Matthew Hartman

Has to be dynamic range for me. I could deal with 1080 resolution for the time being but blown out highlights and clipped shadows drive me bonkers to no healthy end. 
And it makes sense. Our eyes are going right to the lightest and darkest parts of the scene, and what do many videos have in the background? Blown out skies and practicals. ARGRHGHAGHEUHGH. ?????????
Badge? You mean brand? 

I still remember the smell of all the chemicals used in the process. It's funny how that stays with you after so many years. Last time I processed negatives and went into the darkroom was about 1996.
My least favorite part of the process was loading the film into the canister for the chemical process to expose the negatives in complete darkness. Everything was done by touch. 
Man, thinking back, what a long multi-step process to get from A to B. It was all experiemental. I can't decide if I miss it or not.
At least I know I don't miss the cost or brain cell damage, nor the unforgiving nature of making a mistake. ?

Dude, I'm really surprised more here in this community aren't showing you some love for this. I've linked your website to some local filmmaking groups in my physical community. I can't thank you enough. I know how much time and effort goes into this type of stuff. 

Human nature wouldn't you say?
I think some of you need to remember change does not come easy for everyone. In fact, we are part of an industry that is considerably hostile to and is currently going through a lot of growing pains, especially at the upper echelons of the business chain. It's uphill all the way, but berating people into change is never a good idea. It just gives them more reason to remain hostile and indoctrinated. 
At the end of the day, no one interested in image performance is going to reject more dynamic range. But everyone comes into that differently. 

Fair enough. I hope you don't think I was being adversarial, I was genuinely curious. 

In a world where image quality is an endless pursuit to match the human eye, I would say it's another stepping stone on that path. 

Thank you for your suggestions and contribution to this exercise. Your “cool” version was amongst my favorites. 
I am a zero budget filmmaker, and wear all of the hats of my production. I started filmmaking in pursuit of another outlet for my screenplays. Meanwhile, while attempting to acquire a modicum of skill, I was bit by the filmmaking bug, but I would never consider myself a cinematographer or a DP.
I really have no interest in being one. I’m hoping to be a competent camera operator before my film is finished... But somebody needs to film my movies... so I guess it has to be me.
With that being said, I appreciate every bit of info I learn from you guys on this site.
To add, I tend to think of cinematography more like Kubrick or Polanski would (obviously not nearly as talented) from a director and writer’s view. I respect the traditional role of the cinematographer but the film is the director’s... visuals and all. Just my opinion. 

Warm & Cool
 

I actually pull down a very stable 180Mbit and 200Mbit (HEVC) if I turn off other in-cam features. 

Yep, it's predicated off the original rumor and this particular tech blog site has just gotten wind of it. Look, you guys know me by now, I love the NX1. But I refuse to get worked up in any sense or fashion over this rumor. If Samsung does it, they do it and we all will be pulling out those credit cards, if not, they don't, end of story. 
This is incorrect. Mirrorless rumors reported that Samsung is testing an retrofitted NX1, which suggests to me even if they have an NX2 slated, it's not anywhere near development as it's own model. 

@Matthew Hartman
Maybe, we'll see... I'm slowly warming-up Jester with broken English
BTW How nice is your surname - I immediately imagine of whom of to-me-dear creator are you descendant - the Nicolai Hartman, the Heinz Hartman, the Karl Amadeus Hartman...

Yes, and in combination with a Tiffen Low light contrast filter.
But Keep in mind my objective here was to challenge the "unacceptable noise" comment that some people hold against this camera, and others in the same class in general. 
A little Neat Video goes a long way. Also, by the time you add in more contrast or an s-curve to the footage, a lot of those artifacts perceptually go bye-bye. This isn't anything new. It has to be done on a lot of Alexa, RED and certaintly Blackmagic systems as well. 
Sony set such a high and impractical bar in my opinion. The high ISO capability is literally teaching a generation of how to NOT properly light and expose a dark scene, esstentially stripping away a really good tool that has been succesfully used for many of decade. And now the expectation (bad practice) of using very high ISO gets wrapped up in other systems, like the GH5s. It still comes with other compromises too. 
Darkness IS information in terms of narrative work, and I feel like I'm going to be evangelizing this more and more, and I'm already blue in the face as it is. ? Yes, this emoji is yellow. 
The viewer does not need to see every detail in a scene to comphrehend what the scene is relating. That would fall more into line with documentation. A narrative piece is not a document of antiquity, it's a story, therefore an illusion. The human brain is really good at filling in the blank spaces. All you need to give the viewer are hints, the brain parses the rest. It's pretty remarkable, and testimate to how powerful the mind is.  
Take my profile image of the man sitting in the car. You only see small hints of a car, some seat, some steering wheel, both descending into shadow. But you as the viewer know he's sitting in a car and not a train. Correct? It's what you don't see that's drawling you in. So going back to high ISO, do you really want to see all the details in the scene? I say, shadows are friends, not combatants. 
I learned this actually in my fine art classess in college some 22 years ago, and it was practiced knowledge long, long, long before that, and has been effective for all kinds of mediums within the arts and sciences. 

Nothing some noise reduction in post can't handle:
 









 

Neat Video is THE defacto industry noise reduction plugin worth every cent they charge for it. I would rather purchase Neat Video than buy another LED light. 
My process is to first run an instance of Neat Video, than grade the footage, then add a very subtle instance of noise to further help with dithering. In most applications, I don't need the noise instance to help smooth out banding and artifacts because Neat Video takes care of most, if not all of it. The noise layer is mostly psychological for me because that's how I took care of business before Neat Video came along. I seriously doubt a manufacture could script a NR algorithm in-cam on the fly with the power the NV delivers. 

Whenever I watch your videos here or on your channel I'm always left feeling melancholy.   Obviously the music selection, but your videos have a sense of "distance" about them that I find quite intriguing. Even videos of Gunmetal. Ruff! 
Studying photography teaches you the skill of storytelling inside the constraints of one frame, which forces you to think philosophically about your subject matter, and what message your frame is conveying. It's the highest form of "show don't' tell" and I recommend it to all aspiring videographers and DPs. When I think of a scene I think of it in terms of a single frame and then extrapolate that into motion. I once heard a seasoned cinematographer say, "You know you arrived as a cinematographer when you can pause a single frame in your film and it's a work of art by itself". 
I could never be a street photographer. I would feel like I'm constantly invading people's personal space. I give props to those with the courage and vulnerability to do it. 

The "sinister" thing in this which is probably too strong of a word, was they officially towed the line that "No, we're not doing any such thing". (Meaning closing shop) And then turn around and do the exact opposite without an official North American statement, which was an obvious attempt to sell off remaining supplies. It's just your average large corporation dick move.
Personally, I eventually got to the point where I stopped caring (after the petition didn't get the level of response I was hoping for from Samsung) and just enjoy the camera for what it is. And what it is is a dead camera/system that I enjoy using and I don't ask more out of it. One day it will be replaced with something else I also enjoy. 

It's a common German surname (I'm not German, I'm American) but part of my family is descended from south Germany, although on my father's side we've been living here in the States since colonial times. In fact we had some personal conflicts with Thomas Jefferson, as he tried to hang one of my great grandfathers for treason against the United States for his loyalty to the King of England. A lot of ppl don't know that during those times no one trusted anyone, and George Washington wasn't a trusted figure at all either.
Also have relatives that fought in the civil war. 
We are related to Lisa Hartman, the wife of Clint Black. 
Sorry, a bit of a history buff.

Mobiado Grand Touch Executive $3,100.00 USD

 
Vertu Aster $7,000 USD

 
Goldvish Eclipse $7,700.00 USD

 
Ready? 
 
Savelli Jardin-Secret White Ice $10,000 USD

 
ARE YOU REALLY READY? 
 
Aston Martin Racing 808 $24,000 USD

 
The rich are not using Apple. All these phones run a custom fork of Android. 

Yes, and in combination with a Tiffen Low light contrast filter.
But Keep in mind my objective here was to challenge the "unacceptable noise" comment that some people hold against this camera, and others in the same class in general. 
A little Neat Video goes a long way. Also, by the time you add in more contrast or an s-curve to the footage, a lot of those artifacts perceptually go bye-bye. This isn't anything new. It has to be done on a lot of Alexa, RED and certaintly Blackmagic systems as well. 
Sony set such a high and impractical bar in my opinion. The high ISO capability is literally teaching a generation of how to NOT properly light and expose a dark scene, esstentially stripping away a really good tool that has been succesfully used for many of decade. And now the expectation (bad practice) of using very high ISO gets wrapped up in other systems, like the GH5s. It still comes with other compromises too. 
Darkness IS information in terms of narrative work, and I feel like I'm going to be evangelizing this more and more, and I'm already blue in the face as it is. ? Yes, this emoji is yellow. 
The viewer does not need to see every detail in a scene to comphrehend what the scene is relating. That would fall more into line with documentation. A narrative piece is not a document of antiquity, it's a story, therefore an illusion. The human brain is really good at filling in the blank spaces. All you need to give the viewer are hints, the brain parses the rest. It's pretty remarkable, and testimate to how powerful the mind is.  
Take my profile image of the man sitting in the car. You only see small hints of a car, some seat, some steering wheel, both descending into shadow. But you as the viewer know he's sitting in a car and not a train. Correct? It's what you don't see that's drawling you in. So going back to high ISO, do you really want to see all the details in the scene? I say, shadows are friends, not combatants. 
I learned this actually in my fine art classess in college some 22 years ago, and it was practiced knowledge long, long, long before that, and has been effective for all kinds of mediums within the arts and sciences. 

