Thread: Blackmagic URSA

Page 50 of 60 FirstFirst ... 404849505152 ... LastLast
Results 491 to 500 of 592
  1. #491  
    Senior Member Telecinese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Curitiba, Brazil
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by SergeSmArt View Post
    "LATER" !! this is an answer! .. I just forgot to say " FOR NOW" in my post.. and I ready correct it! ...
    I'm agree, that URSA/BMC4K combo would be perfect.. but NOW I think, that investment into stuff like Slider, Skater, Gimbal and new good Lenses GIVE ME MORE in my footage, then new URSA ...
    What I'm trying to say is: I PRE-ORDER BMPK4K in April 2013 ... because I was in need a "film-look-like" image...
    but I 100% DON'T NEED to pre-order URSA ( United Republican State of America ) ..... and will wait until we will get RAW in BMPC4K and until URSA get more options.. like SLOW-MO, I had in FS700
    Gotcha. And amen to slow motion. If I've been keeping up correctly the very best 'reasonable cost' cameras are promising us is 4k/60fps, not-quite 1080p/96fps or 720p/120fps (Sony A7s, Panasonic GH4, GoPro, etc). We want more!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #492  
    Senior Member Telecinese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Curitiba, Brazil
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew View Post
    Are CFast cards faster than SSDs right now? I would guess that going forward CFast cards are going to have a difficult time keeping up with the latest SSD tech.

    I'm honestly asking because in my mind the biggest advantage to CFast is physical size. All media can fail, that's why you backup. What am I missing that makes CFast cards so much better than quality SSDs other than physical size?
    I actually have no idea of the comparative advantages of CFast vs. SSD. Heck, the URSA announcement was the first I've heard of CFast. Every wild-ass conjecture I've presented was based on inferring that BMD's engineers wouldn't make such a decision without good reason (and 'making the camera a tad smaller' does not convince me as their main motivation in such a large camera, regardless of what the salespeople have said).

    So I'm guessing they're guessing CFast will sooner or later be a more reliable and faster alternative to SSDs. And hopefully not so expensive. Computer memory costs have been falling astoundingly fast in the last couple of decades (apart from proprietary RED media, apparently), so who knows if 'CFast expense' will not become less of a problem fairly soon. For instance, this chart suggests that good old CF card memory has become about 4 times cheaper from 2007 to 2013, and almost 4000 times cheaper since the tech's circa 1995 introduction.

    What I do know is that consumer-grade SSDs like our 'gold standard' Sandisk Extreme 240gb or 480gb are much, much more likely to break if dropped than CFs, and probably are less absolutely reliable in other ways as well (fabrication defects, overheating, number of formatting cycles it can take, etc). CFast should keep this unbreakability if they know what's good for them.

    Your speed question did make me curious, and from a Sandisk press release I found the world's first CFast card has around 450mb/s write speeds (only 350mb/s for another size card), which is about the same as our 'approved' SSDs. But this is of course the very first model of the very first generation of a new technology that big guys like Arri and Canon helped develop and seem to be betting on long-term. I'll be surprised if this technology doesn't improve quite a bit in both price and performance before going the way of the Zip Disk and we move on to holocubes or whatever though. Think of how cost-effective was a 1995 CF card compared to a 2014 one, it's what I'm saying.

    A couple of quotes from the press release:

    The SanDisk Extreme Pro CFast card is the first to utilize the CFast 2.0 specification. This specification was a collaboration of leading CompactFlash Association members to meet the demanding requirements of professional video and photography applications. Early adopters and endorsers include SanDisk, Canon, ARRI and Codex. The result of this alliance is the CFast 2.0 specification, delivering a new level of performance for next generation professional video and photography cameras.
    Stephan Schenk, general manager of ARRI's camera and DI systems business unit said, "SanDisk's new SanDisk Extreme Pro CFast 2.0 cards deliver tremendous performance, allowing professionals to record ProRes 4444 up to 200Fps with AMIRA, and up to 120Fps with ALEXA XT/XR cameras, on cost-effective recording media."
    This new high-performance card format is reliable and equipped with a durable form factor. The SanDisk Extreme Pro CFast 2.0 cards are created to withstand real-world exposure to temperature, shock and vibration, and include a pinless design, which lessens the chance of damaging the card or camera while changing cards.
    We'll see.
    Last edited by Telecinese; 04-09-2014 at 12:02 PM. Reason: Added the 350mb/s bit.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #493  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    423
    350MB/sec write speed
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #494  
    Senior Member Telecinese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Curitiba, Brazil
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter J. DeCrescenzo View Post
    All the more reason why I think my sensor-in-a-box camera "design" makes more sense than BMD's URSA.

    Since at least last year, if not 2-3 years ago, building monitoring and recording into a pro camera is, um, ... unnecessary.

    I prefer RED Epic style modularity, but because RED uses such proprietary accessory/components, they're stupid-expensive. Again, unnecessary, at least from a customer perspective.

    There are so many excellent monitor, EVF and recording solutions already in existence -- and new ones being released fairly frequently -- it no longer makes sense to design them into cameras.

