Jump to content


Photo

Canon D5 Mk2 to 35mm mini-test results


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 03 May 2009 - 11:14 PM

Just came back from screening 35mm film-out test footage from the canon D5 Mk2. No major problems that haven't been discussed elsewhere.... it looks good and adding the film grain to low light shots makes it seem "right" to me, and also covered a few artifacts like solarization and aliasing on a few occasions. Overall we were very pleased with the look.

The 30p to 24p conversion we did in cinetool portion of FCP, and it seemed okay. We projected less than 300 feet of film though, and so I can't say these tests were definitive.

Non linear editing systems are not importing the files correctly however and the crushed blacks everyone sees after you take the footage into FCP or Avid can be avoided, supposedly by using the right software from Cineform, or something similar.

Here's a good link to what I wish we had found prior to the tests

http://cineform.blog...m-canon-5d.html

All our blacks were crushed and so most of the test was a waste of time, frankly but it was a good shakedown cruise for shooting with the camera. We learned a lot and if anyone wants the gory details feel free to send me a message.

The two hurdles seem to be A), getting the footage into a non-linear editor without crushing the blacks, and B ) converting it from 30p to 24p, which seems to have been done a variety of ways and need to be stacked against one another side by side before conclusions can be drawn as to which method is best.

Other than that, the camera works quite well. It's full HD, 8 bit color and has a great low light and low DoF look that can't be captured any other way as far as I can tell.

We shot with manual focus AI Nikkors and did car shots, day for night and some basic narrative stuff trying to recreate a lot of typical problem shots. I'm a film guy, and can't stand the video look, but this camera comes very very close to getting it right. It would be a delight to shoot verite with.

The look is worth the hassle. Getting the right lens package together is next, along with learning to adapt a lot of DVX tricks regarding support and post workflow, but this camera will make a movie that looks better than any DVX film I've ever seen. The overall look of the lenses put the camera in a category above super 16mm and the low light performance is incredible.

Edited by Jean Dodge, 03 May 2009 - 11:16 PM.

  • 0

#2 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3510 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 04 May 2009 - 01:02 AM

The two hurdles seem to be A), getting the footage into a non-linear editor without crushing the blacks...

Hi Jean,

Have you seen these articles yet?

http://prolost.com/b...shing-news.html
http://prolost.com/b...-5d-movies.html

Sounds like a workaround using Apple Color and Quicktime 7.6 instead of using Cineform.
  • 0

#3 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11937 posts
  • Other

Posted 04 May 2009 - 01:17 AM

I converted my stuff to DV format for offlining with ffmpeg, which seemed to work OK.

P
  • 0

#4 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 04 May 2009 - 09:00 AM

Satsuki - yes we've followed the google trail of breadcrumbs to CineForm and ProLost now...

Phil.... still exploring other avenues... by DV do you mean DV the little 1/4" digital video tapes???? Or D-5? please expand... I've followed many of your posts over the last two days, and you seem to be deep into this stuff. Kudos for that but here you've lost me.

I'm a film guy who HATED everything about video, including the fershluginer video taps we have to deal with. When I direct, I stand on the off side of the camera, consult with the DoP and trust he's getting good floating compositions based on a glance or two at the monitor or a peek thru the eyepiece. Then I work with the actors and try to get the performances and timing right. I trust my DP and also hope he trusts me to do my job. When I worked as a focus puller I learned my lenses and watched the actors and the dolly marks, not the monitor so much. If it got "a picture" I didn't tweak it much. That's my intro to video, besides renting blu-rays and watching them.

However, now that "digital cineamtogrpahy" is seemingly on the verge of looking sufficiently film like in certain conditions, it's creepining into my life. I'm learning this stuff reluctantly and also a bit late in the game, I admit. So the learning curve is steep and a lot of it is not second nature yet.

My role this last week as we did these tests was simply to build the package, assist the DP and consult with the editor who was doing his own research into the workflow. We rushed to a film-out despite the obvious crushed blacks simply to accelerate our learning curve - and we learned a lot but it's clear we need to keep pushing this little-camera-that-could. Sometimes you have to fail to learn your lessons.

I've also read about CoreAVC,a program that works with H.264 and was recommended by the CineForm blogger David Newman. His posts are linked to from the ones by ProLost but here is a good one with things about the blacks and the codec that everyone who shoots with this camera should know:

http://cineform.blog...m-canon-5d.html

For anyone just coming to this stage, I recommend doing a search on his CineForm Insider blog to read everything he has written using "Canon D5" as your search term.

