Also, don't be afraid to use ISO 100 if the situation allows you to use it. I know you don't get the same amount of dynamic range at ISO 100 in the highlights but if the highlights of your scene are not too demanding and you have ample light available in your scene, use ISO 100 for a cleaner image. I filmed a behind the scenes of an outdoor portrait session and the sky was perfect for using 100 ISO. Of course you have to nail your exposure. Anyway, the results were amazing and literally no noise was present. SUPER CLEAN FOOTAGE. Grant it, *this is situation specific*, but it still worked out. I just didn't see a purpose of using ISO 800 to maximize dynamic range when I had the opportunity to expose it properly at ISO 100 and avoid the noise ISO 800 would bring. Anyway, just my recommendation if you're in that type of situation. Happy filming!
Nice one dude. Was just looking for other BMPCC4k shooters and found your channel. Stay tuned and keep up the good work. Love this camera! New follower
Thanks! This is really cool and I have to try that our moving forward. Typically, I always shoot as low as possible because I’m in an indoor environment with controlled lighting. This will however change when I get outdoors. Did not know 1000 had a more even range. :D
It's kind of weird right? Typically though, stick to your natives at 400 and 3200 and you'll generally be fine. I would experiment with those other ISO to see how it works in the environment you're in!
Appreciate it! Happy to hear all the content is helping you! Btw, working on a full Pocket4k tutorial that will almost be like a manual that has an intricate chapters system on RUclips so you can quickly find the section you want to learn about. What's something you'd like to see in that video? Probably going to be at least 2 hours long at this point haha.
For sure! Been meaning to get around to doing one eventually. I would never claim to be an expert color grader, but I can at least hold my own! Great idea for a future video though!
Thank you for this! Do you experience noise in the form of horizontal lines in low light footage? I do with my BMPCC 4K and it's almost impossible to get rid of.
Yep! I do. Sometimes this seems to be caused by certain lighting elements or it's just too dark. Typically I've found setting it to 3200iso and shifting to lower compression levels helps the cleanup. Just got done filming a video with a single light source in the middle of a mountain forest at midnight, so should have some footage here shortly
@@DarrellDucharme Not a problem. I might do some further research to find out why the sensor throws that horizontal noise and then include it in a video for my best practices for keeping the noise levels down
@@DarrellDucharme I thought the same with my 6k pro, but turned out it was because I wasn't shooting at 1250 at a low light environment in my room with also an aquarium LED.
Now I’m wondering if it’s worth a little noise for more dynamic range. I’m just thinking about using NR in DaVinci... or is it better to have a cleaner image outright
It totally can be! It's really about knowing how far you can push it until the noise becomes too much of a problem to fix. Also, I've found that in situations that tend to cause more noise dropping the compression levels also helps produce a slightly cleaner image as well. Especially for timelapses of sunsets or sunrises. This video was really to give everyone a baseline to start from and understand how the camera reacts to specific settings. Definitely experiment and don't be afraid to push it to see what you can do with it
The dynamic range chart BM gives you doesn’t tell the whole story. If you shoot in BRAW, you can shoot below 400 and use the highlight recovery option to get back the lost dynamic range in highs and keep your footage even cleaner.
Oh, totally agree. I encourage everyone to experiment in different situations with iso to see what works best for them and what they are filming. The chart is really just a guide to get started on and there are situations to not be on native iso for sure! I will say though, I wouldn't rely too heavily on the highlight recovery option because it does change the footage structure and can sometimes introduce other issues. But, with these cinema camera, lower iso doesn't always mean better results or cleaner footage and sometimes it has the tendency to look a little off at lower iso's imo. But, that not always the rule and can sometimes be exactly what you need in that situation. For me, I like keeping it as close to the 2 native iso's as possible and exposing off of that, for my workflow and what I film that tends to work the best for me. Great comment btw! Love having discussion like this
This video is great - I have a question, hope someone can weigh in here. I shoot on the 6K PRO, always in B-RAW, (almost) always at 24fps and always at 180 degree shutter angle; however for some reason, no matter what I do, there is CONSISTENTLY too much noise in my shadows when in low light. I don't know what I'm doing wrong here. Is there an ideal ISO for low light? 3200? Obviously this is subjective to how I'm lighting the scene, but I've tried so many variations and I'm always left with an unreasonably noisy image. SOS.
