gloopglop

here we go again

Are we getting there?

lol I'm following you at the rate of a snail, but yes, we're getting there~!

seriously one of my favorite pieces yet on EOSHD, thank you Andrew

I love how youre able to make nuanced points about subjective aesthetic issues while incorporating the technical details that make it happen

all that and you crack me up too

HDR puke

lmao

which is already very boring

so far this guy is an epic poster

thanks for letting us know that you find the topic of the thread youre posting in boring

clearly the rest of us dont. please desist

but do you think all this is more important than a good story for a film or a good theme for a video or documentary? 

hello friend, you seem lost.

this is a thread about nuances in cinematography: its an "In Depth Test" of Camera A vs Camera B vs Camera C vs Camera D

i dont know anything about color work but the thunderbolt display is definitely glossy as heck. obviously thats a separate issue from color accuracy

i was browsing in an apple store the other day and i found that thankfully the last year of imacs have screens which are significantly less reflective than past models, or my 2011 mbp for that matter, so thats progress, but if i got an imac i assume id need an additional monitor for serious color work? or no?

mind you i have no idea what im talking about

edit: i realize the op is looking for a monitor, not a computer like an imac, srry dont mean to derail this thread 

axel and maxotics, thank you for explaining, much appreciated

However, unless you are working in a set like this:

 

... you can do with 4:2:0. Because a green screen will have only green pixels in 4:2:0. 

Axel, I am an idiot, would you please explain why this is exactly? What is the salient feature of this set that makes it so? Why––because the lighting and screen color are so consistent on a stage like this? (I have no idea why being on that set would allow a 4:2:0 scheme to be so much less of an issue.)

Again, no irony meant, I'd really like to understand this better, I haven't done a lot of keying as I'm sure all of you can tell smh

 

If this is going over anyone's head, there's a great write up here on DVXUser about it:
http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/colorspace/

man, ive been trying to wrap my brain around the whole color sampling thing for awhile now, and ive understood it enough to be successful in practice, but conceptually the little illustrations in this article really helped me a lot, thank you dishe! 

clearly I was referring to "photographers that are angry Canon is giving any love to the video world" as the OP stated, a niche to be sure. Ive never met such a person and I know literally hundreds of people who use canon dslrs

wow Damphousse, that is really something, the bizarro world analogy is accurately hilarious

tbh id wondered before if forums like that existed for complainy old fashioned "still photographers"...and i figured that they must ...and it turns out that they certainly do lol

playing devils advocate, i understand where theyre coming from~! theyre like 'who fucking cares about video' and in their defense canon slrs are marketed by canon as still cameras... with a video function

ironically canon is serving neither niche group, neither us nor them, by making the products theyre making! go figure! 

Hello friends, I am new here, long time lurker. Thank you sincerely for the discourse; it's extremely educational to me.

After a brief analysis of these .dng files in ACR my reaction is, in a word...pleasure~! These images feel naturalistic to me in a way that the BMPCC prores for the most part does not, not to shit on the prores and say it's worthless––it's very fine. But there is a certain character to these that I far prefer, perhaps because of the added effective dynamic range [when properly processed]? I'm really not sure; I appreciate all of your comments as they help me get a grasp on what is going on here. I would like to understand the 'why' of digital cinema as much as possible and ultimately I am just a beginner.

Anyway, again, ACR produced pleasing results for me with minimal effort, and a little noise reduction goes a long way if that's the look you're going for. I didn't find what I would consider to be an unexpected amount of noise in any part of the images based on my perception of the exposure and lighting conditions.

I'm looking forward to seeing more raw imagery from the BMPCC and I look forward to seeing the analysis here on this board, thank you guys.

Cheers!