Sara Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 For $3,000 ? Game changer. I don't know of anything at this price point that can create a look like this. Even compressed - Vimeo compresses and streams at 720p - this looks excellent. http://player.vimeo.com/video/40584879 http://vimeopro.com/johnbrawleytests/blackmagic-cinema-camera/video/40584879 ---------- John Brawley: "Wow. I’ve had a lot of traffic over the last couple of days ! There’s a huge amount of interest in the camera ! I’ve been given the green light to reveal another clip. This is from another early shoot, again with a prototype camera. If you look carefully you’ll notice some stuck pixels, but what’s really exciting here is the dynamic range ! You can clearly see out the window and the levels inside were a fair bit down on that. There’s still fine detail in the darker fabric of her dress as well. Also there’s a lot of fine detail here. You can see the individual hairs on the right hand side of her head, and there’s great detail in her skin (Sorry Leah !) Once again, I graded this myself so in the hands of someone more skilled in Resolve could do a lot better ! Our talent, Leah, was lit by a single 1.2K HMI through a frame of 216 on camera right. I had a 4×4 Poly doing a passive bounce from camera left and a bit of anti- fill between me and the poly." ---------- Most DP's argue that because skin tone (all actors / all races / all sexes) contains a mix of MANY colors (skin under the microscope is very complex) that it NEEDS a vast color space and as much bit depth and DR as possible. Watch the 2011 Zacuto shootout and see how the Alexa stomps the other cameras by a mile in the skin tone test for example. Great news for indi film makers that we get tools like this that anyone can afford. (The BMC has limitations but at 3k we can't complain to much - wow!) Happy times! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garypayton Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Yes, finally some real tests, looks amazing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlegKalyan Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 looks ok.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted April 19, 2012 Administrators Share Posted April 19, 2012 Looks like film. And it isn't even lit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimsMcKenzie Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Looks great, as others have said quite filmic, which is the latitude shining through, that must grade like a dream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_tee_vee Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 When a Super 16 sensor looks this good with 13+ stops of DR, it makes me wonder how people can say that Panasonic is crippled like a boat anchor by the micro 4/3's format. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 [quote author=mike_tee_vee link=topic=611.msg4359#msg4359 date=1334852204] When a Super 16 sensor looks this good with 13+ stops of DR, it makes me wonder how people can say that Panasonic is crippled like a boat anchor by the micro 4/3's format. [/quote] Yep! But [i]does[/i] it look good? I don't like it much. The colors are not nice. Latitude? How do you tell this was not a normal HD-camcorder? If you scale the contrasts in front of the lens, if you bring all the values into these 5-6-7 or so stops (by lightening up the shadows), you have every chance of getting an image at least as dynamic as this one looks in it's 8-bit vimeo compression. Come on, trust your eyes. This is nothing worth mentioning. If it looks like film, it looks like 16mm, good enough to add some patina to the odd music video. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmMan Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 The details in the blacks is very good. Lit with 1.2K and light bounced by 4x4 poly. Still early. More footage is needed. I'd like to be able to download some ungraded footage and give it a go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 [quote author=FilmMan link=topic=611.msg4365#msg4365 date=1334858740] The details in the blacks is very good.[/quote] Where exactly? I have two very simple Samsung Syncmaster, but they are calibrated with Spyder Pro, have correct 2.2 gamma and are backlit against a neutral grey wall with full spectrum daylight lamps. I scrutinize the video, and I see almost no detail on the shoulder behind the powder box. Her locks often drown in black. Her neck has a stripe of carrot-orange in the middle that sometimes looks as if it never had even been 8-bit. [quote author=Andrew Reid - EOSHD link=topic=611.msg4317#msg4317 date=1334833938]And it isn't even lit.[/quote] [quote author=FilmMan link=topic=611.msg4365#msg4365 date=1334858740]Lit with 1.2K and light bounced by 4x4 poly.[/quote] It's a long time ago since I worked with HMIs professionally, but back then they said they were three times stronger than Tungsten fresnels, the halogen lamps. I certainly had this impression. So unless the HMI stood more than 30 feet away, it wood be like the goddam SUN on the right. One should expect a little bit more of that black dress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmMan Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Maybe I should have said the different shades of black. Doesn't have the "crushie dslr tone" to it. Download the jpg (although compressed) and play around with it. http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/frame-grabs-for-leah/leah_1-20-2/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmMan Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Axel, I downloaded the jpg, and after color grading etc., I get pretty darn good detail in the shoulder area behind the powder box. Give it er a go and see what you come up with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 [quote author=FilmMan link=topic=611.msg4375#msg4375 date=1334868734] Axel, I downloaded the jpg, and after color grading etc., I get pretty darn good detail in the shoulder area behind the powder box. Give it er a go and see what you come up with. [/quote] I did, from what looked like a simple superflat frame (attachment, smaller because it's a screenshot from Color). Auto-Balance, and just slightly adding red, because the skin looked yellowish. [quote]... but what’s really exciting here is the dynamic range ! You can clearly see out the window and the levels inside were a fair bit down on that. There’s still fine detail in the darker fabric of her dress as well.