IronFilm

What a weird thread, honestly. There's no real argument being given for why things will go to HFR, @zlfan just keeps repeating the same thing over and over.
What paradigm has shifted? There is no movement towards HFR filmmaking and previous attempts were unsuccessful. There's no demand for it, from Hollywood or viewers. You can't even really use YouTube as a reason, as most narrative (and even a lot of non-narrative work) videos on there are 24 fps. I only really see 60 fps on gaming and sports channels. Even so, history has shown that will have virtually no impact on how films are shot.
I mean, you're talking about the paradigm shifting while we've got an endless number of YouTubers filming themselves in their guest bedroom "studios" in 24 fps because they think it's cinematic! It's silly!
I think it's cool if your preference is HFR video, and I encourage people to create whatever they want if that's their vision, it just never will become more than a personal preference.

it is interesting to see how people are locked in the stereotypic ideas. 
24p for cinema, 30p for tv broadcast, 60p for sports. 
right now, holly wood block busters are typically action packed, green screen vfx focused. so high res high fr are actually very suitable for hollywood features, these are more sports like than classic drama dialogue center like. 
the classic drama which emphasizes on dialogue is moving into the broadcast or streaming service. so if 24p is critical for this kind of drama, actually 24p should be used for soap opera on tv or netflix. 
in summary, the paradigm has shifted.
60p should be for hollywood feature cinema
24p should be for tv soap opera, netfix
30p is still for news. 
 
 

The futurists are certainly free to have their preferences & do whatever they want in this age - but this properly matches the aesthetics to the general subjects. In this case -- the traditional approach is the superior one 😞 .
HFR Lotr was dreadful and a total disaster. Most viewers (in US at least) only saw it projected at 24P.
The reality that these days a bunch of people can't tell the difference between any of this is meaningless to me when it comes to what I choose to make. How many people are falling off heights to their deaths taking selfies every year?
All of the disposable content, trends and mindless bs that western social media encourages & runs on doesn't automatically fall under the category of 'progress' -- sorry.

With "Avatar 2" I made a post on REDUser about it complaining about the unique aspect of the film jumping back and forth between 24fps and 48fps when action scenes came up and declaring that it was jarring. There was a bit of discussion about it but based on other reviews and articles it was clear that it was a widespread problem. Had the whole film been HFR then that would be one thing but not switching back and forth.
You also have to remember that with HFR, just as people can have when looking at old school video camera stuff in 60i, there are people that are so sensitive to the video motion that they get motion sickness. Those complaints have happened every time they've tried to do a HFR project. 24P has also been chosen as our main cinematic frame rate because most people can tolerate it for long periods of time unless someone goes back to doing wild shaky cam like in they did in the early 2000s. There is also a bit of a sensory overload the higher in frame rates we go and, in my opinion, many times the footage loses sharpness and that "magical" cinematic feel just goes away as motion blur gets compromised and the smoothness of the HFR takes over everything and becomes too apparent. I admit, it does look cool to crank things up and film in 120p, even on my RED One MX in 2K mode, but I can't see a reason to film that way for every project or to turn on the TV and see mostly 120p content, it's just not right for everything.

Yeah and most people watched them in 24 fps 🤣

A new generation of viewers will still be able to distinguish between cinema and video seen on social media, just as the generations before did with film and television. It's fine if your preference is high frame rate content, but it's naive to think it will ever become the standard for cinema based on that argument. 
Peter Jackson tried it a decade ago and it was almost universally hated by movie goers. The issue wasn't the display technology, it was that it went against an entire lifetime of what people associate with cinema and that bothered people.

And how many films followed the lead?
You were in the minority. Most people hated it and most theaters showed it in 24 fps because of complaints.

No.
60p = sports
30p = TV
24 = cinema
Sorry Tony, some things will never change. 

And after a century plus of films being in 24p, then all of us have had our brains trained to think 24p = voila, cinema!
You'd not going to undo a lifetime of conditioning of the brain for everyone in the world. 
I'd say just move on, and fight a different battle that's more winnable. 
 

Interesting. I made the move in the opposite direction because my Mac Pros would always get slower and more unstable with every new version of MacOS. In the decade since I switched, I’ve had practically zero issues with Windows.
I think the statement that you need to be a part time system administrator to use a Windows computer is hyperbole. If you have good, mainstream hardware, Windows doesn’t require any more sysadm work than MacOS. If you have weird, or old hardware, then yes, you’ll probably have more issues than with a computer where one company controls both the hardware and the OS.
 

It's hipster heaven. Will look great sitting next to my wooden headphones!

I would rather see a Super 16mm Digital Bolex CCD type camera than Super 8mm film bodies, but yes it should be kept alive. Kodak will do a good job of killing it with products like this though.

Sounds like every wedding I have been to for the last 4-5 years…which has been circa 100+ (would have been more if it wasn’t for covid).
EXACTLY, including that 60+ gent fumbling with his archaic DSLR and that Fuji hipster couple 😂

Look around what are people local to you shooting with? 
Most likely they're using Sony FX6 (or perhaps FX9) bodies. So just follow the herd and do the same. 
But there are pockets of local groups of people around which have gone in another direction, such as they're mainly using Canon C500mk2 for documentary / corporates / etc which have a reasonable budget. Often all it takes is just a few key leaders or production companies in that local region to go together down a certain path, and the whole local region follows them, and there isn't a single Sony camera in sight. 
However, if you are working purely for yourself / in house, then it doesn't  matter what brand or camera model you choose! 
But if you are working for others, then following what others use matters a lot. 
Had a friend who purchased the Sony FS7 right when it was released, did pretty well working with that, and he got to a point that he felt like he was "outgrowing the FS7" and had the money to buy something better. 
By this point in time the ARRI ALEXA Mini had been out for a couple of years, had proven itself, and no longer did you have crazy insane long wait list times if you wanted to buy one himself. 
But a ALEXA Mini was way outside is budget range. 
So what is the natural upgrade from a FS7? The F5/F55 are "upgrades", but are more similar than different. Definitely not what he was seeking. 
What then? He settled upon the Panasonic Varicam LT, which had recently been released (came out the year after the ARRI ALEXA Mini). He sold his Sony FS7 to raise extra funds, with his extra saved up money, he purchased a brand new Panasonic Varicam LT. (but he only got the Varicam after very extensively testing it, renting and borrowing it from others. Not just to run tests on it, but to use it on real world productions too. I worked on a couple of those productions which he shot with a Varicam LT, prior to him buying his own. He really did very very thoroughly all of his homework before settling on a new camera to buy)
Seems like a rational decision. Was the next step up in price (over double the price of a FS7) and quality from a FS7. Has much better low light performance, & much better color science than the FS7. Plus did timecode and raw better than the FS7. In a way, the Varicam LT was even "better" than the ALEXA Mini, with better slow motion, better low light, better audio, and true 4K. (only downsides being it is bigger/heavier than a Mini, and it is "not an ARRI")
Well, what seemed like a great idea on paper, in reality was one of his worst financial decisions. 
Because for the higher end jobs above the FS7 level, then usually they only want an ARRI camera. He's not landing the higher end jobs with the Varicam LT. (plus ARRI cameras are cheaper than you think, relative to the total cost of a project. It doesn't make sense for them to pinch pennies and settle for the cheaper Varicam LT)
Thus he wasn't earning any extra money due to spending almost double the FS7 amount on a new Varicam LT camera. 
But it was even worse than this, the Panasonic Varicam LT was losing him money. 
Because the bread and butter FS7 jobs were no longer hiring him as much, as they don't want to go with some weirdly different new camera, they want the tried and trusted Sony FS7 which all their other shooters use and slots perfectly into their workflow and productions. 
Owning the Panasonic Varicam LT was a lose-lose situation for him. 
Quite sad really, even though on paper the Varicam LT was undeniably a much  "better" camera than a Sony FS7 (even "better" than an ARRI ALEXA Mini in a fair few ways as well).  

Prores 444 and 4444xq are really nice codecs to work with. The issue is compressed RAW is often actually smaller in terms of file size compared to Prores 444. I shoot 2k Prores 444 which is about 500mbps, which is a reasonable size. 

To me 12 bit is important but it doesn't matter if it in the RAW format, Prores 444 or semiraw like BRAW. For me I notice the difference in shadows and skintones compared with 10 bit recording. The differences can be subtle though. 

This video demonstrates some differences you can see in a real world scenario. FX6 10 bit vs REDRAW
 

 

If you don’t need portability, then get a desktop machine. The biggest issue limiting performance on a laptop is heat dissipation, which isn’t as much an issue in a desktop. 
 
Desktops can typically use CPUs with more and faster cores and much more performant GPUs that beat anything possible in a laptop. 

I love Conan, to me the champ of all latenighters. That guy has funny bones and of course a great and funny mind and a great team and sidekick. He is a cultural treasure beyond borders. I remember people who found him to be way too goofy for a relaxed watch and preferred Leno and Letterman, who both were more suited for a broad audience.
Conan got rejected when trying to enter a snobster techno club in Berlin about two or three years ago. I don't mention the name on purpose. Real Estate Pros love to grab Eastgerman trademarks and turn them into elitaer technodiscos. I imagine some technofollowers would disagree with the connotation of disco. So Conans little act gave me tears of joy and gratitude.
I enjoyed Kay on Digitalrev a big deal. It could have always been bigger, badder and better but it was the best available back then. What I came to not like were some gender based jokey remarks iirc. I enjoyed to "travel" Hong Kong as a youtube tourist, with Kay as a photo guide and camera talking guy. A Conan he is not indeed. But who is in the camera world. There is only one other guy i can watch as a whole for camera entertainment and that one is a funny grumpy polarbear in his rather blank living room. Hong Kong and guests and people of Hong Kong were exiting to wander and roam around.

Even if the content wasn't always great, it's a shame when stuff just disappears and isn't preserved somewhere.

Now that! It was super enjoyable to watch Kay on DigitalRev, always quirky, fun, exiting, even whimsical, great locations and occasions, colabs, just the whole thing. To delete that treasure is not only dumb but in a way crudest cultural vandalism the way they did it.

One of the weirder moves in the YouTube sphere lately.
Prob some kind of lawsuit by an ex-employee or something, seeing the way the channel imploded was not amicable at all. Management, talent, producers, the new guys. It was all really embarrassing considering they were one of the premier tech channels out here.
They basically deleted their history as a brand (no one really visits their site, and if they did it was thanks to the YT channel).
We'll see.

It's a weird decision - that was evergreen content that cost them nothing to leave up and, assuming they're in the YPP, probably made them a small (but non-zero) amount of money yearly.

It's a damn shame that it was all deleted, and completely unnecessary. Shams on whoever made that call. 

In all seriousness though, very sad.  Such an iconic piece of photography history; I loved their stuff.  I just got into video right as Kye was in his last year with DigitalRev, but suffice to say I really enjoyed his content and still enjoy his independent reviews.

Looks like DigitalRev TV deleted 100% of their YouTube videos.  RIP the old GH2 and 5D Classic videos I used to watch.
https://www.youtube.com/@DigitalrevTV

And budget for several lighting trucks. 
And budget for a six figure sound package. 
And budget for all the crew, and actors. And feeding them. 
And budget for all the locations. 
  
Yiiiikes, that doco starts out harsh
"There is no reason this shot ever has a boom shadow", the director shouts while pointing an angry finger at the Boom Op. 
Poor guy