Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: The Gentleman's Underwater Bubble Blower Thread

Reply to Thread
Page 120 of 323 FirstFirst ... 2070110116117118119120121122123124130170220 ... LastLast
Results 1,191 to 1,200 of 3221
  1. #1191  
    To avoid potential confusion I have edited my post #1159 to include the following statement.

    That there is NO CONNECTION IN ANYWAY (and that includes me, I had nothing to do with the design of either housing, I just happened to have been an operator on both) between the 3D housing used on the Penguin shoot (a custom rapidly produced housing made in the UK) and any Gates product (such as the Gates Deep Atom). I mentioned the Gates Deep Atom in the above paragraph only as a counter point to my prior experiences with 3D housings!

    Its very important to me that this is understood

    The Gates Deep Atom is an extraordinary rig and I cant wait for the films that have been shot on it to be released because frankly I cant wait to see them.


    Thanks
    Epic M and Gates Deep Epic
    http://www.hughmiller.co.uk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #1192  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tasmania
    Posts
    3,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Hastings View Post
    Not sure we need a 3 chip s35 camera - may be better off with a 3 chip 2/3" sensor with 4, 5, or 6K pixels - pretty easily doable with the density available these days....
    For airy disc size 2µm (which you want to be smaller than pixel size in a 3-chip camera), the lens aperture would need to be larger than f/1.4. Any smaller aperture and your resolution would be diffraction limited, which means you would not be actually getting 4k despite the pixel count. Laws of physics, my friend.

    Now, how practical would it be to shoot at f/1.4 or larger through a dome port, I don't know. I haven't done the calculations, but my gut feel tells me that despite small sensor size, the image plane curvature would be large enough to affect the edge sharpness with the super-thin DOF of f/1.4 or wider. Not to mention focusing problems at f/1.4.

    So happy to disagree with you again, Mike :)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #1193  
    Senior Member Rudi Herbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,431
    Pawel,

    Yes, but you do not need to shoot at the maximum aperture at all times to get a usable image or to keep all of your resolution. The same principle dictates that 1/2" 1080p 3 chip arrays must have an F 1.9 max aperture but you don't have to shoot at it all the time to get proper images. So while you're right, Mike's idea has merit and it could be a solution, albeit with all the problems that 3 chip arrays bring with them, despite their main advantage, which is very accurate color rendition. I for one do not want to go back to B4 lenses, they were and still are, very large and VERY expensive, so while Digiprimes and the like are truly excellent optics, thanks but no thanks.

    I think the solution has to reside on a design that does not interpolate or "guess" colors as Bayer does. Sony's striped design is a good approach, wich was used on the F35 to great effect (the camera has a ~ 5K sensor to yield a 1080p image) and even better on the F65, where an 8K sensor is used to produce a 4K image. Besides "real" resolution gains, we also get 3 pixels yielding colorimetry information for one single pixel in the final image. And I always felt the way to go would be a Foveon style sensor, which has all the benefits of a 3 chip design without any of the disadvantages. It is easier and cheaper to go the Bayer way I know, but in terms of color accuracy, Bayer cannot compare to Foveon or CCD, never did, never will. And yes, the Epic makes breathtaking images on land, but it seriously under performs underwater, so imagine how much better it would do on land if it managed to yield proper colors underwater.

    Lastly Pawel, if you spent $20K to crack the Epic's problem, and all you are is worried about sharing with your fellow shooters without the guarantee of financial remuneration, then sell your solution to Jim, I'm sure he'll be happy to pay you many times over your investment if it means even a slight improvement for his camera. That is, if you truly have a solution at hand. You went from not ever seeing the problem on your Epics, to suddenly discovering it, to figuring out it was a result of the sensor being too good, to then announcing that it was due to a severe flaw in sensor design, all that in a couple of weeks. So while your undeniable technical acumen is appreciated (albeit at the cost of what can be best described as a difficult personality), the ultimate impact of your discoveries for the community at large is so hard to quantify that I find the joy that should arise from your solution akin to that of when Openheimer and co. finally cracked the path to the atom bomb...
    Rudi Herbert

    www.UnderwaterCinema.com

    A site about the equipment and techniques of the art of underwater cinematography
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #1194  
    Senior Member Michael Hastings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by Pawel Achtel View Post
    For airy disc size 2µm (which you want to be smaller than pixel size in a 3-chip camera), the lens aperture would need to be larger than f/1.4. Any smaller aperture and your resolution would be diffraction limited, which means you would not be actually getting 4k despite the pixel count. Laws of physics, my friend.

    Now, how practical would it be to shoot at f/1.4 or larger through a dome port, I don't know. I haven't done the calculations, but my gut feel tells me that despite small sensor size, the image plane curvature would be large enough to affect the edge sharpness with the super-thin DOF of f/1.4 or wider. Not to mention focusing problems at f/1.4.

    So happy to disagree with you again, Mike :)
    You got me there :-) I was just thinking off the cuff.

    I fully admit that I haven't considered diffraction limiting all that much up until now - other than thinking that it is a good idea not to shoot the Epic/Red1 at higher than F8/F11, but if I'm using the same basic numbers that you are (and a quick look at some of the online calculators) doesn't that also imply that we are seeing diffraction limiting on the MysteriumX at F4-F5.6 and on dragon sensor at somewhere between f2.8 and f4?

    Fu.. it, I think it's time to dig out my old SD 520,000 pixel Ikegami Editcam - It had everything I ever wanted in a camera (that great Ikegami image, flawless time-lapse, flawless prerecord, hard disk recording on cheap drives, good ergonomics, nice motorized zoom, focus, iris, everything worked, genlock, bncs, nice remote) - except resolution. And now I find with crappy dome ports, bayer sensors, whacky color science and diffraction limiting I haven't gained anything .... just kidding but you all get my point - sometimes this sh.t gives you a headache :-)
    Save the Sharks
    __________________
    Epic-W Helium 8K (For Rent) Original Manufacturer of Redone & Epic/Scarlet/Weapon Underwater housings - contact us for sale or rent. Aero3D™ mirror/beamsplitter rig. 954.937.6600 www.Aquavideo.com ... aquavideo1 at yahoo.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #1195  
    Senior Member Rudi Herbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,431
    Mike,

    Yeah I hear you. In fact, I will never ditch my RED cameras for land work, but if this trend continues underwater, I am actually wondering how well an S35 sized 1080p sensor would do upscaled to 4K. There are some algorithms already in the works to upscale HD to UHD, and if any of those works relatively well, then an oversampled sensor like the F35 might not look too bad at 4K, and those cameras are already going for below $8K out there. Of course, this is all hypothetical but you never know....
    Rudi Herbert

    www.UnderwaterCinema.com

    A site about the equipment and techniques of the art of underwater cinematography
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #1196  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tasmania
    Posts
    3,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Hastings View Post
    ...doesn't that also imply that we are seeing diffraction limiting on the MysteriumX at F4-F5.6 and on dragon sensor at somewhere between f2.8 and f4?
    Yes and no. Depends on the point light spread and that depends whether it is Bayer CMOS (minimum 4 -pixel light spread) or if it is 3-chip, which can have much narrower light spread. You were talking about 3-chip, so you need to half the size of Airy disc used in calculationsfor CMOS Bayer pattern sensor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rudi Herbert View Post
    Mike,

    Yeah I hear you. In fact, I will never ditch my RED cameras for land work, but if this trend continues underwater, I am actually wondering how well an S35 sized 1080p sensor would do upscaled to 4K. There are some algorithms already in the works to upscale HD to UHD, and if any of those works relatively well, then an oversampled sensor like the F35 might not look too bad at 4K, and those cameras are already going for below $8K out there. Of course, this is all hypothetical but you never know....
    Upscaling only works well if you have good micro contrast and are able to resolve right to Nyquist and beyond. Example of that can be this "true" 8k underwater frame grab: http://www.flickr.com/photos/achtel/8839311952/

    If MTF is zero well before the Nyquist, then there is nothing you can do to put the information back in. What I'm saying is that you would be back to underwater optics (dome port, etc...) and its limitations.

    I haven't tested the F35 and can't say how good or bad it is in handling this specific problem. The control (background frame) in my picture was shot with a Canon DSLR camera. There was not even detectable amount of contamination in Canon, where the MX sensor was pretty much "off the scale": at least 8 stops beyond where I would want it to be :(
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #1197  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tasmania
    Posts
    3,648
    I see absolutely nothing wrong to disagree with or debate anyone who thinks differently. We discuss underwater film making, not personalities. It's OK to be wrong or ask "silly" questions. This is the whole purpose of this board. I don't have all the answers. I learn too.

    Insincere flattery and coverup of facts irritate me. It doesn't matter how famous the poster may be or what his credits are. It's what you know, not who you know.

    And, if I don't like the picture, a housing, a camera, lens, whatever - I will say so openly. I don't care if it hurts someone's ego because the debate is not about that.

    I think many posters on this thread should learn to distinguish disagreement from disrespect.

    I love to disagree with Mike and Rudi, because they often make good points, for which I respect them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #1198  
    Moderator Martin Weiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Switzerland/Norway/Germany
    Posts
    6,116
    Please refrain from making this personal, gentlemen.

    Thank thee.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9.   Click here to go to the next RED TEAM post in this thread.
  #1199  
    Hey guys.. sorry for showing up late to the party.

    I was emailed mumblings of a problem last month... but never any details surrounding the issue or even what the issue was, just a request that If you give me free Dragon upgrades to my cameras and tell me a whole bunch of confidential info I will tell you what the problem is and we have a fix for it and maybe for Dragon too.

    And then again tonight I received the same request but a little more forceful which made me come search for this thread.

    We want to fix this.. and we would love you guys to help tell us what the problem is so we can fix it. I don't really understand the whole " fuck you pay me " philosophy..... thats not the way this small community should work.

    This really sucks... because if someone came to us and said " hey here is a serious problem we are having, and look, here is the solution.. we probably would of given them much more than a Dragon upgrade to be helping us out. Much more.

    You have my ear now, and you have Graemes. Let us know what the problem is, we will do our best to fix it. If you can help us fix it.. then help us fix it. Or don't and just let us muck about and try to figure it out ourselves.

    Or if whatever this problem is has a solution that is some sort of coating or glass or part that you have some invention on.. then make it into a product. I am sure you will do well.

    At any rate.. all we want you guys to be able to take better pictures.. A huge part of our new reel is dedicated to underwater cinematography and we love what you guys do.

    If someone wants to tell us what the problem is without holding us hostage.. please, we are at your service.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #1200  
    Junior Member Jean Bruneau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarred Land View Post
    Hey guys.. sorry for showing up late to the party.

    I was emailed mumblings of a problem last month... but never any details surrounding the issue or even what the issue was, just a request that If you give me free Dragon upgrades to my cameras and tell me a whole bunch of confidential info I will tell you what the problem is and we have a fix for it and maybe for Dragon too.

    And then again tonight I received the same request but a little more forceful which made me come search for this thread.

    We want to fix this.. and we would love you guys to help tell us what the problem is so we can fix it. I don't really understand the whole " fuck you pay me " philosophy..... thats not the way this small community should work.

    This really sucks... because if someone came to us and said " hey here is a serious problem we are having, and look, here is the solution.. we probably would of given them much more than a Dragon upgrade to be helping us out. Much more.

    You have my ear now, and you have Graemes. Let us know what the problem is, we will do our best to fix it. If you can help us fix it.. then help us fix it. Or don't and just let us muck about and try to figure it out ourselves.

    Or if whatever this problem is has a solution that is some sort of coating or glass or part that you have some invention on.. then make it into a product. I am sure you will do well.

    At any rate.. all we want you guys to be able to take better pictures.. A huge part of our new reel is dedicated to underwater cinematography and we love what you guys do.

    If someone wants to tell us what the problem is without holding us hostage.. please, we are at your service.
    Amen!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts