Skip77
-
Posts
456 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by Skip77
-
-
The S1R has a $700 price drop
the S1 has a $300 price drop.
-
I found this on a site about h.264 license.
Q: Is it safe to use such patented algorithms?
A: Patent laws vary wildly between jurisdictions, and in many countries patents on algorithms are not recognized. Plus the use of patents to prevent the usage of a format or codec on a specific operating system or together with specific other software might violate antitrust laws. So whether you are safe or not depends on where you live and how judges interpret the law in your jurisdiction. -
1 hour ago, Display Name said:
As I'm intrigued by all this I felt the need to register and take part in it.
Nikon India is trying to say something.
My bet is after they open up ProRes RAW on the Z6 they also announce 10 4:22 4K internal and 4k 60p external.
-
1 hour ago, Sun Daze said:
Thank you Andrew for this. Here's some of my analysis.
Here's from Apple's Cliff Reader:
MY FINDING:
It is not unique to combine Pressler with Molgard - it's rather obvious. And with Chui, to be using jpeg to do this is pretty obvious. Red did it and it's great, but you can't patent something that already exists and was already patented by combining 2 patents and calling it a day
RED will lose this battle. Apple has been down this road before and it says a lot the they are going after RED in the courts.
Remember RED suing SONY?
22 minutes ago, Video Hummus said:Maybe Nikon and Atomos felt that RAW over HDMI isn’t RAW over SATA interface as described in ‘314 patent?
Kinda weird Nikon started selling video creator kits with a Ninja V right after they announced it and it’s been so long and not a word from either company.
Apple has lots of money. Why wouldn’t they just strike a licensing deal and move on? I think there is more to it than that.
And since Sony and Red settled out of court we don’t know what the agreement was. Maybe Sony lost and RED was facing their own infringement of Sony’s patents so they settled out of court and went their separate ways with NDAs in hand.
Atomos has said ProRes RAW is coming later this year. The screen capture from Atomos was dated Aug 1, 2019
Nikon also outlined what the first few firmware updates would be and they've stayed on schedule.
The lack of a more locked down date does concern me.
-
6 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:
In Apple's attempt to overturn RED's claims over visually lossless compressed raw video, the US Patent Office has published documents submitted by RED. These explain their side of the story with particular regard to REDCODE.
If RED can continue to prove that the approach to their codec was novel, RED will win and Apple will have to compensate RED or make a deal in order to sell ProRes RAW in our devices and cameras, such as the Nikon Z6.
I thought Atomos already has agreements with RED to record / capture Pro Res RAW thru their recorders? or are you saying Apple would have to do the same-thing Atomos had to do with RED?
-
2 hours ago, Skip77 said:
Andrew why's this guy allowed to use this language ?
- Jacek and Mattias Burling
- 2
-
1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:
Ha ha ha, what an epic clown you are...
I guess if I told you I've lived in the US you would deny it just like all the other lies you tell as soon as your wrong.
I thought you would wake up yesterday when no one answered in your favor when you and I asked the forum if they agreed with you.. but I guess that's just further confirmation of your troll status.
(And I think it's sweet that you still try with personal attacks even though it only makes us laugh )
Yup, I won't mention any names but I've had a prime suspect for a while on "Skip The Judder 77" true identity
I am not a former EOS member. Sorry to burst your bubble. How many other people did you have issue with?
-
22 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:
Ha ha ha, what an epic clown you are...
I guess if I told you I've lived in the US you would deny it just like all the other lies you tell as soon as your wrong.
Living in America doesn't mean you like Americans does it?
The question you asked the EOS wasn't what I commented about and you seemed flustered and triggered in your last 3-4 post. You commenting on how RedCode is great and Canon can't do RAW shows you don't know much about RED or Canon.
Why do you keep taking shots at me? I haven't posted comments directed at you, I didn't start any new conversations with you.
12 minutes ago, leslie said:welll duh..... the 6k is nearly double the price you would expect it to better.
pretty sure the p4k can capture it... you must be doing something wrong.
technically the only thing being vocal is you!! I would bet most of us p4k owners are happy chappies, but perhaps not everyone. Not sure what your game is, and honestly i dont care.
