8K is for plebs. Can we edit in 12K?

[Poor nerd 69]

11 hours ago, RILEYISMYNAME said:

It's been a few years since we started filming in 8K. But now, the Blackmagic Ursa Mini Pro 12K is out. Can we make 12K videos?

 

 

 

Buy Blackmagic Ursa Mini Pro 12K

On Amazon (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/KnhwWdY

On Newegg (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/ObG2W

On B&H (PAID LINK): https://geni.us/VBuFlD 

 

BRAW Studio by Autokroma

https://www.autokroma.com/BRAW_Studio

I guess that recording in high resolution is good but I would appreciate more if you would do 60fps uploads. That would be a major upgrade and more noticeable.....

[AvMaverick]

3 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

you do realize right how cheap 4K and 6k cameras are now right? sub 1k in options like XT-3 and cine cameras like BMPCC4/6k for under 2k

Yeah, except I can't get over the fact that it is not so where I live!

[dogwitch]

4 hours ago, themrsbusta said:

This GPU memory problem is on Linux too? DaVinci Resolve works on Linux...

nvidia driver support........

[AvMaverick]

6 minutes ago, dogwitch said:

nvidia driver support........

Has become much better now. @GabenJr's favourite PopoOS is dope with this. And he can be tech support too!

[dogwitch]

Just now, AvMaverick said:

Has become much better now. @GabenJr's favourite PopoOS is dope with this. And he can be tech support too!

still issue with software for video and image works.

[Egg-Roll]

6 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

its 6+ cameras, 3 C200 3 Reds 2-3 BMPCC 4k/6k

 

I had a feeling I was missing some I remember a video about it. Still unless Linus is planning on selling most or all cameras they have now there is little purpose on getting 6 12K units. Or are they planning on a new channel

 

Most people will not be watching their videos in 4K so any benefits they could get with extra detail will likely be lost in youtubes compression. The highest I watch in is 1080, 720 if 60fps.

[Drama Lama]

3 hours ago, Egg-Roll said:

they have now there is little purpose on getting 6 12K units

they got them because they simply can

[2plash6]

But there is no point in filming their videos in 8k or higher for a couple of reasons.

 

1. Probably less than 0.2% of their viewers have an 8k TV to watch it.
2. It would take hours or maybe even days for a viewer to download the video.
3. There is no 12k TV yet that is available to customers.
4. Their videos are bright enough, and if you watch them in 12k on a real 12k TV, then it would really hurt the viewers eyes.

[themrsbusta]

6 hours ago, dogwitch said:

nvidia driver support........

Just use AMD.

[Dedayog]

21 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

Theoretically?

Yes you can.

Given the quality of LTT's videography, you're just wasting time.

Seriously, invest in a steady rig and someone who knows how to pull focus properly.

As a wise man once said "The single most important part of a camera, is the twelve inches behind it." Ansel Adams.

 

Isn't that what my ex-wife said?  Or something along those lines I think

[dogwitch]

3 hours ago, themrsbusta said:

Just use AMD.

they did not mention that on the video. so i dont know.

[Egg-Roll]

6 hours ago, Drama Lama said:

they got them because they simply can

Chances are they are trying to blow as much money as possible in "investments" over paying taxes, which I'm fine with as no one likes taxes Doesn't stop us from making fun out of them for doing it, esp if they could invest in better/more glass first.

[GDRRiley]

4 hours ago, 2plash6 said:

But there is no point in filming their videos in 8k or higher for a couple of reasons.

 

1. Probably less than 0.2% of their viewers have an 8k TV to watch it.
2. It would take hours or maybe even days for a viewer to download the video.
3. There is no 12k TV yet that is available to customers.
4. Their videos are bright enough, and if you watch them in 12k on a real 12k TV, then it would really hurt the viewers eyes.

1. they don't care its for down scaling or cropping in post.

2. not really H265 8k isn't that big

3.okay? go watch their red video it isn't about 12k delivery

4.wtf

[Egg-Roll]

9 hours ago, 2plash6 said:

But there is no point in filming their videos in 8k or higher for a couple of reasons.

 

1. Probably less than 0.2% of their viewers have an 8k TV to watch it.
2. It would take hours or maybe even days for a viewer to download the video.
3. There is no 12k TV yet that is available to customers.
4. Their videos are bright enough, and if you watch them in 12k on a real 12k TV, then it would really hurt the viewers eyes.

How did I miss this gem, oh yea I had to go out.

 

1. Trust me even on 1080p a 8k video if done right looks freaking sweet. (just download a NASA 8K video) https://images.nasa.gov/details-First-8K-Video-from-Space.html

Warning if your computer catches fire, goes supernova, black hole on you while trying to watch this video, neither I or NASA are liable.

2. Maybe time to get away from dial-up

3. Never heard of chaining TVs together to create a bigger screen? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Toft6fMvByA

4. A nice function called brightness control exists, if your unit doesn't you must have one from the 80's. Or are you somehow referring to how no one can see 4K anyways?

[Compuration]

Can’t they convert the Braw from blackmagic into cineform?

They did this video some years ago were they explained why they did that and as far as I know they did not chance there work flow sinds. Or is it because cineform doen’t support 12k?

[Crazywizard]

The point of Braw is that you can do anything you want in post,

Converting it to another form removes a any of the benefits those camara's give.

With Braw you can save nearly any footage that got screwed up. for example a super fun shoot outside and just that one awesome shot went into the sun and got screwed over.

You might be able to save that one shot with raw, where in another forum you cannot.

 

With each update resolve gets better and better,

They should just get for starters 1 editor over to resolve and really see how it compares to premier pro when an editor gets completely adjusted to a new workflow.

It takes time to really learn a new package, it does take time to get on speed from a program you know in and out, to a new program which you know little about.

A good example was Geralds Undone video who pointed out some issues as PP user, and where he asked the audience if there were solutions to his issues that he could not find himself and the audience pointed out some buttons he was not awere of that made some of his complaints pointless.

Furthermore a new program you might need a different workflow, it's something you always need to consider and figure out. thats why you start with 1 editor and give that person the freedom to take his/her time to adapt and figure out the best workflow that works. once that is done, lets say 3-6 months you compare the 2 and make a choice.

That person than also becomes the mentor for the other editors if it's decided a change is beneficial.

you can never make a good choice if you don't give it time, unless it's obvious another software package can't get even close and even tryiong is pointless.

but 90% vs 100% is a close enough match to test it out to see of getting good, or a modified workflow creates better results.

 

When I see tarans "bug list" for PP it's just scary, I wonder if they did switch to resolve or another program if there workflow would really be slower.

All the whines about crashes and bugs and whatnot, you should really invest more than a single week in seeing if another program does not solve your issues.

and if you think after a week you can get to 90% then it's more likely to get to 100-110% or more over some time.

 

 

Look where davinci resolve was not that long ago and how much they improved in such a short time, it's just a matter of time before they surpase premiere pro, if they not already did.

I havent seen yet what they improved on resolve 17 beta compared to 16.3 and how much of a leap it will be.

 

We have seen over time and will see over time that incumbents in the market with be overthrown over time,

There is a reason more and more users are leaving PP.

 

 

 

[GDRRiley]

3 hours ago, seee the state im in nooow said:

if you're thinking of these you'd be sorely mistaken ._.

 

 

the ones they have (had? are they still on the overhead hook corset thing?) simply makes it lighter/easier to hold and doesn't actually dampen movements from the camera operator

I'm not I know they've got easy rigs. its a 3rd point of contact so it should help some. Given they are running a C200+ sigma cine lenses I'd hope that they can keep it steady. (for a lot of their stuff, though reds still play a roll and URSA 12k may replace both)

Edited December 31, 2020 by GDRRiley

[lacek]

On 12/10/2020 at 11:10 PM, RILEYISMYNAME said:

It's been a few years since we started filming in 8K. But now, the Blackmagic Ursa Mini Pro 12K is out. Can we make 12K videos?

 

I am very curious to what extent it is true that "you can always crop 4k image from 12k video". What I mean is to what extent quality of such a crop is same as quality of a shot done directly with a 4k video. 

