Bioskop.Inc

I just compared some DNGs from 4.6k in full resolution in addition to DNGs from BMPCC in last version Resolve 12 vs. RPP and found that Resolve improve their debayer algorithm compared to previous version! Aliasing became less visible and its now pixel to pixel same as VCDMF algorithm in RPP. Thats very huge step forward! Also maybe its a reason why Zak Forsman noticed less aliasing from Micro Cinema Camera when he test it.
But the Highlights are still better handled and controlled in RPP. In more-less normal expose situations Resolve comes very close to RPP when use Davinci ACES workflow, but in extreme situations or when you need to recover a lot of underexposed shadows RPP looks way better and keeps more dynamic range. Hope developers add 3:1 and 4:1 DNG support to it.

Looks really really nice, thanks for sharing!

My advice is to take as many pictures as you can, as these will be timeless & you'll always have them to pull out to show your kids/grand kids etc...
Whatever resolution you film something in now, I guarantee you that in 20yrs or so time, you'll show some friends (or whoever) & start by saying "Look sorry guys, but this was filmed in HD/2K/4K (8-bit). Yeah, I know, but its all that was available back then!" Nothing is future proof, as things are changing all the time.
The trip is the most important thing, so take something you can just whip out of your bag & quickly take something. The one thing you don't want to do is spend all your time filming etc. and then miss enjoying the holiday - not sure what your Brother is like, but my guess is that he'll get really pissed off with you in the end.

I guess you could argue that if they never actually shipped anything....And if there was something else that compared with the very first camera they made....
JB
 

Hahaha it is Portugal, but this isnt the view from my window, I need to drive for a while to get to some spots (though to be fair, I do have an amazing view form my house...almost everyone does, here). But I do get tired of shooting wildlife, and would love to travel to some heavily populated city and film that...the goal is to find "beauty" in everyday ordinary stuff, even if its someone taking out the trash !

Not sure if i used the right term there? Damn! Its one of those terms that really means nothing after all. And yes it does have something to do with the codec used, but also how the sensor works/captures whole frozen frames without any or too much motion skewing?
But my point was meant to be that I really like how some GS cameras capture motion (DB in particular), but this could just be down to the expertise of the operator. Basically, 24p is 24p and all things being equal, there should be no difference, and for most modern cameras there isn't really! However, everytime I see some GS footage, it just seems to capture movement in a more pleasing way - here i'm talking about the cheap cameras, not the high end stuff.
But I'm nit picking really as the URSA mini 4.6k is the first camera (in its price bracket) that seems to capture motion really nicely - so perhaps BM decided that GS really wasn't necessary after all because the difference was minute (all the high end cams have RS not GS - Alexa, Red etc...).

Can't disagree more - i've used loads of cameras over the years and it isn't the greatest, but its not the worst. I think people just like complaining & have been really spoilt over the years - I remeber the screen on the Sony Z1 & that was laughable, but still useable!
Obviously, you'd be insane to use it for a tracking shot whilst focus pulling, but its a pocket camera & if you use a viewfinder, its fine.
I've never missed focus with the Pocket's screen & i'm only using a cheap £10 viewfinder that I bought on Amazon for my old 60D - i'm going to upgrade soon to the Zacuto or the otherone whose name escapes me.

LOL! You know what I mean! And you've got a "clowder" of cats, you lucky boy, now that's special!

Thiss ! 
Recently I started going every weekend somewhere and shoot something, without any specific reason and then edit a short film with what I shot, my last adventure got me this : 
 
And its my most viewed video on Vimeo already, so..Just go out and film ! 

Ive never had any issues with it. Used it on countless projects. But there are better once of course.
Imo, its a cinema camera so its just for settings and emergency framing. And in that segment its one of the best screens out there. Much better than the Bolex and the one on the back of the Red One which doesnt show picture at all.

Never used the Z1 but damn I can't imagine how bad that must've been. Like Mattias said it's mainly for menu controls. i turn the brightness down to 25% just so I can see the menu, to save battery life.

Don't get me started with the menus! Damn they are a real pain, but not as bad as Sony, where you can spend days digging around, and they've never learnt in all the years of making cameras!
But in the end, the Pocket has one of the best images i've ever seen for a camera at that price point & everything else I can put up with - stunning doesn't even do it justice.
I'm now really happy that i can spend some money in other areas, since the Micro won't have global shutter.
I wonder why they didn't think about releasing 2 versions - 1 Rolling & 1 Global? I'd have taken the hit in DR for Global every day of the week! IMHO high DR is for all those "I'll fix it in post" people - shit i no longer even bother using RAW with the Pocket, just too time consuming.

Doing some comment on the discussion about doing this type of stuff for free or not,
I just finished my first music video, my first real one, and I would never do something like this for free. We underestimate the work that we will put into something like this, and more importantly, the creative aspect that we deliver. Bands can be tough to work with (also managers, I've had an awfull experience with a manager, when the actual artist loved the work I did), because they have very high expectations, and extremelly low budgets, and our job, is to direct them, and tell them why we cant do it for free and why we need money. Also, if they are paying, they would never get there late, because time is money. Not only it adds a responsbility to us (the filmmakers) but also for them, the clients.
If I was doing something for free, and got the client to arrive hours late, I would leave and never look back again, im very protective of my own time, and I like to choose how I spend it and have my work appreciated.
With all said, this was my musicvideo :
Im totally looking forward into making another one, and more importantly, evolve.

enny - show us the video (make it private/password protected), then at least we can advise you better. We won't hammer you, but it would be interesting - especially since you're doing it for free & i've got a feeling that in future you should be charging, even if it is a nominal fee.
If you post yours, i'll post my first free music video, which was a complete nightmare as well!
The problem with musicians is that they can be a pain, like a real pain. Nowadays everyone thinks that they can make a video/film (armchair directors), but in reality its a lot harder than that. The last live video that I made got a bit a criticism from the main guy, simply because he showed it to loads of people & a few of them had convinced him that the edits should be quicker. This was also coupled with the fact that he wasn't in it as much as the singer - starting to see the problem with working with bands?!
I met him face to face and explained to him very nicely that this was the best edit possible - the main reason being that I got some great footage during the sound check & then during the gig, the lighting guys went crazy with strobe lighting, which ruined everything and made my job 10 times harder. He obviously came around to my way of thinking - I am very persuasive, in a nice way.
Show us the video, as i'm almost 100% sure the singer wants to re-edit the footage so he's in it a lot more than the others!
Meet them all, face-to-face and I think that they will be your allies (you said the others liked it) in convincing the troublesome one that you've done them a great video for free! Remember, you've done them a video for free! If after meeting them, he's still a pain, then you just look him in the eyes and tell him that you don't need the hassle and are walking away from it all.

enny - show us the video (make it private/password protected), then at least we can advise you better. We won't hammer you, but it would be interesting - especially since you're doing it for free & i've got a feeling that in future you should be charging, even if it is a nominal fee.
If you post yours, i'll post my first free music video, which was a complete nightmare as well!
The problem with musicians is that they can be a pain, like a real pain. Nowadays everyone thinks that they can make a video/film (armchair directors), but in reality its a lot harder than that. The last live video that I made got a bit a criticism from the main guy, simply because he showed it to loads of people & a few of them had convinced him that the edits should be quicker. This was also coupled with the fact that he wasn't in it as much as the singer - starting to see the problem with working with bands?!
I met him face to face and explained to him very nicely that this was the best edit possible - the main reason being that I got some great footage during the sound check & then during the gig, the lighting guys went crazy with strobe lighting, which ruined everything and made my job 10 times harder. He obviously came around to my way of thinking - I am very persuasive, in a nice way.
Show us the video, as i'm almost 100% sure the singer wants to re-edit the footage so he's in it a lot more than the others!
Meet them all, face-to-face and I think that they will be your allies (you said the others liked it) in convincing the troublesome one that you've done them a great video for free! Remember, you've done them a video for free! If after meeting them, he's still a pain, then you just look him in the eyes and tell him that you don't need the hassle and are walking away from it all.

How can someone getting all your work for free possibly own anything? Sounds like bullshit to me.
You hold all the cards here: you've done all of it with your gear for nothing, so at least hold out to get what you want from it, and for God's sake don't be bullied by someone with too big an ego.

Vimeo still trumps YouTube for quality & there don't seem to be any other realistic options at the moment.
So i'm going to stop worrying about their new auto select function, since every viewer has the option to choose the quality of playback if they want to.
I've got until September to decide whether or not to renew.
Perhaps if you leave some constructive feedback, things might get better - since telling them you don't want this function isn't going to work. Work with them to make it better seems the only solution.

Amen to this.
Exactly.
Bad things can happen when clarity and communication is not given across all concerned parties. Even if it's an unpaid project, there still needs to be clear deadlines agreed and understanding of what is to be delivered. Always keep control by retaining footage and submit viewing copies as low/SD resolution or with a fat 30% opacity watermark over the middle of the footage until you get paid. If you are to agree that you are to simply shoot and submit footage, get that in writing. Otherwise once you send the raw rushes, it is then up to trust that the person will pay you the agreed amount.
Any verbal agreement that is made should at the very least be put into an email or writing - so there is some kind of record of what has been agreed to (legally binding or not) This will quickly prove if someone has gone against their word, straight up lied or not clarified conditions clearly. Luckily my memory is getting worse as i get closer to 40 so after I talk to people in person or over the phone - I ask them to put it into an email, which allows me to refresh my memory and creates a paper trail If you like. It allows easy tracking of progress and what has been agreed.
Where applicable, get the relevant release forms/ permissions you need to cover your ass. As a photographer or videographer you simply need to ensure that you retain the rights to your raw images/ footage until you get paid or complete a submission to the terms of agreement to a contract.
I'd say it is even more important to have written contracts between friends (especially when money is involved) - as that way, everyone knows where they stand - even if the project falls apart for whatever reason, you are more likely to remain friends afterwards, draw a line under it and put it down to bad luck. I'd much rather remain friends with someone if a project goes to the wall, and especially if it was out of their control. 
Over the years I've been duped out of about 6 grand by taking on projects from friends or for pitches - only to be given endless deferment promises, or simply no response at all after handing in an invoice. Those times I took the projects 'on trust' and the footage and final edits were sent before payment was received. Never again.
 

My favorite music video was one I did not shoot but edit, for free. It was a wild story provided by the band's lead singer. There were three days of shooting, around ten places with tons of actors and a big party in the end, tight schedule. Second and third morning I presented to them drafts from the intertwining little stories filmed so far, and they were enthusiastic. Of course I had spent some hours each night to edit that. Since it was a poetic story, I cut my own version, with much shortened story lines in dechronological order with occasional appearances of the singer. And a third version with the band more prominent. I made I-don't-know-how-many little changes (every single one well motivated) at the request of the band, and that took at least two weeks.
A month or so later, the singer phoned to tell me that the manager (a guy who had a camera himself and, I believe, Vegas) was not satisfied with it and that he had found another editor. That was a shock. It was really bitter. I became friend with the new editor, but his version wasn't approved either. I said to him, this is not going to happen to me again. 
Later that year, the manager called me to ask if I was *free* to edit a multicam session of a gig. I hang up and never heard of them again. 
Personality rights (and specifically the rights of one's own picture) are more or less the same in every civilized country. I can't publish any recognizable face if the owner forbids it. And even if posing in front of a camera implies the will to have the image published, I can't do it because of the music. Even the band can't allow me if they had already sold the rights.
 

(Most) musicians are a PITA. You learned your lesson! Now do what feels better to you. If they give you money for the raw footage, take it. 

I believe there's absolutely a middle ground where one can be prolific while still producing quality content. 

Indeed.  Add to that the consideration that video is moving into a post-technical world, I think.  Not that tech is unimportant and the foundation of video, but the fact that even the base-line of stuff will be soon be more than "good enough" and video tech in general will become a raw commodity.
In less than a decade you're going to have just about everyone in developed countries shooting 8k on their phones and easily putting it online through any number of services.
From there it becomes less of "how awesome is your video tech" and what sort of advantage do you offer that allows me to share it?  How can I grab eyeballs with my content and can I do it better with hubbub.com vs. kablooey.com?
How the files get served, how information is controlled, how can I monetize my stuff with your service, etc.
The tech side will be a low priority.

Ok here is a little comparisons.
In the sky of the very first shot its visible straight away imo. The grain is almost fully preserved on Vimeo but turned to crap on youtube.
(watch in 1080p of course)
 
 

I turned off my auto-repeat pay function & have until september to see if they will get anymore money out of me. They have some serious work to make their new system hum, but perhaps this is only a first step & they will start to encode with a newer/better codec so that the streaming is smoother?
The real problem is that more & more people are just watching on their phones - this is the whole internet & most websites are more mobile friendly than desktop kind. With the new update to their mobile app, it really does seem that they are trying to copy YouTube - but they are so far behind the curve that they will end up driving people away, instead of getting them to switch.
All they have to do is put back the buffer for those that want/need it - YouTube has a buffer, goddamit!

I turned off my auto-repeat pay function & have until september to see if they will get anymore money out of me. They have some serious work to make their new system hum, but perhaps this is only a first step & they will start to encode with a newer/better codec so that the streaming is smoother?
The real problem is that more & more people are just watching on their phones - this is the whole internet & most websites are more mobile friendly than desktop kind. With the new update to their mobile app, it really does seem that they are trying to copy YouTube - but they are so far behind the curve that they will end up driving people away, instead of getting them to switch.
All they have to do is put back the buffer for those that want/need it - YouTube has a buffer, goddamit!