Nothing some noise reduction in post can't handle:
 









 

I think you've come a lot closer to unpacking it in words than me. Great breakdown, much appreciated. 
I do some 3D modeling, rendering, animation, etc. There's a parallel to what you just described in rendering as well. When you're going for hyper realism, you employ things like ambient occlusion, global lighting, soft raytraced shadows, etc. These properties give the model a more atmospheric/muted look and feel, smooth gradients, smooth rolloffs, etc. In fact, you often have to crank up your specular highlights for reflective/refractive surfaces with AO.  
Top render is without AO/ Bottom with:
 

Yes, and in combination with a Tiffen Low light contrast filter.
But Keep in mind my objective here was to challenge the "unacceptable noise" comment that some people hold against this camera, and others in the same class in general. 
A little Neat Video goes a long way. Also, by the time you add in more contrast or an s-curve to the footage, a lot of those artifacts perceptually go bye-bye. This isn't anything new. It has to be done on a lot of Alexa, RED and certaintly Blackmagic systems as well. 
Sony set such a high and impractical bar in my opinion. The high ISO capability is literally teaching a generation of how to NOT properly light and expose a dark scene, esstentially stripping away a really good tool that has been succesfully used for many of decade. And now the expectation (bad practice) of using very high ISO gets wrapped up in other systems, like the GH5s. It still comes with other compromises too. 
Darkness IS information in terms of narrative work, and I feel like I'm going to be evangelizing this more and more, and I'm already blue in the face as it is. ? Yes, this emoji is yellow. 
The viewer does not need to see every detail in a scene to comphrehend what the scene is relating. That would fall more into line with documentation. A narrative piece is not a document of antiquity, it's a story, therefore an illusion. The human brain is really good at filling in the blank spaces. All you need to give the viewer are hints, the brain parses the rest. It's pretty remarkable, and testimate to how powerful the mind is.  
Take my profile image of the man sitting in the car. You only see small hints of a car, some seat, some steering wheel, both descending into shadow. But you as the viewer know he's sitting in a car and not a train. Correct? It's what you don't see that's drawling you in. So going back to high ISO, do you really want to see all the details in the scene? I say, shadows are friends, not combatants. 
I learned this actually in my fine art classess in college some 22 years ago, and it was practiced knowledge long, long, long before that, and has been effective for all kinds of mediums within the arts and sciences. 

Yes, and in combination with a Tiffen Low light contrast filter.
But Keep in mind my objective here was to challenge the "unacceptable noise" comment that some people hold against this camera, and others in the same class in general. 
A little Neat Video goes a long way. Also, by the time you add in more contrast or an s-curve to the footage, a lot of those artifacts perceptually go bye-bye. This isn't anything new. It has to be done on a lot of Alexa, RED and certaintly Blackmagic systems as well. 
Sony set such a high and impractical bar in my opinion. The high ISO capability is literally teaching a generation of how to NOT properly light and expose a dark scene, esstentially stripping away a really good tool that has been succesfully used for many of decade. And now the expectation (bad practice) of using very high ISO gets wrapped up in other systems, like the GH5s. It still comes with other compromises too. 
Darkness IS information in terms of narrative work, and I feel like I'm going to be evangelizing this more and more, and I'm already blue in the face as it is. ? Yes, this emoji is yellow. 
The viewer does not need to see every detail in a scene to comphrehend what the scene is relating. That would fall more into line with documentation. A narrative piece is not a document of antiquity, it's a story, therefore an illusion. The human brain is really good at filling in the blank spaces. All you need to give the viewer are hints, the brain parses the rest. It's pretty remarkable, and testimate to how powerful the mind is.  
Take my profile image of the man sitting in the car. You only see small hints of a car, some seat, some steering wheel, both descending into shadow. But you as the viewer know he's sitting in a car and not a train. Correct? It's what you don't see that's drawling you in. So going back to high ISO, do you really want to see all the details in the scene? I say, shadows are friends, not combatants. 
I learned this actually in my fine art classess in college some 22 years ago, and it was practiced knowledge long, long, long before that, and has been effective for all kinds of mediums within the arts and sciences. 

I fully expect it will one day. At least, manufacturers seem to pour a lot of resources into trying. 
 
I always knew the NX1 was a slut. ?

Nothing some noise reduction in post can't handle: