Underwater Bubble Blowers User Group Thread NEW

[alex lemon]

Production has officially started on DEEP EPIC.

the precious.... must have the precious...

 

[Johnny Friday]

Yes, i believe Deep Epic hits the streets in December some time......Final design has been very slightly modified to make assembly and breakdown very easy. And there is room for either the quad battery module OR the Red Brick. So looks like Gates has covered both those issues with room to spare in the housing all the while being some 25% smaller and lighter than Deep Red. This all from my brief looks at Dema and the Gates factory.....all non-official peaks and views.

 

[Rudi Herbert]

Rudi, These were taken with filters and using lights. The discussion was a) wheter or not use lights and b) wheter or not use the filters and what filters. The shots show three different scenarios: wide macro (corals), closeup (seadragon), and wide seascape, where there is no artificial light (the shot with blue chromis over a coral reef). I personally like the colours on three of them, but I understand, discussing colours is very subjective and I accept that you do not like them. I would be interested to see what colours you like and how you achieve them.

Ok, let's try this,

Please do keep in mind that since I don't have permission to use the aforementioned Epic images shot with the filter I described, all I can do is post some files that were shot on an EX-1 with a screw on filter that I was lucky enough to receive from Germany among the shipment of filters for the Epics. Unfortunately, the only day I could get away was really bad, with overcast skies, dirty water with low visibility, all of it compounded by a shallow location too close to the coast. So do not focus on the quality of the images, it is not the point here, color rendition is. Of course these images would have looked much better with a RED (they would have looked way better with the EX-1 too under ideal conditions) but the pattern of light behavior is the same regardless of camera, so let's roll with it.

Here first is an image shot without filter. It exhibits the typical blue cast and lack of information on the warm areas, such as sea fans and coral heads. More tellingly, anything that is not right in front of the camera tends to look brown/muddy since all those warm colors turn to shit (literally speaking, in color terms) very easily. The RED would get a cleaner image here, but no by much. This is shot with a Gates/Fathom port, so optically speaking, this is as good as it gets regardless of camera, a very sharp, distortion free lens made specifically for this camera without any disparities in nodal points, entrance pupil, etc, and let's not forget the 1/2 inch sensor helps keep deep focus.

Not very impressive b y any means. So next, let's try to fix the image in post. For that, I took the oranges and reds way past legal limits, as far out as I could without kicking up a storm of noise, while yellows were also boosted, along with pinks and magentas. The result? Here below is the image. Yes, much better color balance, but all that tweaking created a lot of noise in the shadows, which then had to be brought down to kill said noise, resulting in dark shadows and a general darkness/underexposure in the image. The blues had to be heavily treated to prevent them from turning purple, greatly reducing the dynamic range in the highlights lest they start showing color gradients handily. To give you an idea of how extreme this grading had to be, alas, to obtain such unimpressive results, the color temperature of this shot is somewhere north of 16 000 K.

Here I had to go up and slide the filter in, so by the time I went back down I was a little bit farther in on the reef and the sun had come out somewhat, but other than that, conditions were identical. Here's a shot now with the custom made, golden yellow filter. As you can see, it looks much more natural, better than the graded image without filter, but with a more organic, "true" look to it. More importantly, everything in the frame, both in front of the camera and in the rear holds the warm tones. The blue of the water has not been affected either, despite the addition of yellow, and the image looks very balanced on the waveform.

Let's now take this image into a grader, something cheap and easy to use, like Colorista, and see if we can improve the image.

