Sage

Its almost certain to be the case. Efficiency is vital. I have been deep in the code bunker this week, writing a special segment for the EC engine. This will greatly accelerate supporting new cameras, as it minimizes the amount of intervention necessary to conform data (with superior results). As of today, I have a new luma conform tool that is completely free of either hue or saturation distortion, and I am thrilled with it right now (not even Resolve's luma tools work this way). Now, I have to finish the second piece of the puzzle, and (accelerated) camera support will commence.

Its almost certain to be the case. Efficiency is vital. I have been deep in the code bunker this week, writing a special segment for the EC engine. This will greatly accelerate supporting new cameras, as it minimizes the amount of intervention necessary to conform data (with superior results). As of today, I have a new luma conform tool that is completely free of either hue or saturation distortion, and I am thrilled with it right now (not even Resolve's luma tools work this way). Now, I have to finish the second piece of the puzzle, and (accelerated) camera support will commence.

Its almost certain to be the case. Efficiency is vital. I have been deep in the code bunker this week, writing a special segment for the EC engine. This will greatly accelerate supporting new cameras, as it minimizes the amount of intervention necessary to conform data (with superior results). As of today, I have a new luma conform tool that is completely free of either hue or saturation distortion, and I am thrilled with it right now (not even Resolve's luma tools work this way). Now, I have to finish the second piece of the puzzle, and (accelerated) camera support will commence.

Its becoming apparent there is a need for an Ursa variation.
It will be a priority once the S is ready

Its becoming apparent there is a need for an Ursa variation.
It will be a priority once the S is ready

Sage already answered that.
 

2.5K looks bad on 4K screens though, lots of smear and macro blocking especially on YouTube - and you can still select streaming quality manually.
Or chrome which can be color managed in chrome via about:flags url: Force color profile

Select sRGB (standard screens) or DCI-P3 (Mac and OLED) to enable color transform.


Still a bit pink as Alex already mentioned.

Everything looks like shit on youtube tho, 4k uploads are a lot better though, even if you watch them in 720p, they almost look better than 1080p uploads in 1080p. 

I haven't looked at it in-depth yet, but from what I've seen there are subtle differences (i.e. green). Overall, the default color of the 6k is a little nicer. The sensor response as things fall into shadow is a little different. I'll know more soon.

When exporting to YT and Vimeo from Resolve, I've found h.265 to be optimal. There is a slight magenta shift when the video sites re-encode the footage, and I've found it to be slightly less with h.265 (the colors are slightly more accurate). The difference for h.265, to compensate during export, is a node with -3 Tint. H.265 is also a much smaller filesize, which is less heavy on the Vimeo upload quota, and there is no size penalty for higher resolution.
However, I've found the sweet spot for streaming video sites is 2560x1440 (or 2560 pixels wide). The load times are not much worse than 1080p, but the apparent visual quality is much better (because 1080p is very compressed for streaming on these sites). The load times for 4k are much higher, with less of a leap in visual quality. Also, the fluidity of playback for 2560 is smoother than compressed 4k for streaming.
Here are my Resolve settings (horizontal resolution to match aspect ratio):

It appears there is only the option to set Quality to Auto-Best, or to restrict the upper bitrate (unlike Premiere). I gather that they've looked at the needed bitrate for each quality ranking, and kept the works 'under the hood'

I appreciate the feedback — I'm always down for any tips on how to make my work better. I'll definitely upload higher quality files in the future. I'm coming from the world of social media, where I take for granted that everything looks rough no matter what I do. I also use a Mac/Safari and can't view 4K on YouTube in the first place #cool.
@Sage do you have a recommendation for bitrate for 2560x1440 h.265 for YouTube?

