Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Underwater Bubble Blowin' Users Group

Mark, glad you cracked Nat Geo, good on you.

As I said, I only have frames from interlaced HDCAM material. Below are three 50% scaled full frames and coresponding 1:1 crorner crops. The viz on the coral reefs was ~20m, on the sea jelly less than 10m. The sea jelly was from very close distance ~20cm, the corals are from a larger distance, to give some variety. It's not the best footage, just something I had handy. It is not corrected in any way other than de-interlaced using Photoshop. No colour correction, etc.. The contrast is as it was shot. There is some motion blur, but not much. All frames are from a slow steady pan. They obviously look much sharper on a moving picture, but stills are good for comparisons and analysis. They seem to resolve almost 1.4k - about the limit of what HDCAM is capable of. I can not see CA more than 1 pixel. BTW, no, you can not completely fix CA. You can bring the colours together, but the corners will be still soft.

To make meaningful comparison, you need to scale 4k frames down to 25% and, for the crop, 50%. Or, in other words, downsample to 2k, which would work in your favour due to better camera/chip resolution.
 
a few more (all shot with CinePort). No colour correction, contrast "as shot", all de-interlaced with Photoshop.
 
Coming soon

Coming soon

Couple points on Pawel's samples. Seems to me they have the normal slight softness at the edges. It is very hard to be scientific without side by side comparisons with shots of the same subject, same conditions, but I don't see any difference that jumps out at me between his shots and those from the Varicam/HDCam shots from housings I made (and others) using the normal domes we have used in the past.

Here are a couple quick photos of our new glass domes. Will be available as soon as I finish making a separate front plate, since the dome is actually outside of the regular frontplate when centered. It is Hoya glass made, ground, and coated in Japan because we felt it was superior to the Chinese made. I have been told by a friend that has much more experience with all of the various manufacturers that it is superior. Don't know how it compares with cineport but hard to believe it isn't very close. I like the titanium which offsets the weight of the dome a bit, but I don't like the limitation of the 14mm (on RED it is equivalent to a 22 on SLR) which is due to using the smaller slice of the dome. Essentially you would get the same results with ours with the 14, but have the option of going much wider as well because ours is a full hemisphere. Of course, cineport might be slightly better if the optical grinding or coatings are superior to what we were able to find.

I sometimes wonder though if the cineport isn't like the Spinal Tap guitar amplifier that goes to 11.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akaD9v460yI
 
Again few more. All CinePort. No colour correction. Contrast "as shot". The sea dragon picture in ~3m viz
 
Pawel,
i thought you liked shooting in poor viz, murky, green water? can you show some clips from that? and where are your 4k screen shots? oh yeah, you're not working yet. Shooting under ideal conditions? blue water, great viz on coral reefs produces clean images that I think anyone would be hard pressed NOT to achieve. Show those compelling shots under stressful conditions amigo to school us all on how to make beautiful images under such conditions---you should have a plethora of those images to awe us all no? you know, your favorite conditions

I think I'll pass on joining your dive trips. I can only imagine such a trip. Pawel, i hate to break it to you amigo, but you're not a people person.
 
Pawel Achtel said:
It largely depends on surge and current. Wide angle, yes on average I can nail it close to 90% of time sometimes better. But macro; I struggle to get 10% shooting ratio - and that's HD. Many others do much better than that and that's mostly with lesser cameras :bleh: But, on a rare occasion when I get the focus right :blink:, it is nice. I like the results.

Unlike most others, I like shooting in poor viz, murky, green, cold water.
:biggrin:
Click to expand...

Pawel, I'm not surprised. in all honesty i can say that most shooters i know could never compare to your ratio. But that's me and others being so meticulous....at least IMHO. But what surprises me is that 100% of your shots are not keepers. We now know how much you love your work....how could any of it not be a keeper.

....thanks for the insight of a pro. again not useful.

Oops, guess i blew it and will never be working with Pawel.....oh well
 
BajaProductions said:
Pawel,
i thought you liked shooting in poor viz, murky, green water? can you show some clips from that? and where are your 4k screen shots? oh yeah, you're not working yet. Shooting under ideal conditions? blue water, great viz on coral reefs produces clean images that I think anyone would be hard pressed NOT to achieve. Show those compelling shots under stressful conditions amigo to school us all on how to make beautiful images under such conditions---you should have a plethora of those images to awe us all no? you know, your favorite conditions

I think I'll pass on joining your dive trips. I can only imagine such a trip. Pawel, i hate to break it to you amigo, but you're not a people person.
Click to expand...