As I preview this post, I realize that the web compression really does these images great disservice. It may not look like this graded image is much different from the previous one, but trust me, there are all kinds of subtleties and nuances on my screen, from clearly differentiated purples, pinks, magentas, oranges and reds all over the coral heads, to many tones of yellow on the sea fans. Let's just hope that the differences can at least be seen. There is warmth all through the focal range, and I was able to tweak the blues without trouble either, from a more bluish tone on the left side of the screen to a more cyan towards the surface on the right. This is what I personally strive for when shooting reef vistas or wide angle seascapes, good separation of warm and cool colors all through the frame, without the hot and cool spots yielded by lights. I think any camera, more so a RED than any other, can benefit from this, SO LONG as a filter is used under the right conditions, that is, very good light, shallow water, good visibility and subjects with naturally warm tones. Then again, when shooting macro with lights, provided is being done in shallow water, a filter can help too in bringing down the intensity and temperature of the lights needed. All this, of course, is MY TAKE on the subject, but I tell you, those images shot with the Epics and the yellow filters in the Caribbean look utterly amazing. Anyone, as a RED shooter, anyone owes it to himself to test filters before discarding this approach.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Pawel,
you should check with Gates & Aquavideo before you make your tests since NEITHER one uses the Aquavideo 8" acrylic port (for Epic). Or at least they BOTH offer glass ports. So just to be fair for test results before posting and making assumptions. Additionally both have lens coatings. So you'll want to be sure of those things as well as WHERE the camera sits in the housing.....since it sounded like you will not be using a Gates Deep Epic or AV housing?? At any rate, i think for a fair and balanced test you should use the other manufacturers housings for a comparative test. Unless i misread your post. But that would no doubt allow for you to give some real feedback.

That is true. I only obtained 6 or 7 of the 8" Aquatica acrylic ports in the screw style and still have several so there are only 2 or 3 people in the world that have them for the RedOne housing and none on epic. Generally people are either using the 6" acrylic or 8" glass dome. Our 8" glass dome has AR coating on the inside.

I would be curious what "highly optimised for contrast" means beyond relatively standard AR coatings? I realize there are different coatings available but most of it is relatively well know technology. And there are more differences between the AR coatings in cheaper versus more expensive lenses but a lot of that has to do with the large number of elements and balancing things out within the optical design. But a dome is a single (large) element so it would seem to me there is less to be gained.

 

[Dave Blackham]

The differences in resolution between acrylic and glass domes aren't that dramatic as acrylic has refractive index closer to water than glass. It just doesn't last very long (micro scratches) and goes out of shape. The difference between my optical system and a dome, in general, is substantial.

Well, we see a big diference between th Aquatica 8" dome and the 9.25" Mineral glass dome. Id certainly agree that the acrylic gets scratched really easily. Theres a big pile of not much used 8" on the shelf in our workshops with micro scratches on the inside. Some look new till you look in side.....

Id be interested to see who has good or improved coatings for domes to extend the life of them.

Any one used Optolite Optics here ?

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Hi Mike,

Optimisation for contrast is not just the coatings. In fact, the improvement from coatings is only modest, probably in an order of about 6%. But, it still counts.
Interestingly, acrylic dome would have relatively good contrast because of the refractive index being almost the same as water. However, acrylic does not keep tolerances and scratches easily. Shape tolerances affect sharpness. Scratches affect contrast.

There are a number of factors that improve contrast. As you can see, CinePort has a deep conical design. It's hard to machine and requires more material, but does not promote unnecessary stray light entering the dome. The angle is matching exactly the angle of the lens. Other domes have flat back usually and capture substantially more light inside the dome, which then affects the contrast.

Another, very significant contrast improvement is that CinePort has about double the area of intersection with water as compared to 8" dome. In average or poor water clarity, this improves contrast tremendously, to the point that the dome can see several times further than a diving mask.

There are multiple light traps and other strategies to absorb or diffuse stray light. For example, the finish of the edges and surface finish.

I spent a lot of time with a prototype and a laser beam to work out how light is refracted and reflected through the dome. It is a slow and expensive process but, I think, the CinePort is as good as it gets in terms of contrast.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Not sure what you mean "the area of intersection with water", can you explain?

Also, it sounds as if cineport is basically dedicated to a single lens? (Your 14mm MP? Not a bad choice .... but somewhat limiting? AFAIK there are large gains to be made in murky water by simply going wider - which seems like wouldn't be possible with the Cineport?

 

[Pawel Achtel]

Not sure what you mean "the area of intersection with water" can you explain.

Also, it sounds as if cineport is basically dedicated to a single lens? (Your 14mm MP? Not a bad choice .... but somewhat limiting? AFAIK there are large gains to be made in murky water by simply going wider - which seems like wouldn't be possible with the Cineport?

Mike, CinePort is a 12" dome...50% larger than 8" dome...225% larger area of intersection with water. If you imagine lots of little particles dissolved in water scattering light and muddying your pictures, CinePort has twice the definition.
But, that's not all. It also has much smaller image plane curvature bringing corners of the projected images into crisp focus.

No, CinePort is not designed for one lens, it is designed for one angle of view (or smaller)...which is about 90 degrees. I used it with other lenses and I have Seacam mount version as well for smaller lenses.

The point is that most domes are unnecessarily wide and this is affecting contrast. My experience and modeling shows that anything larger than 90 degrees does not work very well through a dome.

As per my invite to Baja Pawel, ...

That's a very kind offer, Tom. Thank you. I will work on it andconfirm in January.

 

[Michael Hastings]

Mike, CinePort is a 12" dome...50% larger than 8" dome...225% larger area of intersection with water. If you imagine lots of little particles dissolved in water scattering light and muddying your pictures, CinePort has twice the definition.
But, that's not all. It also has much smaller image plane curvature bringing corners of the projected images into crisp focus.

No, CinePort is not designed for one lens, it is designed for one angle of view (or smaller)...which is about 90 degrees. I used it with other lenses and I have Seacam mount version as well for smaller lenses.

The point is that most domes are unnecessarily wide and this is affecting contrast. My experience and modeling shows that anything larger than 90 degrees does not work very well through a dome.


That's a very kind offer, Tom. Thank you. I will work on it andconfirm in January.

I don't doubt that these things have SOME effect, I'm just skeptical that the effect is as great as you seem to be claiming.

What do you do to keep the optical center of the lens with the optical center of the dome? It seems that with a 12" dome you need to move the lens 2" further back than on an 8" to begin with - then you have to vary the position of the camera with different lenses if they are different sizes/optical formula OR you lose the precision you are claiming.

 

[Johnny Friday]

REALM of the Giant Sharks OR Island of the Giant Sharks
super rough cut PROMO:

(here's a link to our rough cut off of the plane--no coloring, or effects added yet...notably stabilization).....We literally cut this on our boat ride back from Darwin and finally an hour before our flights departed while waiting at the airport.

BUT, here's a very first look to the Bubble Blowers. This will change DRAMATICALLY....but you get the idea.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByaHpDFN9x0

Shot on RED 1 MX; HVX200; EPIC M
Cut on Premier Pro
Shot by: Alfredo Barroso; Johnny Friday
Written & Produced by Thomas Lucas

 

[Pawel Achtel]

I don't doubt that these things have SOME effect, I'm just skeptical that the effect is as great as you seem to be claiming.

What do you do to keep the optical center of the lens with the optical center of the dome? It seems that with a 12" dome you need to move the lens 2" further back than on an 8" to begin with - then you have to vary the position of the camera with different lenses if they are different sizes/optical formula OR you lose the precision you are claiming.

The differece, in my view, is substantial, specially in 4k. I'm trying to get comparative tests and demonstrate. It is taking longer than I anticipated.

Yes, the camera is on a plate that can be moved all directions and centered precisely.

I do not change lenses

 

[Jon Shaw]

REALM of the Giant Sharks OR Island of the Giant Sharks
super rough cut PROMO:

(here's a link to our rough cut off of the plane--no coloring, or effects added yet...notably stabilization).....We literally cut this on our boat ride back from Darwin and finally an hour before our flights departed while waiting at the airport.

BUT, here's a very first look to the Bubble Blowers. This will change DRAMATICALLY....but you get the idea.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByaHpDFN9x0

Shot on RED 1 MX; HVX200; EPIC M
Cut on Premier Pro
Shot by: Alfredo Barroso; Johnny Friday
Written & Produced by Thomas Lucas

Looks good Johnny, what's your workflow for the project?

 

[Ross Isaacs]

REALM of the Giant Sharks OR Island of the Giant Sharks
super rough cut PROMO:

(here's a link to our rough cut off of the plane--no coloring, or effects added yet...notably stabilization).....We literally cut this on our boat ride back from Darwin and finally an hour before our flights departed while waiting at the airport.

BUT, here's a very first look to the Bubble Blowers. This will change DRAMATICALLY....but you get the idea.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByaHpDFN9x0

Shot on RED 1 MX; HVX200; EPIC M
Cut on Premier Pro
Shot by: Alfredo Barroso; Johnny Friday
Written & Produced by Thomas Lucas

Wow the poor diver that gets whacked by the whale shark's tail after the researcher fires the tag into the shark's back....bloody close call for the poor diver I would say....fabulous footage Johnny

 

[Jon Shaw]

Wow the poor diver that gets whacked by the whale shark's tail after the researcher fires the tag into the shark's back....bloody close call for the poor diver I would say....fabulous footage Johnny

That clip made me laugh, silly place to hang when tagging...

 

[Johnny Friday]

The gal the got tagged by the whale shark came up with quite a big bruise. She was trying to get a DNA sample when one of the other scientiests shot the spear with the tag....this whale shark reacted---was very strange in that no MOST tags, the whale sharks NEVER reacted or even flinched. But this one was nervous the whole time when we were around her. And had she been hit on the head or torso....could have been much worse.

As for workflow Jon....do you mean our post workflow for the show? To sum up in a nutshell. We are shooting mixed codecs and now dropping RAW footage and Native codecs on the Premier Timeline and from there we will do our exports and color correcting. We've not dug into the color work on Premier since all of us are FCP and COLOR converts....but it's been a pleasure to work in a mixed codec world via premier. The trailer was cut on Premier Pro or the suite 5.5....and on a macbook pro. But at both our studios we run mac towers and just recently i bought the NVIDIA quadro 4000 card---have not installed it yet as i'm on the road. We are soon going to go into Premier's 3 way color corrector--looks similar to FCP...and any further tweaking we can output an XML to go int Apple COLOR if we need to .But for now it all looks very simple via Premier.

The show by the way is our third produced by ourselves on our dime and for HULU....my partner has a HULU channel and this is a very new venture. We own the product, produce it and then have lots of flexibility in outputting for "on-demand" tv where we have a HULU & YOUTUBE channel as a content provider. You would be surprised to know this is becoming a very mainstream and lucrative market and we then have leeway to sell internationally and Locally in USA. We do retain internet rights though since our quarterly royalty payments are quite impressive. Much better than i could have ever predicted and advertising dollars are rolling in like mad to online tv networks. But most impressive is we can produce what we want and own it all.

 

[Paul Russell]

REALM of the Giant Sharks OR Island of the Giant Sharks
super rough cut PROMO:

wow, that's amazing footage

 

[Jon Shaw]

Thanks Johnny yeah I did mean workflow for the show. Are you using a mobile rocket with your MBP?

 

[Tom Hamilton]

Progress; slow, but progress nonetheless

Progress; slow, but progress nonetheless

Florida enacts ban on the take of tiger and hammerhead sharks

http://www.grindtv.com/outdoor/blog...n+on+the+take+of+tiger+and+hammerhead+sharks/

 

[John J Ellerbrock]

the precious.... must have the precious...

 

[Johnny Friday]

Thanks Johnny yeah I did mean workflow for the show. Are you using a mobile rocket with your MBP?

no mobile rocket....we try to stay as lean as possible in the field with 14 cases......review in RCX & in Premier/FCP while on the boat is our normal practice. Back at office we go to our full edit system with Rocket etc....