Incorrectly, the night before our film-out on the Arri recorder I had assumed it was the 30p-to-24p conversion that was crushing our blacks and affecting the contrast so badly. (I was in the edit room but only after four 15 hour shooting days. My attention span was clearly not what it could have been!) Now I see it is a simple error in getting the media into a Non linear editor in the right setttings/ standards, but one which is still being sorted out by a vast majority of D5 users.

We'll continue our tests now but will probably wait a bit until we do another film-out. We saw in the screening room enough about color and film grain and what the process does to smooth out aliasing and solarization in dull shadow areas - the film helps cover some of the faults of the camera, and in the very low light scenes the stuff looks amazing.

I've got plenty to say about working on set with the camera, too but will have to write more later. Again, we're very pleased and excited with the camera. Crippled as it is, it still does some tricks you can't do any other way.
  • 0

#5 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 04 May 2009 - 09:28 AM

Great info and links, Jean. Thanks for sharing with us. What are you doing to deal with the notorious, rolling shutter. As well, isn't there a common beef with the exposure control work-around?
  • 0

#6 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 May 2009 - 10:58 AM

Jean: Thanks for posting. Do you have any screen grabs of the crushed-black D5 HD footage you can post? I know, the best way to see it would be on film, but obviously that is not an option. Thanks again.
  • 0

#7 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11937 posts
  • Other

Posted 04 May 2009 - 11:35 AM

You're right, I'm being imprecise. By DV I mean DV25, also called DVSD, which is the compression codec used for the little 1/4" tapes. In its guise as a computer video compressor, it's a useful low-stress way of working with standard-def offline material with a good compromise between image quality, file size, and the computer horsepower required to encode or decode the material. More recently, DVCPRO-100, also called DVHD, has become popular for this, since it allows for reasonable 720p high definition pictures with a similar level of compromise, but it's a bit tricky to handle on anything other than a Mac running Final Cut.

As to crushed blacks - it's difficult to glitch-fix this without a step by step description of your workflow, but I've done everything as file based and I have not hit any problems - I'm looking right now at a monitor displaying both the original h.264 HD material, and the PAL-resolution offline side by side, and the colours appear identical. One reason I like to use free tools like ffmpeg for this sort of thing is that they have a marked tendency not to try and be clever; to simply take the image data and blast it from one file into another without concerning themselves with "correct" levels. Of course, this means you take responsibility for not creating a situation which gives you problems, but it also gives you the flexibility to get out of those situations when they occur.

I'd have to look into this a bit more, which I suspect I will eventually have to do when I come to online the short we did, in order to figure out exactly how to fix it, but in the meantime, I'm accepting bookings!

P
  • 0

#8 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 04 May 2009 - 11:47 AM

Great info and links, Jean. Thanks for sharing with us. What are you doing to deal with the notorious, rolling shutter. As well, isn't there a common beef with the exposure control work-around?


Rolling shutter has not been a deal-breaker thus far. The car shots we tested used a 1/30th (1/33 actual) and 1/50th shutter rate and shallow DoF and as such if there were slanted telephone poles out there, we didn't notice them too much. When we did need to stop down to say, f8 to use a 35mm lens to hold focus on two front seat occupants in a hostess tray type setup, the motion blur of driving blurred the background sufficiently so it didn't look like video, where there is excessive DoF. When the car stops, we noted that a cut to a different angle would be best. Odd things like this became obvious after a day or so of shooting.

Panning in general is an issue, pan speeds need to be worked out as a table/ guide, much as spinning shutter pan speeds have to be dealt with in film. The wide Nikkors are still in the shop getting rear flanges milled down to fit the canon camera but it's obvious they are horribly distorted, and the barrel distortion effects that can be hidden in a still image are bad in a pan - but sometimes easily disguised in a tracking shot on a slant. We'll likely spring for a newer wide angle lens like the Nikon 15mm f3.5 if we decide we really need a super-wide. (tests not complete here)

As for jello-cam, we didn't see any at slower shutter rates and any normal pan speeds. The nikon D90 is much much worse at this. I wouldn't shoot LAWS OF GRAVITY with this system, but so far, so good. (LOG, notoriously HH indie feature from back in the day, filled with whip pans and HH 360 shots. Fun, but audiences got sea sick.)

Personally, we liked the car shot stuff - driving 60mph looks like 60mph and has a very natural feel to it. In fact we didn't see any "judder" issues anywhere in panning, but plan to do more tests soon. Also the small size of the camera lets you put it into places you could never get a film camera. The silly thing is wider than it is long, and often operates better as a SLR than with the FF rig and HH stuff. Imagine taking an Arri SR onto a roller coaster and then compare with taking a Nikon.

Exposure control work around is a pain in the arse but becomes second nature eventually. With manual iris lenses you can stop down while pointed at almost any light source until you trick the camera into displaying an approximation of the ISO and shutter rate that works for you, and then lock the value with the * button. Getting repeatable results take to take was a concern, but seemed to work out okay in the tests we did.

I'm looking into buying one of those cheap photo frames that displays jpegs in a slide-show and shooting a series of grey cards as way to easily repeat brightness values to hold to the lens.... another user forum suggestion I picked up in research. Silly but should be effective. As you may know, the camera uses a combo of ISO and shutter speed rates to control exposure once you take away Iris control as it's third option. At the slower ISOs, 100 and 200, the frame rates are all over the place - up to and beyond 1/160th a sec. ND filters come into play here to make sure you are shooting 1/50th at the f-stop you want, and the camera also has two stops exposure correction available with the thumb wheel. (for 1/50th a sec exposure, always choose and lock 1/40 on the display. 1/50th display can sometimes force a 1/100 shutter in actual practice)

At higher ISOs than 200, it is our understanding that the shutter rate is always 1/30th.

here's the table we went by. I can't take credit for this, but I can't refute anything in it either:

------------
From tests performed by Jon Fairhurst and Mark Hahn, the following findings have been made:

When shooting video with Nikon lenses or any lens where you are setting aperture manually:

Rule 1. Camera shoots at 1/33 of a second, any time the ISO is above 100, or above 200 with HTP mode employed. There is no way around this no matter what shutter speed reads out on the LCD.

Rule 2. At ISO 100, or 200 with HTP set, you can adjust shutter speeds. The following table shows the LCD reading on the left and the right shows the actual shutter speed the camera will use.

LCD -> Actual
Reads

1/40 -> 1/50
1/50 -> 1/50 or 1/100
1/60 -> 1/100
1/80 -> 1/100
1/100 -> 1/100
1/125 -> 1/125
1/160 -> 1/160
1/200 -> 1/200

Rule 3. With a non-aperture control lens, even higher shutter speeds than the 200 shown can be attained, despite Canon's indication of the limited shutter speed of 1/125.

---------------------------

There is some exposure related speculation that concerns using bayonet adaptors that include an interface to the auto focus/auto iris interface, but we have not chased down that rabbit hole yet ourselves. It seems that without a connected circuit to the lens, the camera's tiny brain assumes a value of f2.8 or f 2.0 and keeps it there, which is enough to work from as a good start. In theory I suppose you could hack that method and gain some more manual control back, but we've been too busy to ponder it.

No one said this was easy. But it is hackable, to an extent that the camera's specific advantages can be used and controlled. I think it is best used as spy cam and night vision thing for night exteriors in downtown mixed lighting, and as a way to steal shots inside clubs and museums, etc. For day to day production I don't trust it fully not to overheat or act up, but if I were making a verite doc I'd give it serious consideration over any HD DVX type unit, and I think it also may be better than my beloved s16 Aaton in a lot of ways.

The focus pulling won't be fun with Nikkors either, and the 7" 720 line monitor is not the world's best eyepiece, etc. There are clearly many many issues that can be worked out in future camera systems but again, this is an exciting format and a lot of fun to shoot with.
  • 0

#9 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11937 posts
  • Other

Posted 04 May 2009 - 11:56 AM

Further to earlier reply, here's the problem in the flesh:

5dcrush.jpg

This is a screen capture of the monitor window in Premiere Pro 2. On the left is the DV offline, on the right is the original h.264.

This does at least prove that Premiere is capable of reading the entire dynamic range out of the original h.264 file, although it's not clear at what stage the offline was damaged and we don't know if the full range will survive a render out to file.

P
  • 0

#10 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 04 May 2009 - 12:05 PM

Jean: Thanks for posting. Do you have any screen grabs of the crushed-black D5 HD footage you can post? I know, the best way to see it would be on film, but obviously that is not an option. Thanks again.




Check this link for a better explanation of crushed black issue, with examples and waveform etc:

http://cineform.blog...m-canon-5d.html

It looks like that, and any screen shots I could post are similar. On film, it looks like that only slightly worse due to the small amount of increased contrast. Until we have proper HD footage to load into the Arri Recorder, I'd reserve any judgement on what the 35mm looks like, really.

If you have further needs and a legitimate reason to see some grabs, go ahead and send me a PM and I'll try to help you out. This being a cinematography forum I'm hoping to keep the discussion here to on-set stuff for the most part.

Sadly, as we've all noticed however the job description of cameraman has now been changed to cameraman-plus-tell-the-editor-how-to-do-his-job-too, sometimes. I am of the opinion that the DIT should report to the editing dep't, not the cinematographer. However I seem to be in the minority....
  • 0

#11 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 04 May 2009 - 12:20 PM

Thanks Phil, great work. I'm about to post something to some post-production user sites that specifically address workflow issues - this being a cinematography forum - but I am riveted by your posts... and want to hear more. Mind if I PM you? Where else do you stand by the virtual water cooler and dispense these pearls of wisdom?

I was thinking of trying to take the larger issue of feature length workflow to a FCP user forum, or the cluttered and fraught with rumor cinemaD5 forum.... but wary of getting overwhelmed with bad intel, and then being forced to invade Iraq and water-board my neighbors 88 times a month. :P
  • 0

#12 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 04 May 2009 - 04:22 PM

The 30p to 24p conversion we did in cinetool portion of FCP, and it seemed okay. We projected less than 300 feet of film though, and so I can't say these tests were definitive.


What you need to do in testing frame rate conversion is shoot something with smooth uniform and moderately rapid motion. Some nicely done gear head pans, car by's, stuff like that. Then look at the output frame by frame.

The tests we did showed that the rate conversion consisted of passing three frames thru unmodified, then combining the next two frames in a blur-between. If you shot with an effective 180 degree shutter at 30 fps, what you get at 24 fps is the equivalent of three frames with a 144 degree shutter and one with a 432 degree shutter. If you consider the middle frame of the three and the blur-between to be "right", then the other two straight across frames are a little early and a little late, which gives the motion a sort of 3-2-ishness.

Big talking head CU's work OK for mouth motion, but we did have some in our tests where a blur-between hit on an eye blink, and made a very obvious mess of the eyes.

All that being said, it's still massively stupid to have to work around the 30 fps problem. They need to make the camera do 24. If they don't, perhaps somebody will do it as an aftermarket modification.



-- J.S.
  • 0

#13 Peter Moretti

Peter Moretti
  • Sustaining Members
  • 306 posts
  • Other
  • Sherman Oaks, CA

Posted 04 May 2009 - 10:24 PM

I've never seen Avid crush blacks except when it's been told to do so (often times inadvertently). On import settings, there is a choice for 601 or RGB levels. If you choose 601, Avid assumes black is 16 and white is 235, if you choose RGB, Avid will assume black is 0 and white is 255. There are similar settings for export. And it will depend on what format you choose to export to.

Because Avid is used extensively in broadcast, one thing it does very well is manage how super blacks and whites are handled. It may take some time to find the correct combination of settings, but it should be a relatively simple process.
  • 0

#14 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 05 May 2009 - 01:02 PM

I've never seen Avid crush blacks except when it's been told to do so (often times inadvertently). On import settings, there is a choice for 601 or RGB levels. If you choose 601, Avid assumes black is 16 and white is 235, if you choose RGB, Avid will assume black is 0 and white is 255. There are similar settings for export. And it will depend on what format you choose to export to.

Because Avid is used extensively in broadcast, one thing it does very well is manage how super blacks and whites are handled. It may take some time to find the correct combination of settings, but it should be a relatively simple process.


I don't know AVID, I barely know FCP. I am a cameraman and I have little experience with digital post or video of any kind. However the article I linked to above discusses this issue, and it has to do with the way the canon d5 codec is YUV not RGB, perhaps. There also seem to be frame rate issues, regarding 30p vs 29.978 etc that are not what they seem. However, regarding anything off a tripod, don't quote me. I want VERY much to use this camera on set and HAND OFF the compact flash cards to an expert. To me that is the job of a cameraman, to get great images and be able to briefly CONSULT with post people in layman's terms and trust them to do their job and not mine.

again, the POST discussion starts with this, maybe.

http://cineform.blog...m-canon-5d.html

And I am trying to learn all this, so thanks to all for adding to the discussion.

brave new world... indeed.
  • 0

#15 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 05 May 2009 - 01:10 PM

Further to earlier reply, here's the problem in the flesh:

5dcrush.jpg

This is a screen capture of the monitor window in Premiere Pro 2. On the left is the DV offline, on the right is the original h.264.

This does at least prove that Premiere is capable of reading the entire dynamic range out of the original h.264 file, although it's not clear at what stage the offline was damaged and we don't know if the full range will survive a render out to file.

P



I see a clear difference in the two... where are the grey hairs I see on the left? It's better than "horribly crushed blacks" (sounds like an industrial accident in antebellum days) but still there is lost info there.

But you seem to be onto something.
  • 0

#16 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 05 May 2009 - 01:29 PM

...., and it has to do with the way the canon d5 codec is YUV not RGB, perhaps.


Wow, that's unfortunate. All sensor chips are inherently RGB. Ideally, conversion to YUV would happen once, if at all, and only for TV use. Any idea which luminance equation/matrix is built into the camera?




-- J.S.
  • 0

#17 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 05 May 2009 - 02:25 PM

What you need to do in testing frame rate conversion is shoot something with smooth uniform and moderately rapid motion. Some nicely done gear head pans, car by's, stuff like that. Then look at the output frame by frame.

The tests we did showed that the rate conversion consisted of passing three frames thru unmodified, then combining the next two frames in a blur-between. If you shot with an effective 180 degree shutter at 30 fps, what you get at 24 fps is the equivalent of three frames with a 144 degree shutter and one with a 432 degree shutter. If you consider the middle frame of the three and the blur-between to be "right", then the other two straight across frames are a little early and a little late, which gives the motion a sort of 3-2-ishness.

Big talking head CU's work OK for mouth motion, but we did have some in our tests where a blur-between hit on an eye blink, and made a very obvious mess of the eyes.

All that being said, it's still massively stupid to have to work around the 30 fps problem. They need to make the camera do 24. If they don't, perhaps somebody will do it as an aftermarket modification.



-- J.S.


this is rapidly devolving into a post production thread.... but so be it.

What method did you use to convert from 30p to 24p? Ours is outlined here by "Denver, " whom I give all credit (and blame) to. It uses interpolation of frames in "cine tools" section of FCP and retains info rather than throwing it away as many compression-based method do.

http://www.cinema5d....3...p;sk=t&sd=a

the thread begins with an overview, and denver's method is outlined farther down.
  • 0

#18 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 05 May 2009 - 02:29 PM

Wow, that's unfortunate. All sensor chips are inherently RGB. Ideally, conversion to YUV would happen once, if at all, and only for TV use. Any idea which luminance equation/matrix is built into the camera?

-- J.S.



re : Any idea which luminance equation/matrix is built into the camera?
A: No.

Read the links, and ask an expert, but yes I guess canon wanted to output "broadcast safe" color info and made sure that was baked-in, somehow.

Someone remind me again why I became a camera man and not a SMPTE engineer.... my brain hurts.
  • 0

#19 Jean Dodge

Jean Dodge
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 110 posts
  • Director

Posted 05 May 2009 - 03:30 PM

Thanks to all who have posted.... very helpful and thankful even though I complain sometimes.

To consolidate where this thread seems to be going -

Shooting with the canon D5 Mk2 is a bit of a pain, but gets great images you can't get in low light with any other camera at the moment. The issues with manual control and 30p seem hackable by using manual iris lenses, certain workarounds and then converting the frame rate via interpolation methods available in FCP, or other methods untested. No guarantees made that it will be 100% artifact free 24p, but it looks usable most of the time. More tests will tell more, but film out is a good smoothing way to hide flaws, and the 1/33th a sec and 1/50th shutter rates look acceptable and fairly pleasing to the eye. It's not excessively smearing or "wrong" to see the slow shutter look of 1/33th a sec.

Outputting to 35mm smoothes over some digital artifacts and adds slight contrast, but shouldn't be attempted until one has a full understanding of what the camera is putting out as media, and how to devise a workflow that does two things:

1 ) converts from 30p to 24p, or some version thereof like 23.xxxx etc. without excessive artifacts, or 25p for EU film out.

2) retains best colors, contrast and blacks for color correction stage so the film out is as good as it can be.

Having only seen a very brief test, I still think the frame rate conversion is mostly solved. Anything more is icing on the cake. Normal stuff looks normal. Sound sync is still somewhat troublesome but will be figured out.

Retaining good colors seems possible, but we are starting with compressed QT files, broadcast standard 8 bit color, in full HD, so don't expect more than you can get from that as a beginning.

As for improving colors, now we are marching into uncharted territory, but some basic cc should be possible. How far one can push that is not known.

If anyone is wondering about the images themselves and the form factors of working on set with the camera, I can speak at length about that from personal experience. In my opinion it will be a great doc camera that is going to allow for some amazing footage to be captured in formerly inaccessible places with a low profile.

I am not a post person, but as a potential producer of films with the camera I am trying to learn more. Again, thanks to all who added to the discussion, and keep it coming.
  • 0

#20 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11937 posts
  • Other

Posted 05 May 2009 - 03:48 PM

This isn't baked into camera output, as evidenced by the fact that Premiere is capable of at least rendering it unadulterated to the screen.

I've tried a few other approaches involving various tools, but without success; I've got some time tomorrow and I'll look at it again.

P
  • 0


Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

CineLab

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

rebotnix Technologies

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Tai Audio