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 :)

The Gentleman's Underwater Bubble Blower Thread

Hi Pawel

I knew you would chime in.

What took you so long ? :)

I have been looking for Nikonos RS for while and all has almost disappeared from ebay. No problem resolving the Dragon with these underwater Nikon lenses. Still image looked fantastic on the D800.

Cheers

David
 
He he he, thanks David!

What?!...disappeared from eBay....Nooooo....what a shame....I'm wandering who could posibly be responsible for this? :)

Indeed, Nikonos lenses is the way to go. Why would anyone use 5k camera otherwise?

BTW, we are also working on an interesting module for 3Deep that will make use of Nikonos RS lenses: full auto and manual focus, auto metering, .... full integration with RED Epic lens control :)
 
Tiger Sharks Tiger Beach Shot on EPIC

Tiger Sharks Tiger Beach Shot on EPIC

Just got through at Tiger Beach. A couple of frame grabs from my camera. Just love working with these amazing animals.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oceanimaging/8230043039/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oceanimaging/8231106308/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oceanimaging/8231105310/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oceanimaging/8230042047/in/photostream/

These aren't the high res files and are converted in Lightroom to email size, didn't do anything other than export the files as jpegs out of REDCineX pro. Straight out of the camera.

Just wanted to share them with you guys.

So how do I post these without the links again easily so that they show in the post.
 
Frazier...again nice work. What lens are you using & settings? I really like the two free divers going up the line---was that on RED or another camera?
Well done....Oh, and are your settings using Rec709 or RG2 or RG3 ? I ask just to get a sense of your colors....seems like you have an in camera setting setup since your colors don't run into magenta--or maybe you did an in water WB?
 
Am privileged to be shooting with the brand new Amphibico Rouge prototype, so far, a magic housing. More to come.
 

Attachments

  • Tiger 6.0001089.jpg
    Tiger 6.0001089.jpg
    51.7 KB · Views: 0
Tom Hamilton said:
Am privileged to be shooting with the brand new Amphibico Rouge prototype, so far, a magic housing. More to come.
Click to expand...
Thats a pretty juvenile Tiger Tom gorgeous animal!
 
Thank you Johnny.

Thank you Johnny.

Thank you Johnny for your kind comments.

Free Divers was also EPIC and low res, JPEGs but shot at 60 fps. but I loved the image from EPIC, in high res it's nice. That's actually why I shoot the 5K EPIC, it may not be perfection for some but for me it's just fine. I can pull some nice frame grabs at 48 fps.

I actually use a in camera look and get great results, I might get blasted for this but for UW I use REDCOLOR and REDGAMMA and then in REDCINEX Pro create a look after tweaking footage at depth I am working at, then import that look into EPIC, that way what I'm looking at in the touchscreen is nice when I want to play it back for Director on site. Anyway it works for me. I can always re white balance if I need to but usually don't, just tweak the clips later in RED CineX. Anyway I usually have to not tweak too much later and I like the look I get.

Sigma 14mm lens. F8 seems to be the sweet spot with the best sharpness on the lens. Works for me well. Usually shooting 5KHD, 30 and 48 fps.

No CC filters, used to use them all the time with RED One but not with EPIC, don't have to and still get great color. Anyway for me, REDCOLOR AND REDGAMMA gives me a better look UW in my personal opinion. Use different settings of course for surface filming.

Best,
Frazier
 

Attachments

  • F005_C038_11274V.0000239.jpg
    F005_C038_11274V.0000239.jpg
    34.4 KB · Views: 0
  • F005_C080_1128SP.0000436.jpg
    F005_C080_1128SP.0000436.jpg
    34.3 KB · Views: 0
  • F005_C072_11288I.0000121.jpg
    F005_C072_11288I.0000121.jpg
    52.1 KB · Views: 0
  • F005_C068_1128FI.0001306.jpg
    F005_C068_1128FI.0001306.jpg
    39.3 KB · Views: 0
Frazier, which operator you using? or rather recommend? I have a group of friends that want to do a trip and looking for an operator.
....is the Simga a Fisheye or rectilinear? I've also been playing around with various settings, but seem to always run back to redgamma 3 if i want to do detail work or rec709 if out of camera look but boost Flut.
 
I'm doing a shoot in the tropics mid-Jan for a couple weeks. If my Canon 1Dc is not in hand real soon (doubtful) then I will be looking to rent a Gates for a couple weeks. Who do you guys recommend in SoCal for this? I have the Arri 8R that I would love to use but understand there are port issues. The other PL lens I have is the Angie 16-42 which I feel will be too tight for some shots. Of course I could go with the Canon L's if the 8R and PL's ain't worth the risk and bulk for benefit. Thoughts?
 
Great photos of the sharks guys!!!
 
Since everyone is sharing...Shot this cave footage last month, its a bit dark as one of my 200w HMI's flooded.

 
Josh, using 8r works, but sure depends your subject matter. I have used it on occasion, but prefer fisheye lens inside of the dome port. Also 16-42 is option, but heavy and slightly soft at corners which you can crop easily enough. My recommendation is stick with fisheye lens. But if for a feature, they are accustomed and will likely want to use high end lenses....but with lackluster results compared to the cheaper fisheyes.
 
Johnny Friday said:
Frazier, which operator you using? or rather recommend? I have a group of friends that want to do a trip and looking for an operator.
....is the Simga a Fisheye or rectilinear? I've also been playing around with various settings, but seem to always run back to redgamma 3 if i want to do detail work or rec709 if out of camera look but boost Flut.
Click to expand...



Johnny: Frazier is using the old Sigma 14mm 3.5 rectililnear Nikon mount version on the Red Canon mount. behind the 8" Glass dome.

I bought half a dozen of them over a month or two on ebay when we were trying to figure out how to get control using the Canon mount, and try to keep a couple on hand.

It is an excellent lens and easy to setup in the housing for iris and focus control since - unlike canon lenses - it has a manual iris ring that I made gears for. They are full frame lenses and go for $300 to $400 and gears add a few hundred so makes for a very high qualilty, very simple/reliable system at pretty low cost with either scarlet or epic.

I like a lot of the fisheye stuff you have posted, but I do find it fairly noticeable on things like the cave shot below so I'm a little torn about using it over the rectilinears for regular shooting. Want to get my hands on the canon 8-15 L fisheye to give it a try. Would like to hear your expanded thoughts on fisheye vs rectilinear. Does your Toki cover 5K ? Have you tried the Canon (it covers all the way to full frame and of course has adjustable focal length). Seems like most of your shooting is on Pacific side where vis might not be as clear as over here on the caribbean side - is that a factor?'

On 5K the 14mm gives us a pretty good FOV (about 96 degrees and equivalent to 11.2mm on 4K) with high contrast, clarity and strong color saturation without some of the elongation of things like the sharks that I used to notice with my 10mm on 4K when they swim across and out of frame. For 4k I think I would like a little wider.
 
I will quickly, and unsurprisingly I should say, vouch for rectilinear lenses as well.

At the risk if disagreeing with Johnny, whose pain I feel and share, I would concede that the easy solution to eliminate all soft corners and other optical defects would be a fisheye. Johnny himself has posted beautiful examples of megafauna that look outstanding, and I know that Howard Hall loves the Tokina 10-17 lens and uses it almost exlcusively for wide angle work. Yes, you can learn how to overcome some of the fisheye inherent characteristics, and I even like their "wrap around" effect on things like reefs, where coral heads and the like sort of pop forward and then slide back in a circular motion as you swim by them, that sort serves as a "reveal" of sorts that I find to be of high effect.

BUT

For many other things, fisheyes just don't cut it. Most of what I do, for example, is shooting freedivers and divers at close range, inches from the lens, and the tadpole effect that a fisheye introduces under such circumstances is not really acceptable.Keep in mind that most, if not all, Hollywwod and other theatrical narrative features that shoot underwater will invariably shoot actors close to the camera as well, so rectilinears are the only choice for them. Likewise, for wrecks, you don't want bent lines in the frame. I know that many people have reverted to fisheyes after frustrating forays into the rectilinear realm, but let me offer some advice from somebody who has shot nothing but rectilinear for many years (and yes, I have a 10-17 and its gears always in my bag, I like to know it is there and always tell myself that I will use it on the next dive, I never get around to :-)

- Common nodal point and entrance pupil alignment theories that dictate to move the lens forward relative to the dome when excessive corner softness is encountered are wrong in my opinion. I have found that with my lens of choice, the Tokina 11-16, moving the lens backwards works best. In fact, I am currently using the lens at the dome vignetting threshold, where one more milimeter backwards and I'll see the shades of the dome in the frame. Like this, the lens center is a good 4 inches from the dome center, noticeably longer than any other set up I've seen. But guess what? The corners are VISIBLY sharper than any other setup I've tested. And that is at the 11 mm setting, anything narrower than that, specially from 12 mm to 14 mm, and even at 400% magnification, you'd be hard pressed to detect any softness on the corners. Yes it is there, but it really is barely visible. I think that as the lens is farther back relative to the virtual image, the image becomes more flattened if you will, and the differences between center and corners much less pronounced. Conclusion: move your lens back relative to the dome, not closer.

- Use a diopter. Let me put it better: use a diopter. Perhaps a simpler explanation might work best: use a diopter! It baffles me how so many people using rectilinear lenses, the majority in fact, do not know or do not care, for the use of diopters. My Tokina 11-16 lives permanently mated to a B&W +2 diopter, and next week, I'll be testing with a +3. Diopters are misunderstood in that most people believe they only work to allow lenses to focus closer, which they do although most modern lenses like the 11-16 do not need that help, but more importantly, a diopter acts as a divergent element that counteracts the effects of the dome, which is a convergent element. Those who have dismissed rectilinear lenses while never using a diopter on them are doing themselves great disservice. If you plan on shooting a rectilinear behind a dome, then a diopter is a MUST. That is actually not open to interpretation as the use of color filters is, that is the law of the land, and if you don't believe me, go ahead and try it out. Conclusion: use a diopter!

These two things, increasing the distance between lens and dome centers, and using diopters, have made a great difference for in the use of rectilinear lenses. Those who want straight lines and natural looking seascapes underwater should try this before quitting and moving camp to the land of the bent lines and the protruding facial features...
 
Rudi,
Yes, diopters work well....In fact on a sequence i did at Jellyfish Lake i had stacked several diopters on the red 18-50 lens and shot through dome for the medium close timelapse of feeding....worked very well and in fact was a big surprise for many that said this could just not be done using a dome port....and fact is it was a major sequence for NG in that series.....so disproving the "old" theories is great....just do it and see if it works---much like you have tried with moving back the 11-16 inside your housing.
 
As this is gentleman's thread, I totally agree with Rudi:

I love my Nikonos 15mm rectilinear and, and yes, I have the 12mm Sea&Sea fisheye (without any gears) always in my bag, I like to know it is there and always tell myself that I will use it on the next dive, I never get around to :-) LOL

Seriously, though I'm tempted to try the Nikonos 20mm on one and the 12mm fisheye on the other camera (shooting 3Deep) and see how they intercut together. The 20mm was superb on the optical bench.

James, The cave shots are spectacular.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top