bunk

You shouldn't be to hard on yourself.
Hard to judge on a non HLG monitor ...but at first glance on a non HLG monitor it seems to have a similar problem as Vlog.

 



 
It's indeed very hard to do as it doesn't react as you expect. And you end up with dull highlights. Probably easier on a HLG monitor

You shouldn't be to hard on yourself.
Hard to judge on a non HLG monitor ...but at first glance on a non HLG monitor it seems to have a similar problem as Vlog.

 



 
It's indeed very hard to do as it doesn't react as you expect. And you end up with dull highlights. Probably easier on a HLG monitor

Let me be the party pooper…
Vlog ALL-I is massively flawed!
At least if I go be the files Andrew made available (@Andrew, thanks for sharing).
I noticed dancing spots in the flank of the darker horse. This is usually seen in the darker areas of footage, due to compression algorithms that shouldn’t be there in the first place (My opinion. No change you will ever see this on phenomenon a BM camera. It comes standard with the GH4 …and now GH5)…and we are looking at ALL-I no, with compression methods better than ProRess according to Mat Frazer.
The problem with these noise clouds is that they do not respect the boundaries the live in. Intensity and shape changes per frame. See in the pictures below.


 
And then I noticed something different. Horizontal stripes

We are not talking about a little bit of compression here we are talking about a massive amount of compression, mimicking some kind of interlace.
 
Then checked a ‘standard color’ example with one extreme node, no “interlace”, just looked fine… Actually pretty good!

 
Back to the standard horses with 2 nodes applied, to make it even more extreme and visible. Notice how the red parts follow the direction of the tail (as it should).

 
And the Vlog version with it’s horizontal stripes.

 
This btw what footage of the BMPCC looks like, under the same treatment. See how you don’t see huge blocks of compression as we can see in the GH5 foortage? In all fairness it's Raw, but ProRess HQ 422 looks just as fine.

All screencaps were taken at 100%
My advice if you didn’t buy a GH5 yet, but do want one …don’t buy the VLog upgrade. For anyone that already did buy a GH5 and the Vlog upgrade …file a bug report as this has to be a bug. That or some developer code was added by accident instead of the finished product. If it turns out that this is the finished code and you need Vlog like footage …there are plenty of other camera options out there.

Of course you can.
The content was created to watch on a 1080 screen and the term used 'noticeable difference'. The difference is not noticeable watched at 100%. It's start to get noticeable at 200% and even more noticeable at 400%. ...however at 100% you will not be able to see the differences. On a 4K screen that means using only a quather of your screen.
So if you saw a difference you either where looking fullscreen ( and now your screen starts to create 4 new pixels for every one pixel of the content, for allready two different pics) or your screen has pixels that are somehow better then the pixels of a 1080 screen and in that case I for one would really like to see a screen shot of the differences you saw on the pixels of your screen, as I don't think that is even possible.
 

Of course you can.
The content was created to watch on a 1080 screen and the term used 'noticeable difference'. The difference is not noticeable watched at 100%. It's start to get noticeable at 200% and even more noticeable at 400%. ...however at 100% you will not be able to see the differences. On a 4K screen that means using only a quather of your screen.
So if you saw a difference you either where looking fullscreen ( and now your screen starts to create 4 new pixels for every one pixel of the content, for allready two different pics) or your screen has pixels that are somehow better then the pixels of a 1080 screen and in that case I for one would really like to see a screen shot of the differences you saw on the pixels of your screen, as I don't think that is even possible.
 

Here is te extreem curve used.

Be your own judge.
I don't have a real recipe. What I tend to do is set up some extreme curves to explore the picture as a whole. So literally the top point either to left or bottom direction and the bottom point to the right or up direction and that for each curve. That usually leads to a good first impression of the direction I want to go. After that it's just a choice of tools. On my desktop computer I work with Davinci. The picture you shared was graded on my MBP in ColorFinesse a plugin for AE. I use it as it is the only grading plugin that will work on my 2010 MBP ...it is slow but actually quite sophisticated for it's age. ...In the end basically all you need is curves and a way to set saturation.

The curves in the picture above tell you what I did with the tools available ColorFinesse. The waveform shows I crushed some of the lower levels and the histogram shows the new cloth of the emperor
It would really be cool if the 400mb/s is going to help out but I don't have high hopes.

I really enjoyed grading the shot.

...but if I were you I would hold on to the Ursa just a little bit longer. Especially now you want to focus on grading.

All three have the same curve (red channel) applied. The Terra holds up, The Ursa holds up and the GH5 falls apart.
I think their compression tech is top of the bill ...so much that only after grading you find out that literally every nuance was squeezed out.

