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 :)

Underwater Bubble Blowin' Users Group

Rudi:

Wondering what your shooting situation is. I agree that the 15 is kind of the maximum for general U/W work, as by comparison most in the HD video world for the last 5+ years have been working with 100 to 115 degree wide angles. Of course in very clear water it will work fine but even there your colors saturation and overall clarity would be noticeably better with a wider lens.

I'm guessing that you don't want to go to SLR lenses, but I'm just wondering why you wouldn't just use primes? As Pawel suggests, if you are trying to maximize quality, you would need to change ports for the longer focal lengths so would be basically as easy to change lenses at the same time.

I have an Arri 10mm T2.1 as well as a 12mm (which I am about to sell), that we could probably arrange to try out some time since I believe you are here in the Miami/FLL area.

As far as changing focal lengths underwater, if you actually have a zoom like the SLR 10-22 Canon or Tamron 11-16, it is nice to have the capability - but you will lose some quality. On the other hand, we did that many times in the video days and got some useful shots that wouldn't have happened otherwise.

As far as Johnny and Pawel, I know Pawel's back is healing but I'd like to get you two under contract so when it heals when can arrange the first 4K underwater cage match.:biggrin:
 
Michael,

I'm gonna be filming a running chase scene high on some rocky seaside cliffs in the south of Turkey, where I wanna use a range of wide angle focal distances to a) accentuate the sense of speed during the chase, which you know wide angle can do as it helps pull in the foreground closer making the background and edges of the frame go by quicker, b) keep the sea in the background relatively in focus as it is a very dramatic sight, and with any decent wide angle at F5.6 or so, I should be able to keep everything in the scene crisp and c) we'll be doing a couple of underwater shots on the same location, where both actors plunge into the water from a cliff and wanted to a) do an air-to-water travel shot that will follow them from the cliff all the way underwater so it needs to be the same wide angle lens used topside that goes underwater, and then b) once underwater, as you know, I want to have as wide a field of vision as possible and the ability to get crisp detail and good color rendition from this wide lens. So, although technically I don't need to shoot everything with one lens, I was just wondering if such a zoom exists because given the fact that I will use wide angles very frequently, it would make more sense to me to buy a great zoom instead of a few primes, that's all.

I would like to take a look at your RED setup, including the housing and the Arri primes and get a feel for ergonomics and weight, so yes, it would not be a bad idea for me to visit you up in Fort Lauderdale whenever you have some time, preferably some time in the next two weeks before I leave town. PM me or call me (305-815-3560) and let me know of your availability. I've already had a couple of occasions where I've needed a RED/housing combo and could have done it through you, so let me get set so I can start sending some business your way.
 
Zeiss 14mm MK 2

Zeiss 14mm MK 2

Might have a zeiss 14mm mk2 for sale if anyone is interested. It's a T 2.1 and in great condition and has been serviced recently. I have two and am shooting a test w/ Ken Corben in 3d so when we finish up, it will likely be up for grabs. feel free to pm me if you are interested - likely $6k + shipping.
 
NDing PL lenses Underwater?

NDing PL lenses Underwater?

Hi,

My red housing is near completion and I am wondering what others are doing about NDing underwater? With 2/3" video cameras I simply guess the ND setting from the wheel in the camera before going u/w (based on weather and anticipated depth of dive).

Now with RED which is rated at 320asa approx and PL lenses, say you are shooting in a pool on a sunny day, you are going to need to ND it. I don't have room in front of the lens in the port to fit a large 4x6 glass ND. Has anyone used a bit of ND gel at the back end between lens and camera sensor? If this works it would make life easier.

I suppose the alternative would be to get a couple of different strength round ND made, but they would be about 130mm diam and would cost a fortune.

Any thought much appreciated.


George
www.coralseatv.com
Sydney, Australia
 
If you put a gel behind the lens it will optically extend the flange focale depth about
.0015"
This is not good when using wide angle, high speed or zoom lenses. If you go this route you are going to have to either reset the flange focale depth every time you use a gel or put a gel even if only a clear one on every lens.
 
If you use Canon EF 14mm f/2.8 II, it has a gelatin filter slot for exactly this purpose. Nikon 14mm-24mm f/2.8 does not have this capability. Some re-housed still lenses do have rear filter slot.

My solution: CinePort has Arri filter tray compatible slot. The filter holder simply clips into the rear masking plate of the CinePort. The filter holder is made using rapid 3D prototyping resin. Costs about $1k South Pacific Peso (a.k.a. Aussie Dollar) to make. Bit more to design.
 
I don't know if this has been raised else were, if so id be grateful if some one could point me at the thread. Most of our work involves underwater work, mostly wildlife. We need to use zoom lenses rather than primes with large zoom range. Its a concern with S35 and perhaps FF53 sensors that the range of available lenses is much more limited for 4k/5k not to mention the added depth of field challenges. I also have taken on board Pawel's comments in another thread regarding reduced edge resolution with underwater optics with large sensors. I am wondering if if it is possible to use 2/3 zooms as we have been using for HD work to shoot at 3k (2k is thought not to hold anything above an equivalent 720 resolution) is there a 2/3 lens that projects an image that would cover 3k ? or any other large range zooms available ?

thanks,

Dave
 
Still on about NDs on PLs UW

Still on about NDs on PLs UW

Pawel,

Your cineport ND method looks like you have to take-off the actual glass dome everytime you want to change/remove the ND? This would take a bit of time I imagine and then there's always the chance of introducing dust into the sanctum sanctorum of the dome cavity. I will have to add/remove/change strength of the ND in non-ideal conditions, like on a little boat rocking about at sea with salt spray etc.

I want a solution that takes a moment to change over and is optically the best (oh yeah, and does not cost a fortune) Am I asking too much?

I suspect the answer for me will be to get custom made round ND's that I can attach to the front of the arri, cooke, red etc PL lenses that I am planning to use U/W. This would be pretty quick to change over as I have easy/quick access to the front of the camera lens when in the housing. But as all these lenses have different size front diameters, from about 97mm to about 140mm what size round NDs do I get? The biggest one, 140mm but then how do I attach this to a 97mm lens? Also as I don't think any PL lens has a thread at the front, I suppose I gotta use gaffa tape or worse blue tac to attach the ND. I suspect these (probably very expensive) round NDs will have a short life if I use this method. I don't mean to whine about it, I know there is a solution, I'm just interested in what others are doing to get around this new RED PL ND issue,

Lastly does anyone know if someone make these mega 140mm diam NDs commercially?

Thanks
George
 
George,

There is acces to the filter from the rear of the CinePort by removing the entire round black masking disc from the rear. But, you are right, you need to take the entire port off or open back plate and remove the camera. I wouldn't do it in the field. It is a limitation of my solution.

Dave,

It is a very hard choice. I decided to use primes for wide angle and all the optics are matched to exactly that one focal length. It is more challanging to get a variety of shots you need to stich a sequence, but can be fun too. Essentially you zoom by getting closer, which often is more attractive anyway.

The image sensor size is a big problem. Generally you use small curvature (large diameter) dome and stop down the lens. Unfortunately, the relationship between the image curvature, dome size and sensor size are about proportional so, in order to get the desired resolution at, say f/8, you need quite large port for S35 image sensor. Consequently, you not only shoot with fixed focal length, but also with fixed aperture.

Another approach is to make achromatic optical doublet adaptor. I have designed one, but the glass would weigh about 10kg to cover a MasterPrime and it has some other disadvantages.

You can use zoom lenses with flat port up to about 50 degrees diagonal, that's easy. But you won't get those breath-taking, non distorted wide angle shots with it.

It is remarkable that in the day and age of mass production we seemed to have lost specialised products, like dedicated underwater lenses. :bye2:
 
Pawel Achtel said:
It is remarkable that in the day and age of mass production we seemed to have lost specialised products, like dedicated underwater lenses. :bye2:
Click to expand...

The problem is that as places like Korea, China and such have taken over so much of manufacturing by copying, cloning, etc. and gaining markets by lowballing on price, it drives down profit margins of the originating manufacturers and they have to focus on the core products and abandon the more esoteric accessories and niche products. (Not to mention that some actually have to switch to manufacturing in those countries - which isn't as practical for the lower volume stuff so they get abandoned for that reason also.) Witness Nikon, which basically had to abandon the whole Nikonos line. There just wasn't enough volume and as margins get compressed they can't justify the R&D, support, and manufacturing resources so they move in the direction of the most common denominator.

CoralSeaTV said:
I want a solution that takes a moment to change over and is optically the best (oh yeah, and does not cost a fortune) Am I asking too much?
....
....

Lastly does anyone know if someone make these mega 140mm diam NDs commercially?

Thanks
George
Click to expand...


To answer your question in reverse order - Schneider makes 138mm diameter filters. NDs are about $300 each. They also make some color correction filters in that size. AquaVideo is a Schneider/Century dealer so I can get them for you if you need them.

Secondly, practically speaking you are probably asking too much, when you talk about PL mount cine lenses. I admire Pawel for going for the absolute maximum in resolution with the expense required for buying a master prime and making the dedicated port. But you have to start doing some cost benefit calculations as well as factoring in the logistical problems you mention. Bottom line is that PL lenses, besides being expensive also require a fair bit of hassle and expense to setup gearing in a housing and still have some severe limitations in handling with the gears up at the front of the housing (or some complicated linkages to get it to the rear of the housing.) All is doable, but you have to ask - is it in your budget and are the handling trade offs worth it? Or is that money better spent somewhere else?

This is why you should seriously look at one of the SLR smart mount solutions. Without getting into the still vs cine optical quality argument except to say that while SOME cine lenses might be a slight bit better optically - the slr lenses are very, very good. Most of the limitations of SLR lenses for abovewater shooting aren't very relevant for underwater: i.e. 1) optically probably the biggest difference is that most SLR lenses are F2.8 so one or two stops slower than the best cine lenses but this isn't normally as much of an issue for normal daylight underwater shooting or shooting with U/W lights 2) we don't normally work with a focus puller so some of the operator mechanical issues of the lens itself aren't as critical. and 3) since the lens is inside a housing we don't have some of the "snob" concerns that you have using SLR lenses in a surface shoot.

In contrast, there are some huge advantages with slr lenses: 1) AF SLR lenses have built-in iris and focus motors so we can have electronic controls much as we have done with broadcast video lenses for the past 25 years or so - at very modest cost. 2) The SLR lenses typically take standard 72mm or 77mm filters so all of the filters you would want to use are readily available at relatively low cost - plus you have both standard diopters as well as achromatic diopters at reasonable prices. All are quick and easy to change. 3) cost - the huge volume means high quality lenses are available in the $500 to $2000 range and you have a wide variety of primes and zooms. Further the volume allows the higher end lenses to have extremely sophisticated coatings that previously were only available on very expensive zeiss lenses. 4) All of the SLR lenses designed in the last 7 or 8 years were designed for digital sensors like the RED's - unlike most of the Cine lenses out there.



Pawel Achtel said:
Another approach is to make achromatic optical doublet adaptor. I have designed one, but the glass would weigh about 10kg to cover a MasterPrime and it has some other disadvantages.
Click to expand...

Is it possible that the standard diopters might actually offset some of the problems of the dome - since the positive diopters are essentially the reverse of the negative diopter of the dome when it contacts water? I've used both on broadcast and prosumer video cameras but haven't had the occasion to do much side by side/scientific testing. With your back problems and the time to construct the housing I suspect you haven't been able to do much actual testing on the RED - but you seem to have a pretty good grasp of the optical science so could at least speculate based on sound theory.
 
I agree about DSLR V PL, but will the client?

I agree about DSLR V PL, but will the client?

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your reply. I totally agree with you about DSLR lenses and if
I had my own RED camera I would be going that way. But I don't
own a RED and I will be hiring one in or using the clients. So I suspect that
removing the RED PL bayonet and putting on the Birger or other brand would
not be cool with them.I am only going with PL lenses as I have built the
housing from the ground up and dearly love to have my options open. As an example my HD
U/W housing fits, F900s, Varicams, HPX3000 etc and this versatility has really
clinched a lot of jobs over the last few years. As I don't want to invest in any RED gear or lenses I think having the housing will work with PL lenses will be the way to go for now and I also have the option of using DSLR lenses because I am using the Viewfactor Impero to controll the Iris and Focus servos on
the PL lenses and this same controller will also (I am told) control the Canon lens IRIS/fOCUS via the Birger mount.

Anyway I am interested in buying maybe two of the large NDs and will PM you
when I get to that stage. Hopefully in about a month.

Soon also I am going to post some pics of my sexy new RED housing.

George
www.coralseatv.com
 
George,

It is very ambitious to be able to adapt most client-supplied lenses. Not impossible, but certainly difficult. Another, perhaps easier solution, would be to get one good PL lens and offer it with your housing to the client's body. I think this would be a better solution. Just a thought.

CoralSeaTV said:
Anyway I am interested in buying maybe two of the large NDs and will PM you when I get to that stage. Hopefully in about a month.
Click to expand...
If Mike can get a good price from Schneider, I'd be interested in some filters too around this time. I'm looking for some grads and CC filters. We can save on postage to Oz. :)

BTW, I have a 4.5" round clear filter, which will cover most large lenses. You can borrow it next time we meet. You may be able to make a slot for it in your port or clamp on the lens. I believe this is a fairly standard size and not as expensive as 138mm.
 
Pawel Achtel said:
George,

It is very ambitious to be able to adapt most client-supplied lenses. Not impossible, but certainly difficult. Another, perhaps easier solution, would be to get one good PL lens and offer it with your housing to the client's body. I think this would be a better solution. Just a thought.


If Mike can get a good price from Schneider, I'd be interested in some filters too around this time. I'm looking for some grads and CC filters. We can save on postage to Oz. :)
Click to expand...

