Tyler Purcell

I've been doing some spec stuff recently, shooting with the hopes of getting a job ya know? Here are two very different spec video's, both from my recent trip to Boston. Edited on Avid Media Composter in Pro Res 220HQ and color'd in DaVinci. Unfortunately, there are some coloring mistakes, but its a learning curve and I don't have a color calibrated monitor, so I can't really find out how things look until I throw it up on my projector or upload them and watch repeatedly. Interestingly, I didn't have a tripod for either. Both were hand held with body/lens/mic only. Thats the only way I could shoot so spontaneously and not draw too much attention to myself. Enjoy!

The problem comes from "standards" and people's expectations. Film's "standard" with its 24FPS and photochemical color grading, is something we've all come to appreciate as a given norm. Because the digital world allows for much more manipulation then the analog/photochemical world, people look to mimmic what they're use to. In this case, 24FPS, photochemical color grading, grainy "filmic" medium. As a consequence, the digital medium's seek desperately to copy what they aren't, mostly because people refuse to accept anything else. Its not about comparing numbers, its all about generating a "familiar" image, one the audience can relate to. Its not just about the imager or camera electronics, but also lighting and most importantly post production. Cameras like the Arri Alexa have broken the paradigm of digital cinema my mimicking the look of a flat 35mm negative perfectly and then in post, correcting that into an image which is acceptable by the audience. As filmmakers/cinematographers, do we accept any other format outside of a "filmic" look? How about Peter Jackson's horrible looking "The Hobbit" in 48fps? Looks like a video game, in fact it looks worse then a video game, looks like a horrible television show. How about these new 120hz TV's which make every movie look like its in fast forward?

The one critical thing about shooting 16 is to have a ultra clean and tight gate. I've had nothing but problems with worn gates on SR's. So I prefer the newer cameras because the gate, backplate and mags are practically brand new! :)

Update is working fine for me as well.

The problem with the EF lenses is that they don't have an external aperture adjustment. So you're relying on using the camera body to adjust the aperture. Also, the EF lenses generally don't have repeatable focus. Some EF lenses have major focus shifts when you even touch the lens. In terms of which camera to buy, I've used the standard body BMC and its bulky. The extra resolution isn't worth the size increase in my view. The 2.5 still doesn't have a global shutter, it doesn't have a removable battery and the screen is worthless outdoors. So basically, indoors, closed environment with electricity, it works OK. But with the pocket camera, you can fill your pockets with SD card's and batteries, that will allow you to run for hours and hours. I'd buy the pocket camera and invest on cinema glass. The results are far better then using standard DSLR EF glass.

I love my BMPCC, but costs between $2500 - $4k to build a good kit. The camera is pretty much the last thing to worry about because its back to being all about glass. I'd focus more on having a decent setup; shoulder rig, glass, matte box/follow focus, sound equipment and then camera. I did a good explanation about the differences between the pocket camera and a DSLR on my web site. http://www.welovemotocross.com/equipment-2/

Stocks are so good today, the 16 stuff just looked like grained 35mm stuff since they used longish lenses in the fishing village scenes. Its only when you get to wider shots and look at depth of field, where the 16mm use is apparent. I would have shot the whole movie on the 416, it would have made for quite an interesting look.

Great to know Jean-Louis, thanks! :)

Ohh... here is the next episode of my series... Same lenses and settings as the other episodes above. I had some white screen door effect going on with a florescent light hitting the glass at a funny angle. So I had to do some massive multi-level corrections on the interview footage. Unfortunately, on my grading monitor and editing machine, it looks great. I hope it doesn't look to bad on an uncalibrated machine! HA! Gotta love digital! :( Enjoy

Looks good Will, very cinematic! :) Are you running a shoulder mount or any stabilizing system? Only ask because the rolling shutter syndrome was pretty bad. I find that if I run the camera at any less then 45 degree angle, it has a lot of rolling shutter when hand holding. In my video above at the fire station, I ran 180 degree shutter and it was OK because I used a viewfinder adaptor that I could push the camera against my face to help stabilize. Its the one of the VERY FEW things I don't like about the BMPCC, if they put in a global shutter, it would be a MUCH more versatile camera. Anyway, looks great anyway! Good job on the color as well.

