than I could ever imagine.  In order to do it well, you have to learn about RAW non-bayered images, and all that goes into making them usable.  So if you feel you're still learning, and have the money, this is the camera you want.  (I don't have a 5D3 by the way, I bought a used 50D and EOS-M.  You don't have to spend a lot of money to work with ML RAW!)

Andy, I thought you were in the business of creating fantasies, not destroying them  :(

Reviewing that camera, is beneath you, Andrew ;) Anyway, any camera company that doesn't care if you have dust on your sensor because your shutter mechanism is literally flying apart isn't going to care about knobs that don't work--as if the buyer of that camera would ever turn them past Autol! (I have a D600, which I love as a stills camera, so no one flame me!)

Just thought I'd point it out.  That's what it said this morning.   http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/964117-REG/blackmagic_design_blackmagic_pocket_cinema_camera.html   In the afternoon started saying 7-14 business days.  Last week it was 2-4 months.   I've been trying to get a good workflow with my EOS-M and Magic Lantern but my experience with the other developers doing ML (not as many as you'd think, between 3 and 6) has clued me into why ML RAW is unfortunately more a curiosity than "get out and shoot" solution.     Anyway, curious about what anyone else knows about availability, or when the camera will no longer be back-ordered.