Heeey guys, abit of a silly question, but does anyone know what is the true image sensor resolution of the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera??? :)

@CaptainHook

Usually in on a Layer I think. When I first started trying the LUT thing I had sharpening in a node and couldn't figure out why things looked oversharpened. Took it off and re-generated the LUT and it helped.

There's a chance that I'm seeing something else though because I know it's not supposed to hold Sharpening at all.

Edit: I'll check tonight with the LUT that I had. I'm PRETTY sure that's what I was seeing but it was also like months ago and I haven't messed with it since.

I agree with @Aria that there isn't a 'correct' grade. But I agree with everyone else that there are good and bad grades. Good is anything that looks right for the feel you're trying to create and suits the footage in some way. There are no rules, but like with all art, we know when it works 'cause it feels right.

It's like camera shaking. Is it always bad? No, it can be perfect if it's used in an artistic way (to create tension for example). But often it's just 'somebody shoulda used a tripod' (especially with Pocket sample footage : ).

@kholi, I haven't used Resolve, but a simple 3D LUT (3D = 1 per pixel channel) cannot encode sharpening. It's possible they add extra sharpening information in their files, if so they're more than just a LUT.

LUTs don't have to be destructive, shaper LUTs or input LUTs can remap 'out of bounds' data to work between 0-1 so there's no clipping - the BMDFilm to 709 works with a shaper LUT. Also if you 'prepare' the image before the LUT there doesn't need to be clipping either. LUTs do interpolate data, but i think calling them 'destructive' is a simplification that doesn't really help. 3D animation is interpolation, Vector based images are interpolation, etc etc - i would never call these things destructive. I mean people are using calibration LUTs in their grading monitors etc every day. And that's the thing, there's 'technical' LUTs and 'creative' LUTs. The technical ones usual involve measurement devices and probes etc, and are generally about accuracy and reproduction.

Powergrades are great for flexibility and continual refinement and adjustment, but i've seen a few of the best colourists in this country work and they use LUTs often as well. The main thing is neither one should be used in exchange for working an image in context to best tell the story. LUTs or powergrades can assist though. Originally i decided to share what i was often doing with BMCC footage as a LUT because the powergrade was too complex and honestly most people wouldn't get realtime playback with it, plus i did want to protect a little bit of the work i put into it. :D I did check the accuracy of the LUT and it was definitely 95%+ of what i was seeing otherwise, i've tried to talk Kholi into sending me a Powergrade before to see why it wasn't converting into a LUT to his satisfaction as it makes me curious. Resolve generates 33^3 cubes for reference. :)

Flanders is great for skipping the LUT box (whichever you go with), but they're also using a LUT to convert the LOG.

I'm pretty sure you can do this with the thunderbolt port on the camera, a Macbook Retina, and a Thunderbolt Mini monitor out to an HDMI or HD-SDI source.

^ That's also true. Say Alexa > REC709 works really well with 2.5K footage for Rushes, or I like to use ACES > CAM 2020 > REC709 to rush Pocket or 2.5K footage for someone to edit.

It still looks LOGish which, for WHATEVER reason producers feel safe with (don't even ask me... I think it's a mental thing, like safe zone) but you can see what's there as an editor.

However, it's definitely not THE LOOK, like JB said.

I've sat in on a decently budgeted feature as part of the post chain and they start to develop a look in camera tests. Colorist saves powergrades, as footage rolls in he may ask for a few clips to test out looks in various situations, fine tune, and save that.

@JuMo

I wish I were busy! It's the end of the year and I'm in Georgia... ssllooowwww state.

They aren't really much of anything, the PGs, it's just to pull everything that I don't like out of an image, and to balance it/neutralize it for a very "pure" base. Then there are variations of that "neutralized" look to account for IR pollution, Tiffen IR NDs, and Schneider IR NDs.

All really boring, I believe Hook's LUT is more of a look than what I'm doing. Most of the timeI just want to separate colors, stretch DR, tame red/blue, remove color casts (depending on lens combinations with BMD Cameras), and identify a black point which seems to be a really hard thing to do with BMD cameras? Never really understood why but you have to go and put work in or you end up crushing the lower fifth of your scale if you don't fine tune.

I imagine that's why you see a lot of washed out footage from the existing cameras.

LUTs actually were not originally intended for grading or looks, they were created to sort of "unify" display devices/sources, so people could see their final results for a specific distribution channel.

They're not being used for such within this sort of community because it isn't as important, although a lot of us could benefit from learning how our choices are reflected across a wide gamut of computer screens and why having a proper sRGB workflow could make your finished product stronger.

The only time I've seen a full on Colorist use a LUT's been for a quick job that can't afford the time. Most Ive come into contact with have their own powergrades for specific cameras and prefer to avoid the inherently destructive nature (as Peter from BMD put it) of a LUT. As, it is a destructive process.

Edit: Strangely enough, the more I've gone into color, the more I realize that I do not like LUTs, and once I put them away I learned more about each camera that I've worked with in post than before.

I've got powergrades stored away from Canon DSLRs, Alexa, and all of BMDs cameras at this moment ... and I'm constantly refining them the more footage that I get. Converting any of these into a LUT that gets within 95% of the powergrade, even with R10s 32 Point (I think it's 32 Point) capability, hasn't been successful.

@act Wait, did you say LUTs are not for grading?

They absolutely can be, in fact, they often are used to provide a very good base for grading in all kinds of situations. For example you can do a super fast 4 node grade using LUTs. Node 1: basic corrections. Node 2: saturation adjustments. Node 3: LUT. Node 4: Sharpness. Sure if you were grading a feature film you could go a different route and build a grade from the ground up, but for quick and efficient, this type of grading is often more than enough.

What your RIGHT way set good WB at BMPCC? Picture at monitor too flat to set precious WB and make any fine tuning. I just use 3200 indoor warm light (sorry it can't go lower to 2800), 4600 or 5600 fluorescent light, sun is 5600, shadows with clean blue sky 6500. Is there better way? Finally I bought Zacuto EVF Z-Finder. It can make some changes to make the picture less flat. I set maximum contrast and saturation to see right picture, so it can help a little for WB too.

@vicharris I spent about week on youtube and vimeo Resolve tutorials. Lot of them not about last version 10. I already read Resolve full tread here.

@cantsin Thank you! I asked to help because I just can't find at Resolve 10 lite exactly same RAW settings (Cinema DNG/BMD Film + BMD Film). There is only Cinema DNG to choose, others are ARRI, RED, SonyRAW etc. And at Master settings TAB - Decode Using: Camera metadata, CinemaDNG default and Project. Only if choosing Project opens custom Color Space: BMD Film and Gamma: BMD Film

Well there is more than one way to skin a cat. I'm certainly no expert, but being a designer and a Photoshop expert goes a long way in helping me out when I 'attempt' to grade this stuff.

There are tons of tutorials out there - heck just watch ColorGHear tuts and you're already half way there. People should spend more time on basic color theory, and how to communicate the tone and manner of your story.

And for gods sake - at least get your white balance and levels correct :-)