Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

The Gentleman's Underwater Bubble Blower Thread

Will, yes stills from motion.
Rudi, I will grab the R3D and post when I get back in the office. I have messed around with the images in RCX plus did a little colour tinkering in Aperture so I could be messed up
 
Well, guys, yes and no.

it's more a reflection of the situation of (not) running a business here in Norway, simply not enough work. About 75% of the assignments I get called on to are cancelled less than 5 - 10 days before the shoot starts due to budgetary reasons, feature films mostly. And they are almost all a single day's work at around $1.500 - 2.000. Shooting costs here in Norway are also as much as 100 - 150% higher than elsewhere in the world, which does become a problem working with foreign productions. (e.g. a Pelicase is up to 5x dearer here than in the US, a cheap hotel room $200, a pizza for two is $50 a.s.o.). So, for this reason a lot of foreign productions shy away! Also my day-to-day upkeep is usually about 50 - 100% more than in the EU general - a factor that forces me to move abroad. Ironically, to plan shoots in Norway next year!

Besides, it's part of a process of foraging into new territories such as directing and working on other people's projects and gear. Having, running and upkeeping a load of gear in Norway has so far not been ideal for me, so that is the reason behind parting with it. I wish I could keep it all, but right now the quest is to leave Norway for good, train on various rebreathers and travel the world - regardless of what kind of camera gear or project I may end up working on.

So, any offers?

A.
 
There is enough concern here now, that I am worried as well. When Howard Hall, Johnny Friday, and Rudi Hebert have all expressed concerns about Epic's ability to capture underwater images at the advertised resolution, and is failing to do so, something is wrong. I don't think a Nikonos lens is sufficient answer, by any stretch. The devil is in the digital details, in this case, Epic capture algorithms, as tweaked by Red engineering for topside filmic display.

High time Graeme was brought into this discussion, as well as Jim and Jared. Message copied to them, I encourage all of you to do same.

Ron is local, and knows all of them them personally, perhaps he might weigh in with his considerable influence here as well.

I think we deserve consideration.
 
Tom Hamilton said:
There is enough concern here now, that I am worried as well. When Howard Hall, Johnny Friday, and Rudi Hebert have all expressed concerns about Epic's ability to capture underwater images at the advertised resolution, and is failing to do so, something is wrong. I don't think a Nikonos lens is sufficient answer, by any stretch. The devil is in the digital details, in this case, Epic capture algorithms, as tweaked by Red engineering for topside filmic display.

High time Graeme was brought into this discussion, as well as Jim and Jared. Message copied to them, I encourage all of you to do same.

Ron is local, and knows all of them them personally, perhaps he might weigh in with his considerable influence here as well.

I think we deserve consideration.
Click to expand...
Rudi and I tried to convince RED and they were very, how should I say, "in denial" lets keep it.
The R1 and the Epic were developed for topside and are great cameras for that purpose.
RED even altered the entire industry on their own.

However the Epic fails (sometimes) to give the same "performance" underwater and it is certainly not consistent in doing so.
At a certain point they started mocking me like "10 feet of water takes the red away" and other simple facts I am obviously aware of.
Just to say: they don't want to "confess" the issue or they simply aren't capable to figure it out (which seems very unlikely to me).
They dont even "believe" HH, why would they believe me and all the evidence Rudi and I delivered them.
Maybe 0.1% of their customers shoot underwater so why would they care uwp?
I personally think that them acknowledging there is a problem underwater with the Epic, would hurt their superior feelings.

I sent my brain back to RED as it was just awful what the images looked like.
Even a GoPro shoots way better images at 50 feet then my Epic did.
They held it for like 6 weeks and then returned it saying nothing was wrong with it.
Curiously that camera never shot such bad images anymore.
There still is a problem under stressed conditions (ambient) but it is far from as bad as it used to be.
So I do believe they did change something on my camera....

That's why I'm still hoping Dragon will cure this as they might have secretly solved it with the new sensor.
Fingers crossed for Dragon in my case :)
 
The issue is with the sensor design. We have now measured and quantified the problem. Last time I published scientific and factual information here it wasn't received kindly, so I will leave out science out of public forums for a while, I think. :)

I have offered explanation to Jarred and Graeme. They can contact me if they want to.

By saying that it is difficult or not possible to fix this problem in post is that there is no contrast left in the information that is needed to pull the colours back where they should be. The information is gone. It's RED specific (Red One and Epic). I'm not sure if Dragon has the same issue. I will test as soon as I get my hands on one :)

On a helpful note, there are couple solutions that we are working on (one very complex and one even more complex) and we will be offering specially moded DeepX and 3Deep packages for rental. These rigs do not exhibit the issues described. There is no magenta tint, there is good colour separation and there is much better contrast in all channels. Anyone interested can contact me directly.

I'm hopping to get some blue water footage in Tonga in August and promise to post some samples.

Greetings from rainy Tassie :)
 
Michael Maes said:
...That's why I'm still hoping Dragon will cure this as they might have secretly solved it with the new sensor.
Fingers crossed for Dragon in my case :)
Click to expand...

While it is possible, I think it is unlikely. But we will see. I can't wait.
 
So Pawel,

What do you attribute the variance in repetition of the anomaly to? While I think ALL Epics exhibit signs of the problem, like reduced contrast and poor color rendition while shooting ambient, some cameras behave worse, like the magenta and green tints that are unrecoverable, and a few of them do it ALL THE TIME. This was the case with Michael's camera, we ran tests at many depths and settings and still the same. And then some people like yourself claim to never have had the problem at all. I remember asking Frazier and he said he'd never had it. Do you think it is due to variations in sensor fabrication? And it is interesting that the R1 does not suffer from the problem anywhere near as severely as the Epic.
 
Will Keir said:
Congratulations Pawel. Just saw your write up on red.com

http://www.red.com/news/3deep-underwater-rig-resolves-full-5k-and-beyond

That 3rd shot of the seahorse is very nice and the lighting on it makes it come to life. Would love to see the 4k finish one day. Does BandPro have this?
Click to expand...


Thanks Will. I haven't seen it until you pointed it out :)

It's quite an honour to be mentioned in the news next to Baz Luhrmann.

Yes, RED and BandPro have the raw footage and I'm pretty sure you can arrange to see it in 4k. Give Brett a call.

I'm on a shoot filming deep coral reefs in 3D.

Best wishes from (again) sunny Tasmania.
 
Tom Hamilton said:
There is enough concern here now, that I am worried as well. When Howard Hall, Johnny Friday, and Rudi Hebert have all expressed concerns about Epic's ability to capture underwater images at the advertised resolution, and is failing to do so, something is wrong. I don't think a Nikonos lens is sufficient answer, by any stretch. The devil is in the digital details, in this case, Epic capture algorithms, as tweaked by Red engineering for topside filmic display.
Click to expand...

I can confirm I am seeing these issues too, though its not as bad? Maybe its the depths I am at? I am unsure? I still need to get Rudi some r3d files I have had friends in town so was slightly busy.
 
Last edited:
Hi all,

I'm leaving for Cat Island to film Oceanics with the Epic and Gates.
I was thinking about shooting the Canon 8-15 Fish Eye.
Just got myself some brand new Keldan CRI pair, thrilled to test them.

Any good tips?
Thanks and hope I'll live to show you some shots.... LOL!
 
Some frame grabs and shots from the filming deep coral reefs off east Tasmanian coast:

A010_L004_0518JT.0003160 1280x640.jpg


A010_L003_05185U.0002849 1280x640.jpg



Shot with 3Deep, Nikonos 15mm, f/2.8

Best fishes from sunny Tassie.
 

Attachments

  • DSC_1277 (Large).jpg
    DSC_1277 (Large).jpg
    71.3 KB · Views: 0
  • DSC_1296 (Large).JPG
    DSC_1296 (Large).JPG
    36.6 KB · Views: 0
  • DSC_1295 (Large).JPG
    DSC_1295 (Large).JPG
    30.2 KB · Views: 0
  • DSC_1294 (Large).jpg
    DSC_1294 (Large).jpg
    60.5 KB · Views: 0
Michael,
have you used the Canon 8-15 yet? I'm not much of a fan....since it is kind of a myth....you don't get to use the lens until around 13 or 14mm if i recall in 5k full frame. I'd prefer a more useable focal range. That said, i only used it once, but did not care for it in open water with not much background. It did show images well in highly dense areas like kelp beds, but no more than a more useable focal distance. But i'm also not aware of what other fisheye zooms are out there.
 
Johnny Friday said:
Michael,
have you used the Canon 8-15 yet? I'm not much of a fan....since it is kind of a myth....you don't get to use the lens until around 13 or 14mm if i recall in 5k full frame. I'd prefer a more useable focal range. That said, i only used it once, but did not care for it in open water with not much background. It did show images well in highly dense areas like kelp beds, but no more than a more useable focal distance. But i'm also not aware of what other fisheye zooms are out there.
Click to expand...
Yes Johnny, I mostly shoot scenic shots (loads of them in Cayman) with the Canon 8-15FE.
In 5K the lens vignettes till 11mm.
Personally I think it performs very good at 12.5-13mm.
Honestly I hardly use the zoom, if you can call 12.5-15 a "zoom" of course ;-)
I also have the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, but have not yet used it so not sure if I will take it along.
It adds a lot weight as it needs the 486 extension ring and extra weights.
I want to keep the Gates as light as possible because of the tricky exits to the boat....
 
Michael Maes said:
Yes Johnny, I mostly shoot scenic shots (loads of them in Cayman) with the Canon 8-15FE.
In 5K the lens vignettes till 11mm.
Personally I think it performs very good at 12.5-13mm.
Honestly I hardly use the zoom, if you can call 12.5-15 a "zoom" of course ;-)
I also have the EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM, but have not yet used it so not sure if I will take it along.
It adds a lot weight as it needs the 486 extension ring and extra weights.
I want to keep the Gates as light as possible because of the tricky exits to the boat....
Click to expand...

I get it for scenics....even the tokina 10-17fisheye for me is too wide at times when in blue water taking shots of animals. I find it and others like it to be a lens for a particular shot or look. As for keeping it light.....i'll be shooting my 16-42 Optimo on a commercial with the large port extender....really large and heavy doesn't seem to bother me except for when i have to lift it myself with gear on and roll over the side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top