[/quote] If he used the reflector on the right side and switched off the HMI, the inside would have been considerably darker than the outside (out the window), but not under these circumstances. You are right, we have to wait for better instances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christianhubbard Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 Handles the highlight in the background well but I see noisy video-dslr- like grain on the right shoulder and hair on the right side. Especially noticeable in Axel's thumbnail, (i doubt it's something he caused) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axel Posted April 19, 2012 Share Posted April 19, 2012 With GH2, under absolute lowlight, had there been such noise in the dark areas, everbody would have known, ah, baked-in blacks, the whole thing falls apart as soon as you start grading! Yesterday I saw a ten year old TV doc, filmed with existing light in an old peoples home (the old peoples home of horrors, you would say). It was SD interlaced, probably betacam. They said they measured the light in the hallways, and it was under 50 lux. The video did look dark, but it looked clean. This Blackmagic-clip has shallow DoF despite it's small sensor and the really big lamp. How did they get the aperture that wide? How did they get noise in the shadows though it was Raw (or what? What does this foggy, yellow-casted frame grab was grabbed from?). How comes that the majority is impressed, though it looks so shitty? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sara Posted April 19, 2012 Author Share Posted April 19, 2012 Lol do NOT edit the frame grab I posted. It was a Windows snapshot of the compressed 720p video running on my laptop. It was only ment to preview what video I linked to. Sorry for any confusion. We are still waiting for actual dng files. I still think the actual video looks great. If anyone can show me a vimeo skintone sample from a dslr that looks as good I would love to see it. Sure the red, alexa, and Sony f3 will smoke this BM device. But they are not $3k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OverCranked Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 [quote author=Axel link=topic=611.msg4363#msg4363 date=1334855662] [quote author=mike_tee_vee link=topic=611.msg4359#msg4359 date=1334852204] When a Super 16 sensor looks this good with 13+ stops of DR, it makes me wonder how people can say that Panasonic is crippled like a boat anchor by the micro 4/3's format. [/quote] Yep! But [i]does[/i] it look good? I don't like it much. The colors are not nice. Latitude? How do you tell this was not a normal HD-camcorder? If you scale the contrasts in front of the lens, if you bring all the values into these 5-6-7 or so stops (by lightening up the shadows), you have every chance of getting an image at least as dynamic as this one looks in it's 8-bit vimeo compression. Come on, trust your eyes. This is nothing worth mentioning. If it looks like film, it looks like 16mm, good enough to add some patina to the odd music video. [/quote] You sound like one of those " Art Directors " that make a living from pissing on everything in pissing distance. You end up living in your own p... - you get the picture ( and the odor ). Could you please enlighten and direct us to something that " IS " worth mentioning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Anastasi Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 To be fair the look we are seeing here is entirely in the hands of who ever grades it now, including sharpness as RAW is totally flat and unsharp just like our RAW red and Alexa footage... Who cannot see someone's film like this and have a comment anymore.. It's all about weather the grader was good, the lighting tech was good, etc etc... All that comes into play now :) All your doing here is commenting on this guys grading skills now lol.. And commenting on sharpness is pointless, too much sharpness and the model will hate you forever ! Sharpness is part of the grading process so you can choose how soft or sharp you want the scene to be.. Now It's all totally upto the grader...true ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 The colors look fine, however in another thread with the same image I observed block artifacts on the hands. Folks are stating this camera is a game changer; perhaps best to compare with other cameras on the same material at the same time (same conditions). Skin tones look pretty good for one of the 'crushee's', the 5D3: https://vimeo.com/39237997 https://vimeo.com/40117480 I too would prefer more detail for for the 5D3, however for up-close, skin tones, etc., it works pretty well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christianhubbard Posted April 20, 2012 Share Posted April 20, 2012 Sorry to hijack another thread about skin tones, but can someone explain even more about them? Axel really elaborated the importance of preserving skin tone in another thread, and how to go about that in post, but what makes a camera great in terms of skin tone? If you're shooting raw isnt the skin tone quality entirely up to the grader? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sara Posted April 20, 2012 Author Share Posted April 20, 2012 [quote author=jcs link=topic=611.msg4402#msg4402 date=1334888813] The colors look fine, however in another thread with the same image I observed block artifacts on the hands. Folks are stating this camera is a game changer; perhaps best to compare with other cameras on the same material at the same time (same conditions). Skin tones look pretty good for one of the 'crushee's', the 5D3: https://vimeo.com/39237997 https://vimeo.com/40117480 I too would prefer more detail for for the 5D3, however for up-close, skin tones, etc., it works pretty well. [/quote] Thanks for sharing the samples. Opinions will differ on skin tone I guess, but to me those are good for a Canon 5D but still waxy / videoish / and very cheap looking. I watched them on an Eizo ColorEdge CG245W. https://vimeo.com/29708051 - pretty much proved to the world that Canon 7D, 5D, MK4 are not capable of rendering pleasing film-like skin tone. Or watch Act of Valor - horrible skin tone. But the directors "wanted" a cheap "video game" feel to the movie so for Act of Valor it worked (i guess). Just depends on what you want. But skin tone is very subjective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.