When exporting to YT and Vimeo from Resolve, I've found h.265 to be optimal. There is a slight magenta shift when the video sites re-encode the footage, and I've found it to be slightly less with h.265 (the colors are slightly more accurate). The difference for h.265, to compensate during export, is a node with -3 Tint. H.265 is also a much smaller filesize, which is less heavy on the Vimeo upload quota, and there is no size penalty for higher resolution.
However, I've found the sweet spot for streaming video sites is 2560x1440 (or 2560 pixels wide). The load times are not much worse than 1080p, but the apparent visual quality is much better (because 1080p is very compressed for streaming on these sites). The load times for 4k are much higher, with less of a leap in visual quality. Also, the fluidity of playback for 2560 is smoother than compressed 4k for streaming.
Here are my Resolve settings (horizontal resolution to match aspect ratio):

That would be great. I can help with footage if you need as well and I'm sure others would also

Nice, but one thing I noticed - your uploads are super low quality and blocky. Are you uploading very small files? I'd up your bitrate a lot. Shame to do such nice work and have such a nice camera and upload such poor quality files!

I tracked drums at a session at Bear Creek Studio last week and brought along the Pocket 4K to grab a few shots in my downtime. Only the interview shot was actually "lit" but even with mostly shitty lighting and a quick edit I like how this LUT looks. I'm excited to use it more.
 
Here's one more quick edit. I am not an expert at any of this stuff but I'm super please with how quickly I can get pleasing results.
 
I'll also add that up until this point I'd been using the Buttery LUT — which I do like — however this is the first LUT I've used that actually fixes the greens and what a treat that is.

Thank you Zeng; I need the cameras in hand, as the measurement phase is the trickiest, now that Gen4 is figured out. The code is based around a sample system I made that has ~1k samples per slice, with ~40 slices, and the measurement conditions are defined; often it must be redone several times before everything is sorted out with a new camera. I will move with considerably more efficiency to support new cameras, now that Gen 4 is finalized.

Thank you Zeng; I need the cameras in hand, as the measurement phase is the trickiest, now that Gen4 is figured out. The code is based around a sample system I made that has ~1k samples per slice, with ~40 slices, and the measurement conditions are defined; often it must be redone several times before everything is sorted out with a new camera. I will move with considerably more efficiency to support new cameras, now that Gen 4 is finalized.

Right now, still using Sony a6500.
In a week from now, who knows??? Maybe a7 III, maybe S1, maybe P4K, maybe P6K, maybe X-T3...
Just probably NOT a GH5 nor Z6 nor EOS R (fine cameras that they might be). 

Amazing job. Wish you could do it for more cameras. I could provide you with samples of most of them side by side with Alexa, and you just do the math. How about it? :).

Oh, I understand now.  EC Gen.4 is at the theoretical limit of smoothness, acting like a pass through of source material. This means that if the source material is of sufficient bit depth (for sparse regions), its like the conversion is transparent. This allows for Pre format stacking to support formats like HLG and Cine-D (which will see a major improvement with Gen4) - two V4 cubes stacked is identical to one summed, unless they are intricate 33x with bad interpolation (AE - bad, Premiere - good, Resolve with tetrahedral - very good). Nodes following thereafter may introduce artifacts of their own (the final space is only as clean as the most problematic link in the chain), but EC as yet doesn't cover creative looks etc. One may use the EC gradient chart to verify that each new grade step is not introducing problems in the wider space.
@Mark Romero 2 Thank you - what camera do you use?

@Sage Thanks the great example!
Seems like EC is the way to get the most out of the Pocket 4K sensor In a single conversion/transformation (I’m not considering white balance and black point adjustments as a conversation/transformation for RAW or BRAW footage.)
So would having a set of EC LUTS for emulation film stock or an ideal sensor response LUT would benefit from having an EC LUT for each target output to do it in a single conversion?
Also,  is there the concept of having different EC LUT versions that are tuned for high and low dynamic range scenes as well as the standard EC LUT?  Or maybe this does not apply and only one EU daylight LUT is need for any amount of dynamic range in an daylight light scene?

Sure, Resolve CST is a whitepaper transform, according to the manufacturer spec for the formats. EC is a measured LogC under sunlight and halogen. EC has a unique 709 display component that maintains full gamut (exceeding Arri 709).
P4K CST LogC+Arri 709:

P4K EC 709: