Is IBIS a must for for Underwater Video?

37 minutes ago, Davide DB said:

 

I completely agree with you on half speed shooting. These clips should be used with an eyedropper.

For the ripping current, it's only a title I guess. When you move with the current it's hard to reproduce the feeling in the video.

BTW I really liked the camera WB. Very nice colours for being at 50m away with no lights.

P.S.

I've never seen yoy give anyone a compliment. Can you give me examples of videos you liked?

Yours are dreifish are good and so are some other holiday divers here in the gallery show case I have made note of a few 

The videos of Adamson etc are excellent the way he controls the light but I am not a fan of critters slideshows

What I do not like are the stereotypes that we seem to be victim. Cinematic style? Or just a way to hide buoyancy flaws and other issues

I also think like you said we have a fundamental question in terms of story telling vs documentary fish id type

Thanks,

Quote

I also think like you said we have a fundamental question in terms of story telling vs documentary fish id type

They are two completely different genre.

The "fish id type" is a category born from the combination of music and images which is the simplest and most immediate thing you can do. In the specific case of underwater footage, it is a direct extension of the famous diaporamas of the film era.
As simple as it may seem, it has its own language, its own grammar to be respected:

• Once upon a time I would have said that it was forbidden to exceed 5 minutes, but currently even 3 minutes is too much.
• The choice of music is fundamental.
• One should not go overboard with music beat editing. After a few beats, the brain notices and it becomes tedious.
• Images must be outstanding: since usually the person who edits the video is also the one who filmed it, you should not fall in love with your own images. This, I think, is the most important advice.
• The fact that the video is just music and images does not exempt it from having a story. Even a very simple one or even just telling the events in a coherent way. Almost a consecutio temporum AKA Sequence of tenses! This helps to get the viewer's attention.

From the desire of "outstanding images" arise the so-called "pixel peepers". The most popular category on photography and video forums. 

Don't get me wrong: I like perfect images too. I just find that sometimes the evaluation of the pure perfection of the footage has too much weight compared to the finished video product. 
 

P.S.

a few weeks ago I realized that on Prime Video (at least here in Italy) there are videos of Howard Hall.  They are proposed as a documentary but in reality they are "only" a compilation of his images with music in the background: I've never slept so well on the couch!

Yet the images of HL inserted in real documentaries are more than perfect.

On 3/15/2021 at 9:26 AM, Davide DB said:

 

I completely agree with you on half speed shooting. These clips should be used with an eyedropper.

For the ripping current, it's only a title I guess. When you move with the current it's hard to reproduce the feeling in the video.

BTW I really liked the camera WB. Very nice colours for being at 50m away with no lights.

P.S.

I've never seen yoy give anyone a compliment. Can you give me examples of videos you liked?

Perhaps some of this is due to playing back 60fps video at 24fps and/or stabilization in post, but this footage is definitely smoother than the Canon unstabilized footage from Dustin. The housing for the E2 also looks to be exquisitely well trimmed with plenty of mass from the WACP. So.. basically, I think the moral of the story here is that a larger cinema housing with good trim can get you results at least comparable with those as of a smaller DSRL-type housing with IBIS. Either is viable.

A small DSLR-type housing without IBIS, even with good trim/balance and a solid operator is still going to leave a bit to be desired in terms of stabilization, and might not be the best choice.

Perhaps some of this is due to playing back 60fps video at 24fps and/or stabilization in post, but this footage is definitely smoother than the Canon unstabilized footage from Dustin. The housing for the E2 also looks to be exquisitely well trimmed with plenty of mass from the WACP. So.. basically, I think the moral of the story here is that a larger cinema housing with good trim can get you results at least comparable with those as of a smaller DSRL-type housing with IBIS. Either is viable.
A small DSLR-type housing without IBIS, even with good trim/balance and a solid operator is still going to leave a bit to be desired in terms of stabilization, and might not be the best choice.

A video of my friend Claudio Valerio on a 70m deep shoal in Tuscany. No IBIS 

GH5S + Pana 9-18mm in Aquatica housing

The GH5S footage is pretty smooth. Might have to find a used body and experiment with it side by side with the GH5.

12 hours ago, dreifish said:

The GH5S footage is pretty smooth. Might have to find a used body and experiment with it side by side with the GH5.

Lots of slow motion and a wide lens are not exactly the proof of the pudding

Yes, but believe me, he is rock steady. A human dolly. Just look at his old videos before GH5S. 

Here he experimented with shallow focus. Perfect lightning. He creates a lot of shadows enhancing 3D and super CC.

Keep in minf he's at 80m freehand. No camera, no scooter.

Davide, your pal is truly a human dolly, kudos to him and thanks for sharing.

However, if I may, I'd like to bring this thread back to life towards technology and GAS, since most of us haven't been able to hone our underwater skills for a while now and could certainly use a digital hand to make the most out of upcoming trips, wherever and whenever that may be.

I've been looking at Sony's Catalyst Browse post-stabilization software, which seems impressive from the topside footage I've watched, and I've been wondering if its gyroscope/software combo could be able to make IBIS "obsolete" whilst filming underwater. Maybe "obsolete" is a harsh term, but at least, provide a reasonable alternative. As in, "could it really be able to grasp those micro shakes underwater without proper/topside gravity/grounding?"

Let me share some background to this reasoning. Sony says there is no way to put IBIS (or Active SteadyShot, as they call it) at the same time with a variable ND. So, effectively, one must choose, amongst many differences that don't fall into this particular conversation, between two cameras that share the same sensor and lens mount, but have a different form factor and thus, are marketed towards vastly different users that are already invested in the E mount ecosystem.

Regardless of price, on the one side, you have a very capable low light mirrorless photo/video camera with IBIS but no VAR-ND and poor WB and AF tracking controls (such as the AS7III whilst underwater). On the other, you have a cinema camera with better WB control, proper audio inputs (when using the handle), a top notch variable ND and most "bells and whistles" to film a "Netflix Approved" doc, that -alas- has no IBIS and a poorer topside AF tracking system, no zebras or peaking to an external monitor, such as the FX-6. (Nor a housing...as of now).

Note: I'm already heavily invested in Sony FF and Nauticam (glass, batteries (that would only work on the A7S3, not the FX-6), extension ports, etc), so at least for me, changing ecosystems again is not an option. I'm sticking with both. I haven't tested any of these cameras, but have researched them as thoroughly as I can, so please take my opinions/adjectives with a pinch of salt. YMMV. Short(ish)-term-wise, I will be shooting both topside and underwater in the Maldives and would like to invest in only one body, so I'm leaning towards the VAR-ND/no-IBIS front, but I am open to be proven wrong.....or right.

So.....getting back to the IBIS/CB issue, I was wondering if someone could chime in using a different (older) Sony camera that had a gyroscope and tested its capabilities whilst underwater with the current version of the software? Maybe even share a Before/After comparison to have some sort of benchmark? Am I looking for the goose with the golden eggs? Hope not.

I know for a fact Massimo is not into Sony, for all the reasons he's listed before on this thread and on others. However, I do believe IBIS is a welcome spec that can make underwater filmmakers lives easier and agree with him on that front. So, in the end, my question remains, could Catalyst Browse become a solution to Sony's VAR-ND/no-IBIS - IBIS/no-VAR-ND "crippling" whilst filming underwater?

Thanks

Good stable shots when shooting video is a significant factor for a shot to be a keeper.  The current crop of Sony cameras have darn good , WB and AF tracking. I use both the a7s3 and the a1 underwater and for birds in flight.

I personally have evolved from a Sony RX100 VII in a Nauticam housing to current rigs for multiple reasons but one was the challenge of creating good buoyancy and trim, the smaller config's sinks like a rock. My current rigs achieve about 45 grams of negative buoyancy in fresh water and I’m working to fine tune even this negative number which is still ever so slightly negative in the ocean. It is so much more fun to shoot with a reasonable balanced and stable rig.

Curious to me is the shooting for birds in flight and the relative difficulty of shooting burst stills compared to full motion video. The full motion attempts are so much more difficult it has amazed me.  I have fluid heads, monopods, gimbals and none of it is of value when the wildlife is unpredictable and fast moving.

I’m diving again next week and plan to hone my skills with a Sony 90mm lens. Not specifically on true macro but the intermediate setting to capture fish behavior from a non intimidating distance to the fish.  My use of wide-angle close ups only go so far and I am trying to shoot smaller and faster fish. All basically hand held. I'll also try and move back to ambient lighting if conditions permit. Again not to disturb the fish, and yes I do hold my breath, and have looked into an tested CCR's.

The Sony Catalyst software does look interesting and may take on that challenge to my post workflow one day but maybe not anytime soon.

Quote

 

@Whipauee Have you had any chance to try out the IBIS on the S3/A1 U/W lately? If so, could you please share some of your findings? thanks

I've done a couple of dives with Sony a7s3 or a1 with a 90mm. Even with darn good buoyancy control and a balanced rig handheld keeper footage is in the in the range of a 1 sec out of a couple minutes and then, sometimes never. I learned to really lighten my grip on the housing to minimize to minimize muscle twitches. If I do macro or even quasi macro shots I try and shoot at 120fps which can have a nice feel when slowed down. Or if I have the a1 and my 24-70mm kit (Which is my go to arraignment) and a macro opportunity shows up I'll go to 8K and work it in post but its only 30fps so still needs to be steady with spot auto focus. I also rely on stabilization in my post environment which starts in FCPX. Someday I'll get on board with Resolve for working color and grain.