Katrikura

As I'm sure you know and you just misspoke, you need an external drive for 12bit 4K, not an external recorder. You can shoot internal 12bit 1080p, but ML Raw has an undeniably better IQ, in all respects, than the FP's FHD.
I agree about the IBIS, but I don't really see a point for ML Raw with the R5? You can already shoot internal raw. But all of the Canon IBIS cameras are Digic X, so it will be a long time before they break that code.
It will be interesting to see what they can do with the EOS-R and hopefully the M50. I'd actually be really happy if they were able to enable continuous MLV raw on the 5D4.
But I'm still really impressed with what the 5D3 with ML Raw and a Canon IS lens is capable of handheld. So maybe I'm just easily impressed. 

Our host isn't the biggest fan of that particular person and has requested previously that his content not be shared.

Let’s see how long this post stays up.
I have started a countdown…

Clever ; ) Loved the sausages part! LOL : ) This is what a real production means as conforming creative choices to the stuff we have in hands... Well done again in this yearly tradition of yours, it will surely be appreciated by the local community :- )
¡Felices fiestas de Navidad!
- EAG

Hello to all EOShd members. I haven't been here much this year, but I consider this forum to be my second home. This year has been hard personally (divorce with young children) but we must continue in life with good spirits. So like every year (and it's been 6 now) I link you to my police Christmas greeting:
In the tech side it is Sony FX6 in UHD mode at 100fps (S&Q) and S-log, Hi Base Iso. Rokinon lenses. 
I hope you like it and I send you a hug.
Adiós Amigos!! 

I accidentally shot 8bit cDNG 4K RAW on the internal sd card (I forgot to switch to the external drive):
 

OK, here you go: using the D-Log M 10bit setting and the official DJI D-Log M LUT (I hate LUTs, but what can you do):
Harsh highlights and very processed-sounding audio (set to stereo, front). Not stressed in lower light as expected. Colors are good, but somehow not so appealing. I nixed a bunch of outdoors shots because they were all overexposed (based on using auto exposure), not a problem with current GoPro's (used to be).
Noise reduction was turned off in the camera, sharpness set to -1, not -2, from 0.
GoPro's look to me to have better handling of highlights, more appealing color, and much better audio. Pocket 3 does the job in low light, where the GoPro essentially cannot operate.
I do not think anyone would shoot a mediocre attempted blockbuster film with the Pocket 3 (as was done with the fx3), and it's not a crash cam.
But if one wants to move with the camera in dim places and loves portability this is the only alternative.
It does, btw, charge really fast and it is a nice screen. But that audio...
I will try again outdoors in bright light.

4K 120fps on 1" sensor size going with such inconspicuous form factor is incredibly sweet... I am in love again! :- *

1- the rate of decline in engagement in all of the photo/video forums and websites is depressing. Even comment sections are mini ghost towns compared to same place ten years ago. Maybe social media is stealing a lot of that free time usually spent on traditional web in the past. 
2- many of those people who could write informative blog posts are now like "why bother writting any more when no one reads any more?". Today they're making videos, and try hard to make it 10 min long, which means they have to add a lot of water to the milk. 
3- I don't see any other industry with so much negativity about the major brands of that industry. Telling people they don't need and shouldn't buy new released products is a norm in our corner of internet fora! There is hype moments before and after press release days, but overall discouragement is way bigger. But look at car enthusiasts or audiophiles online communities...They're constantly encourage each other to buy more!
4- lack of communication between experienced users and newcomers is hurting everyone, and sometimes it's sad. Many people who are upgrading from smartphone, are making mistakes related to misunderstandings that discussed and explained and solved seven years ago. They just don't know where to find the knowledge.
5-  a tendency to reduce everything to "matter of taste" has emerged to the point that the whole concept of critique apears as moot point, like there is no wrong way and right way of doing things!
 
Maybe its overthinking. I don't know.. just wanted to share my thoughts. 

