Recording Media – BMPCC4K User Resource Blog

March 6, 2019March 6, 2019

Test & Verdict: Blackmagic Raw vs The World. BMPCC4k

My initial impression of BRAW was negative because it came at the cost of CinemaDNG and coupled with a “raw” codec that is softer/less detail/less sharp resulted in my reaction as an epic fail. I know many people want to argue a softer image is more cinematic and blah blah blah but the point is the image quality HAS changed and whether it can be improved in post is a whole other can of worms. Some are swearing they will not update their firmware which demonstrates the real concern for users who want the best performance from their equipment. It’s equivalent to having a car with 200 hp and you take it to the shop and it now has 195 hp would that really make you happy? Oh but there is now more room in the back seat?! HAHA, same difference.

Many others on forums and groups spouted the same frustration that was directed to another camera company for pressuring through litigation or the threat of litigation to remove CinemaDNG from our beloved BMPCC4k. What a strange reason to finally receive BRAW.

Did BMD really create a camera that was so damn good that one of the “big boys” who sell their camera box alone for $30k was threatened? Did BMD blink and quickly release BRAW and remove CinemaDNG to avoid or stop litigation?

Needless to say, I was frustrated that CinemaDNG was gone with firmware update 6.2 and all I had left was Prores and BRAW (I never use Prores!).

So on a rainy day in Southern California and a canceled shoot I decided to do further testing and here are the results. Please let me know your thoughts on the new codec. Keep in mind the focus was on the center of the chart.

I may upload the files for download…

MT
editor/founder

March 5, 2019March 5, 2019

FAIL! Quick Look: CinemaDNG vs Braw! Firmware 6.2

I have received a few emails wanting a lighter image so I added a node in Davinci Resolve and slightly adjusted the curves. The nodes were applied to the entire timeline and NOT just the clip so the gamma/extended video and curves were equally applied to each clip. Nothing on the camera was moved the only thing is that the camera was updated in place on the tripod. The stills were obtained in Davinci Resolve via the color tab and “grab still” function. If BRAW looks in inferior because of perceived compression of the internet then CinemaDNG should look inferior also. The larger shot has a color chart and highlight blown out area for further testing. The images below are zoomed in.

Please read previous post for the specs of the test : (

I am disappointed in the softer image with BRAW and have now lost the CinemaDNG codec with the upgrade. At this point I would have preferred CinemaDNG and BRAW instead of keeping Prores.

Further proof below of the softness of BRAW. Maybe some of you prefer a softer image out of camera but in my opinion if you are spending over $1k on lenses why allow a codec to soften it for you? The “softness” may be due to BRAW’s inability to capture pixel data and interpret it correctly. Whatever the exact cause it is an epic fail.

This has to be one for the books….so close then a fumble on the one yard line.

Puff the magic went away,

MT
edito/founder

January 23, 2019January 23, 2019

Is This The Best Compact Battery Solution For The BMPCC4k?

Disclaimer: the video was shot at different times of the day and the exposure and focus would vary, I left the camera recording while I worked on other things

Since one of the chief complaints of the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4k being poor battery life I decided to see if I could find the smallest external battery to power the camera. I stumbled across the Powerextra which is a Sony NPF 960 style that insanely has a USB 5v output and 6-8.4v DC output that can power my Feelworld 5″ monitor.

Can it be true that the Powerextra battery can power my monitor and camera??? Can it power while recording to SSD? Can it handle Prores and Raw?

Watch the video and find out.

Make sure to subscribe to this user blog to receive all the latest updates

Keep the magic alive,

MT
editor/founder

January 11, 2019January 12, 2019

Can You Tell Which Lenses Were Used For “The World On A String” Short Film?

In this world of filmmaking lenses are believed to contain some of the magic of what is commonly referred to as “look”. But can you really tell different lenses apart by simply looking at the end result? Can you tell the difference between primes, cinema primes, and zooms? Sometimes the difference can be a couple hundred or thousands of dollars.

A quick note about what was used on the short film. Since the filming would take place at night in various lighting conditions and distances different focal lengths were used. This was extremely challenging considering all the other factors outside of my control in a live performance.

Here are some of the lenses that I use and each have been renowned for their “looks” but not all of them were used for this short film. I have the legendary photography prime Voigtlander 17.5mm f.95. The cinema prime SLR Magic 25mm f.95. And now enter the EF APS-C zooms: Tokina 10-20mm f2.8, Sigma 18-35mm f1.8, and finally the big guns Sigma 50-100mm f.18. The EF lenses are paired with the Viltrox EF-M2 .71x focal reducer.

The short was recorded in film, 24fps and 60 fps, 4k dci, raw 4:1 and fully edited in Davinci Resolve 15. The Moza Air 2 gimbal was used with handheld and a majority on a monopod.

So now let’s look at some stills and see if you can decipher which lens was used. Please comment below.