Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Why 4K matters - and why it's not ready for prime time  (Read 14388 times)
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #80 on: September 08, 2013, 08:44:14 PM »
ReplyReply

The new Sony doesn't interest me. Small sensor, deep DOF and no raw.

A couple of years from now camcorders without raw will seem very dated.

True it would do for our interviews and tutorials, but we have other plans as well. :-)

Michael

Don't know your plans and everybody has a different opinion when it comes to raw vs. broad gamma prorezz, but I'm curious if you have other plans and your going to higher production values, why you would chose black magic?

I don't know much about their cameras and the price looks good, but the other stuff would worry me.  Delivery first off and the fact it seems to take any motion camera company a year or so to work out the kinks.

I just saw the footage that Phillip Bloom did on the bm mft pocket cam and it looked nice, much nicer than previous footage from China, but 5 batteries for 50 minutes shooting and no ability to format in camera are just basic things that would send me crazy.  

The new 4k, might be beyond all of that and I hope it is, but from personal experience I can tell you RED (and no I'm not selling or pushing RED) has most of their issues worked out to the point they are reliable and full featured.

Without RED I don't know what cameras I'd buy.    I know I'd look at the F5, but have never been that big a fan of Sony's motion cameras and of course for the price I'd have to look at black magic, but I'd also investigate even the Arri, though the price is steep.

What I do know that compared to the h264 cameras I have and continue to use, the workflow on RED is a dream and the ability to really move the file is up there in still photography land.

But as I said, everybody is different.

IMO

BC
Logged

hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1704


« Reply #81 on: September 09, 2013, 02:32:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Talking about sound quality is akin to talking about religion.  Scientists/engineers have repeated showed, under controlled conditions, test subjects can not reliably tell the difference between 24/96 and 16/44.  Of course, there is a whole industry built on the 'belief' that this is not true.  I am the most discriminating listener in the house, yet I have the worst hearing (no hearing beyond 10k Hz).  Go figure.
What those scientists do, is fail to show that there are audible differences. That is not the same as showing that there are do differences.

I can spend my career looking for the easter bunny. If I fail to find him, that is inconclusive proof that he does not exist. If I find him, it is pretty conclusive proof that he does exist.

This puts many audiophile phenomena in the same cathegory as homeopathy, abduction by aliens etc: have not been proven, cannot be disproven.

-h
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3636



WWW
« Reply #82 on: September 09, 2013, 03:33:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Talking about sound quality is akin to talking about religion.  Scientists/engineers have repeated showed, under controlled conditions, test subjects can not reliably tell the difference between 24/96 and 16/44.  Of course, there is a whole industry built on the 'belief' that this is not true. 
Since when?
There is however an audio industry that makes sound equipment of very varying quality, which some people can certainly tell apart and others cannot - just like some people can discriminate between certain cameras or lenses which others counldn't give a monkey's about.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3636



WWW
« Reply #83 on: September 09, 2013, 03:51:25 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't know much about BM cameras and the price looks good, but the other stuff would worry me.  Delivery first off and the fact it seems to take any motion camera company a year or so to work out the kinks.
Sounds awfully like RED, but they took far more than a year.


Quote
The new 4k, might be beyond all of that and I hope it is, but from personal experience I can tell you RED (and no I'm not selling or pushing RED) has most of their issues worked out to the point they are reliable and full featured.
Yet they have a dismal reputation for reliability. Philip Bloom sold his despite the fact it produced images better than his other cameras, because he couldn't trust it to always work. And I also seem to to recall RED/Jim Jannard getting a bit annoyed that he did this and there was a bit of an silly online hoo-haa about it all, which didn't do RED any favours.


Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1704


« Reply #84 on: September 09, 2013, 03:55:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Since when?
There is however an audio industry that makes sound equipment of very varying quality, which some people can certainly tell apart and others cannot - just like some people can discriminate between certain cameras or lenses which others counldn't give a monkey's about.
There is also an industry of homeopaths, curing people from illness. The problem (for scientific or critical minded) is that reports of their successes have (AFAIK) never been recreated under controlled conditions, documented and passed the scrutiny of peer reviewers. As such, we don't know if homeopathy (or hirez audio) does what their proponents claim, only that we have so far been unable to prove that it does.

