majoraxis

Can't pass that. ?
 

Should you be celebrating a man who almost shut down EOS's blog in a threat of a lawsuit?  A man who got his employee to lie under oath about Lance Armstrong doping?  Who lied to the public about the origins of his camera?  Who is responsible for the Red Hydrogen, literally the worst tech product of 2018?  Who has bullied and banned people left and right in the cinematography forum?  
How is this man superior to other people?  
Why are we even discussing him or red?
I owned the red one mx.  I owned 2 of them.  I owned the red epic.
It was a great camera.  Flawed of course, how long it took to boot up.  The hard drive would hang a lot.  And it would overheat constantly. That fan noise.  The hard to get to bnc input and timecode input.  But a great image.  They never went past that.  The dragon you couldn't expose past 320 ASA.  Then every camera after that - the same look, pretty much.  The same greenish color cast.  
If you want to do alternative history Emanuel.  Let's say red never happened.  As everyone else has said, the canon 5d mark ii happened.  The iphone still happened.  The need for DSLR's to survive in the face of cell phones taking over their market forced them to make them stills/video hybrid cameras.
Would the sony f3 had been so cheap?  Would the sony f65 have been so cheap?  Would the alexa have been so cheap?  Maybe not.  But the tech existed.  Maybe some other company like black magic would have come in earlier.  Maybe JVC or Nikon would have gotten into video and lowered the prices. Maybe the 5d ii would have convince canon to release a 4k camera that does raw earlier in the game.  Maybe Arri would have as the sequel to the D21. Or Sony could have since they are leaders in cmos technology.
Red One MX shook up the industry, great.  Everything after that didn't.  So what.  That's nothing that special.
Jim didn't leave a legacy.  He put the guy in charge of his message board as the president.  
And that's not a good business move.
Look what's happened.
You think the Gizmodo, I mean the Komodo, is going to save them? From the guy whose greatest creation is dvxuser.com? 
Why would people buy their cameras now that everyone else has caught up, or surpassed them, with better skintones?  Most people I know who are owner operators moved to the alexa mini, or downgraded to the Ursa Mini G2 or FS7 or C300 ii.
There's no place for their 30k cameras in this market - it's too tight.
And if a 10k camera can do pretty much what a 30k camera can do, and now that red has no "mystique" to its name, why would anyone put 30k into a camera system, especially one that looks like with hydrogen, is not going that well.
Move on, man.
They are dinosaurs. Never adapted.  Chasing 8k over skintones or dynamic range or ISO sensitivity.
It's a crazy world, these cameras.
The friggin Sigma FP1 does raw full frame for 2k.
How does Red compete?  With their overpriced redmini mags?  How?
How are they going to survive?
Good riddence to this bully company.
And hello to the new guys.
Hello to E2.  Hello to BMD.  Hello again to Panasonic that is adapting ever since it's glory days of the dv100 and hvx100.  And hello again to canon with the c500 ii and idx iii that look like they are taking big risks.  Hello to the new sony fs7 ii sequel whatever it is called.
They are all trying their butts off to stay relevant in the current era.  Red, come on, with the Komodo?  It isn't even really announced.  Just what it is not.  What's the price?  Does it have internal NDs?
Come on.  Don't waste your time on them.
Time to go.
BYE BYE Red.  
 

I admit it. I am still mad that RED never delivered 3k for $3k.
I hope that the truth comes out and that RED is either vindicated, if they have done nothing wrong, or pays the price for their actions if they have done something wrong.
Either way, I hope Jim recovers from his health issues.
 

FYI if you interpret a (non Blackmagic Design) DNG in Resolve as "BMD Film" this will be Gen 1 which means for gamut there is NO transform - you are getting the sensor spectral response to colour which is not represented by 3 primaries like most gamuts and can't be treated as such. That would mean to "accurately" convert to Rec709 you would need the spectral response data for the sensor in the camera to calculate the transform to Rec709 for an illuminants given colour temperature, or by shooting known targets under various illuminants and doing a regression fit from there. It means multiple transforms depending on your white balance.

The 709 gamut option in Resolve for DNGs is using the 2 colour matrices and "AsShotNeutral" tags (for white balance/tint) provided in the DNG metadata which have been calculated by the manufacturer (using one or both the methods described above) to provide a transform to XYZ for the given white balance (the matrices are actually used to transform from XYZ to sensor space but you can invert that) and from XYZ a standard conversion to 709 is performed. The ACES pipeline in Resolve also uses the same matrices in the DNG to convert to XYZ and then to ACES primaries.

Of course many people just graded BMCC/Pocket footage with Gen 1 by hand and were also pleased with the result, but one should not expect the sensor response to appear in a meaningful way on a typical display without some kind of transform (calculated or done manually).

But this is mostly to say if someone created a LUT or otherwise for BMCC/Pocket Gen 1 DNG footage, it will not be "correct" for other cameras (it may coincidentally look okay but that may also be scene specific). And most importantly for our cameras our others, if grading or creating a LUT etc for footage left in sensor space you need to adjust the correction/transform for illuminants with different colour temperatures. I.e Something done for footage shot under daylight will not usually work well for something shot under tungsten.

If you use the Rec709 gamut option, you could use the CST OFX plugin to transform to another gamut safely as the RAW decode and CST plugin will not clip data and the white balance specific response has been already taken care of (the way the manufacturer wants done) in the transform to 709. This is the workflow I would recommend with such footage. YMMV.

Hi Audio Guys,
This is a great sounding eq. It works like a graphic equalizer where you make a shape with the sliders, except you draw the shape with your mouse. I don't know how long it will be for free so get it while you can. It is regularly $89. Here's the link: https://harrisonconsoles.com/site/free-plugin.html
This one is kind of special because graphic eqs and mastering don't normally go together, so they have done some good coding to minimize phase issues and band interaction.  You may notice it does not sound tizzy or harsh and the bass is punchy even when cutting, so this may be your new favorite, eq especially for free.  Also, it has a useful display mode called lighting, which can visualize the frequency response in an easy to follow way. Enjoy!

Hi Audio Guys,
This is a great sounding eq. It works like a graphic equalizer where you make a shape with the sliders, except you draw the shape with your mouse. I don't know how long it will be for free so get it while you can. It is regularly $89. Here's the link: https://harrisonconsoles.com/site/free-plugin.html
This one is kind of special because graphic eqs and mastering don't normally go together, so they have done some good coding to minimize phase issues and band interaction.  You may notice it does not sound tizzy or harsh and the bass is punchy even when cutting, so this may be your new favorite, eq especially for free.  Also, it has a useful display mode called lighting, which can visualize the frequency response in an easy to follow way. Enjoy!

Hi Audio Guys,
This is a great sounding eq. It works like a graphic equalizer where you make a shape with the sliders, except you draw the shape with your mouse. I don't know how long it will be for free so get it while you can. It is regularly $89. Here's the link: https://harrisonconsoles.com/site/free-plugin.html
This one is kind of special because graphic eqs and mastering don't normally go together, so they have done some good coding to minimize phase issues and band interaction.  You may notice it does not sound tizzy or harsh and the bass is punchy even when cutting, so this may be your new favorite, eq especially for free.  Also, it has a useful display mode called lighting, which can visualize the frequency response in an easy to follow way. Enjoy!

The Blackmagic RAW highlight and shadow rolloff sliders affect the roll off of the "S" contrast curve you create with the custom gamma controls. If you add no contrast, they will do nothing as there's nothing to roll off. Increase (or lower) contrast and they will start to take affect. Choose "Extended Video" from the gamma selection in the Blackmagic RAW panel and you will see it's actually just a custom S curve with saturation preset via the custom gamma controls - you can start to modify it to your taste and the "gamma" automatically changes from "Extended Video" to "Custom". Or you can start from scratch with "Blackmagic Film".

If you want the highlight/shadows sliders that were in DNG panel, those are not RAW specific controls and are still available in the 2nd tab of the primaries (same algorithm as found in DNG tab and same exact effect on Blackmagic RAW clips as DNG).

If transforming to another log curve or colour space helps you get what you want faster, great! Different log curves like ARRI/Red or using highlight roll off sliders/presets don't give you anything you can't do yourself by using the curves tool etc, but not everyone is experienced with that stuff. Our log curves preserve the full sensor dynamic range though so the highlight roll off is completely in your hands, or you can start with another log curve if it suits.

Something I tend to do a bit is expose for the native ISO in camera, then later in the RAW tab I switch to the highest ISO possible and compensate middle grey with the exposure slider which will lower contrast and have the most highlight roll off we offer in our log curves for a particular camera. I start with Extended Video from the gamma drop down and tweak the contrast/sat and highlight/roll off sliders for the shot. Adjust white balance/tint and that gets me 90-95% there with most footage.

@Otago Thanks for posting this!

I have used my P6K (along with my P4Ks) for many hours on three or four shoots per week since I purchased it on release day. I have not had the camera randomly turn off or stop recording, not even a single time. 
I have a Sony NP970 battery plate on the cage and I use the 1TB T5 drives. I am not using original Canon batteries. I will sometimes also use V-mount batteries. I also generally don't fill up the entire drive, so I may be unintentionally keeping the drives below 50%.
In my usage, the P6K has been just as reliable as my 3 P4Ks. 

The could be very interesting IF I'm understanding correctly:
 

What was up with some of the sites saying there was around a 500 dollar price drop on the P6K and then deleting the articles?
The text still populates in a Google search description for Cinema 5D, but they deleted the article.
New Shooter was reporting the same thing.
 

I checked BH Photo and it is still $2499, maybe we will see a price drop tomorrow - first day of IBC. Seems like a good move for Blackmagic to make though I don't think they needed to lower the pock to $1036 to sell it, but still great news for those how were  considering purchasing either one.

Super impressive performance for 5-stops under exposed for the Pocket 6k then brought up by 5-stops in post.  The underexposed performance of the Pocket 6k was also evident in Tom Antos' USRA Mini Pro, Pocket 6K, Alexia and Red Tests.
It seems to me that if you are shooting in natural light the Pocket 6k is the way to go.  I knew there was a reason I liked the Pocket 6k over the Pocket 4k - now if Blackmagic would release a MFT version of the Pocket 6K - I would purchase it.
 
From this:

 
To this:

Wow!
 

Super impressive performance for 5-stops under exposed for the Pocket 6k then brought up by 5-stops in post.  The underexposed performance of the Pocket 6k was also evident in Tom Antos' USRA Mini Pro, Pocket 6K, Alexia and Red Tests.
It seems to me that if you are shooting in natural light the Pocket 6k is the way to go.  I knew there was a reason I liked the Pocket 6k over the Pocket 4k - now if Blackmagic would release a MFT version of the Pocket 6K - I would purchase it.
 
From this:

 
To this:

Wow!
 

BM cams just aren't ready for prime time.

I am really hoping for a micro 4/3 version of the Pocket 6k as the Pocket 6k has about 25% more resolution at the same size sensor crop vs the Pocket 4k.  I would not need a Pocket 4k for M4/3 lens, I would just use the Pocket 6k M4/3. At some point, hopefully sooner rather than later, Blackmagic will offer this as I believe their is lots of demand for it and the engineering seems like it would be nearly trivial.1
Along with M4/3 mount, in camera scaling using the super scale algorithm from Resolve would allow me to crop based on the lens' image circle and output, 6k, 4k or 2k.  This would cover all of my lens and output file size requirements, basically making one camera to rule them all.

Maybe a sticky thread, not really enough posts about Z-cam for an entire sub forum.

I found this on a site about h.264 license.  
Q: Is it safe to use such patented algorithms?
A: Patent laws vary wildly between jurisdictions, and in many countries patents on algorithms are not recognized. Plus the use of patents to prevent the usage of a format or codec on a specific operating system or together with specific other software might violate antitrust laws.  So whether you are safe or not depends on where you live and how judges interpret the law in your jurisdiction.

My understanding is that patents deemed improperly filed or invalid result in the patent concept becoming public domain and permanently unpatentable in perpetuity.

Opinion, without prejudice: It is a shame. RED had and still has great technology, all they had to do was sell and generate goodwill with creatives. All this going mental with lawyers and dodgy patent licensing fees, if that is indeed the case, puts all that good stuff in danger but after what they did to me and so many others, people like Jannard get what they deserve at the end.
According to our favourite Russian friend Vitaliy Kiselev:
 

Backstory is becoming very wide knowledge.
1.6m views
 

I'm not here to defend my purchase.....I'm here to hopefully make people who have the P4K feel better about their purchase after being told by you that their camera now 'sucks' or that it 'sucks' to be them.
 I've had the P4K for over 6 months now and it has paid for itself many times over. I'll never loose money on it because it is still being requested on shoots by DP's who know the deal and know how great and flexible the camera is. Those same DP's and producers are not going to suddenly stop requesting it now that the 6K is out because it still delivers exactly what is necessary for production.  My P4K has been used as an A Cam and as a B Cam along side Ursa Mini Pro, Alexa Mini, Sony F5, Sony FS7, Canon C300II..... as an aside, there are many DP's earning good money who shoot Sony and use optical adaptors on the FS7, F5, FS5 etc. Optical adaptors are widely accepted professionally.
Not once has the MFT sensor been a bottleneck, quite the contrary, it has meant that the camera has been more versatile.
I always use it with a speedbooster because it means I have great flexibility in the lenses I can use. Shooting PL on the Alexa Mini? Sure, I can use the same lenses on the Pocket4k. Shooting EF, No problem, i can use EF....or pretty much any other lens under the sun. 
I have received many compliments on the pictures I have shot with the P4K, the release of the P6K does not mean those same images are any less good or negate the compliments I received from clients and producers. Those same producers have never requested anything greater than 4K files so the P6K would have no advantages and I have used the P4k on everything from Netflix Docs to Sports documentary for National TV. FOR ME......I just don't see ANY advantages to the P6K.
If you are a one man band and shoot/edit your own films and use EF glass exclusively while editing in Resolve and need the extra 2k resolution, sure get the P6K if you want to spend the extra money. It's going to be a great camera.
If you have the P4K and all of a sudden feel like you have been short changed....don't. It's a cheaper camera by a substantial amount (even if you do buy a speed booster, that can be had for $200), still shoots great images and is far more versatile. The 6K does not replace it. Hell, the Alexa Mini LF 'Only' shoots 4K so does the P6K suddenly mean the MiniLF is outdated?
If you want to future proof your investment then maybe 6K will be better in a year or two's time when BRAW is widely accepted, but by then, BMD will have released another camera (or two even, at the rate they are going!) with hopefully a more future proof mount.
The only people making the P4K obsolete are those that spend all their time on forums agonising over specs. In the real world, the P4K will still earn you money in a year's time....by then, there will be a new BMD camera more worthy of upgrading to.
A Viltrox adaptor will cost you $150 at works a treat. 
Also, you will need a beefier setup to edit those 6K files over the 4K ones so factor that in as well.

Thanks @webrunner5 for this article. This was fascinating reading.
So, here are my big picture conclusions:
This is only an issue at really wide apertures (1.4+) The sensor stack on the P4K is 1.5mm thinner than normal M4/3, so if you are using an adapter without optics, the P4K should perform better than other M4/3 cameras because its sensor stack is close to the same thickness as a normal SLR.  The Sigma 18-50 f/1.8 lens is pretty much immune from the problem because it has an exit pupil distance of 150mm.  MOST importantly (and unexpectedly) the P4K may show problems with *native* M4/3 lenses at very wide apertures because those lenses were designed to use a 4mm filter stack but the P4K uses one that is 2.5mm. Luckily, I have a Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 lens and P4Ks + GH5/GH5s cameras. When I get time, I will compare the P4K vs. the GH5s wide open and look for differences. If there are differences, it will probably be on the edges of the images. I would bet that the differences would be most visible in photos, but obviously the P4K doesn't do very good photos...  
So, Blackmagic designed in a difference (filter stack = 2.5mm instead of 4mm) that would likely make the P4K perform better with adapted lenses, but also likely caused it to perform worse with native M4/3 lenses...weird.