    I understand that having redundant hardware can sometimes be a good thing in a pro on-set workflow, but adding a 4th or 5th monitor and/or EVF to an URSA just to make it usable is clearly a stupid waste of money and resources, period.
    Your points on the advantages of a modular design are clear and hard to disagree with. I'm sure this path RED is pioneering (and more generally, Apple with the Mac Pro as the heart of an external system of plugged-in parts you can plug and play to upgrade) is going to please many pros and, depending on its market success, be attempted by Blackmagic Design eventually.

    What I have to disagree with is the 'because this is not right for me it's not right for anyone' stance. In my current workflow style, job requirements and financial circumstance I'm happier with a 'all in one' $6000 product that's larger and heavier because of the extra built-in parts than a $4000 one that requires an extra $5000 worth of extra monitors, field audio recorders, SSD recorders, batteries and chargers. Not to mention the extra bulk, fragility, small-things-going-wrong-factor and particularly time needed to assemble and disassemble the rat's nest of flexible arms, cables and batteries needed in the rig when working with a small crew and time-sensitive subjects.

    Yes, the 'big heavy block that does everything' is super old school and not as flexible or upgradeable as the 'choose your own parts around the core' ecosystem for maximum personalization, but there are plenty of advantages as well for people like me that think that a camera should indeed include media recorders. I actually think there's a place in the market for both approaches. We'll see what BMD thinks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #495  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by Telecinese View Post
    Imagine how embarrassing it would be if they come up later with a 120fps 15-stop dynamic range 8K sensor or whatever but can't use it because SSDs are not compatible? It would completely negate their 'future-proof sensor swap' sales pitch.

    If 60fps 4k is already pushing the limit of cheap SSD speed or reliability (not saying it is, just guessing), then what chance do the awesome future sensors have to work with them? Maybe the CFast thing was more of a necessity than people think.
    At the moment SSDs are waaay faster than CFast cards.
    High grade ones are now at 700MB/write speed and price is not much different than CFast for the same size. If anything go faster it will be SSDs not Cfast cards !
    Enterprise SSDs are 2x faster than CFast, cost about the same and have also very high reliability and endurance.

    The point is not to use cheap and crap SSDs, but decent ones. This is the reason why BM could make BM Pack (tested and good SSD), which would have good price and reliability. This is what AJA and other manufactures have done.
    CFast cards are great, but they are rather match for Alexa, not BM.
    Last edited by Andrew_HD; 04-09-2014 at 12:09 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #496  
    Senior Member Telecinese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Curitiba, Brazil
    Posts
    550
    Maybe BMD just wants to copycat whatever Arri is doing so the kind of people who are happy to pay several times more for RED-approved media starts taking them seriously? 'Man, this is expensive so it must be good'.

    This well-informed talk of relative reliability, future compatibility and technology improvement potential of older vs. newer technologies is way out of my league. I'm just sharing my guesses because I enjoy the debate, but as I said before, I'm a bit of an optimist.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #497  
    Senior Member Peter J. DeCrescenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Portland, Oregon USA
    Posts
    2,001
    Quote Originally Posted by Telecinese View Post
    Your points on the advantages of a modular design are clear and hard to disagree with. I'm sure this path RED is pioneering (and more generally, Apple with the Mac Pro as the heart of an external system of plugged-in parts you can plug and play to upgrade) is going to please many pros and, depending on its market success, be attempted by Blackmagic Design eventually.

    What I have to disagree with is the 'because this is not right for me it's not right for anyone' stance. In my current workflow style, job requirements and financial circumstance I'm happier with a 'all in one' $6000 product that's larger and heavier because of the extra built-in parts than a $4000 one that requires an extra $5000 worth of extra monitors, field audio recorders, SSD recorders, batteries and chargers. Not to mention the extra bulk, fragility, small-things-going-wrong-factor and particularly time needed to assemble and disassemble the rat's nest of flexible arms, cables and batteries needed in the rig when working with a small crew and time-sensitive subjects.

    Yes, the 'big heavy block that does everything' is super old school and not as flexible or upgradeable as the 'choose your own parts around the core' ecosystem for maximum personalization, but there are plenty of advantages as well for people like me that think that a camera should indeed include media recorders. I actually think there's a place in the market for both approaches. We'll see what BMD thinks.
    Point taken.

    I've edited my previous post to include the following:

    "... There are so many excellent monitor, EVF and recording solutions already in existence -- and new ones being released fairly frequently -- so in most cases it no longer makes sense to design them into cameras.

    For some users the traditional "all-in-one" cam design is totally appropriate. But given the ready availability of superior separate components (now and in the future), the traditional approach more and more becomes the "special" case. It's all good. ..."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #498  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,345
    Peter, it's completely fine to actually quote me when you're responding... We disagree, and that's pretty much okay when people are doing it respectfully.

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter J. DeCrescenzo View Post
    All the more reason why I think my sensor-in-a-box camera "design" makes more sense than BMD's URSA.
    Well, I guess they had their own design...

    Since at least last year, if not 2-3 years ago, building monitoring and recording into a pro camera is, um, ... unnecessary.

    I prefer RED Epic style modularity, but because RED uses such proprietary accessory/components, they're stupid-expensive. Again, unnecessary, at least from a customer perspective.
    I agree and disagree. Any of BMDs current cameras could have come without the screen because I certainly don't use them for anything... is it bad that they have one?

    There are so many excellent monitor, EVF and recording solutions already in existence -- and new ones being released fairly frequently -- it no longer makes sense to design them into cameras.
    There are, I've had my TVLogic for three years or so now and it's still running strong. That's what I consider an excellent monitor, and for some people it's not a cheap expense. There are a number whom are actually still only using the screens on the back of BMD cameras because of that. But if BMD hadn't put screens on the back, then what happens?

    I understand that having redundant hardware can sometimes be a good thing in a pro on-set workflow, but adding a 4th or 5th monitor and/or EVF to an URSA just to make it usable is clearly a stupid waste of money and resources, period.
    There are usually two to three monitors hanging off of the camera on the kind of sets you're referring to... I really don't think anyone will be angry that the camera has extra monitors at this price, or well most people.

    The excuse of using CFast because it's small is also stupid. SSDs aren't much bigger, SSDs will always be significantly more cost effective, and there'd be plenty of room for them in an URSA if the cam didn't include _3_ f*cking monitors.
    Has anyone assessed the potential of CFast regarding speed and reliability in the future? Will SSDs be enough to record 6K or 8K reliably? I'd be interested in those projections.

    I strongly disagree that this situation is anything like the BMCC/BMPC-4K cam's built-in battery ... as if people like me simply aren't getting the brilliance of the URSA design. I'm a huge fan of the BMCC/BMPC-4K built-in uninterruptible power supply battery feature. The URSA's triple monitor design isn't anything like that. The URSA's 3 monitors don't add "invisible" convenience and security with little or no downside or cost.
    Noone said it's brilliant. I said it reminds me of it, and there are a lot of people that aren't huge fans of the internal battery and really didn't understand its benefits. But how can a screen on dummy side, built into a camera that has a base MSRP of 4,500 or 6,000 depending on how you look at it, not be of a convenience at certain points during a shoot that involves more than one guy doing everything?

    And, oddly enough, if URSA didn't have built-in monitors and recording, there'd be room for a built-in uninterruptible power supply battery. Funny that.
    Are you sure there's an internal power supply solution that's strong enough and safe enough to power a water-cooled camera for more than three minutes?


    One last thing: I totally "get" the value of pumping-up the price of a camera as a way of pricing-out wanna-be whiners like me (grin), and just as importantly, as a way of financing a very necessary pre-sale and after-sale support network for pros. I get that. However, pumping up a cam's price by adding stuff that no longer makes sense these days (let alone a couple of years ago) does no one any good.
    This isn't BMD pricing anyone out of their gear... and I know you're referring to what I'm saying (which I can see you take offense to), but let me clarify again: my comments about pricing this segment out covers longer development cycles (as someone else mentioned), better hardware hopefully, and doing away with trolls that really aren't adding any value to the community. THe last of which usually comes around when prices are way too low.

    I said that anyone what doesn't represent a troll shouldn't take any offense, and I got quite a number of PMs from people saying that I didn't have to explain myself, people got it.

    I've never considered you a troll... are you considering yourself a troll?

    This camera's quite affordable given what it's supposed to do and offer now and especially in the future. The kind of price I thought about was more like 12-15K.


    Lastly, just projecting myself into a working environment with the camera, and knowing what I know from slaving away on sets as an AC or Camera Operator... I'd definitely say your argument would be much more convincing if you recognized that the CF slots are on the wrong side of the camera.

    Put cables where you need them to be, you can always re-route those, but closing the screen means that you have to flip it open to access the CF slots every time, AC can't get to them very easily unless you back away from the camera. If an additional monitor or EVF's hanging down on the side of the camera, blocking the screen, you need to adjust that monitor first before you can access the cards.

    THAT is a VERY real concern.

    SKYPE (best way to talk to me): Camera_Kholi | twitter
    Avery and Pete: Superseeds Feature Film Trailer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #499  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,345
    I did forget one point: the screens may not be a major cost at all. Taking them out doesn't necessarily mean reducing the consumer's cost in a massive way. I imagine building a durable hinge for that kind of environment wasn't extremely cheap, but in the grand scheme of what the camera is the monitors are probably one of the cheapest parts to add. Just about everything BMD builds has a screen or two, so it's likely the case.

    They could have left two screens off, but then those that aren't coming from a seriously professional set wouldn't be happy about not having a screen to use on their own. Many ways it could have been done, my hope is that it doesn't interfere.

    SKYPE (best way to talk to me): Camera_Kholi | twitter
    Avery and Pete: Superseeds Feature Film Trailer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #500  
    Senior Member imdjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    432
    indeed, think of how cheap some tablets/readers are. i bought my nook color years ago for under 100 bucks, and it has a fanstastic IPS screen. i think screen tech probably one of the cheapest aspects of visual items these days. OLEDs being the latest which are not yet cheap as chips, but give it time.
    Darren Levine

    he shoots, he edits, he frequently rants
    http://mediahalo.com/p/dlevine
    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
  •