If no-one have ever been able to pick out 96kHz from 44.1kHz in, say 19 out of 20 attempts in a simple ABX test, why should anyone waste money on it, as long as there are other parts of the audio chain that really does affect audible performance? And if anyone think that they can pass such a test, why not just go ahead and do it, instead of endless debates on internet forums?

-h
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 03:57:15 AM by hjulenissen » Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3636



WWW
« Reply #85 on: September 09, 2013, 04:05:46 AM »
ReplyReply

No-one cares about 96KHz Vs 256KHz Vs 1028KHz Vs 1 billionKHz .
Does the music sound better yes or no? That is what matters. And is the bit you accountant types repeatedly ignore by talking about irrelevancies.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1704


« Reply #86 on: September 09, 2013, 05:43:58 AM »
ReplyReply

No-one cares about 96KHz Vs 256KHz Vs 1028KHz Vs 1 billionKHz .
I don't. I just listen to the music that I love. To the audiophiles, sampling rate specs seems to matter a lot more than those of us who have had any engineering or scientific experience (and indeed, most of the musicians I know). One example:
...which doesn't surprise me actually as higher sampling rates in music, which cannot be directly heard makes audio sound better in my experience....
Quote
Does the music sound better yes or no? That is what matters. And is the bit you accountant types repeatedly ignore by talking about irrelevancies.
Either it is audible or it is not. If the music sounds better if you have 96kHz AND can see a nice expensive audiophile box, but not if it is 96kHz and you cannot see a nice expensive audiophile box, then I shall leave it up to the reader to conclude about what part is irrelevant.

-h
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 05:49:22 AM by hjulenissen » Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3636



WWW
« Reply #87 on: September 09, 2013, 05:57:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Don't post irrelevant nonsense then. If you bothered to read posts correctly in first place, then there would be less of an issue with your pointless replies.
This is a thread about video resolution on which I touched upon how music can sound different, not about the absolute limits of human hearing. Try and reply to the actual posts, not what you incorrectly assume them to mean.

Post this was a reply to has now vanished!
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 05:59:47 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3636



WWW
« Reply #88 on: September 09, 2013, 06:30:40 AM »
ReplyReply

To the audiophiles, sampling rate specs seems to matter a lot more than those of us who have had any engineering or scientific experience (and indeed, most of the musicians I know).
So you think MP3s, no matter what the encoding quality is from say from 32-320kps, sound exactly the same as each other and also identical to a lossless file or even the original sound?

Quote
If the music sounds better if you have 96kHz AND can see a nice expensive audiophile box, but not if it is 96kHz and you cannot see a nice expensive audiophile box, then I shall leave it up to the reader to conclude about what part is irrelevant.
Usually the part where you post anything.  Tongue  And as if to prove my point above, no-one claimed anything about this sort of comparison. Once again you are arguing against points not made.

« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 10:22:33 AM by jjj » Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #89 on: September 09, 2013, 07:34:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Sounds awfully like RED, but they took far more than a year.

Yet they have a dismal reputation for reliability. Philip Bloom sold his despite the fact it produced images better than his other cameras, because he couldn't trust it to always work. And I also seem to to recall RED/Jim Jannard getting a bit annoyed that he did this and there was a bit of an silly online hoo-haa about it all, which didn't do RED any favours.





Full disclosure.  I've had my up and downs with RED, especially in their buying process.  

I also waited until the mx sensor was available AND in wide use before I bought my first then second R1.  

I had heard the things about overheating, you need two, etc. etc., but ours have been virtually perfect, around the world, from Zero C in New York and Paris to hellish hot and humid conditions in Thailand and KL. In fact for dialog I usually run very long takes and had no issue.  

Now the Scarlet, I bit early and yes . . . it's been more than a year since I find it really all around usable.  But RED came through made hardware fixes for sound, fan, connections and it is a useable production camera and now well worth the money. 

I'm not a RED fan boy like you see on their forums, rarely go on their forums unless I want to buy something, but there was and is no completely capable 4k, to 5k raw camera, with it's own software suite, that is available today, that is tested in battle for the price RED sells for.  