I never understand how people are able to use a mouse with modeling, feels like you're handicapt.
If Zbrush clicks with you go for it, you can't go wrong. It never clicked with me so I went the 3DCoat route. ...and then there is Mudbox, if it still excists.

I
How about approaching Ron Mueck ...I think you can skip the scans

The prints from the photoscanner look like shit and only half descend because the photos used for the scan are also used as a texture.
Here is what you can do.
Use this photoscanner to create a scan of your dog. Give the file together with the photo's it creates to a 3d sculpt artist, so he/she has a starting point to create a life like sculpt of your dog. The sculpt will look way better than the scan and even descend when printed at a height of 25 centimeters average (without texture).
But you want a life size print. There are two problems. Small printers print up to 25cm average. Industrial printers are probably out of reach and I wonder if they have the resolution you are after.
Lets say you want to print the dog in pieces and glue them together afterwards.
If you use the data of the 25 centimeter dog it will give the same effect as shooting at 2k and scaling it up to 8k. 
http://3dprintingcenter.net/2016/01/31/how-to-3d-print-a-1-meter-high-sculpture-of-the-hero-of-childrens-animated-movies-part-2/
No detail what so ever was left from an already poorly detailed original.
If you subdived the sculpt enough to keep the details for a 1mtr print the computer probably comes to a stand still and the sculpt artist won't be able to cut the sculpts into parts for the print ...and if he/she manages, your print times will go way up (on the one hand robust enough the be glued together on the other hand fur detail).
Why not hand over some photos to a sculptor and ask for a real piece of art in bronze? ...at least it will have some artistic value.

Looks beautifull ...watching with my Ipad, photo or frame?

Thanks, way more clear now ...but you also wrote this
...and I always wondered how that is even possible as the LUT doesn't have a clue what lens or lens combination in the case of a speedbooster I used.
 

Thanks for sharing. Last time I graded jvc ls 300 footage it wasn't so robust. Either I changed or the footage improved.

slightly less blue in the highlights.

slightly less blue in the highlights.

I think you forgot a few "smalls" ? But yes I completely agree with your statement. I don't mean to pat myself on the back here, but without shooting Raw on the 5D3, I never would have gotten an image close to what I've been getting. And when you're shooting completely guerilla style as a one man band... every little bit of IQ helps. For instance, I know this isn't the best image in the world, but I would never get this level of skin texture with an h.264 codec...

Even zoomed in, the actor's skin looks better than anything I've ever captured. 
So for someone like me, a shooter and colorist with a minimal amount of skills, and productions like mine, with a minimal amount of self-funding, to be able to do a minimal amount, or a simple but extensive amount of LUTS and still get an image that doesn't break proves just how effective Raw is for no budget productions. IMO. YMMV. 

slightly less blue in the highlights.

I disagree.
If you want to go wild in post, RAW is the only way to get access to good quality footage for small indie productions (5DmarkIII, bmpcc. With Mercer in mind maybe we should talk about small small indie productions ;)).
If you shoot with a pro camera you already have access to decent not completely fucked up footage by  poor debayering and/or compression and you can still go wild in post without tearing the footage apart.

Such 2000 bucks camera already exist.
It’s small, lightweight, you can attach almost any lens to it, 10 bit 422 internal, great codec, battery life is only half of it’s predecessor, 5-axis IBIS, ergonomics you can only dream of ...and it has great colors you only have to adjust a bit to make it look like a Terra 5K!
Plus free ufo sightings at higher ISO when too much internal NR is applied.
It simply can't be beaten.
 

To my eyes the gh5 is already "falling apart" ...and only prores was used on the Ursa.
@Aaron thanks for taking the time to do make the test.

If you can't get the nuance the V-log profile offers like hihglights, look at here hair and eyes, with the like709 profile, I would go for V-log. Skin tones you can adjust, you can't ad highlights(rolloff).
 

I like it too. It doesn't break easily. There is chroma smearing/shift as wel but it doesn't jump in your eye. I like the noise as well.
Here is a grade

The footage is very sensitive to contrast, before you know you're shadows get this burned in look.

I like it too. It doesn't break easily. There is chroma smearing/shift as wel but it doesn't jump in your eye. I like the noise as well.
Here is a grade

The footage is very sensitive to contrast, before you know you're shadows get this burned in look.

That would be very cool.
I already like F-log better than V-log ...and thats from just grading two compressed jpg's. looking forward to the prores files.

That would be very cool.
I already like F-log better than V-log ...and thats from just grading two compressed jpg's. looking forward to the prores files.