 

As far as I understand in 4k crop of 12k video you consider image from 1/3 (1/9) pixels of a 12k sensor, which is most likely much smaller physically (in terms of milimiters) than fill 4k sensor.  Does the lens in the 12k camera produce so sharp image, that taking 4k crop is in any way comparable to capturing 4k vide using full sensor and full image area of the lens? 

 

I seriously doubt that these are the same, but at the same I have no intuition to what extent does the "crop" suck.

 

[Crazywizard]

On 1/2/2021 at 3:31 PM, lacek said:

I am very curious to what extent it is true that "you can always crop 4k image from 12k video". What I mean is to what extent quality of such a crop is same as quality of a shot done directly with a 4k video. 

 

As far as I understand in 4k crop of 12k video you consider image from 1/3 (1/9) pixels of a 12k sensor, which is most likely much smaller physically (in terms of milimiters) than fill 4k sensor.  Does the lens in the 12k camera produce so sharp image, that taking 4k crop is in any way comparable to capturing 4k vide using full sensor and full image area of the lens? 

 

I seriously doubt that these are the same, but at the same I have no intuition to what extent does the "crop" suck.

 

Sharpness of an image is unrelated to sensor size. 80m pixels on a microfourthird or a full frame sensor is 80m pixels.

The only effect a sensor size has is related to the amount of light any of those pixels recieve. a smaller sensor recieves less light per pixel then a bigger sensor.

 

This becomes apparent in low light conditions where the larger sensor can produce a better image because in the same condition they can use a lowe ISO.

 

But in a studio you control the light, so there is no issue there.

There is a reason expensive filmcamera's like the arri alexa LF still use a super35 sensor and not a full frame sensor yet

If full frame was that much better for there workflow, they would have switched to that the second they did go digital. yet they did not.

 

So you can cut any 4K image from a 12k picture without any loss.

[Biomecanoid]

56 minutes ago, Crazywizard said:

Sharpness of an image is unrelated to sensor size. 80m pixels on a microfourthird or a full frame sensor is 80m pixels.

The only effect a sensor size has is related to the amount of light any of those pixels recieve. a smaller sensor recieves less light per pixel then a bigger sensor.

 

This becomes apparent in low light conditions where the larger sensor can produce a better image because in the same condition they can use a lowe ISO.

 

But in a studio you control the light, so there is no issue there.

There is a reason expensive filmcamera's like the arri alexa LF still use a super35 sensor and not a full frame sensor yet

If full frame was that much better for there workflow, they would have switched to that the second they did go digital. yet they did not.

 

So you can cut any 4K image from a 12k picture without any loss.

But you loose Field of View

[lacek]

6 hours ago, Crazywizard said:

Sharpness of an image is unrelated to sensor size. 80m pixels on a microfourthird or a full frame sensor is 80m pixels.

The only effect a sensor size has is related to the amount of light any of those pixels recieve. a smaller sensor recieves less light per pixel then a bigger sensor.

 

This becomes apparent in low light conditions where the larger sensor can produce a better image because in the same condition they can use a lowe ISO.

 

But in a studio you control the light, so there is no issue there.

There is a reason expensive filmcamera's like the arri alexa LF still use a super35 sensor and not a full frame sensor yet

If full frame was that much better for there workflow, they would have switched to that the second they did go digital. yet they did not.

 

So you can cut any 4K image from a 12k picture without any loss.

Yeah, sort of. Sharpness is unrelated to sensor size, if the lens is able to make an image on the sensor that is able to focus image down to a single pixel. And this is never the case, especially far from the optical axis. And of course you are right with the "light / ISO" claims.

That said 12k camera would require "three times more sharp" lens which I presume is not affordable. 

 

I somehow doubt that lens for the 12k camera has optical properties so that crop of a image (especially from a corder) is of the same sharpness as 4k image that is captured with full sensor.

 

as far as "So you can cut any 4K image from a 12k picture without any loss." - the point is that you have two setups:

a) 12k camera which you on purpose use with "wide angle" lens to have more options for cropping

b) 4k camera, you make additional effort to capture exactly the frame you need.

is the 4k crop from 12 really the same in the case a) as the image in b) and if not can you in practice notice the difference. 

 

 

 

[mindstormsag]

Could it be, that the color-quality and iso noise in the videos has gotten worse in the last few weeks and it could be because to the switch to the 12Ks?