Well, I started doing some serious color grading with the camera using Apple's Color which is a very basic tool, but it gets the job done. Unfortunately, I can't use DaVinci yet because it would take an entire re-build of my editing machine, operating system and software would need to be updated. I enjoy running the older software because it allows me to run MUCH older applications and not have to re-buy new ones. Here is the most recent episode of my series, its a bit more "colorful" heh ;) The indoor stuff was shot at 180 degree shutter at 1600ASA with a 14mm wide angle lens. The outdoor stuff was shot with a 45 degree shutter and my normal 200ASA setting.

Video mode has much less dynamic range... I made a template in FCP that I throw on all my "raw" mode footage and it works great. I shot a few things with video mode and the dynamic range was so reduced, if the exposure wasn't 100% perfect it would be completely washed out, peaking in fact. The camera is absolutely not designed to be used in Video mode... kinda bothers me they even have it as an option.

This is assuming you have a crew. I do documentary work, I have zero crew. I show up with two cameras, put one on sticks and hand-hold the other. I run a shotgun attached to my camera on sticks and a wireless kit attached to my hand held camera. Audio meters would allow me to make sure what I'm getting isn't distorting because very rarely am I in a quiet enough environment to hear distortion through headphones. Yes, it would be great to do sync sound, buy a portable recorder, record with a slate to sync and make it all "professional", but thats not in the cards. I turn around projects in hours, not days, not weeks. The Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera has a lot of flaws, but it also is the smallest, lightest, most innocuous camera one can own. People think its a still camera and as a result, I can shoot things, go places where "video" cameras aren't allowed. Sure, for making a feature narrative film, you'll probably have a crew. Unfortunately there are a lot of us who aren't capable of making that type of complex product every day of the week. ;)

Next video is up! I had an issue with my color grading setup on this one... so pardon the flatness of the color, its MORE flat then usual. Enjoy!

What an interesting issue... just read through the whole thread. Any reflective surface can cause this issue, including a mirrored shutter reflecting light back at the lens for a brief moment during its rotation. So I always look at things like viewfinders and video taps as the leading culprit. Sometimes lenses have decayed coatings and built up mold which is hard to see with the naked eye. So light reflects strangely through the glass and hits the shutter, which then reflects back at the lens for a brief moment, causing that blip. Sometimes with a dark room and a flashlight, you can mimmic these issues. But unless you know what to look for, its hard. I haven't shot with the Eclair's before, but I've seen this phenomena on the Cinema Products mirrored shuttered cameras like the CP16R. But we tracked it down to a lens coating issue. Switch lenses, problem went away. Never had issues like this with my SR's or Zeiss primes I use to use.

Next video is up... Its a re-hash of an old one, but its pretty good as well. I've got 4 more to post between now and the end of the month. Lots of great stuff in some extreme (sun/heat/dusty) conditions. I also started shooting a friends documentary feature with the camera. I will ask permission to post a few clips so you can see what it looks like. Still love the camera... :)

Interesting, I wonder if to save battery and keep the heat down, they're limiting the CPU's speed when not recording. The standard cinema camera has a fan to keep it cool, but the pocket doesn't. I have noticed my pocket gets really hot when shooting, but doesn't get hot when left powered on and at idle. That could be evidence...

