BMPCC for a static theatre stage wide shot?

Having used professional camcorders forever, I'm thinking about getting a BMPCC 4k to film just my static wide stage shot. So I don't need shallow depth of field and all other settings will be manual. I would prefer to use PRORES in these situations due to shows being up to 2h30m, and as ever, lighting can be pretty dreadful at times. My wife has a bunch of EF lenses so I would need a speed booster. Although, I have no clue what type of lenses are ideal for this situation, I generally shoot my current static camcorder at around 3.7 aperture and push the gain up a little to compensate for most lighting situations. I also shoot at 25fps at 1/50. A faster zoom lens I guess would be better but does this hinder getting the full depth of the stage in focus? I generally shoot from a 10m-30m distance.

Should I just stick to a pro camcorder as I have heard the low-light is not that fab in the BMPCC 4K. Would a 6K (native EF) be an improvement? Was just also looking at the Micro Studio 4K G2, but no PRORES.

I would also like to use it for cinematic shooting for non theatre work. So trying to kill two birds with one stone (camera)

An app like Lens Toolkit f8 can help you plan the lens setup you need. Are you planning on shooting principally one theatre? If so, measure the width of the stage or proscenium where most of the action occurs. f8 allows you to enter the camera and how you’ll be shooting with it. It also supports using a selected Speedbooster in its calculations of depth of field and field of view.

When I’m doing theatrical shoots, I use the BMPCC4K typically with a 32mm lens but that only covers a part of the stage so I have an operator to follow the action. If I wanted to cover most of the stage, I’d use a 25mm or 20mm lens while recording 4K DCI. My proscenium is 40’ about 10m distant for most action, but the actual stage is even wider and closer (and 20m in depth) so I use T5.6 to get more DOF. I record with ISO set to 1600 and use noise reduction in post.

As for ProRes recording, I don’t recommend it if you are calling the shots. I only use BRAW with either Q1 or Q3 constant quality setting. Many people shoot Q5 successfully though. BRAW gives you more flexibility in post (highly recommend DaVinci Resolve which is free with the camera purchase but other NLEs work if you have a favourite.

If using Resolve you can grade your videos with scopes and controls designed for high dynamic range or standard dynamic range.

I film lots of live performances and a BMPCC4K with a Lumix 12-35mm (MFT) has been my go-to wide cam for quite a while. I typically shoot at ISO 2000, f4, and Q5 BRAW, and I definitely agree with Rick that BRAW will likely serve you much better, particularly if there are lighting cues that fall a bit more to the extremes.

Thanks both for your great advice.
I film about 60 dance shows per year, so my turnaround time is paramount. I also (if required) film both a matinee and evening performance as a technical backup, so BRAW could be a problem file size wise, I'll be using a Samsung T5 1TB (for now). Also, its always a 2-4 cam shoot. 80% of these shows are at different theatres and I do need to get the entire stage in shot.

I will certainly need some zoom on the lens for the different sized theatres.

I've used Final Cut for years hence PRORES for convenience and a reduced file size, but trying to find time to get my head around DaVinci Resolve

Over this last weekend I have just shot 4 2.5 hr dance shows. I used my PCC 4K with a Olympus 12 to 40 MFT on its widest as one of the locked off shots. I shot Braw at 50 FPS Q3 on to T5 SSDs. 3200 iso at F5.7 colour temp 3800K. The files for each show ended up at about 680GB. I had to buy a 4TB M2 drive for my editor to cope with the large files, if I had more than one Braw camera I would easily run out of space. My other cameras are Sony EX types and they only shoot at 35MB/S much less than the BM.

Quite an achievement, Richard, managing 10 hours of quality footage. It’s a challenge for me to ensure I have enough free space on my RAID5 by offloading previous shoots to ProRes 444 archive drives (18TB and 22TB) once they are about 4 months old with no further client requests for the BRAW footage. Of course ProRes 444 takes more space than BRAW Q1, but spinning dishes are economical.

Over this last weekend I have just shot 4 2.5 hr dance shows. I used my PCC 4K with a Olympus 12 to 40 MFT on its widest as one of the locked off shots. I shot Braw at 50 FPS Q3 on to T5 SSDs. 3200 iso at F5.7 colour temp 3800K. The files for each show ended up at about 680GB. I had to buy a 4TB M2 drive for my editor to cope with the large files, if I had more than one Braw camera I would easily run out of space. My other cameras are Sony EX types and they only shoot at 35MB/S much less than the BM.

And that's with 50fps? I shoot in 25fps most of the time as 50% of my parents still want an option to buy DVD

So to get the full stage shot you dialled down to 12mm? F5.7 is impressive and the gain not too high also.

@Lee
If you want to stick to FCP-X, there’s the excellent BRAW Toolkit to make it compatible. It even allows keyframing of RAW when the lighting changes.

@Lee
If you want to stick to FCP-X, there’s the excellent BRAW Toolkit to make it compatible. It even allows keyframing of RAW when the lighting changes.

Good to know..thank you

I would prefer to use PRORES in these situations due to shows being up to 2h30m,

BRAW is actually smaller files than ProRes at the same resolution.

And...it's RAW!

@jim
Really! I never knew that. Forget PRORES then

As an ex broadcast and video person, I do not understand why people use cine style cameras with interchangeable lenses and post colour work when a video camcorder will do the job with less headaches.

The price of BMD gear is very attractive and that may be a factor.

However right tool for the right job.

A video camcorder, using Rec. 709, would have far more difficulties handling the massive light changes on a theatre stage.
If it does log in 10 bit (minimum) it would be better, but then you'd also need to work on the footage in post.

A video camcorder, using Rec. 709, would have far more difficulties handling the massive light changes on a theatre stage.
If it does log in 10 bit (minimum) it would be better, but then you'd also need to work on the footage in post.

Exactly. I would consider the Pockets to be the bare minimum for theater, and had a much better time shooting closeups with an Ursa Mini Pro a while back.

As an ex broadcast and video person, I do not understand why people use cine style cameras with interchangeable lenses and post colour work when a video camcorder will do the job with less headaches.

The price of BMD gear is very attractive and that may be a factor.

However right tool for the right job.

Interesting question, especially given the volume:

I film about 60 dance shows per year, so my turnaround time is paramount. I also (if required) film both a matinee and evening performance as a technical backup...

From the first post:

Should I just stick to a pro camcorder ...

I would also like to use it for cinematic shooting for non theatre work. So trying to kill two birds with one stone (camera)

I would consider the Pockets to be the bare minimum for theater, and had a much better time shooting closeups with an Ursa Mini Pro a while back.

Sorry, but I don't understand why you can't shoot close-ups just as well with another camera. It's just a question of position and the right lens.

… I do not understand why people use cine style cameras with interchangeable lenses and post colour work when a video camcorder will do the job with less headaches...

Good question when you look at a simple lightweight camcorder with built-in zoom and many automated features to capture images in almost any conditions. I have recommended camcorders for non-professional shooters for personal use.

But for me:
Occasionally, I used to shoot weddings with my Canon HV20 camcorder and I got fine looking images for editing in Final Cut. My last Canon wedding in 2011 had lovely images shooting miniDV tapes outdoors on a farm with the ocean in the background in the daytime with 150 guests dancing afterwards in the field. But then we moved to the large tent reception which seemed to go well until it was nighttime. I still shot but the Canon images were extremely noisy and the dynamic range seemed to be only a few stops; was very difficult in post, but not horrible.

Contrast that with my first wedding with another 150 guests five years later with the URSA Mini 4.6K with Fujinon 20x7.8BRM. Totally manual, relatively heavy rig, some stressful angles. Outdoors daylight, indoor reception, nighttime dancing. Some lovely cinematic shots including medium closeups. Post in DaVinci Resolve. No problem as everything was manageable.

The camcorder barely did the job and the heavy headaches were in post. Sure camcorders have greatly advanced since 2011, but I’ve no reason to switch. Shot several weddings and clients always happy with the results. That’s why.

I would consider the Pockets to be the bare minimum for theater, and had a much better time shooting closeups with an Ursa Mini Pro a while back.

Sorry, but I don't understand why you can't shoot close-ups just as well with another camera. It's just a question of position and the right lens.

The extra dynamic range of the Ursa (compared to the Pockets) definitely helped. Note that 99% of the time I shoot all angles during theater shows with Pockets, I just happened to use 2 Ursas for closeups during one particular shoot and I did find the extra dynamic range to be helpful under pretty brutal theater lighting. Which would of course make a difference on wide shots as well, but we only had 2 Ursas in that instance so prioritized using them on closeups.

Braw is prevalent enough at this point that I'm finding it hard to imagine a situation where I'd want to capture 10 bit log footage with Prores on a Blackmagic Camera.

With the G5 cams, Blackmagic Video is far more forgiving of overexposure than a true REC709 transform. Two stops over and caucasian skin is gone in 709, Blackmagic Video is going to tone map the highs and save a big chunk of the image that would be mathematically discarded using a straight transform. Shooting "video" I can see a more compelling argument for Prores capture.

RE: Turnaround. A moderately spec'd M2 will render 2.5 hours of UHD25 Braw to Prores 422 in under 10 minutes. The machine is rendering frames at the threshold of disk write speed. One can basically copy or render to an external drive in about the same amount of time.

This setup will record ~4 hours of Braw UHD Q5@25fps to the Samsung 256GB. The battery is good for another 5 hours. The data rate is roughly equal to Prores HQ at HD resolution. Set it and forget it.

Good Luck

97wh.jpg (96.3 KiB) Viewed 860 times

Howard, would you also recommend recording BMD Extended Video or only BMD Video?

This cam only records braw, I use video over extended video on the output (live camera) because the color is more faithful and it matches the other cams better.

Good Luck

Thanks.

I do not understand why people use cine style cameras with interchangeable lenses and post colour work when a video camcorder will do the job with less headaches.

More control, and that leads to better results.

Braw is prevalent enough at this point that I'm finding it hard to imagine a situation where I'd want to capture 10 bit log footage with Prores on a Blackmagic Camera.

The only time I do is when I'm handing the media card to the client at the end of the shoot.

Which may be what he/she wants, more often than we like.
But ProRes 4444 in log is not that bad, only eating more space than BRAW.

My client archives are ProRes 444 flat and I’ve tested ingesting them to create a new version of a video. Definitely not as flexible in the grade as raw, but would be good enough if ever a client requested new material from old footage (which one client has hinted they want shortly).

But ProRes 4444 in log is not that bad

Do any BMD cameras offer that?

Ours does (UMP 4.6K G1).
Oldie, but Goldie