Home Camera Blackmagic URSA Mini Test Part 2: Underexposure and Skin Tone

Blackmagic URSA Mini Test Part 2: Underexposure and Skin Tone

written by Shane Hurlbut, ASC

Sign up for Shane’s Inner Circle for access to full articles like these. Don’t miss out!

Welcome to PART 2 of 9 of our Blackmagic URSA Mini 4.6K Film Test series. Last time, we covered overexposure and skin tone in a day exterior environment. Today, we’ll see see how it handles underexposed skin tones in the same setting.

Remember, if you’re not already a member of Shane’s Inner Circle, now’s the perfect time to join and take advantage of all our resources, and take your film career to the next level!

Coming in early 2017, Parts 4-9 will each cover advanced techniques in color grading with these color spaces—which can be difficult to master.  My colorist and DIT, Derek Johnson, will take you through our process, explain short cuts and starting points that will put you on the right track. We will also discuss how you can get the best out of your camera’s sensor during both day and night shoots, along with the accessories it will take to achieve a clean, professional image.

Let’s get started!

LATITUDE TESTS: UNDEREXPOSURE

The underexposure and overexposure tests are the two most difficult tests you can do when getting to know a camera. To get the most out of these tests, you have to be absolutely precise with how you are going about it. The goal is to understand what the breaking points are for the camera’s sensor. That way, when you are out on the job, you can push the camera to its limits and get the best out of it.

Under Exposure at ISO 800:

URSA Mini 4.6K ISO 800 settings

To start things off, we have our URSA Mini dialed in to the following settings above. We rolled the camera at 23.98 fps at ISO 800, with our shuttle angle at 360° and captured at 4.6K RAW lossless.The lens of choice for this test was the Rokinon XEEN 35mm. This gave us everything we needed to fully understand how the sensor reacts when underexposing at ISO 800.

To start the underexposure test and to get our bearings, we are going to begin with the image being 1 ½-stops overexposed. I’ve set the lens at a t/2.0 and the key is coming in at f/2.8510. With these settings dialed in, I personally feel this is the “sweet spot” of the sensor. Our subjects pop from the background and maintain a well-rendered skin tone.

This is the image that I gravitate to with these settings dialed-in. You can feel the richness in the detail and color. The blues take persistence in the frame and compliment the shadows, but don’t get lost in the background.

Ungraded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Graded +1.5 Overexposed

**The key light is reading at f/2.8 5/10, which overexposes the sensor by 1 ½-stops.**

Now that your eyes are set to what our desired image would be, we are going to plunge down the scale and begin to drop in ½-stop increments. This way, you have a reference point as we try to break the sensor and bring back the image.

Ungraded +1 Overexposed vs. Graded +1 Overexposed

**The key light is reading at f/2.8, which overexposes the sensor by 1-stop.**

At 1-stop over and graded, the image is continuing to hold nicely. We can see that it is still virtually noiseless like when it is 1 ½-stops over. The colors pop and our subjects remain cut from the background.

The image holds well at ISO 800 and still maintains a nice key light on our subjects. You can see with the ungraded image you’ll retain a lot of detail in your highlights, mids, and shadows—making this a favorable image for post.

Ungraded +0.5 Overexposed vs. Graded +0.5 Overexposed

**The key light is reading at f/2 5/10 which overexposes the sensor by a ½-stop.**

The graded image continues to hold nicely—retaining a lot of detail in the RAW file.

The key light still illuminates our subjects’ faces and maintains a proper exposure. You can begin to feel the need for a bit more light on the image, but nevertheless it is 100% usable.

Ungraded +/-0 Exposed vs. Graded +/0 Exposed

**The key light is reading at f/2, which (+/-0) exposes our image.**

We are now right at (+/-0) exposure for the sensor. I have the key light right at f/2 and that’s where we are exposing the camera.

This is an image that could work for this environment. With how dark the setting is, it’s fine for the subjects to feel slightly underlit. It works if you wanted to portray them in a dark environment, allowing them to semi-melt into the background. They’re still popping out, so you don’t have to worry about this image being unusable.

Ungraded -0.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -0.5 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/1.4 5/10, which underexposes the sensor by a ½-stop.**

Now we are officially at a true underexposure on the image. We are under by a ½-stop of light on the sensor.

With the loss of light, we can start to see the blacks are beginning to consume Chelsea. Our subjects no longer pop or mesh with the background. This is a perfect example of when I say this camera wants light and doesn’t want to be underexposed. You begin to have detail fall off and that really hurts the quality you want to deliver. That said, you might be able to work with this in the proper setting. It’s still a usable image for post if you know what you are looking for out of the sensor.

Ungraded -1 Underexposed vs. Graded -1 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/1.4, which underexposes the sensor by 1-stop**

We are now 1-stop under on the sensor. Our key is at a f/1.4, just kissing our subjects and pulling them out from the background. This lighting provides a moody, yet underlit feel on our subjects. We aren’t quite at the dimly lit bar.

You could possibly use this for some interior settings, like a backstage or storage room. From what I see with the look, we continue to plunge into loss of detail when graded.

Ungraded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Graded -1.0 Underexposed

Now we are going to cross compare our starting point, which was 1 ½-stops overexposed to 1-stop underexposed.

Looking at the original image helps our eyes reorient to where we started and to help see how the image has been affected since pulling 2 ½-stops of light.

When we were overexposing the image at 1 ½-stops, you could see that our subjects were popping from the background and had a nice glow. Switching over to 1-stop underexposed, we had to push a lot out of the image to get it balanced back to where their skin levels were. With this change, it really pulls out the background and adds a lot more noise to the image.

Ungraded -1.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -1.5 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/1 5/10 which underexposes the sensor by 1 ½-stops**

You could use this exposure from a dimly lit bar to many other aesthetically-dark, interior locations. Remember to look for the detail on the key side of our subjects’ face. The difference between, say, an alleyway at night as opposed to a night interior (such as what we set up in our image above), is how the light wraps the face.

You’d probably want heavy backlight/rim light in the alleyway, so the light on the face would play as ambiance. Maybe something to play like city lights? With this exposure, you are trying to create a squint factor; that way the audience is looking for more detail. We are getting pretty close on Chelsea, but we most likely won’t get there with Monette until around 2-stops under.

Graded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match -2 Underexposed

Since we have removed this much light, I can feel the image starting to get thin.

With being 2-stops under, we are still getting good detail out of the image. We’re nearly at that squint factor with Chelsea. I bet when we go to 2 ½-stops under, we should hit that “sweet spot” for an alleyway scenario.

Now let’s cross-compare both images to see how it holds up when brought back. Even though you get the most detail when 1 ½-stops over, we are still retaining a lot of detail at 2-stops under and it continues to hold in the image.

Here we have the image 2-stops under brought back and color corrected to match the original. You can see that trying to dial it in to match the 1 ½ stops over just isn’t going to happen. The skin tones begin to feel milky and flat. All the color has washed out and it no longer makes either Monette or Chelsea pop.

The background had to be lifted, which doesn’t match and also pulls grain out in the image. You can shoot for a dimly lit look, just don’t expect to try and bring it back if you end up improperly exposing. Unfortunately, the camera just doesn’t have the latitude to do major changes in post.

Ungraded -2.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -2.5 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/0.7 5/10, which underexposes the sensor by 2 ½-stops.**

Now we have entered the “sweet spot” when it comes to the squint factor for Chelsea. At this point, I can barely see detail on the fill side of her face and she has lost all detail on the key side. To me, this would be perfect for the alleyway lighting scenario. With her darker skin tone at 2 ½-stops under—lighting her from the back and from her face plays off the ambience as if it was from the city. You could definitely strike an alluring image at this exposure.

With Monette’s lighter skin tone, we’ll want to plunge and drop the exposure a bit more before attempting the alleyway lighting scenario. There is still too much detail on her face. We want to create that squint factor and come in close to how Chelsea looks now at 2 ½-stops under.

Ungraded -3 Underexposed vs. Grade -3 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 3-stops.**

Surprisingly, there’s still detail in the image, but at this point, it’s almost all from Monette. We’ve pretty much lost Chelsea in the blacks, and even rendering her for the alleyway scene. Once you reach a point where there’s too much squint, it’s unusable.

Graded at +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match Grade at -3.0 Underexposed

We are going to ground ourselves again and readjust our eyes to the original image. Let’s cross-compare the original ungraded 1 ½-stops over vs. the ungraded 3-stops under.

The great thing about this sensor is it continues to stay clean when underexposed. Compare it to the +1.5 and the grain seems relatively the same. Now when we bring the image back to match the 1 ½ stops over—it completely falls apart.

It goes to show that when underexposing, it’s not going to be forgiving like when you overexpose. The latitude just isn’t there in the sensor. If you get the camera in the right pocket, you’ll be okay every time!

Ungraded at -3.5 Underexposed vs. Graded at -3.5 Overexposed

**The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 3 ½-stops.**

Looking at 3 ½-stops under, I feel we have finally entered into the squint factor on Monette. On the key side of her face, we are getting enough detail for an alleyway lighting scenario. With a big rim light on her, and the ambience of the city playing on her face, this would put us in the “sweet spot” for squint factor.

This is a perfect example for why we do these tests. I know when I’m dialing in the settings on set and putting 3 ½-stops under on my light meter at ISO 800, I’m still going to get enough in the RAW file from lighter skin when I put the grade on it. If you didn’t test these sensors, you would be wasting time on set and hoping for the best in post.

Upgrade at -4.0 Underexposed vs. Graded at -4.0 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 4-stops.**

With Chelsea, I’m beginning to see green noise created due to the lack of light and the RAW file wanting more for the sensor. The moment we slap the grade on Chelsea, she disappears. She melts into the shadows and the only thing cutting her out is the background. With Monette, we’ve fallen off on the squint factor and it will no longer work with her skin tone levels.

At this point in the test, I know that when I’m lighting darker skin tones I’m not going to go below 2 ½-stops under. With lighter skin tones, I can push it to 3 ½ -stops under and should still be fine.

Graded +1.5 Over vs. Color Corrected To Match Graded -4.0 Under

Now we are going to reorient and cross-compare our original 1 ½-stops over vs. the 4-stops under. Both Monette and Chelsea are gone, so we’re going to try to bring them back!

There is no hope trying to bring an image underexposed by 4-stops. It completely falls apart across the board. It almost looks as if I accidentally hit false colors on the monitor. Just don’t expect to fix your shots if they are underexposed by this much.

Ungraded -4.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -4.5 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 4 ½-stops.**

With Monette, we begin to see what we saw with Chelsea. This green noise is pumping into her flesh tone on the RAW file and there’s no longer information after it’s graded. Trying to bring it back will only raise the noise of the image, and it’ll break down to something that is unusable in your edit.

Ungraded -5.0 Underexposed vs. Grade -5.0 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 5-stops.**

Graded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match Graded -5.0 Underexposed

Now we are going to reorient our eyes and try to pull this image back to match 1 ½-stops over.

When trying to bring this image back, the under exposure shifts to this deep blue hue and the noise destroys the image.

Ungraded -5.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -5.5 Overexposed

**The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 5 ½-stops.**

Ungraded -6.0 Under vs. Graded -6.0 Under

**The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 6-stops.**

Graded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match Graded -6.0 Underexposed

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED?

  • At ISO 800, you start with an image that looks great when over exposed by 1.5 stops. The colors pop and really make our subjects look good. I would peg this as the “sweet spot” for the sensor. Once we drop in ½-stop increments, you won’t find the same image rendition.
  • When working with darker skin tones, try to stay above 2 ½-stops under. The further you underexpose the image, the more it won’t hold up and you’ll start to get color contamination in the blacks.
  • When working with lighter skin tones, try to stay above 3 ½-stops under. Further underexposing the image won’t hold up and you’ll start to get color contamination in the blacks.
  • This camera maintains a relatively low-noise footprint when underexposing. It’s a safe bet when trying to go for a dimly lit feeling overall. Don’t expect to maintain the noise level when pulling the image back. Make sure to check exposure and realize the boundaries of this camera when sacrificing light.

Sign up for Shane’s Inner Circle for access to full articles like these. Don’t miss out!

Under Exposure at ISO 1600:

To start things off, we have our URSA Mini dialed into the following settings above. We rolled the camera at 23.98 fps at ISO 1600, with our shutter angle at 360° and captured at 4.6K RAW Lossless.The lens of choice for this test was the Rokinon XEEN 35mm. This gave us everything we needed to fully understand how the sensor reacts when underexposing at ISO 1600.

We are going to start this test off at 1 ½-stops over on the sensor, then work our way down the ladder in ½-stop increments. Like the Underexposure ISO 800 Test, we are going to see how the sensor holds up when 6-stops underexposed.

Ungraded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Graded +1.5 Overexposed

**The key light is reading at f/2.8 5/10, which overexposes the sensor by 1 ½-stops.**

When we set the camera to ISO 800 and expose it at 1 ½-stops, the colors are rich! At ISO 1600, the colors seem to be muted in comparison. The blues don’t pop and the flesh tones are slightly washed out.

Ungraded +1 Overexposed vs. Graded +1 Overexposed

**The key light is reading at f/2.8, which overexposes the sensor by 1-stop.**

Ungraded +0.5 Overexposed vs. Graded +0.5 Overexposed

**The key light is reading at f/2 5/10, which overexposes the sensor by a ½-stop.**

The image continues to hold up while dialed-in at ISO 1600.

Ungraded +/-0 Exposure vs. Graded +/-0 Exposure

**The key light is reading at f/2, which exposes the sensor at (+/-0).**

Now we’ve dropped down to exposure (+/-0) on the camera. When graded, the image already feels underexposed. You are seeing all the detail on both Monette and Chelsea, but it doesn’t hold the snap like when we were overexposing by 1-stop. It seems a bit washed out and muted compared to what we saw earlier.

Next, we’ll officially be underexposing the sensor and dipping into the negative. The goal is to see where the “sweet spot” is for a dimly-lit bar or the alleyway setting.

Ungraded -0.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -0.5 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/1.4 5/10, which underexposes the sensor by a ½-stop**

It’s apparent that there is a lot more noise than in the previous exposures. The further we dip into underexposing the sensor, the more it wants to compensate by adding noise to the image.

Ungraded -1 Underexposed vs. Graded -1 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/1.4, which underexposes the sensor by 1-stop**

As we dip another ½-stop, a green hue of noise enters the image contaminating Chelsea. On the ISO 800 test, we didn’t start to see green noise until about 3-stops under. It shows up in the RAW file, then once graded, it cleans up a bit.

Graded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match Graded -1 Underexposed

Here we are going to cross-compare our 1 ½-stop overexposed image vs. our 1-stop underexposed image to see how it holds up when bringing it back. Right away, the green is apparent in the image and the noise is pulled out. The image, already at 1-stop underexposed, isn’t able to match our desired look.

Ungraded -1.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -1.5 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/1 5/10, which underexposes the sensor by 1 ½-stops.**

If you look at Chelsea’s hair, you can see that the blue channel is really being affected by ISO 1600 being underexposed. This is something we didn’t see at 1 ½-stops under at ISO 800.

Ungraded -2 Underexposed vs. Graded -2 Underexposed

**The key light is reading at f/1, which underexposes the sensor by 2-stops.**

At 2-stops under, you are still getting enough information from Chelsea and Monette to be able to do a dimly lit alleyway scenario. Unfortunately, the blue channel is affecting the noise of the image making it unusable. This is a problem for your underexposing capabilities.

Graded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match Graded -2 Underexposed

Now, once again, we are going to reorient our eyes and cross-compare our starting point: 1 ½-stops over vs. 2-stops under.

By cranking up the ISO to 1600, you would think that this could help when trying to see into a dimly lit environment. Unfortunately, when you do that and then apply your look, you start to get artifacting from the blue channel. Once that becomes apparent, it completely destroys the image.

When you bring the image back and try to match it, it falls apart in Chelsea’s hair. The noise engulfs the image completely and becomes unsalvageable.

Ungraded -2.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -2.5 Underexposed

The key light is reading at f/0.7 5/10,, which underexposes the sensor by 2 ½-stops.

At this point, it becomes apparent that the native ISO is most like 800. There isn’t enough latitude, bit-depth, or clean underexposure qualities at ISO 1600 compared to 800.  At 2 ½-stops under with ISO 800, we could still work with the image for certain situations aesthetically.

Ungraded -3 Underexposed vs. Graded -3 Underexposed

The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 3-stops.

By going to ISO 1600, we are gaining 7/10-stop on overexposure but yet losing so much more on how it impacts the image quality.

Graded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match Graded -3 Underexposed

This sensor is just not reacting well when underexposed at ISO 1600. If you plan on using available light, make sure to take into consideration that this camera NEEDS light. Entering into a dimly lit environment could harness these same problems with the blue channel. You can’t just pump up the ISO and hope to see into those shadows. You end up losing the snap of the image immediately and it feels underexposed at (+/-0).

Ungraded -3.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -3.5 Underexposed

The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 3½-stops.

Ungraded -4 Underexposed vs. Graded -4 Underexposed

The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 4-stops.

When we were at ISO 800, it took on an underexposed image beautifully. It didn’t fall apart until about 3 ½ — 4-stops under. The image was clean and maintained detail. It works well for those dimly lit scenarios, like when trying to create a moody bar or alleyway setting. You just aren’t getting the latitude necessary at ISO 1600.

Graded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match Graded -4 Underexposed

When trying to bring the image back, it’s unsalvageable. The image breaks apart with noise and turns into that false color look. No matter what you do, it seems to be affecting the different color channels.

Ungraded -4.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -4.5 Underexposed

The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 4½-stops.

Ungraded -5 Underexposed vs. Graded -5 Underexposed

The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 5-stops.

Graded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match Graded -5 Underexposed

 

Ungraded -5.5 Underexposed vs. Graded -5.5 Underexposed

The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 5½-stops.

Ungraded -6 Underexposed vs. Graded -6 Underexposed

The key light is reading at f/0.7, which underexposes the sensor by 6-stops.

Graded +1.5 Overexposed vs. Color Corrected To Match Graded -5 Underexposed

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED?

  • At ISO 1600, you already start off with an image that has less snap to it; the colors are muted and their skin tones are slightly washed out.
  • At (+/-0) exposure on the sensor, the image already felt underexposed. That tells me that this sensor wants light. So make sure to try and hit that 1 ½-stops over exposure as close as possible. You will get the most out of an image when you hover around that.
  • The image started to fall apart at about 2-stops under on the sensor. That doesn’t give you much latitude for failure in post. Trying to bring the image back on ISO 1600 just isn’t something that’s going to be achievable. Be sure to stay above 1-stop under.

This concludes PART 2 of our Blackmagic URSA Mini 4.6K Film Test. Hopefully, this material is helping you to master your Blackmagic URSA Mini! As always, let us know your questions and concerns in the comment section below!

Next up on our list is PART 3: Day ISO/Finding Native!

We’re going to test this camera with different ISO settings in a day exterior environment, and find out what this baby’s native ISO is. Stay tuned as all this new material rolls out the door tomorrow, December 23rd, 2016. Also, for a more indepth analysis, as well as tons of other resources that can elevate your career as a filmmaker, become a member of Shane’s Inner Circle today!

Best,

Shane Hurlbut, ASC

This concludes our film test section. Sign up for Shane’s Inner Circle for access to full articles like these. Don’t miss out!

Now, let’s take a look at our table of contents to see what we’ve covered and where we’re heading:

PART 1: Overexposure and Skin Tone

PART ONE TOTAL VIDEO CONTENT: 1 HOURS 20 MINUTES

  • Overexposure at ISO 800 – Runtime 9 minutes 35 seconds
  • Overexposure at ISO 800 Shane’s Review – Runtime 16 minutes 14 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Overexposure at ISO 1600 – Runtime 8 minutes 21 seconds
  • Overexposure at ISO 1600 Shane’s Review – Runtime 17 minutes 1 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Overexposure at ISO 800 vs. ISO 1600 – Runtime 13 minutes 46 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Overexposure at ISO 800 vs. ISO 1600 Shane’s Review – 16 mins 2 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)

PART 2: Underexposure and Skin Tone

PART TWO TOTAL VIDEO CONTENT: 1 HOUR 21 MINUTES

  • Underexposure at ISO 800 – Runtime 10 minutes 11 seconds.
  • Underexposure at ISO 800 Shane’s Review – Runtime 18 minutes 50 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Underexposure at ISO 1600 – Runtime 10 minutes 47 seconds
  • Underexposure at ISO 1600 Shane’s Review – Runtime 12 minutes 34 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Underexposure ISO 800 vs. ISO 1600 – Runtime 15 minutes 50 Seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Underexposure ISO 800 vs. ISO 1600 Shane’s Review – Runtime 13 minutes 34 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)

Part 3: Day ISO/Finding Native

PART THREE TOTAL VIDEO CONTENT: 58 MINUTES 24 SECONDS

  • Day ISO Noise Test – Runtime 3 minutes 59 seconds
  • Day ISO Noise Test Shane’s Review – Runtime 13 minutes 55 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Day ISO Noise Test Compared Against ISO 400 – Runtime 4 minutes 3 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Day ISO Noise Test Compared Against ISO 400 Shane’s Review – Runtime 7 minutes 32 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Day ISO Noise Test Compared Against ISO 800 – Runtime 4 minutes 5 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Day ISO Noise Test Compared Against ISO 800 Shane’s Review – Runtime 13 minutes 18 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Day ISO Noise Test Compared Against ISO 1600 – Runtime 4 minutes 2 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Day ISO Noise Test Compared Against ISO 1600 Shane’s Review – Runtime 7 minutes 30 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)

Here’s a look at what’s to come in Shane’s Inner Circle  for Parts 1 – 3:

Part 4: Color Correcting Your Blackmagic URSA Mini 1

PART FOUR TOTAL VIDEO CONTENT:  7 minutes 13 seconds

  • Color Grading Day Exteriors with DaVinci Resolve  – Runtime 7 minutes 13 seconds

Part 5: Color Correcting Your Blackmagic URSA Mini 2

PART FIVE TOTAL VIDEO CONTENT: 8 MINUTES 34 SECONDS

  • Color Grading without a LUT Under Tungsten Lighting – 5 minutes 14 seconds
  • Color Grading under Mixed Color Temp Sources – 3 minutes 20 seconds

Part 6: Combating IR Pollution Using Straight NDs and IR NDs

PART SIX TOTAL VIDEO CONTENT: 51 MINUTES 01 SECONDS

  • IR Pollution Test with Straight ND – Runtime 6 minutes 46 seconds
  • IR Pollution Test with Straight ND Shane’s Review – Runtime 19 minutes 25 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • IR Pollution Test with Tiffen IR ND – Runtime 6 minutes 44 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • IR Pollution Test with Tiffen IR ND Shane’s Review – Runtime 18 minutes 06 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)

Part 7: Combating IR Pollution with True NDs & Our Battle Royale Finale

PART SEVEN TOTAL VIDEO CONTENT: 45 MINUTES 32 SECONDS

  • IR Pollution Test with True ND – Runtime 6 minutes 29 seconds
  • IR Pollution Test with True ND Shane’s Review – Runtime 16 minutes 01 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • IR Pollution Test ND Battle Royale – Runtime 4 minutes 55 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • IR Pollution Test ND Battle Royale Shane’s Review – Runtime 18 minutes 07 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)

Part 8: Night ISO Test

PART EIGHT TOTAL VIDEO CONTENT:  19 MINUTES 49 SECONDS

  • Night ISO Noise Test with Chelsea – Runtime 3 minutes 04 seconds
  • Night ISO Noise Test with Chelsea Shane’s Review – Runtime 5 minutes 46 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Night ISO Noise Test with Mason – Runtime 2 minutes 33 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Night ISO Noise Test with Mason Shane’s Review – Runtime 3 minutes 18 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Night ISO Noise Test with Chelsea vs. Mason – Runtime 5 minutes 08 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)

Part 9: Rolling Shutter Test

PART NINE TOTAL VIDEO CONTENT: 8 MINUTES 06 SECONDS

  • Rolling Shutter Test with Car – Runtime 1 minutes 41 seconds (SIC EXCLUSIVE)
  • Rolling Shutter Test with Car Shane’s Review – Runtime 6 minutes 25 seconds  (SIC EXCLUSIVE)

All videos were edited on HP Z840 workstations using HP Z24x DreamColor monitors.

Order Black Magic URSA Mini Camera Test Series Part 1-9

Click to order Blackmagic URSA Mini Camera Test Series: Part 1 – 9

OConnor Ultimate 2575D Head & Cine HD Mitchell Top Plate Tripod System with Floor SpreaderRokinon Xeen 14, 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 Cine Lens Bundle (PL Mount)Tiffen Pro Indie HV Neutral Density Filter KitTiffen 4 x 5.65” Full Spectrum IRND 0.3 FilterTiffen 4 5.65” Full Spectrum IRND 0.6 FilterTiffen 4 x 5.65” Full Spectrum IRND 0.9 FilterTiffen 4 x 5.65” Full Spectrum IRND 0.9 FilterTiffen 4 x 5.65” Full Spectrum IRND 1.5 FilterTiffen 4 x 5.6” Full Spectrum IRND 1.8 FilterTiffen 4 x 5.65” Full Spectrum IRND 2.1 FilterTrue ND Filters 4 x 5.65”

Related Articles

Leave a Comment