Here are my thoughts
https://www.eoshd.com/news/oppenheimer-review-70mm-imax-screening/

Indeed, just look at the leap forwards in improvement from GPT2 to GPT3
Or each generation from Midjourney V1 vs V2 vs V3 vs V4 vs vV5 (and those 5 generations only took a single year to happen!!!). 
https://aituts.com/midjourney-versions/ 
We might laugh at the efforts of generative AI video right now, but they're no worse than Midjourney V1 was.... 
Perhaps 50/50 odds we'll have the Midjourney V5 equivalent for video by 2028:
https://manifold.markets/ScottAlexander/in-2028-will-an-ai-be-able-to-gener 
Or maybe even higher odds than that... 
https://manifold.markets/firstuserhere/will-we-have-end-to-end-ai-generate-12f2be941361 
https://manifold.markets/firstuserhere/will-we-have-end-to-end-ai-generate-de41c9309e38 
I agree with your disagreeing.
That's a good analogy! 
And if it is carefully/appropriately managed, you can even have a change in voice actor who is doing these characters, and almost none of the fans will notice or care. 
Another good analogy. It is indeed very likely, I feel, that the country as a whole will be massively better off and wealthier thanks to AI. But... there will also be huge numbers of individuals (such as those middle aged textile workers) who will be a lot worse off. 
We'll be able to have super niche "micro celebrity AI avatars"
At the moment, celebrities need a certain amount of broad appeal. As  you said, they need to avoid offending their fans. So end up appealing to the common denominator, because what might appeal to one section of the fan base could drive away other fans who get offended by it. But once you're freed from the physical constraints, then an "AI celebrity" could cater to any and all of these micro niche fanbases. 
"I think there is a world market for about five computers." ~ IBM's president, Thomas J Watson (said in the early 1940's) 
Nah, my Raspberry Pi can run a LLM. (ok, only a baby-ChatGPT that's quite cut down, and somewhat crippled. But even if I want to run a LLM that's quite close to the power of GPT3, that only costs me much much less than a $1/hr, in fact, more like a handful of cents per hour. It is cheap to run a LLM)
It's predicted as highly like that even GPT4 can be run on consumer grade hardware by next year:
https://manifold.markets/LarsDoucet/will-a-gpt4equivalent-model-be-able 
What you're thinking about, is the costs to train GPT4 from scratch. That's VERY EXPENSIVE! 
But still, it isn't quite as bad as you think. If a government wanted to do it, then absolutely any government in the OCED  could do this, they could do it ten times over. Likewise, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of companies in the world which could train the next GPT4 if they wanted to. (GPT4 would've cost roughly the same order of magnitude as $100M in costs, waaaay out of reach for you and me, but easily within reach of many many other organizations) 
But they won't, because the costs to train their own GPT4 vs the profits they could make (as AI is quickly becoming a very competitive space!) just isn't worth it. 
The good news though, is that costs for training are dropping drastically fast! 
Look at this prediction, it is highly likely that before 2030 it will cost under $10K to train from scratch a GPT3 quality LLM (i.e. any keen hobbyist can do it themselves!):
https://manifold.markets/Gigacasting/will-a-gpt3-quality-model-be-traine 
And that's yet another reason why there are not hundreds of other companies training their own GPT4, why put that risk into it if you're not already an industry leader in this? When your $100M+ investment could quickly within a few short years be worth next to nothing. You need a solid business plan to recoup your costs fast. OpenAI can do that, because they're massively funded with Microsoft's backing, and they have a first mover advantage. 
Too late, that genie left the bottle long ago. 
 

Great post.  As a fellow computer science person, I agree with your analysis, especially that it will get better and better, and will get so good that we will learn more about the human condition due to how good it will get.  This is also not something new, in the early days of computer graphics, someone wrote a simulation of how birds fly in formation and it was so accurate that the biologists and animal behavioural scientists studied the algorithms and this is how the 'rules' of birds flying in formation were initially discovered. 
I just wanted to add to the above quote by saying that studios have already made large strides in this direction with the comic-book genre films, whose characters are the stars and not the actors that play them.  This is an extension of things like the James Bond films.  These were all films where the character was constant and the actor was replaceable.  
VFX films are the latest iteration of this, where the motion capture and voice actors and the animators are far less known, and when it's AI replacing those creatives to make CGI characters that will be the next step, and then it will be AI making realistic-looking characters.
For those reading that aren't aware of the potential success of completely virtual characters and how people can bond with a virtual person, I direct your attention to Hatsune Miku, a virtual pop star:
Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatsune_Miku
She was created in 2007, which in the software world is an incredibly long time ago, and in the pop star world is probably even longer!
But did it work?
That's a figure from over a decade ago and equates to just over USD$70,000,000, which is almost USD$100M in todays money.  I couldn't find any reliable more recent estimates, but she is clearly a successful commercial brand when you review the below.
 
What does this mean in reality though, it's not like she topped the charts.  Here is a concert from 2016 - she is rear-projected onto a pane of glass that was mounted on the stage.
She was announced as a performer at the 2020 Coachella, that was cancelled due to covid.
So, while Japan might be more suited to CGI characters than the west is (although that is changing) - take the Replika story for example.  Replika is a female virtual AI companion who messages and sends pics to subscribers, including flirty suggestive ones.  The owners of Replika decided that the flirty stuff should be a separate paid feature and turned it off for the free version - the users reacted strongly.  So strongly in fact that it's now an active field of research for psychologists trying to figure out how to understand, manage and regulate these things.  It's one thing for tech giants to 'curate' your online interactions, but it's another when the tech giants literally control your girlfriend.
Background: https://theconversation.com/i-tried-the-replika-ai-companion-and-can-see-why-users-are-falling-hard-the-app-raises-serious-ethical-questions-200257
There are also other things to take into consideration as well.  Fans are very interested in knowing as much as possible about their idols, but idols are real people and have human psychological needs and limitations, but virtual idols will not.  The virtual idols that share their entire lives with their fans will be even more relatable than the human stars that need privacy and get frustrated and yell at paparazzi etc.  These virtual idols will be able to be PR-perfect in all the right ways (i.e. just human enough to be relatable but not so human that they accidentally offend people).  
There is already a huge market for personalised messages from stars, virtual idols will be able to create these in virtually infinite amounts.  Virtual stars will be able to perform at simultaneous concerts, make public appearances wherever and whenever is optimal, etc.  
And if you still need another example about how we underestimate technology... 
"Computers in the future may weigh less than 1.5 tons.” - Popular Mechanics magazine, 1949.

Nice article! My perspective is as a software engineer, at a company that is making a huge effort to leverage AI faster and better than the industry. I am generally less optimistic than you that AI is "just a tool" and will not result in large swaths of the creative industry losing money.
The first point I always make is that it's not about whether AI will replace all jobs, it's about the net gain or loss. As with any technology, AI tools both create and destroy jobs. The question for the economy is how many. Is there a net loss or a net gain? And of course we're not only concerned with number of jobs, but also how much money that job is worth. Across a given economy--for example, the US economy--will AI generated art cause clients/studios/customers to put more, or less net money into photography? My feeling is less. For example, my company ran an ad campaign using AI generated photos. It was done in collaboration with both AI specialists to write prompts, and artists to conceptualize and review. So while we still used a human artist, it would have taken many more people working many more hours to achieve the same thing. The net result was we spent less money towards creative on that particular campaign, meaning less money in the photography industry. It's difficult for me to imagine that AI will result in more money being spent on artistic fields like photography. I'm not talking about money that creatives spend on gear, which is a flow of money from creatives out, I'm talking about the inflow from non-creatives, towards creatives.
The other point I'll make is that I don't think anyone should worry about GPT-4. It's very competent at writing code, but as a software engineer, I am confident that the current generation of AI tools cannot do my job. However, I am worried about what GPT-5, or GPT-10, or GPT-20 will do. I see a lot of articles--not necessarily Andrew's--that confidently say AI won't replace X because it's not good enough. It's like looking at a baby and saying, "that child can't even talk! It will never replace me as a news anchor." We must assume that AI will continue to improve exponentially at every task, for the foreseeable future. In this sense, "improve" doesn't necessarily mean "give the scientifically accurate answer" either. Machine learning research goes in parallel with psychology research. A lot of machine learning breakthroughs actually provide ideas and context for studies on human learning, and vice versa. We will be able to both understand and model human behavior better in future generations.
My third point is that I disagree that people are fundamentally moved by other people's creations. You write
I think that only a very small fraction of moviegoers care at all about who made the content. This sounds like an argument made in favor of practical effects over CGI, and we all know which side won that. People like you and I might love the practical effects in Oppenheimer simply for being practical, but the big CGI franchises crank out multiple films each year worth billions of dollars. If your argument is that the people driving the entertainment market will pay more for carefully crafted art than generic, by the numbers stories and effects, I can't disagree more.
Groot, Rocket Raccoon, and Shrek sell films and merchandise based off face and name recognition. What percent of fans do you think know who voiced them? 50%, ie 100 million+ people? How many can name a single animator for those characters? What about Master Chief from Halo (originally a one dimensional character literally from Microsoft), how many people can tell you who wrote, voiced, or animated any of the Bungie Halo games? In fact, most Halo fans feel more connected to the original Bungie character than the one from the Halo TV series, despite having a much more prominent actor portrayal.
My final point is not specifically about AI. I live in an area of the US where, decades ago, everyone worked in good paying textile mill jobs. Then the US outsourced textile production overseas and everyone lost their jobs. The US and my state economies are larger than ever. Jobs were created in other sectors, and we have a booming tech sector--but very few laid off, middle aged textile workers retrained and started a new successful career. It's plausible that a lot of new, unknown jobs will spring up thanks to AI, but it's also plausible that "photography" shrinks in the same way that textiles did.

Bitrate is 100mbps fixed which is near as dammit the upper limit of the variable bitrate that my iPhone 12 uses (a typical comparator for what people would use a Pocket for) and I don't find it lacking for the purpose.
More important for me is that the Osmo Pockets have Cinelike D which is a good compromise and very easy to grade.
I had to do a little project at the weekend using the LX10/15 (with my Cinelike D hack activated) and the Pocket and they matched easily both in terms of colour and acceptably enough in image quality.
On the Pocket 2, it is derived from a 4.6K sensor which is giving about 1.2x lossless zoom when shooting in 4K and roughly 2x and 1.6x in 1080p and 2.7K respectively.
In the edit, I punched in to around 2x on a 4K file from my weekend project and was comfortable with the result so I wouldn't be bothered going up to say 1.5x as a safety and then adding the rest in the edit.
A big advantage of the Pocket is adding the control stick which will give you full pan/tilt/zoom controls right from the handle.
That usability trumps a small loss of image quality for the purposes I use it for.
 
The 24mm in that spec is coming from it being a drone camera though.
The actual lens on a Pocket 2 is 20mm f1.8.
On of the beauties of this camera though are the magnetic clip on wide angle adapters (which gives you 15mm) and of course the anamorphic versions too.
As well as also simultaneously being able to us magnetic ND filters too.
If DJI do bring a new version 3 out with an optical zoom and/or with 10 bit capture then that would be great but I have to say that even as it stands now the Pocket 2 is a very compelling camera for travel and, for me, it is a vastly superior proposition to my iPhone for that role.
Its not only because of the creative possibilities it has with having an integrated gimbal so you are not only stabilised but can do tracking etc or the anamorphic and NDs or the ability to have real hardware controls with the control stick.
Its that you can take it out of your pocket, hold the power button on and be ready to shoot 2 seconds later rather than titting about unlocking the phone, opening an app and making sure you are in the correct mode.
Another bonus is that if do have a need for remote shooting or self shooting with tracking then you can operate it from your phone which you can't do with your phone as you are already using it to film with 😉 

Filmmaking is an art form. In the realm of creativity, people often crave the authenticity that only real humans can provide. This is why blockbusters often enlist well-known actors to generate interest and why, despite our daily reliance on them, our personal computers don't make headlines in gossip columns.
https://www.eoshd.com/news/dont-panic-about-ai-its-just-a-tool/

A new blog post:
https://www.eoshd.com/news/oppenheimer-why-christopher-nolan-uses-a-flip-phone/
It is interesting that the same technology that enables modern life, also at the same time destroys us.

