Thread: 4.6k Sensor Checklist

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 58 of 58
  1. #51  
    Senior Member Timothy Cook's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Ft. Worth, Texas
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by yoclay View Post
    But as I said I really do not understand a company that releases another camera with the same known and important sensor issue as this and has made no effort to correct it in the new model. Kind of blows my mind actually.
    I can probably help you out with this one. ^^^^^^^

    For the shooter who BMD are targeting I can assume when given the option of ARRI money and zero URSA mini cameras in the wild or $5000-$6000 Ursa minis and a few work arounds, and with the end result having footage that looks almost identical to the ARRIs. It's a no brainer in my eyes. We forget that BMD isn't charging a fortune for the cameras, and I'm sure they are hoping the buyer understands there are going to be some sacrifices made to get said "ARRI" look, which has become the bench mark.

    Just sooooooo much unbelievable footage out there in the wild that has been shot on the Ursa Minis, and everyone of those shooters and colorist had to work with in the same limitations. I guess you can keep waiting on the perfect camera, but don't hold your breath.

    I feel the same way about the shooters I know who won't even give the Pocket a chance because there are to many work arounds for there style of shooting. Honestly, I feel sorry for those guys because of what I know the Pocket and BMMCC are capable of. I've literally stopped trying to convince them anymore and I have realized that some people just can't see past the work arounds.

    If you were to poll DPs that buy $10,000 or less cameras and asked, "UMP with work arounds? Or no UMP?" I think the results would be obvious.
    I'm sure BMD wants the UMP to be flawless and have ZERO issues just like the ARRI /S. But it doesn't, and they know that, and they also know there is a big demand for RAW cinema cameras in the $5000 range that shoot incredible images. (Honestly I can't believe I'm finally getting to say that these last 5 years) Amazing times!

    To BMD: Keep improving your cameras! But Pleeeeeeeeeease don't stop making them because of minor flaws you encounter.


    If I had $6000 to drop on a UMP right now my conversation with a distributer would sound like this.

    Me: Hi, I would like to purchase a Ursa Mini Pro.

    Rep: Great! Just to let you know, there will be some issues you will have to work around while shooting. ( He then explains all know issues) Are you ok with this?

    Me: YES!

    Rep: (silence)..... did you hear the issues I just listed? (He starts to list issues again)

    Me: (I stop him in mid-sentence while he is still listing issues) Yes I heard you the first time. Are you ready for my card number?
    Last edited by Timothy Cook; 03-15-2017 at 07:29 PM.
    Vimeo.com/dropbars
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #52  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    USA N. CA
    Posts
    1,876
    I like it! Thanks for this.
    Cheers
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #53  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,396
    My beef is with the crosshatching. A lot of us, those that received their cameras early did not have this issue with older firmware. Even now with sensor calibration you can still pick it out. What is it that BMD feel the need to give us crosshatching, is this a price of progress we don't know?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #54  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,396
    I read somewhere that less than 2% of RED sensor make it pass QC and goes into their cameras which means the cost is higher. I don't know how many BMD sensors make it pass QC but if it is 2% I would suspect their cameras could be much higher.
    So if someone ask more money for a problem free sensor camera it is concievable people will pay extra.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #55  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    2,637
    Quote Originally Posted by yoclay View Post
    Thanks for your input John. I want you to know that I do appreciate your point of view.

    However, there is definitely an issue there.
    Well this is the point no? I'm saying it's up to the individual as to whether it's a deal breaker issue or not. It's not been an issue for me as detailed, not for any of the clients or colourists I work with. You have an opinion that says otherwise. That's your view. As it relates to the wok you do.



    Quote Originally Posted by yoclay View Post


    It can clearly be seen even without even touching exposure or correction on your cloud images.
    Did you know that you're looking at a DNG render of the RAW straight from the browser ? Hows it look when you open it resolve or PS without touching it ?

    Quote Originally Posted by yoclay View Post

    I am looking at a very common shooting situation and I see what anyone who has worked in grading suites (I own one) over the years sees : "Damn, I am going to lose a lot of time creating a circular mask and play with finicky questions of saturation to deal with the transitions on this."
    And yet I've never had to do that kind of correction. EVER. And you know, I've been in a few grades. Company 3, Lightiron, Deluxe. With this material. I'm not trying to be a dick, but you keep saying stuff like this that just doesn't tally with what I ever have to do. I don't know who you are, I feel like you get to be picky, fair enough, but I'm speaking from hundreds of hours of grading time with this material.

    Quote Originally Posted by yoclay View Post

    So while you may think "no big deal" as the shooter, from the point of view of a guy who has had to fix a lot of stuff in post in the past, I definitely do not agree. From the looks of things this is not an ultra rare situation where this uneven color problem shows up, but rather a regular occurrence. I would wager that anyone who shoots weddings or fashion and has a decent eye would encounter this issue on a very regular basis. White or pale dresses on a spring day, watch out!
    Cmon, a low blow. I'm in grades all the time. If post doesn't work out for me I get fired really really quickly because my screw ups cost hundreds of thousands. Don't give me that set vs post crap.

    Hey, guess what, the show I'm shooting RIGHT NOW features a key recurring wardrobe piece that is an all white outfit. Number one on the call sheet is wearing it in every episode. All white head to toe.


    Quote Originally Posted by yoclay View Post
    I want to love the camera. I really do. I keep trying. Otherwise I would not still be lurking here hoping for things to change. But as I said I really do not understand a company that releases another camera with the same known and important sensor issue as this and has made no effort to correct it in the new model. Kind of blows my mind actually. They really have got to sort this out.
    You don't have to love it. If it doesn't work for you then all good and well. You're doing a great job of letting people know the issues that may affect some shooters.

    Blackmagic listen. I know they do. I get to see what happens. It's up to users to decide if they can put up witht he workarounds or shortcomings of EVERY camera. They don't get a free ride from me. But it doesn't stop me from using them to do a job that I can only do with their cameras. As soon as someone makes a better one for that job, I won't be loyal. I'll be using that one.

    Like any new camera or lens, I always test eyes wide open and try to figure out what it can and can't do. it's often not what the manufacturer claims. I've got shopping lists of plusses and minus's for lot's of cameras. Some are image faults, some are utility and function. It's not really that hard is it ? You seem hell bent on holding Blackmagic to account and nailing them on an issue most people can't even see in their own work. You didn't even pick it in the original ursa footage.

    I think 95% of the users of this camera either don't see it in the first place, OR they see it and don't find it's a problem. If it's an issue then get something else ?

    JB
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #56  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    668
    Quote Originally Posted by John Brawley View Post
    Well this is the point no? I'm saying it's up to the individual as to whether it's a deal breaker issue or not. It's not been an issue for me as detailed, not for any of the clients or colourists I work with. You have an opinion that says otherwise. That's your view. As it relates to the wok you do.





    Did you know that you're looking at a DNG render of the RAW straight from the browser ? Hows it look when you open it resolve or PS without touching it ?



    And yet I've never had to do that kind of correction. EVER. And you know, I've been in a few grades. Company 3, Lightiron, Deluxe. With this material. I'm not trying to be a dick, but you keep saying stuff like this that just doesn't tally with what I ever have to do. I don't know who you are, I feel like you get to be picky, fair enough, but I'm speaking from hundreds of hours of grading time with this material.



    Cmon, a low blow. I'm in grades all the time. If post doesn't work out for me I get fired really really quickly because my screw ups cost hundreds of thousands. Don't give me that set vs post crap.

    Hey, guess what, the show I'm shooting RIGHT NOW features a key recurring wardrobe piece that is an all white outfit. Number one on the call sheet is wearing it in every episode. All white head to toe.




    You don't have to love it. If it doesn't work for you then all good and well. You're doing a great job of letting people know the issues that may affect some shooters.

    Blackmagic listen. I know they do. I get to see what happens. It's up to users to decide if they can put up witht he workarounds or shortcomings of EVERY camera. They don't get a free ride from me. But it doesn't stop me from using them to do a job that I can only do with their cameras. As soon as someone makes a better one for that job, I won't be loyal. I'll be using that one.

    Like any new camera or lens, I always test eyes wide open and try to figure out what it can and can't do. it's often not what the manufacturer claims. I've got shopping lists of plusses and minus's for lot's of cameras. Some are image faults, some are utility and function. It's not really that hard is it ? You seem hell bent on holding Blackmagic to account and nailing them on an issue most people can't even see in their own work. You didn't even pick it in the original ursa footage.

    I think 95% of the users of this camera either don't see it in the first place, OR they see it and don't find it's a problem. If it's an issue then get something else ?

    JB
    Thanks for your feedback John.
    However, I think I will pass until they get this sorted.
    If I wanted my films to look like the real world I'd buy a video camera.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #57  
    Senior Member rick.lang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Victoria BC Canada
    Posts
    3,832
    Yoclay, the video I posted in post #35 taken from John's stills... go to the last clip, Clouds. That was done in Resolve with only Auto selected in the Colour tab. Quite a different result than what your Auto in ACR produced. I'd start questioning what ACR is doing compared to Resolve. Why aren't you using Resolve to examine BMD's raw images. It makes sense that they may be handling raw better than Adobe. It looks that way to me.

    Look at my recent tests posted relating to IR pollution. There was a fair bit of overcast cloud, similar to John's shooting condition in a Texas. In the first three parts of my test, there was no colour correction so you could see what was really happening. In part 4, I only hit Auto again in Resolve. As you know and pointed out to me about 10 or 11 months ago, my URSA Mini 4.6K had a troubled image that showed flaws. Several months later I noticed it was getting better by itself (I think some chemicals that were used on the sensor had finally evaporated) and then we've seen BMD making mprovements in the firmware and my results continue to improve.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #58  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,396
    Quote Originally Posted by rick.lang View Post
    Several months later I noticed it was getting better by itself (I think some chemicals that were used on the sensor had finally evaporated) and then we've seen BMD making mprovements in the firmware and my results continue to improve.
    And they gave us crosshatching
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Sensor improvements or same sensor issues for UM46 Pro?
    By mrbrycel in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-03-2017, 02:04 PM
  2. 4K V2 sensor vs. 4K V1 sensor
    By Howie Roll in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-26-2015, 11:29 PM
  3. Is this the sensor for the BMC 4K ?
    By AndrewDeme in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-11-2013, 08:30 AM
  4. If this is the same sensor, then wow....
    By RyGuy in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-20-2012, 10:19 PM
  5. Is this the BMC sensor?
    By randyman in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 04-26-2012, 07:52 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •