majoraxis

Here it is:
 

Within the week; I'm finishing the last details and trying to figure out email. Email is a logistical nightmare

I was lucky enough to break six figures last year with 73,000 subs. I’ve never enjoyed my work more and i’ve never made more in my life. I highly recommend it if you’re thinking of starting a youtube channel. 

i recommend watching this :
if you want to get into production... lighting is much more important than any camera/lens
 

They are Exposure Pres, conversions made with the same interpolation system as the other conversions (converting color in the mix). Its a lot of fun to use in conjunction with the conversion. The P4Ka workflow video shows it in action in Resolve, though it applies to every NLE (and the Posts, which are an essential part of the picture):
They may be stacked in order of greatest to least, and all may be used in conjunction with gain key/opacity to dial in an exact value (Post or Pre).

Sharpness at -5 for sure. NR can be a personal preference (some are noise averse and prefer the ease of NR in cam). Though -5 would be the Arri equivalent, from a purist perspective.
Indeed, for VLog, 400 is the base. Then it goes to 200 for Cine-D, but this is just the labeling (200 really is 400, in VLog land)
Yes; lately I've been recommending the simple rule of thumb to anchor everything around the center of the waveform (leaning higher rather than lower), no matter the profile. This is because all profiles share this middle 'cross point', and diverge from there (with varying contrasts), and 50-60 is generally where midtones should place (in exposure for EC709, not for post placement). The great news is that exposure/luma is about to become a breeze, in roughly a week.

In the end, all the free/Open Source conversion programs - including Handbrake and Staxrip - are just graphical user interfaces for ffmpeg, and will thus yield the same results and performance. So one can simply stick with the tool whose user interface one prefers - or use ffmpeg directly on the command line. (Which provides more advanced functions such as ProRes and DNxHR encoding...)

That's the plan - I'm almost finished setting everything up for cameras going forward. I will really be able to accelerate now; a good indication will be how fast the GH5S is supported after the release of V4 for GH5. If a matter of weeks, then that is a very good sign for other cameras. Things will accelerate from there.

He'll need to get in line if he does
 

In the "Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K" thread it is mentioned that the sensor stack thickness of black magic sensors (being that they have a thinner sensor stack) may cause issues with the image with lens not designed for a specific sensor stack thickness.  There is a mention of the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 being basically immune to this issue due to the fact that its is a very telecentric lens.
Kisaha wrote in that tread : "3. How telecentric the lens is. (More specifically, how far forward the exit pupil of the lens is.) A lens with the exit pupil far away from the sensor is not affected by the thickness of the sensor stack very much. A lens with the exit pupil very close to the sensor is affected a lot."
and drm wrote: "3. The Sigma 18-50 f/1.8 lens is pretty much immune from the problem because it has an exit pupil distance of 150mm." As sigma does not make an 18-50 f1.8, I assume he is talking about the 18-35 f/1.8.
So the physics of the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 with its exit pupil distance of 150mm makes it very telecentric, which may explain in part why it is hard to beat as it finds itself on so many different sensor stacks thickness and still maintains its image quality.  The telecentric quality of the Sigma 18-35 may also allow the image to stand up better when running through additional glass like a speed booster.
 

In the "Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K" thread it is mentioned that the sensor stack thickness of black magic sensors (being that they have a thinner sensor stack) may cause issues with the image with lens not designed for a specific sensor stack thickness.  There is a mention of the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 being basically immune to this issue due to the fact that its is a very telecentric lens.
Kisaha wrote in that tread : "3. How telecentric the lens is. (More specifically, how far forward the exit pupil of the lens is.) A lens with the exit pupil far away from the sensor is not affected by the thickness of the sensor stack very much. A lens with the exit pupil very close to the sensor is affected a lot."
and drm wrote: "3. The Sigma 18-50 f/1.8 lens is pretty much immune from the problem because it has an exit pupil distance of 150mm." As sigma does not make an 18-50 f1.8, I assume he is talking about the 18-35 f/1.8.
So the physics of the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 with its exit pupil distance of 150mm makes it very telecentric, which may explain in part why it is hard to beat as it finds itself on so many different sensor stacks thickness and still maintains its image quality.  The telecentric quality of the Sigma 18-35 may also allow the image to stand up better when running through additional glass like a speed booster.
 

XT3 is in the plans, indeed. At this moment, its down to documenting the process of adding a camera to the server, and then streamlining the Pdf writing process as best I can (later today). This will make a camera cycle as efficient as possible.
From the LogC alone, V4 isn't that different from V3 for the average image. When saturation becomes more extreme, V4 is quite a bit better (much, much more accurate to Alexa). And when using V4 on unintended formats (i.e. Rec709 footage), V4 holds up, while V3 doesn't. Here is a comparison with one of the more saturated images I've got (most notable shift), using Soft (most equivalent variation between 3 & 4):
V3

V4

Attila does great work, he has an excellent grasp of the technical; highly recommended
That 4K 60 sounds quite good (super-sampled 10 bit)
Ironically, I've still been working away at the EC engine, and fixing copious bugs (its inevitable that when I think a thing is finished, the work has just begun ) That being said, I think today I've fully tested it, and everything is working really, really well.
This is a GHa Tungsten LogC render from this morning; the wheels on the far left and right are completely theoretical extreme gamut, beyond what the camera can record - the ones in the center are actual log gamut (and V3 for comparison):
V4:

V3:

I think Resolve is the future.  The fact is that Resolve 16 is finally stable enough for pro users.  I know people have been using it professionally for years, but having used all the versions starting with 12, it is finally ready for prime time, both feature wise and stability wise.  It will become the industry standard in the next to 2 years, so learning it now will put you ahead of the game.

BMCC 2.5K and original pockets image quality made my jaw drop. GH2 was the mysterious affordable super cam I never came to own. GF1 for being the most beautiful camera body in poor mans digital leica land. GH5 making awesome image quality a super common thing. And most definately Davinci Resolve. Exuse my diction, it´s late over here and time to go to sleep.

I think Resolve is the future.  The fact is that Resolve 16 is finally stable enough for pro users.  I know people have been using it professionally for years, but having used all the versions starting with 12, it is finally ready for prime time, both feature wise and stability wise.  It will become the industry standard in the next to 2 years, so learning it now will put you ahead of the game.

I think Resolve is the future.  The fact is that Resolve 16 is finally stable enough for pro users.  I know people have been using it professionally for years, but having used all the versions starting with 12, it is finally ready for prime time, both feature wise and stability wise.  It will become the industry standard in the next to 2 years, so learning it now will put you ahead of the game.

I think Resolve is the future.  The fact is that Resolve 16 is finally stable enough for pro users.  I know people have been using it professionally for years, but having used all the versions starting with 12, it is finally ready for prime time, both feature wise and stability wise.  It will become the industry standard in the next to 2 years, so learning it now will put you ahead of the game.

Within the month. Yes indeed - everything will be entirely new

The mythical "Sharpene" is  improving!
 
I wonder how this "AI" product compares to typical wavelet sharpening.
 
The Topaz Labs JPEG to RAW AI seems to get rid of macro-blocking.  Topaz Labs offers six products, some with apparently overlapping functions.
 
Yes, resolution can be traded for bit depth while maintaining the same color depth, but those figures are not mathematically correct.
 
Keep in mind that bit depth is not actually color depth.  Digital color depth is a product of resolution and bit depth:  digital color depth = resolution x bit depth.
 
The color depth of an image cannot be increased, unless something artificial is introduced (which is evidently what some of the Topaz Lab products do).  So, scaling down the resolution of an image to increase bit depth won't add any color depth for grading.
 
On the other hand, if you merely scaled down the resolution without summing the binned pixels and then just increased the bit depth, you likely threw away a lot of the color depth.  The pixels have to be binned/summed (or averaged) to retain the image's color depth, when trading resolution for bit depth.

Very nice!
From this morning, here is an interesting one. This is GHa Tun v4 extreme gamut finished with the new system (Tungsten extreme gamut is the most difficult scenario). GHa v4 Tun actually outperforms the Alexa in extreme red (Arri has the edge in blue though). Also note the slight banding apparent in blue/cyan/green (VLog All-I), a non-issue on the P4K  (GH5 on the bottom):
 

Another tricky thing is the hand-off from the measured space under a given light source (sunlight or halogen) to extreme gamut simulation. This is because extreme saturation is only achievable with color light sources (i.e. red leds etc.). This amounts to two different 'perceived' color spaces from the same sensor.
The challenge is to preserve hue lines of the measured light source as they move into extreme gamut, while simulating the behavior of extreme gamut. Hence, extreme gamut cannot be an exact match - note the difference in cyan and yellow especially (though can be similar enough as to be perceptually equivalent)

Happy New Year!
Alexa has a distinctive red (when LogC is paired up with the intended display primaries). It is a deep magenta red, and twists moreso approaching extreme saturation. This can look stunning. Other cameras may opt for the default of twisting towards orange with increasing saturation because Cmos red clips to yellow, and the gamut clipping is more coherent. For example, the Alexa has an especially messy extreme red clipping at tungsten WB. With Gen 4, this extreme red behavior is simulated. Here is P4Ka v Alexa in extreme gamut, with EC709 (P4K at bottom):

Apart from desired hue twists, like Arri display gamut, hue twists when conforming color spaces via interpolation (in log etc) have generally been one of the main challenges in developing EC (to keep the true clean hue lines as they should twist). At many stages, I've coded the engine to preserve clean hue lines. Hue is perceptually salient in color, and has a privileged place in the engine today (whereas once upon a time, it was just 'one of three' in the engine)

Would this test and the accompanying RAW files help with your project?
https://cinematography.net/CineRant/2018/07/30/personal-comments-on-the-2018-cml-camera-evaluations/
https://www.myairbridge.com/en/#!/folder/XDn2Yx7xLBAaLh0Zbq415jcXW5hOa9SM
It seems that only Alexa can render pure red colour accurately, while others all skew towards orange, is this something that's specifically addressed in your colour engine?

A while back I posted a tutorial on film emulation and recreating halation and grain in a realistic way. I recently came out with a new video that goes over it in a better, more concise way.
I see quite a bit of people asking how to achieve the look of film and it's characteristics so hopefully this video can help them out!
A big thanks to the Lift, Gamma, Gain forums for figuring a lot of this out also feel free to share your results and download the PowerGrades I've provided on my website!