Jump to content
thani

BlackMagic Cinema Camera underwater custom housing

Recommended Posts

Hello,

 

Anybody there?

Any successful downloads or color correction for the images?

:(

You can get Davinci Resolve lite for free. It is really good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It will be interesting if you can post any color graded frames back to this post. This will be highly appreciated and interesting as each colorists will be seeing the underworld way in his/her own creative way.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/rk241svrgtg4ywp/G1oOpa0STM

I am travilling for couple of weeks and I thought I will try to post some of the sample frames hence no body posted any color corrected files from the above link : :fool:

Note that images are being compressed badly during the upload :(

post-22245-0-59913800-1377032207_thumb.jpg

post-22245-0-49433000-1377032421_thumb.jpg

post-22245-0-18596500-1377032607_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had to break it in to multiple post:

post-22245-0-11653900-1377032791_thumb.jpg

Edited by thani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there,

 

Here is a video we shot with the custom housing using the following setup:

BMCC (2.5k)

RAW video

Sigma 8mm (F4 - not a fast lens) behind a flat port. Focus preset on 3ft (as the manual focus was built for canon 16-34 lens)

Edit was done entirely in Davinci Resolve Lite 10 beta

Video was shot 2-3 Nov 2013 in Musandam Oman

Depth vari between shallow - 110 ft. i.e. stingray at 110, Fish around 100 and Grouper around 70-80

 

I will try to post my thought on shooting RAW when time allows :)

Thank you Sultan for your innovation, love for the sea and everything else :)

 

Remember to watch it in Full HD and I hope you enjoy it:

Edited by thani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a video we shot with the custom housing using the following setup:

BMCC (2.5k)

RAW video

Thanks Thani for your sample. This video displays a good selection of various material at various depths.

 

The only thing I am wondering about is why do I see uneven banding on the sea backgrounds, e.g. 0:59-1:01. The smaller steps in the banding are understandable (8-bit color components), but, why are there larger steps as well? Or is this a result of the video having been converted for/by Youtube? I actually took a framegrab and noticed how colors changed quite abruptly at the edges of the coarser bands, e.g. RGB 0:113:138 to RGB 0:110:136 from pixel to neighboring pixel, which explains why the banding is so visible. Just curious. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I am wondering about is why do I see uneven banding on the sea backgrounds, e.g. 0:59-1:01. The smaller steps in the banding are understandable (8-bit color components), but, why are there larger steps as well? Or is this a result of the video having been converted for/by Youtube? I actually took a framegrab and noticed how colors changed quite abruptly at the edges of the coarser bands, e.g. RGB 0:113:138 to RGB 0:110:136 from pixel to neighboring pixel, which explains why the banding is so visible. Just curious. :)

Yes, I believe youtube compression had an effect on the quality. In addition, I have not rendered to the 'best quality' hence the size will be too big to be uploaded. I used the second best which is called 'high' in davinci resolve.

I have dropped four frames in Dropbox, two are the original camera raw and the other two (namely 033 & 142.dng) are converted by adobe converter so that it can be opened in Photoshop.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/pzipmq80ahi2ogu/SiW3c6Ga6M

 

I am interested to here about your findings :)

Edited by thani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am interested to here about your findings :)

I opened the files in CorelPaint XV. All of them appear to be 48bit files with 16-bits per color component. Due to restrictions of the tool I was not able to verify the effective amount of bits per channel. But the images do have a lot of latitude in color processing. You can actually adjust them into quite beautiful colors if you can accept the increase in the noise level. It would be interesting to calculate the S/N ratio with this exposure. My guestimate is 33-39 dB but I could be wrong. What exposure settings did you use at this point of the video footage?

 

Even with strong image adjustment I did not observe any banding (or it is camouflaged by the noise). Thus the banding visible in the earlier Youtube video sample must have been a result of conversion(s) and/or other post processing. If possible, you might want to keep the full bit depth until the very last conversion into output media. The picture below was edited first in 48-bit - no visible banding. When I exported it into a 24-bit jpeg at the end, slight banding was introduced.

 

It would be interesting to view a fully color graded version of your video.

post-33246-0-00692700-1384548105_thumb.jpg

Edited by r4e

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I opened the files in CorelPaint XV. All of them appear to be 48bit files with 16-bits per color component. Due to restrictions of the tool I was not able to verify the effective amount of bits per channel. But the images do have a lot of latitude in color processing. You can actually adjust them into quite beautiful colors if you can accept the increase in the noise level. It would be interesting to calculate the S/N ratio with this exposure. My guestimate is 33-39 dB but I could be wrong.

What exposure settings did you use at this point of the video footage?

 

It would be interesting to view a fully color graded version of your video.

First, I really appreciate your effort into qualifying the images :)

 

On the exposure, I believe on this dive my iris control got stuck and the iris was opened at the widest 4.5. On the same note, I am quite amazed by davinci resolve recovery from such over exposure issues. I've seen total white images come back a live. Like the sardine shot at the end of the clip.

 

Re. Viewing a fully graded version, do you mean a better graded one than the YouTube version? Can you elaborate more on this plz

 

It is important to recall that the BMCC is meant for film and the footage itself tends to be grainy, a desired affect for films, where I think it would not be desired for underwater. Still to be studied.

 

In the full version of Resolve there are various ways of reducing noise. I think the one that works on separate channels such as luminance may be effective.

 

Remember that I did the edit in resolve lite and that I am a beginner in color grading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thani, thanks very much for your test. I am really impressed by the extend that these raw video files can be tuned. Can't wait for the housing for my bmpcc.

10883134656_1737a5483b_z.jpg

Edited by kkfok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re. Viewing a fully graded version, do you mean a better graded one than the YouTube version? Can you elaborate more on this plz

Remember that I did the edit in resolve lite and that I am a beginner in color grading.

I am a beginner as well. But, like kkfok demonstrated, there is even more latitude for color grading. Depending of course on your targets. E.g. beautiful bright pictures vs giving the impression of depth.

 

Perhaps on the sequence of the searays I would have adjusted the color of the sand differently as well as the overall color balance. Most of the footage, however, looked very good. And then it is a question of how far you personally want to take your color grading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kkfok.... nice grade, are you able to share what you did to the image?

 

Thanks. Basically just the tint slider, temperature slider and exposure in ACR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kkfok, good job with the image.

Were you guys able to use the Blackmagic dng files or are you using the converted ones by Adobe?

I will uploading some more raw images if you like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Nauticam Blackmagic 4K housing has just been posted to the NauticamUAS.com web site for those interested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Phil! Been looking for this.

 

I see from NauticamUSA that there is only partial support for the M43 version of the camera. Thats really too bad as this version has the best wide options with the new metabones converters (announced today) rendering many of the Dx lenses super fast and with the same angle as a Dx lens. Would be nice indeed! I guess I could live without the zoom on the lens and use the wheel to control the manual aperture ring on the metabones instead. I would love to see more images of the housing insides as well as a price quote for the housing and accessories.

 

E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Phil! Been looking for this.

 

I see from NauticamUSA that there is only partial support for the M43 version of the camera. Thats really too bad as this version has the best wide options with the new metabones converters (announced today) rendering many of the Dx lenses super fast and with the same angle as a Dx lens. Would be nice indeed! I guess I could live without the zoom on the lens and use the wheel to control the manual aperture ring on the metabones instead. I would love to see more images of the housing insides as well as a price quote for the housing and accessories.

 

E.

Hi Espen,

 

The Nauticam housing looks great. Remember that this housing is meant for the 4k cam as well which is an EF mount. BTW, Reef photo sent me a quote upon my request according to the lens specifications I provided.

 

I have tried the custom housing with the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 which is quite a fast lens and has great low light performance :) the sea state was not good but I will try to post some shots anyways.

 

Pokeh:

Fast lenses such as the above lens can produce pokeh easily even on the small 2.5k. I am certain on the 4k pokeh will be exaggerated due to the super 35m sensor.

IMHO, I have few rthoughts about pokeh and whether it will be desired or not for underwater video. This needs an article by itself. In summary, for close ups it "might" have a nice effect by having the background out of focus/pokeh so your viewers can concentrate on the foreground only on the other hand if you want your whole frame to be in focus like if you are shooting a reef scene or big pelagic creature such as a whale pokeh can be a spoiler. Some of the pros here on wetpixel can help start a fresh topic on this kindly :)

 

Here are some inside pics of the Nauticam housing:

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.631884070164998.1073741825.205206982832711&type=3

Edited by thani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Espen,

 

The Nauticam housing looks great. Remember that this housing is meant for the 4k cam as well which is an EF mount. BTW, Reef photo sent me a quote upon my request according to the lens specifications I provided.

 

I have tried the custom housing with the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 which is quite a fast lens and has great low light performance :) the sea state was not good but I will try to post some shots anyways.

 

Pokeh:

Fast lenses such as the above lens can produce pokeh easily even on the small 2.5k. I am certain on the 4k pokeh will be exaggerated due to the super 35m sensor.

IMHO, I have few rthoughts about pokeh and whether it will be desired or not for underwater video. This needs an article by itself. In summary, for close ups it "might" have a nice effect by having the background out of focus/pokeh so your viewers can concentrate on the foreground only on the other hand if you want your whole frame to be in focus like if you are shooting a reef scene or big pelagic creature such as a whale pokeh can be a spoiler. Some of the pros here on wetpixel can help start a fresh topic on this kindly

:)

 

 

Hello Thani :)

 

I'm not too concerned about bokeh underwater. If I was doing a artsy topside film I probably would. Underwater and with macro especially, I find shallow depth of field to be a nuisance. There are however other IMHO far greater (real benefits for underwater shooting) with these converters. They basically give you the opposite effect of a typical teleconverter. A sharper image and more light are the real benefits from using the new metabones BMCC converter.

I live and dive in Norway. Its dark half of the year, the time with the best visibility, so light is a very big deal to me. If Nauticam would make a gear so that it would be possible to turn the aperture ring on the metabones converter and retain focus with the other gear it would be an amazing setup for WA here up north. I have a different solution with a different camera for macro.

 

Besides, most of my glass is Nikon so the Metabones BMCC Nikon to M43 converter makes more sense than a BMCC EF version with less light sensitivity, less field of view and a different lens mount.

 

The 4K version is still just on paper, but the specs are less desireable in terms of low light. I don't expect it to surface before next summer, so I will not really think to hard about it until it appears and the first reviews are in. S35 sensor size and global shutter is a good thing though.

 

Anyone know if the Nauticam housings are actually shipping, and what the battery and converter solution is going to cost. Also very curious to hear what Simon Spear has to say about the combo.

 

E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Thani :)

Besides, most of my glass is Nikon so the Metabones BMCC Nikon to M43 converter makes more sense than a BMCC EF version with less light sensitivity, less field of view and a different lens mount.

 

Anyone know if the Nauticam housings are actually shipping, and what the battery and converter solution is going to cost. Also very curious to hear what Simon Spear has to say about the combo.

 

Hi Espen,

If already have good stock of Nikon lenses the MTF option makes good sense. Nauticam says on their website that they have "limited support for MTF". It would be good to know what are the limits or if they can customize an aperture ring for it. Technically it is easy for them. Does it make a commercial sense?

 

On the shipping of Nauticam housing, reef photo made it sound like it is shipping :)

Edited by thani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the delay in my write up on the housing. I've an awful lot going on right now and I've got so many deadlines that I am about to miss that it would drive a lesser man insane!! :D I'll definitely try to get it all down by Christmas/just after. In summary though I thought it was great if you can always shoot in RAW and have the ability to handle, store and process RAW in post. I will try to get something down as soon as I can. Promise!

Cheers, Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

Here is a test clip taking in Sultan's custom housing for the sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 behind a flat port with the BMCC:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...