Very mixed. I am not dependant on ads and never have been so that side makes no difference to me, but there is definitely a shift to YouTube and social media. People aren't researching Google or reading long articles as much as before.
YouTube is a grind and I have mixed feelings about that too. I enjoy it when I have some ideas. But the thought of being on a treadmill of content is horrific. Don't post for a week and you may as well be dead.
On the other hand, EOSHD is great, having your own site independent from the algorithms of social media and YouTube is much more relaxed and I can do what I like, post what I want, when I want. And then there is this lovely forum, which is pretty unique.
Never was close to the PR side of the camera industry and rejected a lot of advances.
The site is not in a better position to cuddle up to the manufacturers, they are putting their free loans and exclusive invitations behind social media influencers instead now.
Bloggers with articles are the previous gen of social media influencers.
Now it is clowns and show offs on social media.
They are perfect for one another and I don't want to be involved to be honest.
I am looking to the future now and that is keeping EOSHD updated, at the same time as moving onto two new sites:
Full Frame AI (making most of AI for photographers)
and
Ultra Camera Review (smartphone cameras and apps)
There is much more future development in these areas than in mirrorless cameras, or filmmaking. Video on stills camera has kind of been "done" hasn't it?

Hey friends, now with the latest built from Bilal and Dannes achievements before let´s get some Raw magic started. Thanks to our friend @ZEEK the latter are well reported, the former has been posted about here by our friend @QuickHitRecord The challenge would be up to us to make up. So what are your suggestions, what kinda challenge could that be? I think there are plenty Magic Lantern lovers and Canon owners. I got a EOS M for 75EU about a year ago and a 5D2 for 150. Still, I have not filmed anything with it yet. I feel pumped to try out my EOS M though with the latest built from Bilal, since even Danne seemed to like it.
Some 50D cats here? Put some dirty fungus M42 Meyer Goerlitz on your cam and give us that Keny Ty look but not in filthy 420 8bit but in gorgeous RAW glory! 5D3 queens and kings? Mercer, you go! Some keywords for our magic fun tour: experimental, 3min narrative, video essay with photographic beauty, cinema verité exitement, locked shots parade..camer
So all camera cats with the love for the some Raw image magic, let´s get our and your jazz on with magic lantern! 🙂

The funding goal was just reached. Thanks to everyone who donated!

As it has not been up on the forums, I would just like to inform about some recent developments that actually could make the Eos M *THE* digital super-16 camera, as well as a much improved super-35 5.2k raw shooting camera. Just needs some financial support, which I personally think is more than justified. So, if you want an updated user experience for magic lantern on eos m, 650d, 700d and 100d, or just want to support magic lantern, have a look here: https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=26851.0

That's big news. I don't use my EOS-M often, but this would go a long way toward making it a lot more workable. Thanks for sharing. Donated!

I am speechless... this is ML cinema camera series 2.0.
Yes indeed, this deserves every single donation they can raise. It is the very least decent thing we all users can do.
- EAG :- )

Honestly, I don't even know what we're talking about anymore.
I am just a hobbyist who has been using a 5D Mark III with 1080p ML Raw for the past 5-6 years as I attempt to make a few short films in my spare time. I'm hardly chasing cameras. I picked up a Sigma FP a few months ago, on a whim, and I like it. It has a nice image, I can't say for sure that it's a better image than the 5D though. I assumed the 14bit color from the 5D may be evening out the playing field, but what do I know... as I said... I'm not a professional like you guys are.
I've always been a writer first, so story is the most important thing to me, but I'm not delusional enough to think I am going to sell a screenplay or make a film that will have any impact on anything. I enjoy doing it, though and I suppose there are worse things I could spend my money on.
Next year I may buy a camcorder, making movies was a lot more fun back when camcorders were the only option for zero budget filmmakers.
I will end with this, though. Since we're all being so brutally honest... none of these cameras look that good. If you're shooting with a P4K and a Sigma zoom, or a 5D3 with ML Raw... they all look amateurish. So when you guys attack other people for their choices... remember your choices probably look questionable as well.
Then again, I've never seen any of your work, so maybe you guy's are artistic geniuses, but how could anyone know... only a few people share any of their work on this forum and when they do, the posts about the next best camera gets way more attention...
Good luck to you. 

eh, if you're rolling for hours (days even!) covering some random small business conference in a hotel that's only going to be put on YT (or perhaps even only used internally) then 8bit is perfectly fine.