Ursa Mini Disclaimer

[M.Halsell]

Sorry, I've been posting from set, it's not always easy to respond.

I've been posting some images to instagram from the shoot I'm on now. You'll see we're using the camera in some pretty mixed situations.

https://www.instagram.com/johnbrawley/

This disclaimer from lensrentals was also discussed at length here...

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...-Ursa-4-6K-New-Footage-looks-darn-good/page12

jb

Thanks JB for sharing those production shots. Neat seeing the Micro cinema camera wedged in the small spaces. How much trouble was it to keep the HDMI cables secured considering cable weight?

 

[John Brawley]

Thanks JB for sharing those production shots. Neat seeing the Micro cinema camera wedged in the small spaces. How much trouble was it to keep the HDMI cables secured considering cable weight?

Hi.

We're moving a bit OT but so far it's been OK. The good thing is that it's a full sized HDMI. The little micro HDMI on the pocket cameras is a real problem. Actually HDMI is just the wrong choice for these scenarios but it's become what everyone uses.

So far it's been fine but we haven't abused them much either. They've all been rigged shots. I haven't "operated" them yet and that's when it gets interesting.

JB.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

As I covered before, a simple solution for some cameras is a simple velcro loop to keep good angle and tension on the connector. But a better solution I have advocated for USB, is to have the connectors recessed, or on the back/front/sides/etc recessed or not in these cases. Most hdmi plugs are fairly standard so a slot with the hdmi socket at the end would allow most plugs to be buried somewhat and clamped or velcroed around. But having the connector flat on the case allows it to be camped or velcroed flat on the case or a bit recessed.

Another short term solution is to get angle adaptors and short cables to aim any way you want and velcro again. See, simple solutions that help depending on the camera (and if the hdmi transmitter and reciever can handle the extra components).

Now, a longterm solution for most companies. Immediately promote and adopt the 100Gb/s MHL standard as a professional solution. It uses the much smaller and easier to recess and clamp USB-C small cable, and at the moment conversion straight into hdmi. The full standard is likely meant for future implementation as needed and as consumer technology improves, but is useful right now professionally and for cheap hdmi recorders (or direct to recorder) so full implementation can be brought forward years using existing design work. However I'm more for thuderbolt x and hdmi trancoding (displayport mode supports this), also allows a wide angle of control a day data back channel to be implemented, and dp supports a compression mode which would be useful in video work for recording. So, for a videocam application the dp part can produce a recordable format on its own. Not saying it is any good for good cinema of course, but still an consideration.

 

[John Brawley]

The problem is that HDMI requires a handshake and constant two way connection over multiple pins / wires.

It's not just that reliable. The physical connector's aren't reliable. The cable isn't reliable (being smaller individual wires)

Despite being a logically better technological approach in reality it's prone to failure when the comms break down. Sometimes you have to restart the device to get the handshake going.

There's something beautifully simple and RELIABLE serialising everything down coax.

JB

 

[Wayne Morellini]

That is an issue, but here I'm talking about short haul use of course. With that it depends on the equipment and buying reliable parts with sturdy intervals. You get what you buy sort of thing. But reboots are uneeded if the equipment is designed to buffer and actively reboot the connection instead of the equipment. If it is an issue, look to the engineer.

Now coax. Unless it is based on a mass standard the price usually goes up a lot. Now, you gave to find coax cheap coax Tarzan handle the data, and eventually it becomes an optical solution that may cost more. So computer interface standards like TB look more better on the price front and are looking to 100gb/s optical, and likely multiple optical might be possible, or multiple terabit optical at cheaper prices than coax can do and reliable longer haul. YeYep, I agree, I should have do everything that USB/coax over rca connector decades ago, going into optical to make hooking up TV equipment one plug to anything with Daisy chaining and control signals and streamed direct and routing data packet handling. But times change, hopefully BT/DP can be adopted to do it now.

 

[Gene Sung]

This thread got crazy.

Seriously guys. Who cares? If the cameras work for you, then great. If they don't work for you, then great. It seems silly trying to justify your camera of choice to someone (or similarly, to try and put down someone's camera of choice).

Like many BM thread, it gets completely nuts and goes down the gutter fast.

A number of haters have reported serious issues, John Brawley and Frank G. seem to have a near flawless experience. The truth? It's probably somewhere between the two camps.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

John might well be using an engineering sample or whatever you call it, near flawless, where as everybody else is usually using a manufactured units of different qualities.

 

[C.H.Haskell]

I am a long time readuser and just took delivery of my Ursa mini 4.6k and all I can say is the image quality is superb...right out of the box. I have my camera at Digital Film Studios if you want to test it out yourself. Spend more time shooting and less time worrying about what your shooting with. Cheers

 

[John Brawley]

That is an issue, but here I'm talking about short haul use of course. With that it depends on the equipment and buying reliable parts with sturdy intervals. You get what you buy sort of thing. But reboots are uneeded if the equipment is designed to buffer and actively reboot the connection instead of the equipment. If it is an issue, look to the engineer.

.

Yeah.

It just doesn't work that way in the real world does it. My view of HDMI is formed from using most of the major brands, with most of the accessories that are supposed to work with them and it's just a POS.

Yet we persist with it as a standard.

jb

 

[Tristan Pemberton]

Yeah.

It just doesn't work that way in the real world does it. My view of HDMI is formed from using most of the major brands, with most of the accessories that are supposed to work with them and it's just a POS.

Yet we persist with it as a standard.

jb

It's the same reason we don't use it in events for high end projection & display. HDMI is just not a robust standard you can rely on. Sync issues aside, you can't even lock the connector.

The professional vision standards are SDI & DVI. In this sphere, HDMI is considered a standard for home theatre only.

 

[John Brawley]

John might well be using an engineering sample or whatever you call it, near flawless, where as everybody else is usually using a manufactured units of different qualities.

I currently have three UM4.6K bodies.

One is the original hand made prototype that was given to me to shoot the demo footage that BM released as the downloadable files. I'm still using that body which is now nearly 12 months old. It has a few dings in it but I'm very attached to it and it's been solid.

I also got two factory built new in box cameras recently for a show I'm on that were sourced via an independent distributor in Australia (they wouldn't have known it was for a show I was working on)

In my many years of Blackmagic shooting constantly I've only had a problem with corrupted media once, with some crappy OCZ SSD's in the very early days. Since then, I've never ever had a problem.

I've had exactly one problem with a RED show...corrupted media which RED was eventually able to recover, though it took 8 months to get it back.

I've had a corruption (lost files) on an Alexa several times, once with an XT and many with the Alexa Mini. They never responded or offered to try to recover the files....and by the way, does the mini record RAW yet ? I mean Arri advertise it as being able to do it....And it's buggy as, especially when trying to use it with a WCU4.

I've had a SONY RAW file corrupt on an F55 too, and Sony again couldn't explain or recover it.

They are about the same as everyone else and have a pretty good record I think in my experience.

I think there are many parallels here with RED's early days. We all had to step up as cinematographers to understand a new workflow. It was a paradigm shift, and a lot of established experinced DP's really struggled to come to terms with it. Simply because of the price point we now have many users using a RAW cinema camera for the first time and a lot of those people are using RESOLVE for the first time and are coming from a DSLR background shooting 8 bit 264 files.

Many users are buying a camera as their first RAW workflow setup without really comprehending what it means for post, or even having the resources to support an uncompressed 4.6K RAW workflow.

9 out of 10 of the corrupted media threads I see are because of using unsupported media, bad data wrangling practice or bad Resolve setups not rendering files.

And overheating ? Really ? I've never ever seen a camera ever shut down because of overheating. Blackmagic cameras don't overheat. They just don't.

Eventually things will shake out, the cameras will speak for themselves. Look at the source of the bad experiences in even this thread and ask yourself, which of it comes from those that actually have a camera in their hand that they're using and which views come from those who haven't used or own a camera.

And while there's still plenty of aggravations in using the 4.6K (basic timecode for starters !) they have a place on my set and they're reliable in doing the job I need them to do.

JB

 

[Demetri Zuev]

I currently have three UM4.6K bodies.

One is the original hand made prototype that was given to me to shoot the demo footage that BM released as the downloadable files. I'm still using that body which is now nearly 12 months old. It has a few dings in it but I'm very attached to it and it's been solid.

I also got two factory built new in box cameras recently for a show I'm on that were sourced via an independent distributor in Australia (they wouldn't have known it was for a show I was working on)

Early beta builds are superb in quality and reliability from what I heard, but since you now have 2 retail units - are they as solid as the beta camera you have? Do they exhibit any signs of magenta corners/cast or fixed pattern noise at ISO 1600? You've tested them before putting on a show, so you should know, right?

 

[John Brawley]

It's a requirement on most shows that have neg insurence that the cameras and lenses are comprehensively tested.

That's exactly what happened on the show I'm doing with them and they passed fine.

JB

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Yes, I was more thinking the image quality issues (and at this stage of production they should be looking at in testing and even have things sorted in manufacture So yes, they should know enough to pass a grade to a helpfull friend). That is the common early complaint I was aware off. I didn't know there was a real recording issue except in media selection.

But that is the way real life works, like with media selection, you can reduce issue frequency by getting prescriptive about which components you use for quality. So apart from BM recommending the most hassel free cable compnonets, we are predominantly talking about so many inches to get to a recorder (unless we are talking about a remote head, then we might be talking about distance to a convertor to haul hundreds of feet, as I would not trust HDMI over more then 2 feet). I said short haul hood quality as I know that would get around a number of issues. I appreciate that soave might be a premium and professional interface components boost the price a bit for what is predominantly a non events broadcast market, so HDMI gets a plug from BM infrastructure. However, I think what I said about TBx optical applies very well for longer hauls and it is designed to be able to package things like SDI data over it. This means that a TB like optical interface can eventually be used to long haul transmit, with some repeaters, with a terminating convertor at the end. At the start of course, you need to have the convertor near the camera on old infrastructure. As long as the convertirs are cheap, eventually equipment infrastructure could be converted over from SDI. Something companies like BM could profit from in new equipememt. I'm not as stupid as some like to believe John, I know reality better than most, but most don't know the reality of figuring out how to get from a to b in technical stuff, and hence think I'm the unrealistic one. Here I'm really talking about economies and marketing and profit driven. But frankly, the sooner we go to something like TB optical in a long haul version, and Tera bit pro version, the better. It is just a pain in the but to have so many incompatible standards. Wastes a lot of time and money. But I fear TB has not been defined well enough to do this from on board link to Link, to washing machine controls, to mouse, to drive, TV, pro video pink, data center and network infrastructure. That would be cool and drive down costs. But the people in control.

 

[John Brawley]

However, I think what I said about TBx optical applies very well for longer hauls and it is designed to be able to package things like SDI data over it. This means that a TB like optical interface can eventually be used to long haul transmit, with some repeaters, with a terminating convertor at the end.

I assume you know that optical / fiber is already used for this purpose in broadcast ?

http://www.fibersavvy.com/broadcast-fiber-cable.aspx

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/au/products/miniconverters

It has the same kinds of issues, except it's a lot more expensive.

JB

 

[Wayne Morellini]

I'm aware, but talking about a common standard driving up component manufacture 1000x to 1m x in a lot of cases (and designing around issues at the same time) the start is not the finish I say. This will drive prices down to BM levels. When your infrastructure cable becomes just the standard network and computer cable the chip circuit design to drive it becomes virtually free and component and cable costs fall through the floor as many times more uses are paying for the common manufacturing costs together and already.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Just reading through those links John. These are low volume solutions. I'm saying by co-opting mass standards you get mass savings, as you are just using common standard cables whoes development and.manufacture is largwrly paid for by other industriw. paid for by other industries. You however need to design an anchorable connector system (with plug or for plug). Price of optical has tumbled in the last decade, that is why TB isgling with an in plug optical convertor. However, a point to point, and point to point network, streaming protocols with time stamp has to be devised, if not already. I used to come up with new network schemes in my vos design, so have seen most everything new today. A channel can be established to stream realtime Piont to point, but also channels canbe packaged together in time slots and those passed through a network. That one is probably old, but I was doing this in the 90/s and 2000/s on old stuff. Trying to have shared random access without sacrificing bandwidth efficency and throttling to archirve equal access ehuke allowing full use, was a bit of a dozie to work out back then. The perfect random access common line protocol, so to speak.

So, anyway high speed and low delay is possible eben over a multi link network. However, probably helps to put your desk and recording solution first.