kye

You might benefit from the Voice Isolation feature in Resolve. I'm not sure if this is a paid feature or in free version, but it seems to work pretty well in some situations. In general though, having something on the microphones to block them from wind is essential. You can't side-step the laws of physics 🙂 That's true of almost every camera. The closest you get it right in-camera the better the output will be.

Gotta love a demo video that starts with a world-famous model / actress... All else being equal, products like this probably help to keep film alive. There's a chance the rich might adopt things like this, and perhaps burn through film like they're rich (because they are). For the rest of us, if you wanted to shoot on 8mm film then get yourself a second-hand real film camera and then benefit from the film consumption of the rich to give economies of scale. Personally, I think that the iPhone / smartphones have finally gotten here. The compression artefacts (and even the crushing over-processing) are made invisible by the time you add enough blur and grain to get a semi-decent match, and they've finally caught up in terms of dynamic range, so you can have contrasty mids with strong saturation but gentle and extended rolloffs. Also, the more these images trend on social media, the more my OG BMPCC and BMMCC go up in value!

Agreed that it's often about the processing. I think there's a bunch of stuff going on and often people don't understand the variables, or aren't taking into account all the relevant ones. Also, people forget that the main goal of any codec is getting nuanced skin tones in the mids of whatever display space you'll be outputting to. In that context: RAW in 12-bit is Linear, which is only about the same quality as 10-bit Log LOG in 10-bit isn't significantly better than 709 in 8-bit when exposed well It's commonly believed that only 12+bit RAW let's you adjust exposure and WB in post, and that 10-bit LOG is required for professional work, but thanks to colour management we can adjust exposure and WB in any of these (obviously 12-bit RAW > 10-bit LOG > 8-bit 709 from most cameras in real life and for big changes but if you're only making small changes then the errors are often negligible) 8-bit LOG is much worse than 8-bit 709 unless you were delivering to HDR (because if you convert LOG to 709 then you're pulling the bits in the mids apart significantly, which is absolutely visible) HLG is sometimes better than LOG - despite "HLG" being a marketing phrase and not a standard (unlike rec2020 or rec2100) it typically has a rec709 curve up to the mids then has a more aggressive highlight rolloff above that to keep the whole DR of the sensor, and combines this with a rec709 level of saturation. This is brilliant because it typically means that you get the benefits of having a 10-bit image with 709-levels of saturation and the full DR of the sensor. This is superior to a 10-bit LOG profile from the same camera (unless you clip a colour channel) because there is greater bit-density in the mids for skin tones (roughly equivalent to 12-bit LOG) and you get to keep the whole DR. You can also change exposure and WB in post with proper colour management. The GH5 and iPhone implementations of HLG are like this. The pros require greater quality than consumers because they have to keep clients happy when viewing the images without any compression. Much of the subtleties get crunched by streaming compression, and unless you're shooting in controlled conditions you can't really expect to keep the last levels of nuance right into the final delivery. I'm keen to learn more about what happens at this stage of processing. If you have resources on this, please share! The other aspect to consider is that RAW and uncompressed aren't the same thing. The megapixel race has obscured the fact that very close to 100% of material is now being shot at resolutions above the delivery resolution. This is fine, and oversampling is great for image quality, but if you want to shoot RAW (and get the benefits of having no processing in-camera) and not have to deal with 5K / 6K / 8K source files when delivering 4K or even 1080p, then you have to deal with the sensor crop and having your whole lens package changed because of it. The alternative to this, and what I think is the big advantage of Prores, is to have a full sensor readout downscaled in-camera, but unfortunately this typically means that you have some degree of loss of flexibility to the source image (either by compression, bit-depth reduction, or even straight-out over processing like iPhone 14 did). The alternative is to downscale in-camera and then just save the images as uncompressed. There is nothing stopping manufacturers from implementing this. The GH5 downscaled 5K in-camera and many cameras record Cinema DNG sequences in-camera - just combine the two and we're there.