I think Pawel has the right idea. Although as a beta tester I have had a birger canon mount for quite a while, I do a fair amount of rentals and as you say you can't expect them to put on the canon mount, so I made a trade deal for the older zeiss 12mm T2.1 as it is wide and pretty easy to control iris and focus with a simple control. Recently I bought a 10mm T2.1 (which is huge so I had to make a special port/8" glass dome) so will offer that most of the time and will be selling the 12mm (about $5500 to $6500) . Also I think Johnny Friday (bajaproductions) is going to be selling one of the two 14mm lenses that he was using for 3d tests. (look for a post a week or two ago).

As far as the Schneider filters, dealer is about 20% off so you could figure about 12-15 percent discount to you.

BTW Century has a 138mm achromat diopter - I think 2.5 but it is $2500 where a 72mm is only $430.
 
AquaVideoRed206 said:
Longer cable lengths would probably be fairly easy with transceivers and fiber optic cables.
Click to expand...

Michael,

We have created fiber optic systems for many underwater HD/SDI applications, including end users like Woods Hole, Montery Bay Aquarium Research Institute, PACE, Lightstorm (for Jim Cameron's live Discovery Channel underwater broadcast from the Titanic a few years back), Insite Pacific, and many, many more. Let me know if you have an questions about fiber optics for underwater production.

Best,

Jim
---------------------------
Jim Hurwitz
Product Manager, On-Camera and E-Cinema Products
Telecast Fiber Systems, Inc.
415-383-5388
jhurwitz@telecast-fiber.com
www.telecast-fiber.com
 
AquaVideoRed206 said:
Recently I bought a 10mm T2.1 (which is huge so I had to make a special port/8" glass dome) so will offer that most of the time and will be selling the 12mm
Click to expand...

Mike,

I had sent you a PM as well as a personal address on this thread 3-4 pages ago asking to arrange so that I could pass by and take a look at your housing/RED combo since I've had several chances to rent it or recommend it to clients that came to me for advice. Is there any way we can do this or should I look elsewhere? I'm in Miami.

Regards,
 
Getting my own PL lens while not owning a RED camera

Getting my own PL lens while not owning a RED camera

Pawel & Mike,

Thanks for that. I think I might eventually buy my own wide 14mm or 12mm and get a couple of ND's that fit that actual lens. I reckon about 95% of commercial jobs will be shot on a 12mm or 14mm lens. However I will wait a while as I am out of money after the housing costs. I will do my initial housing tests with a RED 18-55mm lens which I can access. I will post some footage when done (at least 6 weeks away).

By the way I have now looked over most of the posts on this thread and was wondering has anybody actually posted some U/W footage shot on the RED camera? I have seen heaps of top side RED footage but no U/W. Is there a link somewhere that I have missed.

Thanks


George
 
Monteiro said:
Here are some samples of some footage I have shot using my prototype Sea-Cam housing with the 18-50 zoom lens and a custom dome port. It is also available for rental (with an operator/assistant). The topside footage is HDV.

www.sea-cam.com/Video/DOLPHINS&SHARKS.wmv
Click to expand...

Any chance to post it in higher resolution and less compression?
 
Higher Rez copy

Higher Rez copy

I edited in a few more shots today and output a 600x300 H264 MOV file on the Medium quality setting. It yielded about a 50 meg file which is fairly clean. Unfortunately the water was not that clear in the dolphin segment and as the subjects move away from the camera it loses contrast. I compensated with Final Cuts 3 way color corrector but I am not totally happy with it.

www.sea-cam.com/Video/Trailer.mov

The shark hypnotism segment was in 40 feet of water much clearer but since this was only the second time I used my dome port my hyperfocal distance was slightly off, making distant subjects slightly soft where the close up of the shark's eye was right on the money.

www.sea-cam.com/Video/sharkhypnotism.mov
 
Who is that masked man???

Who is that masked man???

Monteiro said:
I edited in a few more shots today and output a 600x300 H264 MOV file on the Medium quality setting. It yielded about a 50 meg file which is fairly clean. Unfortunately the water was not that clear in the dolphin segment and as the subjects move away from the camera it loses contrast. I compensated with Final Cuts 3 way color corrector but I am not totally happy with it.

www.sea-cam.com/Video/Trailer.mov

The shark hypnotism segment was in 40 feet of water much clearer but since this was only the second time I used my dome port my hyperfocal distance was slightly off, making distant subjects slightly soft where the close up of the shark's eye was right on the money.

www.sea-cam.com/Video/sharkhypnotism.mov
Click to expand...

Hi George,

Great footage, guess what I came across just yesterday.

Where did you shoot the dolphin footage??

Best,
Frazier
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top