I guess 4k isnt enough for you. 6k should compensate for whatever it is your lacking. ?
Why do you take issue with me defending the P6K?
Why take personal shots at me? Did I ever post comments to you that offended you? No, so why get nasty with me?
- Jacek and Mattias Burling
- 2
-
23 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:
Same thing for me. I had that troll on ignore but some how he resurfaces.
Because you are trolling and deserve it?
The post you just made is trolling.
I made no comments directed at you.
You guys don't like AMERICANS and that's all this is. You all ran off @webrunner5 because of his views and you attack me for saying the same-things camera related comments that other people post about.
You might want to create a few more new click - bait titles for your You Tube channel instead of bothering with me.
-
15 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:
READ THE FUCKING FACTS IN MY POST YOU FUCKING MORON
Andrew why's this guy allowed to use this language ?
- Kisaha, Andrew Reid and Mattias Burling
- 1
- 2
-
18 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:
For fucks sake.
I have you on ignore, how can I see this post ?
Seeing that I can....just for old times sake and for ONE post only I'm going to respond.
READ THE FUCKING FACTS IN MY POST YOU FUCKING MORON
The lens options for EF mount are not endless if you want to use PL mount lenses.
You want to talk about serious cine shooters an yet want to pretend that PL lenses wouldn't somehow fit in that area ?
Seriously ?
I'm going to repeat this one more time so you can try and understand it.
There is no lens that you can put on an EF mount camera that you can't put on an MFT mount camera but there are plenty of lenses that you can put on an MFT camera that you can't put on an EF mount camera.
Therefore, the lens options for EF aren't "endless" as they literally end at any lens with a flange distance less than 44mm.
As for the rest of your post well I'll leave you to your "spreading false information" and the "unless you feel threatened" fantasies like the pound shop Donald Trump you clearly are.
Fuckity bye.
Last time I checked Sigma Primes, Canon Cine Primes, Zeis, Rokinon and others are EF mount.
The test so far show P6K with EF mount out performs the P4K with speed booster for resolving clarity. Look at the videos comparing the two cameras.
I'll say it again the EF lens options are limitless based on choices and quality. You need more lenses and quality then you need your head checked.
Why are you so triggered? This is not a political board or discussion. You don't know my world views or political views. Let me guess you're not an American and don't like America or Americans.
-
49 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:
EDIT>>>
I had a longer reply but really I think "Fuck off" will suffice.
I'm joining the long list of people that have you on ignore you complete and utter tit.
No problem bud.
My original statement was easy to understand.
It's great you're in the m43 camp and will defend that camera and mount all day long.
But lots of people welcome the P6K and see the advantages. It boggles the mind to think a NEW BM 6K camera can be released and at the same time has this group of m43 P4K owners have horrible, mean spirited, non factual and brutal half a page long comment on why the P6K is not for them. It's like the P6K is the enemy and they have to tell everyone not to buy it.
- arson519 and JordanWright
- 2
-
1 minute ago, BTM_Pix said:
OK, just for clarity for me and all the other dicks that lack the sufficient reading comprehension, talk me through the argument for having a lens mount with less options being better than one with more options.
Hey I responded in kind as one.
How does EF mount have less options?
The lens options are endless and for serious cine shooters EF gives you options that you can build around.
There's no extra cost in dealing with 6K footage. You like spreading false information motion don't you? If you're working with P4K 4k footage then you're not talking a hit working with 6k Braw in Resolve. Resolve has CPU and GPU requirements that are the same for the p4K footage and P6K footage. But keep spreading false info to make your case.
It's been proven the P6K resolves better detail then the p4K. This should worry you but you don't get it or have already made excuses for it.
The P4K is a great camera and no need for you to justify your P4K purchase unless you feel threatened. You can keep your tricked out speed boosters and the issue it brings. I know P4K speed booster users feel like they're beating the system and that they're smart using speed boosters to cheat the camera up to better specs, but most pro's have embraced the P6K because they see the advantages.
And if the additional cost of the P6K bothers you then you really have no business owning the P4K or P6K. ( I paraphrased this from multiple users when they said it too me).
-
6 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:
You think and have seen ?
Which one is it ?
Your argument or one that you have seen?
Since reading comprehension I lacking with you I'll clear this up.
I think (EF mount is better) and have seen better argument for EF mount and lens for the P6k then the other way around.
1 hour ago, drm said:After using both the P4K & P6K cameras for a bit, I do not believe that the P6K is an upgrade to the P4K. It is a sibling or cousin to the P4K. There are advantages to both. If I had to pick only one, I don't know which I would pick. If I could only take one on a trip, I would currently probably take the P4K, because I have a much larger selection of M4/3 lenses. I am positive that either one will give you great footage, if you do your part.
I bet we will end up with three cameras in the P4K line: M4/3, Super35, & Full frame
$1,295, $2,495, $3,495
Did you see more detail in the P6K? Most side by side comparisons show the P6K resolves more detail. Other then that the image quality looks identical ( the P6K does look better in low light even though other have said the P4K with booster would be better),
-
Awesome OP Crevice -
You make a strong case for this camera with footage that backs it up.
-
40 minutes ago, The ghost of squig said:
I have no interest in the P6K. The problem I've found with speed boosters is they sometimes need fine backfocus adjust for individual lenses. I'm using a $180 Vilrox adapter and getting very good results once it's dialed in properly, so I'm going to get a couple more. For $540 extra, my P4K is just as capable as the P6K. For the cost of a P6K I'm looking for features like DPAF in particular, that's why I have my eye on the Sigma FP and upcoming Sony and Nikon models. Just hoping Apple whoops ? and frees internal raw for the masses.
What Sony and Nikon models are you looking forward to?
4 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:I think its being misinterpreted by a lot of people that the Pocket 6K is the Pocket 4K Mark II and it just isn't.
The resolution is one thing but the mount dictates that it a different camera.
There is no lens you can put on the Pocket 6K that you can't put on the Pocket 4K but there are plenty the other way round.
If I look at 3 example lenses of a similar focal length that I own and use on the Pocket 4K but will not fit on the Pocket 6K:
- Panasonic 25mm f1.7 MFT mount
- 7Artisans 28mm f1.4 M mount
- REDPro Prime 25mm t1.8 PL mount
So would I prefer the bump in resolution or to be able to use those lenses?
I'd like both but I'll take the lenses thanks.
That doesn't mean its right for everyone, of course, but for me as a Pocket 4K owner its my preference.
What seems to be forgotten in all this is that when the BMCC was launched with the EF mount, people were absolutely thrilled right up until the point that BM produced the MFT mount version shortly after which devalued the EF version immediately as everyone wanted the more versatile mount.
So I find it curious that the EF was the "wrong" mount and the MFT was the right mount then and yet now it seems to be the other way round when even leaving aside the additional adaption capabilities there are also far better MFT mount lenses available now than there was then too.
Who knows whether history will repeat itself again here and the Pocket 6K will be released with an MFT mount?
MFT lens won't cover the APS-C sensor, right?
I think and have sen a better argument for EF mount and lens for the P6k then the other way around. MFT P4K users are more vocal but the side by side samples sow better detail and clarity on the P6K EF mount. You can't get detail back if the P4K can't capture it.
The P4K looks great until you compare it to the P6K. (detail wise).
-
1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:
Ok then, let's ask them.
Hey everyone, Skipp here says that all of you believe that Sony and Canon shoots Raw that is natively supported in FCPX.
In other words, you can drag n drop ML Raw files from a 5D or raw footage from a Sony straight from the card in camera onto a FCPX timeline and access the raw settings tab, just like with RedCode.
Personally I know for a fact it's 100% bullshit. But I'm curious about his comment about you all.
If anyone reading actually does believe that, let us know.
I said Canon DSLR shoots RAW that's unlocked thru Magic Lantern. You said lower end Canon DSLR cameras don't shoot RAW.
I never commented on any RAW file to FCPX.
