User

C100 appears to capture over 100 into super. Using it in Premiere you can just pull it back, it's not a hard clip, that's probably the float engine at work. It's really useful. You'll probably lose that when you transcode I'd guess.
I wonder if "full range" in 5D2RGB is pushing that down into a 0-100 file, hence the look?
32-bit in AE sees it all, slows working down though. I often work in 8-bit, occasionally check 32, and render in 32.
 
Ah I missed that, sorry. Yes if you're having trouble with Mercury I'm sure ProRes will be easier on the system.

4K is the standard of 2016 and future proof.
Furthermore 4K is the only way to get true 1080p or 2K res out of a DSLR or mirrorless camera. None of the 1080p cameras shoot 1080p. It's just a sticker on the box. They are really shooting a pixel binned or line skipped image. The exception are the full sensor readout 1080p cameras like the A7S which down-sample better on the image processor, but shooting 4K is still preferable over this as it's future proof. In most situations you also have to shoot 4K to avoid severe moire & aliasing.
So in short, 4K was necessary to move us on from the crappy line-skipping and moire era of DSLR video.
It's not so much a resolution obsession, even if you deliver 1080p, it helps to have your acquisition quality 4K.
Now we have two kinds of 4K... that from a full sensor readout is preferable for the full lens circle to get used, whilst a crop of the sensor readout is a stop-gap until the sensor & image processor tech gets better - although sometimes it has its benefits - like a Super 35mm mode on a full frame camera, and 1.3x crop (1D C) doesn't hurt as much as a 2.3!
True, rolling shutter and heat issues can occasionally bite you on some of the lower end models, but it's still in the most part preferable to have some kind of technological progress than none. Without progress, we wouldn't get through this early phase of imperfect 4K and onto better things.
The only times I avoid 4K these days is if I am shooting hours and hours of live footage and need very small file sizes, or the other aspects of the image outweigh the benefits of the alternative 4K cameras for a particular project - such as full frame RAW on the 5D Mark III with magic lantern for the best colour and keying, or high frame rate 120fps 1080p which can be lovely for certain things.

User, has something happened to you? I am genuinely concerned. PM me. Cheers

From now on all EOSHD videos and camera tests will be on YouTube, not only Vimeo. Subscribe to the EOSHD Youtube Channel here.
Recently EOSHD forum user "Werner" had the chance to meet Canon at the European HQ in Germany.
Read the full blog post

My favorite was the Chinese University ones. That was 15 pages wasn't it?

You have CS6 and I think Mercury Playback was only introduced on CS5. It probably got a lot more use via nVidia/CUDA than OpenCL/AMD, so maybe that accounts for the reliability issues you saw. Re ProRes, this helps performance due to eliminating the need for H264 decoding. Long-GOP encode/decode like H264 cannot be greatly accelerated by normal GPU methods so using Mercury hardware playback doesn't help that per se. However Mercury hardware playback makes a huge difference on effects. Since virtually all editing requires effects the net result is GPU acceleration makes a big improvement even though it doesn't accelerate encode/decode by itself.
ClipWrap can either rewrap AVCHD which does not transcode but is faster to convert, or it can transcode which is slower to convert but will run faster on the editor. In your situation I would suggest transcoding. The tradeoff is ProRes takes about 8x the space of AVCHD and also requires more I/O for that lower-density data. However it greatly lowers the CPU consumption of editing and improves responsiveness.
In general I would suggest moving from CS6 to some other editor, whether that is Premiere CC, FCPX, or Resolve. CS6 is really old, is not being maintained, and you will get better performance, reliability and features on any of those other editors.

I've used C100 AVCHD native in Premiere for a couple of years with no problems.
You don't gain any grading latitude by transcoding to another codec even if it is uncompressed 16-bit or whatever, as the Mercury Engine is moving around in a 32-bit space anyway using acceleration to decode and render. Just be sure to render your final with "render at maximum bit depth" ticked and you'll be good.
Transcoding is for when you don't have a native engine or your computer can't handle the playback so need to make it iFrame.
I've A/B tested it with Premiere and unsurprisingly, there was no difference. Most of the ones where there's difference are people not ticking the right boxes on export.
That's my experience!

Yeah, I make sure all my files are kept in a separate disk.
Check this out: http://www.macworld.com/article/1164891/mac-apps/keeping-mac-os-and-data-on-separate-drives.html  This is one hell of reason I like Mac OS, just like those Linux and Unix systems. Organizing files is a breeze. Actually most of the settings are still there after reinstall the OS if we do it right, saved a lot of time, and I don't need time machine any more.
I don't do upgrades anymore because it's actually quite buggy most of the time. Instead I just do a clean install. I normally spend about two hours for the install of everything and it's very easy with the above trick. Once per year for a Mac, doesn't sound too crazy, and it actually saved me quite some time from sorting out all the upgrade bugs. And sure the OS is blazing fast as it's a clean install, no matter it's Mac or Windows.