Just got around to watching this - interesting stuff. One thing described as a key element to the French New Wave was the availability of affordable and portable 16mm film cameras, allowing the available-light, hand-held shooting style. I see from wikipedia that the Italian Neorealism was a precursor to the FNW, with Italian Neorealism in full swing from ~1945-1955 and FNW not really getting started until the late 1950s. I couldn't find any good timeline about when 16mm film became affordable - but I did note that wikipedia said "The format was used extensively during World War II, and there was a huge expansion of 16 mm professional filmmaking in the post-war years." so maybe the Italian Neorealism was the first movement to really benefit from this technological advancement? I was also under the impression that the FNW was the innovative movement that took the new tech and developed new techniques that fully utilised it, but maybe that's not the case?

While not being action-camera sized, the BMMCC had RAW (compressed and uncompressed) from a S16 sensor (only a tiny bit smaller than 1" sensor) approaching a decade ago. Of course, that was with 1080p - the mindless pursuit of increasing resolution means that what was once possible now generates too high data-rates, too much heat from processing, etc. Realistically, there isn't a huge overlap between the people who want RAW and the people who demand cameras smaller than a RED Komodo. I wish there was, as I think it would be great, but I just don't think it's true! You didn't answer my question. I'll just write lines until you tell me to stop....

Interesting! You must have really been utilising something that moved from software to hardware in the upgrade - every benchmark I've seen was incremental between the two. Unless your M1 wasn't an M1 Max? I use a 13" MBP as my only computer, but connect it to my 32" UHD panel / hifi audio setup for normal uses, and then when working in Resolve I connect the UI to a 27" FHD panel to the side of my view, and the BM UltraStudio to my UHD panel as a clean 1080p feed of the timeline. I also sit about 1.5m/yards from the screens and operate with wireless kb / trackpad / BM Speed Editor / BM Micro Panel, which is why I have a large 1080p panel for the UI. Absolutely. My current 2020 Intel MBP is enough for editing 4K 10-bit IPB h264/h265 on a 1080p timeline with very basic colour applied. Then I can apply heavier colour grading and effects before exporting. At the moment it's not fast enough to edit the footage with the heavy colour grading applied, but I make do. When the M1 Mac Mini came out I contemplated getting one as a fast editing machine but there was just too many hurdles to overcome with the need to sync two computers. The fundamental logic is this: If you need to be portable then you need a laptop If you want a desktop as well then you either need to separate your uses or you need to sync between them I didn't want to separate my uses, so that was it, game over, and so that meant I needed a relatively powerful laptop. It would have been cheaper to get a desktop only setup, but it just didn't work for me.

I thought that GoPro models are fixed focus? and were in-focus between about 30cm and infinity? Going to a larger sensor size might mean they'd have to include AF, which would be a significant change over a fixed focus approach. Still, it would be good to get a larger sensor, as that would improve low-light performance etc. The size of the camera is a variable to watch though. I thought that the RX0 was a really interesting camera and that despite Sony telling everyone it wasn't an action camera and not to review it like that, mostly people were too stupid to take that advice and so it was largely mis-understood and not really utilised for its potential. Unfortunately it had many of the normal Sony weaknesses including overheating. It would be really interesting to see what Panny or Oly would do with a similar form-factor, but based on the poor understanding of the RX0 I wouldn't think they'd make an attempt...

Not all. The Canon XC10 included the whole sensor DR in its standard profile. I really wish that other camera companies would adopt this practice, but unfortunately they don't. https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3335_s17.pdf Don't confuse the bit-depth with DR, they're independent variables. You can take an ARRI Alexa image and make it 4-bit if you like, and that doesn't radically reduce the DR. You're confusing a bunch of things. I personally absolutely HATE the look of 60p. I am so sensitive to this look now that 30p also looks pretty awful to me. It looks far less like reality than 24p does, 60p/30p look like hyper-reality, like how reality would look if I was part robot living in the year 3000 after I'd taken my smart drugs for the day. I don't know why they look like this, but they do. If you analyse all the variables involved then you become aware that 24p and 60p are both significantly different to how reality looks to our eyes, they are just making different trade-offs, and neither one is more 'correct' than the other. The errors of 24p are just less offensive than those of 60p to me, and many others too. I can understand that watching sports in 60p is useful because there are quick motions of the ball etc, so it's great for making things obvious, but it doesn't look real. Oddly, when playing video games, 60p / 120p / 240p don't have the same look to me as video. Maybe it's to do with interacting vs passively watching, I'm not sure. Maybe it's that games are artificial and so the artificial look of those frame rates doesn't clash with the aesthetic. I understand that you like the look of 60p and you want to make things look like reality, but that's not what everyone wants. Cool. If we promise to never say a bad word against the mighty and perfect GoPro will you promise not to come and tell us off for blaspheming? Seriously though, the sooner you accept that not everyone wants what you want, shoots what you shoot, shoots how you shoot, the sooner you'll be able to discuss things rather than always argue with people.

Here's a BTS and sample footage of a music video shot on the Pro model... It shows some temporal NR ghosting in this footage (which admittedly is a bit of a torture test in this regard) but still worth noting (linked to timestamp):

So, now that even a phone is a capable camera we'll have to stop obsessing on the specs and learn to make engaging films? ........NAH!!!!

I have a very vague recollection that a Panasonic rep said that they weren't interested in going to 8K, but who knows if that was correct or if something might have changed. The idea of having a base model, a video variant and a high-res stills variant is a pretty common one now.

They've registered two new cameras in China recently: According to 43rumours: https://www.43rumors.com/panasonic-officially-registered-another-new-model-in-china-we-now-have-two-cameras-coming-soon/ How long is it normally between wild YouTuber parties and NDAs elapsing?

Cined lab test of the iPhone 15 is out... https://www.cined.com/iphone-15-pro-lab-test-rolling-shutter-dynamic-range-and-exposure-latitude/ Highlights: Rolling shutter is very low (4.7-5ms for rear cameras and 9.3ms for front-facing camera) DR varies across ISOs due to heavy NR and processing (testing was done in 4K Prores HQ Apple Log) and they had to adapt their testing methodology for a range of reasons DR measurements are in the 11-14stops range, depending on how you measure them, and some assume no NR but this has tonnes of it, so.... In terms of exposure latitude it has 5-6 stops of latitude, depending on ISO. In general the latitude relates to the DR, so by comparing with cameras that have 12 stops of DR and 8 stops of latitude, that would mean the iPhone has 9-10 stops of DR In the end, it's a smartphone with a tiny little sensor The article is a good read and there's lots of nuance there.

But I hold you personally accountable for the entire content of the internet! Well, except for when @BTM_Pix makes funny jokes or posts ironic pictures of spam - that's all him.

Interesting video. First things first - could that guy be any cooler? I'm pretty sure there isn't a single element in that video that isn't an automatic 10/10 for hipster chic. Wow. Talk about those people whose whole life is their own art project! Secondly, his commentary is all over the place. I see the differences he's talking about in the footage, plus a great many more that he probably sees but didn't mention - there are hue shifts and gamma shifts and subtractive colour operations and all sorts of wonderful things that are different between the two cameras. However, he points to differences and says "see the difference with 10-bit?" whereas I think the differences are likely to be a mix of: FX6 sensor read-out bit-depth FX6 image processing Sony RAW-LOG profile conversion (gamma, gamut, and bit-depth) FX6 compression I built a DCTL plugin for Resolve that reduces the bit-depth of the image, and to my surprise, you can reduce the bit-depth of rec 709 footage to 6-bits (and some shots to 5bit!) before there are visible changes. I'm not saying that there aren't any differences between 16-bit and 10-bit, because there are (however subtle they might be) but the things he was pointing at were definitely NOT all bit-depth related, and I'd suggest that most of them were processing/compression related actually. If you want to understand what the differences are with one parameter, you can't change dozens of them at once and then just declare that all differences are due to the one variable you want to talk about. You could take his whole video and just replace the phrase "10-bit" with "compression" and it would make just as much sense, despite having exactly the same examples. So yeah, it's a great video to show an FX6 LOG vs Komodo X RAW comparison, but it isn't an isolated 10-bit vs 16-bit comparison.

In Cullen Kellys most recent livestream he mentioned that he's working on a guide for Resolve around the "why don't my exports look the same on YouTube as they do in Resolve" question, and he said that it's a recurring problem because it's actually about 20 problems and you need to make sure that every step is correct. I suspect that most of these issues will apply to any NLE, not just Resolve. It might actually be more difficult for other NLEs because serious Resolve users will purchase BM hardware to get a clean video out signal that bypasses all the OS colour profiles etc, whereas I don't know how available/popular such a setup is with other NLEs, so Resolve likely skips some of the issues on other packages.

Would he have any say in that? My guess would be a change of management / ownership. Does having a YT channel with backlog of videos require any work at the back-end? If it was generating spam or unhelpful customer enquiries or something maybe they just pulled it to save on some kind of management effort required? Or maybe it was a PR decision and the content was just dated? Things move fast in consumer electronics after all..

Thanks for the promotion to colourist @markr041! It seems like we need to get a handle on what the relative strengths and weaknesses are across the options. Certainly, lower DR in a camera used to record outdoors in uncontrolled conditions with a wide-angle lens likely to have the sun in-shot is a long way from the ideal situation... and just for your information, I am currently revising my setup to include a second camera to my GX85 because I want something with more DR for exactly these reasons. Realistically it's going to depend on what you're shooting and how that aligns with the relative strengths/weaknesses of the different models. So far we have what... iPhone 15, GoPro 12, Insta360 Ace (Pro), DJI Osmo Pocket 3, and DJI Osmo Action. Are there others in this fixed-lens / super-compact / small-sensor market segment?

It sounds like a very "business" decision to me. That's the intellectual property of <holding company name> so <no-one else can have it / no-one can have it for free / we don't want to risk being sued during the transfer process / etc>. If this was a company permanently closing a storefront / restroom / whatever during a business reshuffle then no-one would bat an eyelid, but when there's any element of common good then people notice. Unfortunately, the idea of a sharing economy is basically incompatible with a zero-sum-game business mindset, which is where the confusion / reactions start. There's a fascinating relationship between the social contract and the legal frameworks that control how businesses deal with the public, and people often react very differently to how business people would think they do.

I accidentally skipped winter one year, with a couple of overseas trips in the northern hemisphere happening to be over the coldest part of the year. I didn't realise it until the following winter what I was like "Gee, it's getting cold/wet now... it hadn't been like this since.... hang on a second!!" If I won lotto, I'd do that every year 🙂

Indeed! Good luck with this, though I'm not optimistic.

200Mbps should be fine. The only times having more bitrate would help is when there is huge amounts of random movement, so scenes with water / snow falling / rain / trees blowing in the wind / etc. Other things to try are doing a factory reset on the camera, and it might be a good time to update the firmware if you're not on the latest version. Also, check the firmware for each lens you use, those have firmware too!

Perhaps you were thinking of @Mako Sports?

Obviously the decision between these would be heavily dependent on the situation, but obviously I'd choose the smallest one for the millions of reasons I've already shared. When I look at the choices of S5iiX, Sony, GX85, Nikon, Fuji, I see the choice as being around: Size and weight - for both your own ergonomics as well as how stealth you wish to be Dynamic Range - some of these setups have higher DR than others Stabilisation - some of these setups will have Dual IS, but i'm assuming some won't Obviously there are loads of other things going on too, but these are the ones that I see mattering to me. Ones that don't matter to me are: DoF - almost all these lenses are capable of creating levels of background defocus used in cinema, which is enough for me Codec / resolution - the GX85 with 100Mbps 4K IPB h264 codec edits fine on my Intel MBP and is sufficient on a 1080p timeline (if it's good enough for Hollywood it's good enough for me) so I don't need extra resolution or ALL-I to edit with Colour science - with colour management any of these cameras can be coloured just as easily as any other and [production design] > [colour grading ability] > [camera colour science]

This is a great point - if you don't need the portability then a Mac Mini would be spectacular value. They're not powerful enough for the serious colourists, but I think those not as far into their careers use them, and I've heard that large post-houses often use them for background / batch tasks like preparing footage, rendering projects etc. The Mac Studios with the Ultra processors are apparently stunning performers, but more expensive obviously.