You might want to focus a little more on your questions.
1 hour ago, mercer said:I do not believe that is true, otherwise I would be taking my MLV files directly into FCPX.
However, I think Skip might believe that all Raw is the same, which we know it is not, just like he is confused with the stutter, judder, flicker 24fps debate.
So, in short, I don’t think Skip is having the same conversations we are having and rather than acknowledging that, he is doubling down and grasping onto single words in sentences to save face.
In other news, how did the Redcode files from the Raven get along with your computer?
I never commented if ML RAW worked inside FCPX. Not sure were he got that question from.
I have said all along RED is keeping the Canon and Sony's of the world from bringing RAW to the lower end cameras. Matty has said it's not RED's fault except that RedCode is so wonderful that that's why RED Raw works on FCPX natively.
RED's kept the other complies from developing their own RAW formats based on RED patients.
1 hour ago, mercer said:I do not believe that is true, otherwise I would be taking my MLV files directly into FCPX.
However, I think Skip might believe that all Raw is the same, which we know it is not, just like he is confused with the stutter, judder, flicker 24fps debate.
So, in short, I don’t think Skip is having the same conversations we are having and rather than acknowledging that, he is doubling down and grasping onto single words in sentences to save face.
In other news, how did the Redcode files from the Raven get along with your computer?
@mercer you know PP and FCPX have to allow plug ins to work within their software. This is one thing @webrunner5 was correct about. You have to pay to play.
He was also right about RED stopping or making it hard for other companies to shoot RAW.
-
1 hour ago, mercer said:
Don’t confuse my lack of caring as “riding the fence.” I come to this site to learn and to discuss filmmaking and filmmaking gear, not to argue with people that are incapable of admitting when they’re wrong.
24fps has a stutter/judder, end of discussion. It is a fact! In all honesty, the word FLICKER, is probably a better choice, but with semantics aside, 24fps is anything but smooth.
https://www.filmindependent.org/blog/hacking-film-24-frames-per-second/
24fps is motion picture cinematic's choice forever. The argument that 24fps has a built in stutter is ridiculous. If 24fps had a built in stutter it would be unwatchable.
24fps has a stutter that happens but it' not built in. The GH5 has a massive stutter glitch that happens if you move left or right for 3 seconds. That's the GH5's fault. This has all been discussed in the other thread started by that smart guy that was kicked out of the EOS.
1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:Stutter and judder. Canon and Sony raw works natively in FCPX. The RED plugin doesn't exist. The P6K can only shoot videoish. The P6K can not shoot videoish. He has said so much weird stuff it's impossible to keep track.
Plus he always puts naive flame baits and personal attacks in the posts to try and derail them and shift focus when he knows he is wrong. Classic troll behavior or that of a juvenile.
Canon DLSR cameras have been able to shoot RAW for 10 years.
And RedCode is a marketing gimmick.
Everyone else is smart enough to see you are wrong.
2 hours ago, KnightsFan said:People who says 24fps has no stutter should be condemned to a life of playing first person shooters at 24 fps.
Did you see that stutter at 2:27 second mark. Man his mouth and face just juddered like crazy.
-
1 hour ago, mercer said:
Thanks, I guess I better get that plugin before Red forbids FCPX users to access it.
Dont worry, I already went a round with that guy and I really don’t have the time, or inclination, to debate basic camera operations and the history of 24p in cinema with someone who will cherry pick one word in a sentence to try and prove his argument.
Thanks, but don’t go too crazy, I base a lot of my opinions on mojo.
Btw, I recently used the Samyang 50mm 1.4 on a shoot and I think I may have a hard time parting with that lens. Lol.
It's not cherry picking. It's actually trying to stop false information about 24fps having a built in stutter. It's not my fault you ride the fence on every comment you make. You even say that when you post. You play for people to like you instead of having an opinion. You act like this is high school and you want to be part of the click.
Sorry but the word videoish that @Mattias Burling threw out pissed me off because he did it as an asshat and did nothing to back it up.
So please be on your way and keep my name out of your post.
1 hour ago, Mattias Burling said:It's in the inspector under clip information. But keep it to yourself. @Skip77 will attack you if you find it useful.
Again you bring nothing to defend yourself. Why?
You're not up to date on RED and clearly you are the one that doesn't read or comprehend people's post. That's why people have to explain everything to you over and over again.
Do you need anymore help understanding FCPX?
-
13 minutes ago, drm said:
I was wondering about the Speedbooster when I watched the video as well. The P4K footage looked almost out of focus in places compared to the P6K footage. I wonder if his Metabones is soft or if he missed focus (over, and over...). If there is that much of a jump in sharpness between the 6K downsampled to 4K and the 4K straight out of the P4K, that is surprising to me. Another thing to add to my comparison list...
I think the added or loss of detail is the difference between the P6K and P4K. Unless you zoom in you don't notice and if you didn't have P6K footage to compare it to you also wouldn't know the P6K had more detail. Detail is also not sharpness.
-
8 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:
Don't know why anyone would think the P6K captures vidoish footage. That's just crazy. It's a cinema camera for crying out loud.
I was just mocking you and your comments big guy.
5 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:This.
Oh my videoish comment was joke taken from Mattias. I like all P6K footage because I can see past a LUT or badly graded footage. People use the word videoish and cinematic when they don't know what they mean.
-
7 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:
Thats exactly what I said, very lame troll attempt from you..
And you still don't read posts. Not mine nor your own. I just told you that you don't need to put in the flame baits and yet you try again.
Its starting to become rather sad.You mean when I answer your question about why Sony and Canon donor have RAW on their lower priced cameras because of RED. You must not understand or acknowledge that RAW was unlocked on Canon DSLR's with Magic Lantern CODE.
You get owned and showed you didn't do your homework and that you bought into RedCode's hype and marketing.
Did you read the link I sent you?
I read and answered every bit of your comments.
Do you actually understand how RED has controlled RAW output from Sony and Canon and others?
1 hour ago, Kisaha said:Add an Osmo and an iPhone there, and even @webrunner5 will be back for good!
I would pay for a such a showdown with that Skip guy!
No you guys and gals ran off @webrunner for good. You won't break me the same way.
You smart-ass people need to educate yourself. The ones who have been nice and civil that comment wasn't for you.
https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/motion/stutter
Stutter of TVs
Stutter on TVs influences how smooth motion appears on the screen. It is generally most visible in slow panning shots with low frame rate content such as movies and causes a regular pattern of jerkiness. This is different to judder, which is an irregular pattern of jerkiness caused by inconsistent frame cadence. For watching movies or even field sports, it is important to get a TV with low stutter.
-
12 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:
Fingers crossed.
So you are saying that both Canon and Sony have affordable cameras on the market today that shoot Raw. And that the raw files are fluently editable in FCPX with access to the raw settings in a separate tab?
If so, please, tell us all the names of those cameras and make a tutorial on where your secret buttons in FCPX is located. Because I'm sure many of us are dying to know
(And you can stop with the endless flame baiting. If you think I'm gonna get sucked in by someone that argues about the difference of "stutter and judder" then you are just naive. Life is to short.)
RED doesn't have affordable cameras on the market that shoot RAW either.
Go follow this thread:
Magic Lantern unlocked RAW on Canon DSLR's 10 years ago. So if MagicLantern Code could unlock RAW for Canon, then how mighty is that RedCode you keep talking about?
RedCode is RED's way of marketing their CODE to justify their HUGE price mark ups and the win over PEOPLE like you. RED and RedCode was just smoke and mirrors and wasn't proprietary code that should have every been patented.
As the big bad You Tube influencer you didn't do your homework on this subject.
-
10 minutes ago, zerocool22 said:
Well on reduser RED is saying something else. But only time will tell though, as anybody can say what they want on the internet.
Something else about what exactly? The codec issue
RED respond to Apple in compressed RAW patent battle
In: Cameras
Posted
Part of RED's justification in overpriced cameras is that RedCode development cost were so high and that RED is the only company that could provide RAW. It kinda puts a big dent in RED's business model and price structure.