Dimitris Stasinos

I checked out Media Player Classic Home Cinema (MPC-HC). It's an improvement over VLC, but it does not match my other color-managed applications (yet!). Would you guys mind sharing your settings or any insights? Currently, I have found:
A) Davinci resolve, Krita, Rawtherapee, and GIMP all look identical, and all are manually set to use my calibrated icc profile. In the case of Resolve, this includes generating a 3D LUT from the icc profile using DisplayCAL, as per the tutorial here. (Though I am using sRGB instead of Rec709).
B) MPC-HC looks identical to the default Windows Picture and Photo Viewer, but appears to have slightly more contrast than the programs listed in A), or maybe just a slightly lower black level. I adjusted every setting I could find, but could only get worse results, not better. Reading through Wikipedia, I came across this:
AND I notice that in the color management section of MPC-HC, you can choose between Gamma 2.2, 2.35, and 2.4. So perhaps MPC-HC is actually using a single gamma value? That would explain why it looks just BARELY off from the A) programs.
C) VLC is on its own planet. Changing renderers will change the colors around, but they don't explain what is actually happening so it's anyone's guess which settings are most accurate.
 
I couldn't agree more. Every day, lots of people here on EOSHD discuss the color science of various cameras. I'm assuming they are all viewing on calibrated monitors? If so, I hope they will chime in and help us out!

I just calibrated my monitor again, but this time used DisplayCal as @KnightsFan suggested, instead of iProfiler. Same settings but totally different results. X-rite's app (iProfiler) gives a strange red shift. Many users have mentioned the same thing, so i can definitely confirm this.
As for After Effects, i forced the application to use my icc profile and the results where totally off. I tried the same thing with Premiere by exporting stills which i passed through a simple colorimetry process using Photoshop. I am sure i made a lot of mistakes and this was not a scientific test in any universe but i can say this with confidence: The color management in Adobe video apps on a mac doesn't work in harmony with Colorsync. Even if you force these apps to implement an icc profile you can't trust what you see.
KnightFan said that VLC's color is not accurate and i totally agree. But i was not expecting in any case that i would see the exact color management inside 2 widely used Adobe's apps.
I made a custom lut in Photoshop, then added that on an adjustment layer in AE and exported my files again. That was the quickest way to fix the color shift and it worked as a charm. I think...
Overall i think those are major issues and must be discussed more on the forums. It's funny cause we talk everyday about how disruptive a codec or a compression method could be and i just discovered that every single clip i have exported from AE has been rendered in a slightly shifted colorspace.

Keep in mind that the VCGT (video card gamma table) is universal, while the icc profile is not. So you should have the correct gamma everywhere already.
Assuming Quicktime uses the calibrated ICC profile, yes, that is correct. (As a Windows user, I have no experience with Quicktime).
If an application such as Quicktime is verifiably correct, then yes, you will probably have to use a LUT to make your other software match. I would try to confirm Quicktime's accuracy using image editors, as they usually have better icc profile support than video applications (after all, icc profiles are used calibrate printers for printing photos). If 4-5 different photo editors all use the calibrated icc profile and match each other and quicktime, you can be reasonably certain those are all correct.
However, gamma should be correct already (if my understanding is correct... I'm still figuring this out!) so my suspicion is that it's a problem with actual colors, or with video vs. data levels, rather than a gamma problem. I don't know how color management works in AE.
 
Which software to you use for calibration? I use DisplayCAL. It has a lot of nice tools, like generating a LUT from the icc profile. The forums there seem like a good place to ask questions.
Final note: VLC absolutely SUCKS for color. Afaik, there is no way to use an icc profile, and even a simple thing like specifying 16-235 vs. 0-255 levels is unreliable. You can be reasonably certain that VLC's color is not accurate.

There where numerous debates in the late 90s about bit depth & sampling frequency in audio. The majority of professional audio engineers today will agree that a 24 bit, 96 khz audio recording is more than enough for music, except sound design applications where you may want to slow down the recording. With a proper parallelism, a musician will get this. A 1080p video will be totally "fine" for every web application just as 16 bit/44khz will be more than enough for an audio track that will end up in Spotify or Soundcloud in a shitty audio codec.
But if your client/musician are one of those guys who are considering analog equipment as superior due to it's "warmer" sound, or he is trying to justify a 10000 $ investment in a single rack audio unit which magically adds wonderful harmonics on a poorly mastered track, then don't try to explain anything. Just shoot in 4K and make him happy :).

There where numerous debates in the late 90s about bit depth & sampling frequency in audio. The majority of professional audio engineers today will agree that a 24 bit, 96 khz audio recording is more than enough for music, except sound design applications where you may want to slow down the recording. With a proper parallelism, a musician will get this. A 1080p video will be totally "fine" for every web application just as 16 bit/44khz will be more than enough for an audio track that will end up in Spotify or Soundcloud in a shitty audio codec.
But if your client/musician are one of those guys who are considering analog equipment as superior due to it's "warmer" sound, or he is trying to justify a 10000 $ investment in a single rack audio unit which magically adds wonderful harmonics on a poorly mastered track, then don't try to explain anything. Just shoot in 4K and make him happy :).

“A filmmaker is always provoking some reaction from an audience.”
I totally agree Andrew. But the means a filmmaker uses to achieve this can define the quality of his art (at least from my point of view, anyone can disagree). The easiest way to challenge your audience is by serving them scenes with genitals being cut with a pair of scissors or crashed by stones and then calling them puritans based on their totally justified reactions. Is it a bad thing that most people can’t stand sadism & graphic violence in cinema? This doesn’t have to do with a pair of tits being “shown” but with a pair of tits being “cut off” (plus children being shot). And you are calling this an antidote? I don’t get this but who knows, maybe i am a puritan too. But in any case i consider my self as lucky for not enjoying his films.

I just tried the app. The phone connects instantly to the camera (actually faster than Image app...) and it works! This community is a gem, thanks to people like you sir!

Yeah, there's no way you won't be able to reach this one. You could operate it with boxing gloves on and still get it into record
Mmmmm....operating in boxing gloves as a gimbal shock absorber. Now theres a thought !

Well, thanks to a bit of jet lag boredom, that escalated quickly and tomorrow is now today.
I have an Alcatel Pixi 4 (4) which is a cheap 4 inch Android phone which you can get for £36.50 off Amazon. They also do a 3.5 inch version as well. 
As a phone its not going to give Samsung or Apple any sleepless nights but its a good little tool for stuff like being a pocket hotspot or running custom remote control apps
This is it running an app I've just made will basically turn it into what you want which is a big record button for the GX80 (or any Panasonic camera).
You just press the screen to toggle between record and stop (red when recording).  Cheaper and easier than knocking up a piece of hardware for a task like this.

App is here if anyone needs it.
https://mega.nz/#!5mpXTB4J!4v8WNh1l8E7HpqO9piV43LdL5NPWECVH694ye2ICDVw
 

From the hardware point of view, you'd need a wifi capable Arduino or similar, a switch, an LED (optional) and a power source (either USB or Lipo).
Software is obviously all custom from scratch so you'd need to write that too
For something like you are trying to do though, I think I might be tempted to look at a cheap generic 3.5" or 4" Android smartphone and an app. They have the advantage of being an integrated solution so you wouldn't have to mess with wiring and powering options and a case and at £30-50 they'd work out to be not much more expensive than buying the components.
I'll knock a quick app up tomorrow to show you what I mean.

“A filmmaker is always provoking some reaction from an audience.”
I totally agree Andrew. But the means a filmmaker uses to achieve this can define the quality of his art (at least from my point of view, anyone can disagree). The easiest way to challenge your audience is by serving them scenes with genitals being cut with a pair of scissors or crashed by stones and then calling them puritans based on their totally justified reactions. Is it a bad thing that most people can’t stand sadism & graphic violence in cinema? This doesn’t have to do with a pair of tits being “shown” but with a pair of tits being “cut off” (plus children being shot). And you are calling this an antidote? I don’t get this but who knows, maybe i am a puritan too. But in any case i consider my self as lucky for not enjoying his films.

“A filmmaker is always provoking some reaction from an audience.”
I totally agree Andrew. But the means a filmmaker uses to achieve this can define the quality of his art (at least from my point of view, anyone can disagree). The easiest way to challenge your audience is by serving them scenes with genitals being cut with a pair of scissors or crashed by stones and then calling them puritans based on their totally justified reactions. Is it a bad thing that most people can’t stand sadism & graphic violence in cinema? This doesn’t have to do with a pair of tits being “shown” but with a pair of tits being “cut off” (plus children being shot). And you are calling this an antidote? I don’t get this but who knows, maybe i am a puritan too. But in any case i consider my self as lucky for not enjoying his films.

Maybe you can use it with a counterweight to help balancing, if your gimbal can handle the weight of the camera+counterweight.

Moment, which makes lenses for smartphones, sell a counterweight with this purpose: https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/11/21/16686030/moment-lens-dji-osmi-gimbal-official-counterweight-iphone-8-plus

So we are reaching that freaking point where filmmakers are considering smartphones as tools and vloggers want to record stuff in ProRes or even RAW... Wow.. BM shouldn't have put that rec button above the mount. It's like a beacon for these guys. You know, these guys that when the spec list of this camera showed up the first thing that came on their mind was "dude this is fu**ing ugly!!!". The same guys that would make a Vlog with an Alexa if the price was "right" for them, thank god it isn't...
 

I really can't see how this camera will disturb the Lumix shooters. Apart from all the good stuff which BM is known for (such as colour science, colour science and maybe colour science too), the lowlight performance is expected to be worse than GH5 and the crop factor is a deal breaker for many shooters. You can't go wide enough with a 1 inch sensor, nor handheld. CFast cards are expensive too and the majority of GH5 users are still bitching for the terrible autofocus performance, oh wait to see this baby  Don't get me wrong, i believe this will be a monster tool for many of us, but it won't be GH5's Nemesis in any case. A better cinema camera? Yeah why not. But don't expect to see this used in weddings & documentaries. 

The price will intimidate many GH users. A large chunk of them like to think that their camera is the very best: anything more expensive is stupid overkill and anything equal or less is garbage. This price bracket seems to be where the most fragile egos exist. 

I really can't see how this camera will disturb the Lumix shooters. Apart from all the good stuff which BM is known for (such as colour science, colour science and maybe colour science too), the lowlight performance is expected to be worse than GH5 and the crop factor is a deal breaker for many shooters. You can't go wide enough with a 1 inch sensor, nor handheld. CFast cards are expensive too and the majority of GH5 users are still bitching for the terrible autofocus performance, oh wait to see this baby  Don't get me wrong, i believe this will be a monster tool for many of us, but it won't be GH5's Nemesis in any case. A better cinema camera? Yeah why not. But don't expect to see this used in weddings & documentaries. 

You won't see many GH5s in productions like this. This is a showcase, made specifically to promote GH5s. Of course you don't need IBIS if you are using a gimbal and a dolly, but why would you use a GH5 on a shoot like this, where only the daily cost of renting the rig is much more expensive that the camera's price? Why on earth would anyone make a custom set with expensive lighting setups, cranes & remote controlled gimbals to shoot with an MFT camera which hardly delivers 12 stops of DR in a compressed format?

You won't see many GH5s in productions like this. This is a showcase, made specifically to promote GH5s. Of course you don't need IBIS if you are using a gimbal and a dolly, but why would you use a GH5 on a shoot like this, where only the daily cost of renting the rig is much more expensive that the camera's price? Why on earth would anyone make a custom set with expensive lighting setups, cranes & remote controlled gimbals to shoot with an MFT camera which hardly delivers 12 stops of DR in a compressed format?

You won't see many GH5s in productions like this. This is a showcase, made specifically to promote GH5s. Of course you don't need IBIS if you are using a gimbal and a dolly, but why would you use a GH5 on a shoot like this, where only the daily cost of renting the rig is much more expensive that the camera's price? Why on earth would anyone make a custom set with expensive lighting setups, cranes & remote controlled gimbals to shoot with an MFT camera which hardly delivers 12 stops of DR in a compressed format?

the extra $500 is the "you know you fuckin want it" tax.

It is obvious that the reasons they did not implement IBIS in GH5s are clearly technical, although I think it is possible with this new sensor after some minor mods in the body. I respect every technical justification for not implementing IBIS, like: It doesn't fit, it generates heat ,vignetting is introduced etc. But those exaggerated claims like: "We asked the pros and they said NO, IBIS sucks, don't implement this, cinema cameras don't have IBIS, leave this off board please", cmon these are bullsh$t... GH5's target group (i am talking about the majority here) does not mount their cameras on cars, and even if they will, the proper way is to put the camera on a gimbal. How many users have encountered problems with these  "ibis jumps" when using GH5 on a gimbal? I am using this camera every day for almost 6 months now. I have never switched IBIS off, and never encountered these problems that "the same company which produced the freakin camera" reports.  Until last week IBIS was one of the reasons to buy a Lumix, and since last week it is a flow which "professionals users reported to Pana"? GH6 will definately have it, paired with a stupid marketing term like "magnet freeze", and those "reported by pros issues" will vanish. We know this, they know this.

It is obvious that the reasons they did not implement IBIS in GH5s are clearly technical, although I think it is possible with this new sensor after some minor mods in the body. I respect every technical justification for not implementing IBIS, like: It doesn't fit, it generates heat ,vignetting is introduced etc. But those exaggerated claims like: "We asked the pros and they said NO, IBIS sucks, don't implement this, cinema cameras don't have IBIS, leave this off board please", cmon these are bullsh$t... GH5's target group (i am talking about the majority here) does not mount their cameras on cars, and even if they will, the proper way is to put the camera on a gimbal. How many users have encountered problems with these  "ibis jumps" when using GH5 on a gimbal? I am using this camera every day for almost 6 months now. I have never switched IBIS off, and never encountered these problems that "the same company which produced the freakin camera" reports.  Until last week IBIS was one of the reasons to buy a Lumix, and since last week it is a flow which "professionals users reported to Pana"? GH6 will definately have it, paired with a stupid marketing term like "magnet freeze", and those "reported by pros issues" will vanish. We know this, they know this.

It is obvious that the reasons they did not implement IBIS in GH5s are clearly technical, although I think it is possible with this new sensor after some minor mods in the body. I respect every technical justification for not implementing IBIS, like: It doesn't fit, it generates heat ,vignetting is introduced etc. But those exaggerated claims like: "We asked the pros and they said NO, IBIS sucks, don't implement this, cinema cameras don't have IBIS, leave this off board please", cmon these are bullsh$t... GH5's target group (i am talking about the majority here) does not mount their cameras on cars, and even if they will, the proper way is to put the camera on a gimbal. How many users have encountered problems with these  "ibis jumps" when using GH5 on a gimbal? I am using this camera every day for almost 6 months now. I have never switched IBIS off, and never encountered these problems that "the same company which produced the freakin camera" reports.  Until last week IBIS was one of the reasons to buy a Lumix, and since last week it is a flow which "professionals users reported to Pana"? GH6 will definately have it, paired with a stupid marketing term like "magnet freeze", and those "reported by pros issues" will vanish. We know this, they know this.

It is obvious that the reasons they did not implement IBIS in GH5s are clearly technical, although I think it is possible with this new sensor after some minor mods in the body. I respect every technical justification for not implementing IBIS, like: It doesn't fit, it generates heat ,vignetting is introduced etc. But those exaggerated claims like: "We asked the pros and they said NO, IBIS sucks, don't implement this, cinema cameras don't have IBIS, leave this off board please", cmon these are bullsh$t... GH5's target group (i am talking about the majority here) does not mount their cameras on cars, and even if they will, the proper way is to put the camera on a gimbal. How many users have encountered problems with these  "ibis jumps" when using GH5 on a gimbal? I am using this camera every day for almost 6 months now. I have never switched IBIS off, and never encountered these problems that "the same company which produced the freakin camera" reports.  Until last week IBIS was one of the reasons to buy a Lumix, and since last week it is a flow which "professionals users reported to Pana"? GH6 will definately have it, paired with a stupid marketing term like "magnet freeze", and those "reported by pros issues" will vanish. We know this, they know this.