Thread: Mixing RED Scarlet footage and BMCC footage

Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1 Mixing RED Scarlet footage and BMCC footage 
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    4
    Hi all. I am wondering if it would be possible to mix footage from both RED Scarlet and BMCC effectively considering both shoot in RAW. I know that the Scarlet has a larger sensor and is 4k capable but I am wondering since I own a Scarlet and am thinking about picking up a BMCC as a second angle camera for small jobs which would end up on 1080p output anyway. Has anyone tested this? Mainly this would be for shooting interviews. Thanks

    -Samir
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    If you shoot 3 K on the Scarlet, it will be close.
    I'm planning on a test shoot with the BMC , Red Scarlet and an Alexa as soon as I get the BMC .

    After playing with the RAW DNG frames from the BMC, I think it will be slightly sharper than the Red at 3K.
    You read that right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    4
    Thanks redgamma. My plan would be to shoot Scarlet in 4k with a wide angle lens so that I can get two useable angles out of that when scaled down to 1080p output. A wide shot (scalled down to 1080p) and a medium shot (cropped from the 4k to 1080p). And then if I can set the same white balance and ISO on the blackmagic camera I can have that at an slight angle for just a different perspective shot.

    I would hope that if both cameras are RAW, that with minor settings adjustments I can cut all clips on the same premiere timeline and then just color grade at the very end the whole shot. Do you think that it would work?

    Please if possible try to do a test of mixing footage together from both in a single sequence when you do your test shoot.

    -Samir
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,099
    Man I would love to have that 120fps option
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by redgamma View Post
    If you shoot 3 K on the Scarlet, it will be close.
    I'm planning on a test shoot with the BMC , Red Scarlet and an Alexa as soon as I get the BMC .

    After playing with the RAW DNG frames from the BMC, I think it will be slightly sharper than the Red at 3K.
    You read that right.
    You may well be right. Those DNGs I've seen so far have been really sharp; they certainly seem a bit more detailed than when I've shot Scarlet at 3K. The sensor size is almost exactly the same between Scarlet at 3K and BMC, so in that sense, getting the two to match should be pretty easy. Probably shouldn't be too difficult to match the two in grading either, though the look of each camera seems different enough to me that it may take a bit of work to make it seamless.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason M. View Post
    Probably shouldn't be too difficult to match the two in grading either, though the look of each camera seems different enough to me that it may take a bit of work to make it seamless.
    This is to me a strange statement. But Im not too up on raw workflow in motion packages and how well conceived they are for proper raw management so it may not be an untrue statement.

    It should be possible to match the cameras automatically (or close to).. surely one of the joys of shooting raw.

    The process would be (in a controlled environment) to shoot a test card of both.

    The test card should be lockable in the raw software and savable.

    You now a have a look for each camera. "BMC Correct" and "SCA correct"

    In post you add each cameras 'look' to the correct camera - the cameras now 'match' (this process should be automatable using file metadata to identify the appropriate camera)

    You then grade be making a secondary look (say a warm kodak feel) and applying that as a secondary to the footage from both

    This should create a perfect 'match'.

    Matching by eye, using 'a bit of work' should be a process put in the dustbin of history. It should simply be a few clicks, theoretically automate-able .. no work should be involved!

    ---

    Of course if one camera has, for example, a weak blue channel, the camera reference look will pump the blues to the correct level, and that would induce a noise pattern that is not the same as the camera without the weak blue channel so the match will never be perfect, but should be in a different (closer) ballpark than any non raw cameras, involving a super simple workflow.

    S
    Last edited by morgan_moore; 09-29-2012 at 12:23 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by morgan_moore View Post
    This is to me a strange statement. But Im not too up on raw workflow in motion packages and how well conceived they are for proper raw management so it may not be an untrue statement.

    It should be possible to match the cameras automatically (or close to).. surely one of the joys of shooting raw.

    The process would be (in a controlled environment) to shoot a test card of both.

    The test card should be lockable in the raw software and savable.

    You now a have a look for each camera. "BMC Correct" and "SCA correct"

    In post you add each cameras 'look' to the correct camera - the cameras now 'match' (this process should be automatable using file metadata to identify the appropriate camera)

    You then grade be making a secondary look (say a warm kodak feel) and applying that as a secondary to the footage from both

    This should create a perfect 'match'.

    Matching by eye, using 'a bit of work' should be a process put in the dustbin of history. It should simply be a few clicks, theoretically automate-able .. no work should be involved!

    ---

    Of course if one camera has, for example, a weak blue channel, the camera reference look will pump the blues to the correct level, and that would induce a noise pattern that is not the same as the camera without the weak blue channel so the match will never be perfect, but should be in a different (closer) ballpark than any non raw cameras, involving a super simple workflow.

    S
    The process you are describing doesn't seem very clear.
    You are talking about shooting a test card. Correcting it in post to bring all your values into place, saving it and then using that as an automatic correction when applied - a look as it were?
    Perhaps I am missing something.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,081
    Yes.

    Proper digital post is done like that.

    You photo/film a test card (macbeth) and the software should be able to lock onto the known colours with one click
    Giving that shot a neutral profile
    Once you have a neutral profile for each camera
    You should get a 'perfect' match between cameras
    Adding a 'look' as a secondary to both cameras on top of this if you want 'kodak warm' 'bleach bypass' or some other 'look'
    neutral profels do look.. well neutral (horrid)

    The 'lock onto macbeth card' is not availalable AFAIK in toys like ACR I dont know about Resolve

    When shooting under varied light source or multicam you should always shoot a gregtag card first.

    This should enable you to match shots across cameras, lighting setups, and even long time durations, scenes shot months apart, pickups shot with a different (raw)camera should all cut in.

    Most film/video types dont get this and are therefore unimpressed by raw and happy with crappo log mush

    Daylight warming as we move towards the end of the day? No problem Sir.
    Tungsten bulb blown mid scene? moved to a kino? No problem Sir.
    Just keep shooting that card


    You could try downloading "sinar exposure" or "sinar capture shop" to play with some DNGs.


    S
    Last edited by morgan_moore; 09-29-2012 at 05:25 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,081
    http://notesonvideo.blogspot.co.uk/2...nar-notes.html

    Scroll down to 'science fair'

    Also the blogger refers to the functions as "One feature I found particularly interesting"

    I would call the function "Mission Critical"

    And describe any software without this as "Fundamentally Flawed" as it is an essential step in a raw workflow.

    S
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    411
    Quote Originally Posted by morgan_moore View Post
    This is to me a strange statement. But Im not too up on raw workflow in motion packages and how well conceived they are for proper raw management so it may not be an untrue statement.

    It should be possible to match the cameras automatically (or close to).. surely one of the joys of shooting raw.

    The process would be (in a controlled environment) to shoot a test card of both.

    The test card should be lockable in the raw software and savable.

    You now a have a look for each camera. "BMC Correct" and "SCA correct"

    In post you add each cameras 'look' to the correct camera - the cameras now 'match' (this process should be automatable using file metadata to identify the appropriate camera)

    You then grade be making a secondary look (say a warm kodak feel) and applying that as a secondary to the footage from both

    This should create a perfect 'match'.

    Matching by eye, using 'a bit of work' should be a process put in the dustbin of history. It should simply be a few clicks, theoretically automate-able .. no work should be involved!

    ---

    Of course if one camera has, for example, a weak blue channel, the camera reference look will pump the blues to the correct level, and that would induce a noise pattern that is not the same as the camera without the weak blue channel so the match will never be perfect, but should be in a different (closer) ballpark than any non raw cameras, involving a super simple workflow.

    S
    I wasn't thinking that the work would come in with matching the camera's colors, which, as you say, can be done by shooting a Macbeth card, but more matching the way the two cameras handle highlights and shadows differently, and matching image texture if necessary. It may be pretty trivial, though.
    Reply With Quote  
     

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
  •