Yea, its all about the mag. Worst part is, if you get a rental camera, its hard to test the mags until loaded and running film through them. I've had mags which at the beginning of the roll made almost no sound and towards the end were squeaking under changed loads. I've worked with such poorly maintained equipment, it amazes me I ever captured anything! HA! But yea, Arri vs Aaton? I'm an Arri guy... SRIII for the win! :)

Its hard to work with an LCD monitor outside in the sun on a run-and-gun documentary style project. Even the small ones are bulky and need serious sun protection. I've been shooting documentaries on film and broadcast ENG cameras for almost two decades. So for me, the viewfinder is a pretty worthless thing, it really is only good to check composition. The nice thing about the BMPCC are the built-in tools for checking focus and exposure. With the viewfinder shade, it works pretty well, you can actually use the viewfinder. People look at my results with the camera and wonder if they should by one for documentary work and I flat out say no way. Its a cinema camera plain and simple, it works great in a controlled situation. I only got one because I like the cinematic look and refuse to deal with H264 OR RAW files (DSLR). The Pro Res workflow, size of camera, lens availability and of course cost of package, really fits into my needs. Yes, I wish it did 60FPS, yes I wish it was 2k instead of 1920x1080. But these are sacrifices I'm willing to deal with and be more creative with my shooting to compensate. Anyone can shoot crap, slow mo it or highly stylize the material in order to fix the issues. My style of filmmaking is to show the audience exactly what came out of the camera. Post production in my eyes should be to assemble and apply color. ;) The video above called "We Love Motocross Episode One: The Travelers" was shot in less then 3hrs and posted in less then 3hrs. If I was shooting on a DSLR or other compressed ENG camera, it would have taken me 2hrs at least to transcode the footage... Its all about ease of workflow and both FCP and AVID (using AMA) can reference the Pro Res HQ files without any copying or transcoding.

First trick is the eye piece. This is the plain-jane stripped MOS rig. Just push the viewfinder against your face and that helps stabilize. Second trick is a cinema rig. This is a counter-balanced shoulder rig with matte box and follow focus. It allows me to use 4x4 filters of any kind as well. You'll notice the mic as well. This is the rig I use when capturing sound. I'm using 1.0 ND's when its super bright outside. When its not, I don't use any filtration. None of the video's above were using filtration. Here is a video that uses the fill cinema rig in the 2nd picture with 2.0 ND's!

Still shooting pretty much non-stop. Got my complete rig now with mic's and filters. Here is my most recent video, shot without my filter rig, but everything else. 200 ASA 45 degree shutter Film dynamic range, Pro Res HQ 220 4:2:2 10 bit codec Rokinon 8mm F3.1 EOS mount prime for fish-eye shots Rokinon 24mm F1.5 EOS mount prime for wider shots Rokinon 85mm F1.5 EOS mount prime for close-up shots Edited with FCP 7 in native Pro Res Colored in FCP 7 without any difficulty, no LUT necessary

My favorite main-stream 16mm film of recent memory is: Moonrise Kingdom Shot with Aaton cameras; Aaton A-Minima, Zeiss Super Speed and Canon Lenses. Aaton Xterà, Zeiss Super Speed and Canon Lenses. Kodak Vision3 200T 7213

Its a great idea for Arri to come out with this camera, the ENG market needs a quality cinema grade camera pretty badly. Remember, if you aren't an ENG guy, you wouldn't be buying this camera, there are plenty of other options on the market for cinema. This camera fills a void where people need a cinema looking camera, but the flexibility of ENG. I've used ENG cameras for more then a decade and I vastly prefer them over the "cinema" double-system cameras we have today. The problem has always been, the ENG cameras look like crap. One hopes this new camera looks good, only time will tell! On a side note, isn't it funny Arri announced this camera between IBC 2013 and NAB 2014?

The Rokinon 8mm is the widest lens I shoot with and it works ok for those few times you need a super wide angle lens. I find the 14mm prime to work much better as an all-around lens, they even make a 12mm... which I didn't buy.

Video cameras don't have 13 stops of latitude and RAW recording capabilities. Video camera's don't have "cinema" lens mount options. Video camera's generally shoot highly-compressed video. Video cameras have very few "manual" camera head controls. Most Video cameras are still CCD and not CMOS. Here is a great example of a video camera: http://www.panasonic.com/business/provideo/AJ-PX5000G.asp The blackmagic cinema camera is a good example of a "cinema" camera.