In fact I'm so pleased with the R1's that if I needed a 4th RED, it would be an R1, but I use the scarlet and now as a c cam . . .  use it for shoulder mounted and quick set up shots, usually with Canon I.S. lenses.

But to Blackmagic. I can promise you nobody would like them to succeed more than I.  The price is good, (not great considering what it takes to make one really work) and I believe they will get there, though it seems to take even Sony, a year or so to really get a 4k camera working in mainstream and varied conditions.

I had my pocket book out for the little mft pocket camera, and if I like it, maybe the 4k camera,  but Phillip bloom's testing kind of threw me back.   No camera formatting which I'm sure they'll fix in firmware, though 5 batteries for 50 minutes is not going to work for most people.  Just like the in handle Scarlet and Epic batteries, they're is just not enough juice in small batteries to run a 4k camera.  I know, because I own more V-locks than I do SSD, CF and SD cards.

BTW:  Either the camera or Phillips color grading for his quick tests was very, very pretty for such a quick test.

But back to why 4k matters.  Go get a small dslr, or a mft camera.  Set a jpeg at around 2000 pixels across and throw it into fcp.  Drop a filter in and start working.  Then take the same image shot raw at 4k and do the same.  Even for a still you'll see the difference and more than a looks a little better difference, you'll see a holy s__t what a difference.

4k is here in production.  In output I'm not that sure, but in acquisition 4k is the deal.

Yea, Sometimes Mr. Jannard does himself no favors, but he's bold, he's proud, he did what he said . . . not all . . . but more than the big players and he doesn't take any lip.

In a world that bold and proud has been turned to a negative, I find Mr. Jannard refreshing and he puts himself out there for the world to swing at.  I like him.

Consequently medium format cameras fall into the same high quality niche and the Phase one CEO essentially does the same thing, in a much more understated manner, but he makes no apologies for making good camera backs that are professional.

The part I don't understand with both of these companies is people like to diss them, few that do have actually worked with their equipment under heavy, lots of money on the line production, but everybody, even part time testers love to complain and unfortunately the web gives everyone an equal voice.


IMO

BC
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 08:11:58 AM by bcooter » Logged

Manoli
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 685


« Reply #90 on: September 09, 2013, 08:00:09 AM »
ReplyReply

I shall leave it up to the reader to conclude about what part is irrelevant.

Excellent idea.
And in the meantime, for some noted authorities and a whole stream of comments ..
http://www.avguide.com/forums/blind-listening-tests-are-flawed-editorial

Now, back to 4K ..
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3636



WWW
« Reply #91 on: September 09, 2013, 10:17:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Yea, Sometimes Mr. Jannard does himself no favors, but he's bold, he's proud, he did what he said . . . not all . . . but more than the big players and he doesn't take any lip.
I certainly admire JJ, particularly with regard to bypassing the deliberately crippled product that gets very slightly less crap each year that Sony/Canon liked to do and also making movie cameras more affordable. Still too expensive unless you're a pro film maker, but the non-pros are not quite his market.
But I'm not a fan of paying to beta/alpha test equipment/software......
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4914



« Reply #92 on: September 09, 2013, 11:30:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Returning to the BMCC 2.5K, after a couple of weeks of daily use I'm very pleased. I am assuming(?!) that the 4Ks when they come will be about the same when it comes to field ruggedness.

I'd been working exclusively on a tripod, since my hand-held rig isn't here yet, but it's no better or worse than any other cine or even MF or LF camera in that regard. Yesterday I was in and out of the car 30 times in the afternoon, and the rig sits on the back seat, bouncing around. Sets up quickly.

The large rear LCD is a pleasure to work with in anything except direct sunlight. For that I have a Cineroid EVF on order. I feel like I'm looking at a 4X5 view camera ground glass, except unreversed. Might even bring a black cloth with me for outdoor work next time :-)

Raw workflow is a breeze. I've now got DaVinci Resolve under control, and I can do a one light grade on about 30 files (as I did yesterday) in about 45 minutes. On my Macbook Pro Retina rendering to ProRes HQ runs at about 50% realtime. Once done it's normal workflow in FCPX. I don't roundtrip at this point.