I’ll give you a courteousy of responding to your trolling.

These ARE images taken under relatively stressful conditions. The visibility never exceeded 20m (*), and in case of Grey Nurse sharks, it was 5-10m and sea dragon was shot in just 3m viz. It was GREEN water when I was filming Grey Nurse sharks and they were filmed in NSW on rocky temperate reefs in 16 degrees Celsius. The sea dragon was filmed in the most treacherous seas, strong currents off Kangaroo Island under raging seas and 16 degrees water. The sea jelly was filmed in really murky water with lots of suspended particles. The 35mm DSLR stills taken with Seacam dome and housing from the same dive of the same subjects were not as crisp, even after manipulation in Photoshop.
The leopard shark resting was filmed in 5m viz. There is a still picture from 35mm DSLR on my website of me filming it. It was shot without a flash, but you can still see a lot of particles in the water. The DSLR image was heavily modified in Photoshop, mine wasn't.

I told you that I did not have underwater 4k footage. I was on a topside shoot recently. I said I was happy for you to compare my HD footage to that of your 4k. I am still waiting for some frame grabs. You see, a good film maker does not have to blame the weather conditions, which seems to be a common excuse if/when people post their samples here.

And, you are absolutely right about not being the kind of person that would feel well on our trips.

If you have something constructive to add about underwater optics or post your 4k images to compare with my 1.4k or otherwise, you are most welcome. I am not the subject here and your trolling will not be taken kindly.

If my posts, samples or information are useless to you, the best advice to you is to ignore them. It is that simple.

(*) The way I measure viz is the depth from which I can just see the objects or people on the surface. The CinePort can see more and further than you can see through a dive mask.

AquaVideoRed206 said:
Couple points on Pawel's samples. Seems to me they have the normal slight softness at the edges. It is very hard to be scientific without side by side comparisons with shots of the same subject, same conditions, but I don't see any difference that jumps out at me between his shots and those from the Varicam/HDCam shots from housings I made (and others) using the normal domes we have used in the past.
Click to expand...
Aqua, my repeated invitation to post some samples to compare.

AquaVideoRed206 said:
Essentially you would get the same results with ours with the 14, but have the option of going much wider as well because ours is a full hemisphere.
Click to expand...

Whilst it does not seem immediately obvious, this is actually not exactly true. The MTF of a section of a wider port is not exactly the same as that of a narrower port. There are number of factors that contribute to image quality, some of which have to do with the way the lighting is controlled around the lens, optical elements and inside the port. There are good reasons why images taken with CinePort have high contrast and stand out clearly against other taken in the same conditions using other optics and irrespective of the capturing format. It has a lot to do with how lighting is controlled and a wider dome does not work as well. You will see this in the image being milkier, less contrasty and flare is more easily produced.
 
what is trolling? is that to do with fishing?? i do that all of the time mate. in fact doing it next week.

....as usual Pawel not useful information. Keep up the personal praise. You do make nice images....no one here denies that. Your just a pain in most peoples butt with how you post and give very little to this community other than nothing will do other than your system and your very own professional experience. Great! but once said is enough.

...I've never suggested that my images were stunning and that my system is the only way to shoot etc...I merely post what I've done and add what problems I've encountered and how i have countered them. I leave all imagery and personal props to you amigo.

...I'll just continue working as i do and leave it at that.
 
Pawel Achtel said:
These ARE images taken under relatively stressful conditions. The visibility never exceeded 20m (*), and in case of Grey Nurse sharks, it was 5-10m and sea dragon was shot in just 3m viz. It was GREEN water when I was filming Grey Nurse sharks and they were filmed in NSW on rocky temperate reefs in 16 degrees Celsius. The sea dragon was filmed in the most treacherous seas, strong currents off Kangaroo Island under raging seas and 16 degrees water. The sea jelly was filmed in really murky water with lots of suspended particles. The 35mm DSLR stills taken with Seacam dome and housing from the same dive of the same subjects were not as crisp, even after manipulation in Photoshop.
The leopard shark resting was filmed in 5m viz. There is a still picture from 35mm DSLR on my website of me filming it. It was shot without a flash, but you can still see a lot of particles in the water. The DSLR image was heavily modified in Photoshop, mine wasn't.
Click to expand...

Wow, challenging conditions for sure....:excl:

Pawel Achtel said:
You see, a good film maker does not have to blame the weather conditions, which seems to be a common excuse if/when people post their samples here
Click to expand...

Uhhh, isn't that what you just wasted a whole paragraph doing? :glare:

Until we can all compare 4k images with Pawel setting the standard I suggest we all just calm it down a little. The proof, they say, is in the pudding and we're hardly through our appetizers yet with regards to dipping our cameras so time will tell.

Let's look forward to that, doff our caps to each others respective successes and buckle down with work. Its gonna be a great ride.

Cheers,
Mark.
 
Enough already!
Come on guys, this forum is becoming drenched in Pawel-this and Pawel-that.

Even though he does have some valid technical points and appears to be a brilliant engineer, this man is someone who only wants to have the last word in every debate, and getting nowhere in the process. The whole thing reminds me of a school yard shouting contest. Baja, stop taking the bait from Pawel, he only revels in your obvious irritation at his posts and remarks. Just ignore the guy!

I am sure we are all eager to get on with our own things more than listening to arguments about whether or not his fantastic gear is better or worse than ours, and instead get out and do some beautiful shots in the 2 to 4K range.
 
But of course we need technical/operational debates, don't get me wrong on that.

What I'd like to see debated is:
- Manual focus control solutions. What kind of gears are in use, and how are they fitted? Pictures!
- Lens choice, still vs. cine. Is there any optical quality difference, and does it matter?
- Safety issues: Lens controllers can and do leak (with poor maintenance). Wouldn't you rather have salt water on your own $500 Nikkor than the clients' $50.000 Zeiss?
- Birger mount: What is the progress here, and how would one fit it and the controllers into the housing?
- Weighting: With bits and pieces added (lights etc), the housing soon becomes heavy. How to neutralize and balance the housing
- Lights: What kind do you use, and why
- Exposure: UW shooting has some of the most extreme contrast ranges (surface sun vs murky bottom). How do you expose?
- Filters: fitting colour correction filters and using them
- Underwater grip: Tripods, supports, how to get a heavy housing in and out of the water etc
- Dive gear: Rebreathers vs. air. Buoyancy issues, keeping warm, communication equipment, air for actors

Perhaps a small market place too: "Trade you this for that/I can make that for you/I have some stuff sitting on a shelf here"

Job opportunities: "Help needed/Can you step in/I've heard about a job in ...."

Work experience: How to handle actors in the water/how to handle animals in the water/how to handle clients above water etc, etc, etc

Something tells me this might have to move to a different web page or forum altogether, because the RED forums in general are becoming impossible to search for interesting information anyway. 90% of the stuff here is people raving about RED as a company or other opinionated posts that add nothing useful about how to own, operate, and make a living on the RED.
 
I just wanted to provide some valuable info from our latest underwater shoot off the coast of Belize.

We combined the Birger mount, Red, Viewfactor, Canon EF lenses and the Aquavideo housing to pull off some killer 4K footage.

For years, we have been spoiled with the autofocus feature from the FX1 and the BlueFin housing which by the way is still great technology. But, when your shooting with the Red camera in 4K, focus is critical and is near impossible for the diver to accomplish by viewing the underwater lcd at depth. We saw no other way to accomplish this task than by teaming up with Erik Widding(Birger), Mike Hastings(Aquavideo) and Kurt(viewfactor). The Birger allowed our director to stay on the boat dry and comfortable while our divers framed up the shots at depth. The Birger software allowed our DP to adjust the focus and the iris using a 200' tether and the Birger software. We also ran an HD-SDI feed to the surface and gave the DP a 22" monitor to make critical focus happen. To save Mag space and speed things up in post, we used the Viewfactor on/off button to start and stop record at precise times. The Aquavideo housing protected our Red camera and functioned very well. The housing is balanced well and was great for free swims. The only feature I wish I had was zoom control. The Birger software doesn't currently have a prevision for zoom control. But, Zacuto sells a clamp on gear that can be placed onto your Canon lenses. I've heard that Kurt and Erik have been talking and may soon provide a motor that may be interfaceable and will daisy chain off of the Birger mount. Underwater filming with Red is becoming more and more a reality everyday.
 
focus is critical

focus is critical

I'll second the focusing. I fount it terribly difficult to focus using the LCD and in fact don't find it to be a tool for focusing. I think we'll have to find a way to get that EVF into a housing in order to make any real attempts at focus. Additionally having precise focus control is a must. I worked a lot using Mike's hyperfocal settings and it worked out for much of my shooting. But when it comes to nailing focus edge to edge on macro or shallow DOF settings, we really need precise focus, iris and zoom control. I think Mike might be working on some solutions for that. I'll be retrofitting my housing with those controls soon as i find them a must have. The EVF, well again waiting on a solution. I also think Mike is working on that. Seems the lemo connector is the holdup for now.
 
BajaProductions said:
I'll second the focusing. I fount it terribly difficult to focus using the LCD and in fact don't find it to be a tool for focusing. I think we'll have to find a way to get that EVF into a housing in order to make any real attempts at focus. Additionally having precise focus control is a must. I worked a lot using Mike's hyperfocal settings and it worked out for much of my shooting. But when it comes to nailing focus edge to edge on macro or shallow DOF settings, we really need precise focus, iris and zoom control. I think Mike might be working on some solutions for that. I'll be retrofitting my housing with those controls soon as i find them a must have. The EVF, well again waiting on a solution. I also think Mike is working on that. Seems the lemo connector is the holdup for now.
Click to expand...

Johnny:

Birger with canon EOS is the easiest way to get iris and focus control - particularly when switching lenses because no gears are used. As you know we can do the gears for the PL lenses but they are fussy and expensive ($3K-$4K for a set for focus and iris)

I finally have the cable/LEMO connector issue resolved acceptably for both LCD and viewfinder, and the viewfinder is actually pretty easy to house - I have done that sort of thing in the past with Varicam/HDCAM so I already have part designs and some parts on hand. I just need some time with a viewfinder. I am trying to decide whether to make the body of the viewfinder housing aluminum or plastic - I know everyone likes aluminum and there is not much cost difference but the plastic is lighter so less negative bouyancy issues - feedback?. I am trying to get 8 more housings out the door in the next week or so and then I will have time to make the parts for the viewfinder, and also more LCD external housings. (I made several LCD housings back in March but shelved them waiting for the cable - now I am just waiting for a new order of Delrin to come in. )
 
Monitor Housing

Monitor Housing

Hi Aquavideo,

Attached is some pics of my recently constructed HD monitor housing for my 2/3" camera housing. It holds a Panasonic monitor which is huge compared to the little Red monitor. We were going to build it from aceytal but you can't get a big enough block of it in Australia so we went with welded aluminum. We painted it with some fancy 2 pack boat hull paint and so far there is no corrosion or lifting of the paint. Amazingly this housing is positive with the monitor inside and actually gives some much needed lift to the front of the camera housing. The aluminum is about 5mm thick but the guy who made it for me strengthened the corners and I reckon it is good to about 45m depth which is deeper that I wanna take the housing anyway. The weakest link is the acrylic front face which is 15mm. I am really interested is finding out about the connectors/cables you are using to get the viewfinder signal from the main housing to the monitor housing?? Also lastly I am posting these pics to show-off what a beautiful bloody monitor housing I have, please do not mention that it's a little clunky! Also I can access to the monitors inbuilt waveform monitor while underwater which is excellent for HD as it is so fussy about over exposure. I will initially planning to use this monitor housing on my RED camera housing which is under construction at the moment.

Regards


George
www.coralseatv.com
 
Guys,
In general I've been out of the loop for quite some time. Busy with getting a couple of projects sorted in Belize and then a return to South Africa. Then of course there is my impending wedding at the end of October.

To that end I've been starting to look around at Macro issues for RED and lens control. I would like to look at adapting either a Tamron 90mm f2.8 prime for my system. The main issue is that it does have a telescoping lens issue for telephoto. This means though that I will just set the lens to work a specific focal length on a per dive basis. Pain in the ass I know but I am looking at spending a very long and protracted period working on a specific project. So basically diving on a per sequence requirement basis on small small critters.

Any ideas, discussion points to address?

Cheers for any suggestions.
Mark.
 
Getting married, Mark? Congrats!

Where is the wedding?
 
Hey Tom,
Yep I guess it happens to us all in the end eh? Finally found my soul mate, well about 4 years ago actually, and we've set the date for a small wedding ceremony in Yokohama, Japan. No plans for an immediate honeymoon depending on project dates etc. Just finished with the rings, hers is diamonds on Platinum whilst I settled for Platinum and Gold mix.

Small chapel close to Yokohama so that her grandmother, who is almost house bound, can also attend.

Looking forward to it. I would post an image of my significant other but I know that Finner patrols these threads ........ i just can't trust that cod piece!!

Cheers,
Mark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top