Hey! Great question. You can actually get some pretty good results at 1250 in low-light vs. 3200. 3200 just gives you the best quality of footage essentially because it's the native ISO. With that being said, RAW footage, even a hybrid raw like BRAW will always have more noise in it. Usually you can remove it in post as long as it's fairly under control and I know davinci resolve has an excellent noise reductions effect. Hope this helps!
does this mean if you shoot at 400 iso, you can change the iso to 1000 in post and still get the same benefits in the highlights as you would have if you shot 1000 to being with in camera?
In a sense, yes. The difficulty here is that you'll be exposing for whatever ISO you choose to use. So even though you can change the ISO settings after filming, you can still only take it so far because increasing or decreasing ISO will still affect the baked in exposure. Meaning, if you exposed it for 400 ISO but you wanted to get those benefits in the highlights of 1000, unless the shot was way underexposed, the benefits will be close to none by the time you have to adjust everything else to correct the exposure again. I always say you should try to nail exposure and white balance as closely as you can when you're out filming, that way even if you were off slightly, it's easy to fix it in post. If you're too far off footage starts looking weird. Great question though!
You can have have "less" noise at 100 ISO but the problem is you corner yourself in with that setting on this camera. So say you film in a bright location and you get back and now it's overexposed you have no room to move back when it comes to ISO. I like to be at native's because it gives you room for error in post production. Plus, the noise gained, if properly exposed if fairly easy to fix in Davinci or in Premiere. RAW footage will always tend to have more noise than others.
I would say the least "noise and most detail out of an image" Going below native's starts to digitally de-amplify or amplify the sensors sensitivity to the light it's capturing. I just find I get the best picture and the most flexbility staying around 400 ISO. I've noticed, especially at 100 iso, that the footage tends to look a little off. At least that's my experience.
Great video! Do you have to use a plugin to edit bmpcc footage in premiere? I use premiere but in the process of switching over to resolve. Which is..... amazing. But I'm just curious!
Appreciate it and Yep! Blackmagic has it for download on their website or I believe there is a third-party plugin you can also use. I use Black Magic's software plugin.
The chart very confused for me. Let me expose for native iso 400 than adjust iso to 100. The image going to darker, because the camera record as iso400 and deamply the signal -2 stops. Because the image darker, I open aperture +2 stops for perfect exposure. But infact i overexposure for 2 stop as the cam still record as iso400. Because overexposure, the highlight going reduce to 2 stop and the shadow increase 11 stop
yeah! It still would work. I would always recommend staying in your native ISO no matter which system you are in. This video was really just meant to show ways to stretch the ISO in certain situations and if you really want to push the camera. IF you can expose it at 400 iso, you'll have a lot less noise to deal with then you would at 1000.
okay then, thanks for confirming ! recently I always use 2 kind of iso switching 400 or 1250 depends on situation, no else in between, I found it really clean when editing ! 😋
Oh totally, in my experience not having it set correctly can lead to that. There are certain bounds you should try to keep yourself within when adjusting the iso. Really, you should test multiple iso exposures and see how it works in your given circumstance. But, generally but not in all cases, the closer you stay to native ISO the better.
Thanks for the comment! It really depends in my experience. Like I said in the video, sticking as close to your native ISO is always going to get you better results generally. But this camera definitely gives you a lot of latitude to play with. At night, while 1250 has a better dynamic range, you will probably do better using 3200 ISO generally. In my experience, I see a lot more noise in 1000 ISO and 1250 ISO then I do in the native ISO of this camera. But, as long as you understand what you are getting at a specific ISO and have seen what it will look like in post and know you can fix it, I would by all means go and utilize the greater dynamic range at 200 and 1250. This video is really aimed to give camera users a base to start from and then from there experiment with varying degrees of ISO levels.
@@FrameVoyager my bmpcc 4k experience: - If you shoot in BRAW, ISO does not affect the dynamic range and noise in a straight line. Affects how you exposed the frame. That is, if you have correctly exposed the frame and then changed the ISO (inside 100-1000 or inside 1250-8000...), you will have the same inside the RAV file. As a result, ISO ONLY shows on the monitor screen where you are at 13 stops. and my noise at 400 iso only means that im underexposed. so i use 200. Probably need to be shown in the video so that my idea becomes clear. I'll do it later =)
@@videographersurvival Gotcha! I think we are coming at from different angles. Totally agree with what you are saying. I think I'm coming at it from a more sense in that if you are lighting a scene, you should try and be at native ISO's for the best results. Because at the end of the day this is a cinema camera and doesn't have some of the low light capabilities of a Sony Alpha camera. But if you are shooting in a pinch and can't control the lighting based on what you are shooting, absolutely venture into exposing for those ISO levels to reduce the noise in the footage. I do this all the time when I shoot run and gun and the ability to change the iso in post is a lifesaver. So totally agree with what you are saying, I was just coming at it from if you have direct control you should be aiming for native ISO for the best results and less work in post. Just want the viewers who are just starting out to understand what they can get at Native ISO and then when they understand the limits of those expand out into some other values.
Not that I want to be that guy, but I have to: ISO is not an abbreviation, so it is not pronounced I.S.O. It's comes from the Greek "Isos" meaning 'Equal'.
Also, don't be afraid to use ISO 100 if the situation allows you to use it. I know you don't get the same amount of dynamic range at ISO 100 in the highlights but if the highlights of your scene are not too demanding and you have ample light available in your scene, use ISO 100 for a cleaner image. I filmed a behind the scenes of an outdoor portrait session and the sky was perfect for using 100 ISO. Of course you have to nail your exposure. Anyway, the results were amazing and literally no noise was present. SUPER CLEAN FOOTAGE. Grant it, *this is situation specific*, but it still worked out. I just didn't see a purpose of using ISO 800 to maximize dynamic range when I had the opportunity to expose it properly at ISO 100 and avoid the noise ISO 800 would bring. Anyway, just my recommendation if you're in that type of situation. Happy filming!
“Grant it”
r/boneappletea
Your content about der blackmagic cameras is very useful! Keep up the good work!
Appreciate it! Glad it helped!
Nice one dude. Was just looking for other BMPCC4k shooters and found your channel. Stay tuned and keep up the good work. Love this camera! New follower
Appreciate it! The BMPCC4K'S are for sure awesome cameras!
Brother, you have the best audio!!! If you make videos regarding different audio issues and audio editing, it will be really great. Thanks a lot.
Appreciate that! Actually working on a series sort of like that!
Thanks! This is really cool and I have to try that our moving forward. Typically, I always shoot as low as possible because I’m in an indoor environment with controlled lighting. This will however change when I get outdoors. Did not know 1000 had a more even range. :D
It's kind of weird right? Typically though, stick to your natives at 400 and 3200 and you'll generally be fine. I would experiment with those other ISO to see how it works in the environment you're in!
Thank you ... this explanation removed some unsureness on my side 🙄 🙄 🙄
No problem!
Man I love the content you've helped me so much with bmpcc4k thanks man 🦾
Appreciate it! Happy to hear all the content is helping you!
Btw, working on a full Pocket4k tutorial that will almost be like a manual that has an intricate chapters system on RUclips so you can quickly find the section you want to learn about. What's something you'd like to see in that video? Probably going to be at least 2 hours long at this point haha.
Great camera work, color grading!
Thanks! Appreciate it
Great explanation!
Appreciate it! Hope it was helpful for you!
I would love to see a video of you describing your coloring / noise reduction process in davinci on your shot @3:58.
For sure! Been meaning to get around to doing one eventually. I would never claim to be an expert color grader, but I can at least hold my own! Great idea for a future video though!
@@FrameVoyager Amazing! looking forward to it! Coloring is something that can always take your footage to the next level.
Nice explanation. 👍
Appreciate it!
Thanks
No problem!
Thank you 🙇🙇🙇
Thanks for watching!
Thank you for this! Do you experience noise in the form of horizontal lines in low light footage? I do with my BMPCC 4K and it's almost impossible to get rid of.
Yep! I do. Sometimes this seems to be caused by certain lighting elements or it's just too dark. Typically I've found setting it to 3200iso and shifting to lower compression levels helps the cleanup. Just got done filming a video with a single light source in the middle of a mountain forest at midnight, so should have some footage here shortly
@@FrameVoyager Thanks, I have not seen any mention this and was beginning to think it was just my camera.
@@DarrellDucharme Not a problem. I might do some further research to find out why the sensor throws that horizontal noise and then include it in a video for my best practices for keeping the noise levels down
@@FrameVoyager I would definitely watch!
@@DarrellDucharme I thought the same with my 6k pro, but turned out it was because I wasn't shooting at 1250 at a low light environment in my room with also an aquarium LED.
Now I’m wondering if it’s worth a little noise for more dynamic range. I’m just thinking about using NR in DaVinci... or is it better to have a cleaner image outright
It totally can be! It's really about knowing how far you can push it until the noise becomes too much of a problem to fix. Also, I've found that in situations that tend to cause more noise dropping the compression levels also helps produce a slightly cleaner image as well. Especially for timelapses of sunsets or sunrises. This video was really to give everyone a baseline to start from and understand how the camera reacts to specific settings. Definitely experiment and don't be afraid to push it to see what you can do with it
@@FrameVoyager awesome man, i appreciate the response! gonna go out and experiment!
@@thenightowl5438 no problem! Love to see everyone getting out there and filming!
@@FrameVoyager Reducing the compression level - is that what you mean, for example, use 3:1 instead of 5:1 compression? Is that what this is about?
thanks
No problem
Grazie, molto utile.
contento che sia stato utile! spero di vederti nel nostro canale!
The dynamic range chart BM gives you doesn’t tell the whole story. If you shoot in BRAW, you can shoot below 400 and use the highlight recovery option to get back the lost dynamic range in highs and keep your footage even cleaner.
Oh, totally agree. I encourage everyone to experiment in different situations with iso to see what works best for them and what they are filming. The chart is really just a guide to get started on and there are situations to not be on native iso for sure!
I will say though, I wouldn't rely too heavily on the highlight recovery option because it does change the footage structure and can sometimes introduce other issues. But, with these cinema camera, lower iso doesn't always mean better results or cleaner footage and sometimes it has the tendency to look a little off at lower iso's imo. But, that not always the rule and can sometimes be exactly what you need in that situation. For me, I like keeping it as close to the 2 native iso's as possible and exposing off of that, for my workflow and what I film that tends to work the best for me. Great comment btw! Love having discussion like this
This video is great - I have a question, hope someone can weigh in here. I shoot on the 6K PRO, always in B-RAW, (almost) always at 24fps and always at 180 degree shutter angle; however for some reason, no matter what I do, there is CONSISTENTLY too much noise in my shadows when in low light. I don't know what I'm doing wrong here. Is there an ideal ISO for low light? 3200? Obviously this is subjective to how I'm lighting the scene, but I've tried so many variations and I'm always left with an unreasonably noisy image. SOS.
Hey! Great question. You can actually get some pretty good results at 1250 in low-light vs. 3200. 3200 just gives you the best quality of footage essentially because it's the native ISO. With that being said, RAW footage, even a hybrid raw like BRAW will always have more noise in it. Usually you can remove it in post as long as it's fairly under control and I know davinci resolve has an excellent noise reductions effect. Hope this helps!
1250 iso in low light no nois
love your channel bro!
Appreciate it!
Nice video. What are you suing to reduce the noise in this video?
Appreciate it! I usually use Neat Video's plugin to remove noise
does this mean if you shoot at 400 iso, you can change the iso to 1000 in post and still get the same benefits in the highlights as you would have if you shot 1000 to being with in camera?
In a sense, yes. The difficulty here is that you'll be exposing for whatever ISO you choose to use. So even though you can change the ISO settings after filming, you can still only take it so far because increasing or decreasing ISO will still affect the baked in exposure. Meaning, if you exposed it for 400 ISO but you wanted to get those benefits in the highlights of 1000, unless the shot was way underexposed, the benefits will be close to none by the time you have to adjust everything else to correct the exposure again. I always say you should try to nail exposure and white balance as closely as you can when you're out filming, that way even if you were off slightly, it's easy to fix it in post. If you're too far off footage starts looking weird. Great question though!
Thank you, but you didn’t actually state what was meant (why it is called) by ‘Native’ iso.
Does this mean you have less noise in 400 iso than in 100? Can’t be right?
You can have have "less" noise at 100 ISO but the problem is you corner yourself in with that setting on this camera. So say you film in a bright location and you get back and now it's overexposed you have no room to move back when it comes to ISO. I like to be at native's because it gives you room for error in post production. Plus, the noise gained, if properly exposed if fairly easy to fix in Davinci or in Premiere. RAW footage will always tend to have more noise than others.
@@FrameVoyager interesting. im considering buying one so thanks for the reply
3:18 you say... stay on 400 and 3200 for less noise in your footage, but my noise is the lowest at 100 and 1250?
I would say the least "noise and most detail out of an image" Going below native's starts to digitally de-amplify or amplify the sensors sensitivity to the light it's capturing. I just find I get the best picture and the most flexbility staying around 400 ISO. I've noticed, especially at 100 iso, that the footage tends to look a little off. At least that's my experience.
@@FrameVoyager Thanks for the clarification! Are you happy with your footage at 3200 noise wise? Do you find the need to denoise?
Great video! Do you have to use a plugin to edit bmpcc footage in premiere? I use premiere but in the process of switching over to resolve. Which is..... amazing. But I'm just curious!
Appreciate it and Yep! Blackmagic has it for download on their website or I believe there is a third-party plugin you can also use. I use Black Magic's software plugin.
The chart very confused for me. Let me expose for native iso 400 than adjust iso to 100. The image going to darker, because the camera record as iso400 and deamply the signal -2 stops. Because the image darker, I open aperture +2 stops for perfect exposure. But infact i overexposure for 2 stop as the cam still record as iso400. Because overexposure, the highlight going reduce to 2 stop and the shadow increase 11 stop
Love it 👍🏽
Appreciate it!
Wait, isn't changing the 'iso' in DR, not really changing the ISO but amplifying digital gain? Or is that the same thing?
It essentially is amplifying digital gain. But it changes the DR with it. Not dramatically but enough to make you think when exposing.
The volume knob is not the same as the gain knob on a guitar amp
Right. Just like each of the iso systems in this camera is different than the other and does something different.
hey bro, how about 400iso ?
would it be great for shadow and highlight compared to 1000 iso ?
yeah! It still would work. I would always recommend staying in your native ISO no matter which system you are in. This video was really just meant to show ways to stretch the ISO in certain situations and if you really want to push the camera. IF you can expose it at 400 iso, you'll have a lot less noise to deal with then you would at 1000.
okay then, thanks for confirming !
recently I always use 2 kind of iso
switching 400 or 1250 depends on situation,
no else in between,
I found it really clean when editing ! 😋
Does ISO affect to color depth????
Oh totally, in my experience not having it set correctly can lead to that. There are certain bounds you should try to keep yourself within when adjusting the iso. Really, you should test multiple iso exposures and see how it works in your given circumstance. But, generally but not in all cases, the closer you stay to native ISO the better.
What the hell was that on 3:12? Grasshopper, fish? Also at 3:26... What noise? lol
400 iso have noise. better to use 200 or 1250 at night
Thanks for the comment! It really depends in my experience. Like I said in the video, sticking as close to your native ISO is always going to get you better results generally. But this camera definitely gives you a lot of latitude to play with. At night, while 1250 has a better dynamic range, you will probably do better using 3200 ISO generally. In my experience, I see a lot more noise in 1000 ISO and 1250 ISO then I do in the native ISO of this camera. But, as long as you understand what you are getting at a specific ISO and have seen what it will look like in post and know you can fix it, I would by all means go and utilize the greater dynamic range at 200 and 1250. This video is really aimed to give camera users a base to start from and then from there experiment with varying degrees of ISO levels.
@@FrameVoyager my bmpcc 4k experience:
- If you shoot in BRAW, ISO does not affect the dynamic range and noise in a straight line. Affects how you exposed the frame.
That is, if you have correctly exposed the frame and then changed the ISO (inside 100-1000 or inside 1250-8000...), you will have the same inside the RAV file.
As a result, ISO ONLY shows on the monitor screen where you are at 13 stops.
and my noise at 400 iso only means that im underexposed. so i use 200.
Probably need to be shown in the video so that my idea becomes clear. I'll do it later =)
@@videographersurvival Gotcha! I think we are coming at from different angles. Totally agree with what you are saying. I think I'm coming at it from a more sense in that if you are lighting a scene, you should try and be at native ISO's for the best results. Because at the end of the day this is a cinema camera and doesn't have some of the low light capabilities of a Sony Alpha camera. But if you are shooting in a pinch and can't control the lighting based on what you are shooting, absolutely venture into exposing for those ISO levels to reduce the noise in the footage. I do this all the time when I shoot run and gun and the ability to change the iso in post is a lifesaver. So totally agree with what you are saying, I was just coming at it from if you have direct control you should be aiming for native ISO for the best results and less work in post. Just want the viewers who are just starting out to understand what they can get at Native ISO and then when they understand the limits of those expand out into some other values.
Not that I want to be that guy, but I have to: ISO is not an abbreviation, so it is not pronounced I.S.O. It's comes from the Greek "Isos" meaning 'Equal'.
WTF is that thing on 3:13? 😅
Supposedly a hummingbird moth. Weirdest thing I've ever seen
@@FrameVoyager Such a peculiar looking insect. Now that you mention it, it makes sense...at first, I thought "What a weird looking moth! "