If at all possible when you upgrade to a major OS version, stick it on a partition or a separate boot drive (clone your current boot drive and then boot from the clone and install the new OS and you'll see how everything will work through the upgrade process to actual real-world work). Test everything you can think of on the new one. if something's not ready for prime time, you can get straight back to work on your old drive. When you finally decide it's cool to switch over, keep the old version handy for a few more weeks just in case.
I assume most people working with this level of software are only using their boot drives for system, apps, and maybe email and invoicing. Maybe music and personal photos as well. That's really the way to go (and you should be backing up your boot drive as well as your raids and work drives). Keeping your boot free of work and renders and scratch files makes testing a new OS a lot easier.

These kinds of questions are dependent on many factors. It would be easy to do some tests and find out. Get the same clip in prores, AVCHD, etc, play with it, stack some effects, and you'll know how it "feels" -  and also time your final renders and so on for harder data.

Drag&drop works perfectly, as ever!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/For-Black-Aluminum-M42-Screw-Lens-to-Canon-EOS-EF-Camera-Mount-Adapter-Ring-/301450391372?hash=item462fd7ef4c:g:evIAAOSwQYZWyo4a

Well, here is the answer. Make a Timemachine backup of your current system (any external drive will do), and you are back there within half an hour if necessary.
 
Drag & drop works. Of course every new OS has some bugs. I always read bug reports before I update. But I update eventually. I have an office iMac with Mountain Lion, and though it's working fine it feels slow and antiquated in comparison. Staying with an old OS is not the Apple way ;-)
Since Yosemite, the most dramatic change is the appearance. The system font changed from Lucida to Helvetica, which is harder to read on low res displays but easier on retina displays.
El Capitan supports "metal" for most Macs built after 2012. Apples statement that it would make graphics up to ten times faster has been challenged, but an average boost of round about 30% has been reported, depending on system and software. My 2009 MP with GTX680 feels faster, but I didn't measure anything, may well be a placebo.
The most annoying bug, NO BLUETOOTH, has allegedly been fixed with 10.11.2. Don't know, use no BT.
I didn't find this bug description, but my WiFi and Lan-Connection failed reliably after a while since El Capitan. I tested different things and identified the cause: Adobe Flash. I deinstalled this. Only little AV content will not be played back through HTML5 (Firefox announced "Shumway", a plugin that will play the dubious rest too), and Flash is risky anyway. Do not install it, even (and particularly) if you are prompted to. 
 

I'm on El Capitan 10.11.4 with latest Premiere CC (2015.2 "9.2"). No problems at all here.

My hard drives stopped working when I updated to El Capitan. Apple stopped supporting a certain format. Would not update again if I could go back in time. I got them working again but it took a while to figure out.

I am on El Capitan, but use FCP X. It's working well for me. 

Glad it's a doc and not narrative. Otherwise you'd be in David Fincher territory.
That's a close fit for 4GB. Maybe 6TB would be better? Where's your scratch disk? I agree no need for 422 HQ. If you're concerned about super whites, definitely choose extended range to flatten the image and bring them back in legal range. That said, if 422 standard is 8 bit and you shot Canon Log you might be getting a bit too flat for an 8 bit finishing codec. Guessing it's not the end of the world, though.
Hope it goes well.

What are you cutting that is 120 hours of footage? How will you store all that.
ProRes cuts WAY faster than AVCHD. 
 
I use 422 (not HQ for that much footage)
rec709
full range (though FCP does broadcast range by default and both will work, but full range will look flatter and not lose super white detail in RGB conversion.
No post-processing or gamma correction (1.0 is fine).

My opinion is that you shouldn't expect too much improvement with ProRes if Premiere is using GPU acceleration for mercury playback. The reason is that your GPU is your bottleneck and not the CPU.  If Premiere was not using your GPU then yes, CPU friendly codecs such as Prores would help. Lowering the resolution helps with real-time playback of the effects (here more details), and truth be told you should only have it at 100% resolution only if you have a full screen preview on a second monitor. 
The advantages of the Prores codec will be smoother scrubbing (see previous link), and a 10 bit environment that can help with some effects. 

So my lingering questions are:
If I transcoded to ProRes, can I expect my system to bog down less? Yes, you will be much happier!
If I transcode, would I want to use 5DtoRGB which is said to have a very good 10bit conversion processor? ClipWrap and EditReady are much faster on the transcode. 

I already have ClipWrap and 5DtoRGB. 5DtoRGB worked great with my older GH2 AVC codec, with the Canon C100  AVC codec, I noticed little difference from the ClipWrap files and the 5DtoRGB files? I also recorded out of the C100 to my Nanoflash recorder ( XDCAM HD 422, 100mbs Long Gop ) the Nanoflash had a richer cleaner (less noise in the blacks) look.
 
Also unless you are doing major VFX or color CC don't waste the space and go for ProRes 422. 
 
Broatch Berry
Venice CA
screamingdime.com
 

I've used 5d2RGB a lot. It does create an image in encoding that's slightly better than what QuickTime can do. 
It is a slow transcoding process, however.  
If proresHQ offers a better IQ than regular prores, I've not been able to see it.
I'll also use proresLT at times to save hard drive space --depending on how much footage I'm trying to convert. 

Some NLEs will let you edit right from AVCHD (but they're basically rendering it in the background as I understand it).
Opinions are various and often heated, but I'm a prores shop and transcode from the start. Makes it easier to share footage, and more seamless to jump from after effects, etc. I also very much prefer to trim files in MPEG Streamclip for effects or motion graphics vs. trimming in AE, and I tend to do that daily. So again, Prores is much more universal on a mac. And if your system doesn't have a lot of oomph, editing native will slow you down, where ProRes will crank through like melting butter on toast.
I shoot AVCHD, H264 and H265 (NX1). I really dislike AVCHD since I can't go to the folder, see the clip I want, and grab it, insert it, trim it, effect it, whatever. it's a good format for shooting but I don't like it for post.
Don't know about FilmConvert, but you can edit ProRes 1080 on a pre-2000 mac all day, full screen, full rez, no slowdowns unless you add a lot of filters or stack a bunch of titles and graphics. it's designed to run like a champ on a decent Mac. And you can recompress ProRes all day with no artifacts or visible loss.
EditReady does a killer job with AVCHD, just drag the folder in, set your output folder, and make some coffee or whatever. You can also resize and conform frame rates at the same time. (FCP 6 and 7 also do a good job transcoding HVAC with their log and transfer windows). EditReady is well worth the fifty bucks and it will handle about anything you can throw at it, it's a robust piece of pro software, not like Rocky Mountains at all. A real workhorse. My workflow is "get back from the shoot, copy the raw card, transcode with Editready while I unpack or do invoicing or snort coke off a hooker's.." well, you get the idea. I don't return the cards to the cameras until the next day, after my backup has run, so I have the raw card and the ProRes on my system and my backup drives. Just my .02 but it's a very robust and versatile workflow.

Depends on what you think 'DP' stands for.

So I was offered a 1DC with low number of clicks and for $600 less than the current price of a A7rii retail.
I thought "What that heck, if its bad I can probably turn profit by selling it".
Ive only used it out and about twice so far. Also for a product review. And to be honest, I don't think its a keeper for me.
The reasons are:
Awesome image, truly great. But imo the 5D Mark 3 Raw matches it. Lower res but better color and lower crop. Even at the low price, a used 5D is half the price. The 5D is much easier to use due to zebras, raw meter, etc, etc, etc. The 5D is smaller but I like the big size of the 1DC. Easily fixed with a battery grip. The 5D workflow is tougher in post, needs converting. But worth it for the Raw imo. Ive been offered a used c100ii or two c100i for the same price. And those where my reasons against the 5D. But if you dont care about Raw or to have "Canon Colors" there are tons of cameras in the same price range that will make your shooting so much easier. 

As some might know I currently have the LS300 on loan for review. And today I had both in the garden just shooting random stuff in the bright sun.
It is of course night and day in workflow between a fully featured camcorder and a mostly equipped DSLR.

And at the end of the day, watching the footage Im not seeing a big enough difference. The 1DC looks nicer imo, no question. But not that much better.
Im not saying that I will buy the LS300, 5D or c100. But Im pretty sure I won't keep the 1DC.
Maybe I change my mind after some more testing but the initial thought is, not for me.
Here is the LS300 and 1DC.
Same lens same settings
JVC

1DC

JVC

1DC

And two short tests,
1DC
 
JVC
 
 
For reference, 5D Mark3 with a soft vintage Nikkor lens.
 

I dig it, whats not to dig?
This was quick and dirty while getting the GFs birthday present. Now I might focus on the LS300 for a while but then I will give the 1DC a run through.
 
To early to say 100% but I suspect its the 5D3raw. But that includes a longer workflow. The 1DC I just drop in FCPX and go.