My only concern will be rendering 4K footage out of DaVinci. When that begins, if the Retina laptop is too slow I may just render proxies and roundtrip from FCPX. Then render out the final overnight if needs be.

Michael

Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1188


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #93 on: September 09, 2013, 02:16:19 PM »
ReplyReply

I certainly admire JJ, particularly with regard to bypassing the deliberately crippled product that gets very slightly less crap each year that Sony/Canon liked to do and also making movie cameras more affordable. Still too expensive unless you're a pro film maker, but the non-pros are not quite his market.
But I'm not a fan of paying to beta/alpha test equipment/software......

Your right.  None of us should beta test.  Michael's doing it with the BM, I did it with the Scarlet, Apple, Adobe, Canon, Leaf, Olympus, Nikon (barley), Not Phase, Not Contax, Not Panasonic.

Red did address virtually every issue with all three of their cameras, except of course their fixes cost money, but hey, they fixed them.

All are pros.  We'll that's their original market, but now I'm sure they'd love to pick up the non pro, serious amateur and probably thought the Scarlet was the answer (it may be I don't know).

But if you glance over the RED or for that matter any photography forum, what is the percentage of people that make 100% of their household income off of paying photography?

I'd bet the numbers would surprise you.

But I still agree, RED did have issues, today many less and the thing with digital, still or motion, it's a fright to buy any new camera because until your really under fire you never know what's going to happen.

IMO

BC

P.S.   T Mark made an interesting remark that the systems in all genres of still and motion need to be faster.  Every 4k or 2k for that matter motion camera should have a dedicated or access to a dedicated processing and transcoding suite that use cpu and gpu power with approved video cards that worked with the system.

When I saw that 4k tablet, my eyes lit up.  I thought, now how cool that would be for editing.   Touch, drag, drop, lock edit, drag timeline into coloring suite, turn a few flat screen knobs and wa-la, your done.

Even if the tablet had to interface with a tower, what a great idea and think of the time savings.  Post is huge, huge, and did I say huge when it comes to time and budget.

There needs to be a more cohesive and standard way to work, instead of the roll your own system we have now.  (No I don't think fcpX is the answer as it sits today, but something like it could be).

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 02:23:03 PM by bcooter » Logged

jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3636



WWW
« Reply #94 on: September 09, 2013, 04:35:35 PM »
ReplyReply

The large rear LCD is a pleasure to work with in anything except direct sunlight. For that I have a Cineroid EVF on order. I feel like I'm looking at a 4X5 view camera ground glass, except unreversed. Might even bring a black cloth with me for outdoor work next time :-)
I often wonder why similar isn't done more often. The hood that comes with a SmallHD [ext] monitor is pretty good, you can even rest it quite comfortably against your face for a large style EVF.

Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
hjulenissen
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1704


« Reply #95 on: September 13, 2013, 07:56:14 AM »
ReplyReply

And in the meantime, for some noted authorities and a whole stream of comments ..
http://www.avguide.com/forums/blind-listening-tests-are-flawed-editorial
Yeah, and my magic homeopathy potions "really" works, except when you test them blindly, then they stop working all of a sudden. $200 per box. 99.99999% natural ingredients. Interested?

I wish that the general public would have a look at the video below and think through why we do what we do, why we think what we think.
"Audio Myths workshop from the October 2009 AES show"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYTlN6wjcvQ

The sad part is that there are known problem areas in sound reproduction (spatial reproduction, mastering practices,...), but certain audiophiles tends to pick the things that are least likely to matter (as in: have never been scientifically proven to matter at all), and divert the publics attention and money (and thereby manufacturer effort) away from the things that are most likely to matter (as in: have routinely been proven to matter, see e.g. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sound-Reproduction-Acoustics-Psychoacoustics-Loudspeakers/dp/0240520092). That is an image problem for all of us interested in high-quality reproduction of music: we are largely seen as middle-aged men with more money than critical sense, instead of the music lovers that many of us are.
Quote
Now, back to 4K ..
Good idea.

-h
« Last Edit: September 13, 2013, 08:35:29 AM by hjulenissen » Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad