Leaderboard

10 years just about EVERYBODY on the planet that can afford a phone will have the same motion picture IQ power we currently have. Best to question "what exactly do I bring to the table when offering video production services?" If your answer is "the camera" you need to start getting really paranoid. Most clients are not going to fret about DXO scores. If that's where your attention lies (and there's nothing really wrong with that) I hope you're aspiring to a much higher echelon of production than I am! I'm pretty close to retirement so my day in the sun with all this stuff is coming to an end. Looks like I'll be riding the imaging technical wave as it crashes onto the beach.

Just bought a S1 and a 24-105mm lens for very VERY cheap, goodbye nikon.

Apologies, I was away for a bit. An update - first, my dad is out of the hospital and recovering from surgery. We are ostensibly through the worst of it. Second, I ended up rewriting the complete engine. All legacy code has been replaced, in order to make extreme saturation projection more accurate, as well as make some improvements along the way (for example, the engine now features a 1D function at core) Third, I've completed the S1/S1H/S5 conversion, as of yesterday. It is the most recent LogC (SUP 11.1.1) Fortunately the S series seems to have a better internal codec. The GH5 was uniquely problematic with its red/green macroblock splitting. To test gradient motion, film a white wall in darkness. Then, move a spotlight back and forth to see If there is banding revealed as the spotlight falls into darkness. Better codecs will handle this smoothly, while more compressed codecs may have some visible bands moving in the gradient. This is the kind of thing that can crop up in lens flares, or panning across gradients.

Definitely match in heaven for Panasonic shooter!

I'm not one of those that likes to piss on others parades, but it's about as exciting as the new Nikonzzz

Just used mine this week on another commercial hybrid capture project and it was superb in all regards. One minor niggle and that is when switching from stills to video or back, it takes a few seconds to set itself up. Another is write speed is a little slow at times, ie, switch to video following a few stills and there's a few extra seconds there whilst it's writing. Nothing that's deal-breaking to me, just niggles I have become aware of and need to work around. @herein2020 Yes, everything I have read points to Sigma lenses being best on the Sigma camera, Leica on Leicas and Panasonic on Panasonic. The first of the f1.8 primes, the 85mm is due in Nov and the rest of the primes some time 'soon' and I guess the next best option is the native 24-70 f2.8, but it's a bit of an investment. I'm making do with the 20-60 until then (and it's pretty superb in it's own right, never mind at £200 which is what it cost in the deal purchase price) until those primes arrive. I was looking at a pair of Nikon Z6ii's for my hybrid wedding work for when that starts again (hopefully) in April, but now that Nikon have blown it for me and are passing into history, I'm really looking forward to those primes as 3x S5's are looking like my next 3 years future.

Yeah 85% might make more sense in a controlled situation but if I am just shooting in natural light I like to expose the highlights as high as I can (again depending on the situation).

Maybe a bit off topic, but if you're still tinkering with the forum, is there a way to open a topic to the last read post? If not, it's not exactly a major deal to scroll down from the top of the last page.

It means they are coronavirus super spreaders.

I was wondering about that too. I thought it meant they were asking permission to go to the toilet.

The world is shit. People are shit. The end. Do you like my film proposal? Inspiring, isn't it? 🙂 I've heard the arguments for and against phones, social media, and gaming... On Sunday, I heard Leo Laporte talk about it again on the radio. I listen to other podcasts where they talk about it. I'm in my mid 40s and I too have struggled with issues with addiction to gaming, phones, and social media. I have real world experience with the "future leaders" of the world. My optimistic conclusion for the moment is looking more and more like WALL-E, the Disney/Pixar film. I don't knee-jerkingly say "everything new sucks." That's not me. Just embracing everything tech can have its own issues. For one, humanity's demise. Remember, tech is often used for controlling people, winning wars, and total domination. Now, is it all innocent and good?

I have taught 200-300 teenagers in the last few years. Phones, social media, and gaming have stifled their development in a traditional sense. It's not one or two- it's the majority! Doing something without their phone is a problem. The thought of going only one day without playing a video game is a problem. Is that addiction? I'm not sure, but sure does lack variety and it's so bad that now they don't allow phones at the school anymore. You're right, it's not at gunpoint, but do you know anyone who takes heroin at gunpoint? That's not how addiction works. Unfortunately, I don't really see the value in these devices. 5G? ...4G and 3G were good enough for me. Camera? ...I'm happy with my proper camera. Screen size? ...I prefer the smaller screens if it's supposed to be portable. My point is "progress" is a very subjective term. I don't like what I see.

Ok, now I understand what you were saying. When you said "a digital monitor 'adds' adjacent pixels" I thought you were talking about pixels in the image somehow being blended together, rather than just that monitors are arrays of R, G, and B lights. One of the up-shots of subtractive colour vs additive colour is that with subtractive colour you get a peak in saturation below the luminance level that saturation peaks at in an additive model. To compensate for that, colourists and colour scientists and LUT creators often darken saturated colours. This is one of the things I said that I find almost everywhere I look. There are other things too. I'm sure that if you look back you'll find I said that it might contribute to it, and not that it is the only factor. Cool. Let's test these. The whole point of this thread is to go from "I think" to "I know". This can be arranged. Scopes make this kind of error all the time. Curves and right angles never mix because when you're generating a line of best fit with a non-zero curve inertia or non-infinite frequency response then you will get ringing in your curve. What this means is that if your input data is 0, 0, 0, X, 0, 0, 0 the curve will have non-zero data on either side of the spike. This article talks about it in the context of image processing, but it applies any time you have a step-change in values. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ringing_artifacts There is nothing in my code that would allow for the creation of intermediary values, and I'm seeing visually the right behaviour at lower bit-depths when I look at the image (as shown previously with the 1-bit image quality), so at this point I'm happy to conclude that there are no values in between and that its a scoping limitation, or is being created by the jpg compression process.

I take pictures with my iPhone every day so better image quality is welcome. One thing this may excel at is shooting in public places without a permit or kit. A couple of self recording lavalier mic body packs and you could shoot a conversation at a table in a mall that would probably look pretty good. Also, car interiors could be a good application. The saying used to be “lights, camera, action” now it’s “no lights, no problem, I got the new iPhone“ Anyways, someday the photos I take of paperwork at work (instead of scanning them) will be ready for the big screen.

@Andrew Reid considering how good these things are getting, is it now possible to start ranking phones against cheaper cameras? All the discussion is phones vs phones or cameras vs cameras, but I'm curious when we can start comparing them directly. Or maybe it's obvious and I'm out of the loop because I'm still using my iPhone 8.. It will be a great day when the image quality of a consumer device mimics Zeiss Master Primes. Cameras are tools, and currently the best tools are inaccessible to the vast majority of people who would like to create with them. Democratisation of image quality is good for art, good for creators, and good for society in general. The only people it's not good for is technical elitists, or people that are obsessed with equipment and don't care about art. You do realise that if my camera gets better then yours doesn't get worse, right? and smartphones don't crawl from your nightstand and inject you with heroin while you're sleeping... improving the camera in a phone will help you to get access to traditional camera equipment, not hinder it, and owning a phone doesn't automatically mean that you are forced at gunpoint to browse social media. These things are tools. Agreed. It's a tough job to convince many people that a photographer is more than a camera-transportation-device, but the more that smartphones get better and people take photos and realise they're not that great even though the picture quality seems fine, the more they'll realise that there is a skill component to things. The best way to educate the public is to give them the tools and then watch as they discover it's not so easy. This transition from photographers being technicians who restrict access to the equipment to photographers being artists has been occurring for a very long time. It used to be that accessing and operating a 8x10 camera wasn't accessible, then it was lenses and lights, then with digital it was the megapixels and lenses, now it's just lenses, and once fake-bokeh is convincing then there will be no technical or ownership barriers at all, which is why the good photographers are the ones who specialise in lighting, composition, posing, set design, concepts, etc. It's pretty easy to make an Alexa look like a home video. The equipment won't save the amateurs from needing to be artists.

Just watched... These type of PROs ain't used to this level of devices, so they don't even realize Camera2 API exists in order to have sharpness under control: Pure marketing. Not the best skillful pro to put behind a mobile device like this one is :- )

Amazing video and great script for a commercial. Is this yours?

Perhaps these might provide some background to subtractive vs additive colour science. https://www.dvinfo.net/article/production/camgear/what-alexa-and-watercolors-have-in-common.html https://www.dvinfo.net/article/post/making-the-sony-f55-look-filmic-with-resolve-9.html Well, I would have, but I was at work. I will post them now, and maybe we can all relax a little. No bit-crunch: 4.5 bits: 4.0 bits: In terms of your analysis vs mine, my screenshots are all taken prior to the image being compressed to 8-bit jpg, whereas yours was taken after it was compressed to 8-bit jpg. Note how much the banding is reduced on the jpg above vs how it looks uncompressed (both at 4.0 bits): Here's the 5-bit with the noise to show what it looks like before compression: and without the noise applied: Agreed about 'more than the sum of their parts' as it's more like a multiplication - even a 10% loss over many aspects multiplies quickly over many factors. Not a fan of ARRIRAW? I've never really compared them, so wouldn't know. Indeed, and that's kind of the point. I'm trying to work out what it is.

These specs always sound good, but when a client actually sends me video from their iPhone to use in a project it always looks soft. Granted, they're not professionals, but I've never really been blown away by video shot on any phone.

its funny but last i checked i thought glass was the most important part of a good image. why buy Zeiss Master Primes when you can use the plastic lens of a smartphone. it will be a sad day when processed images of a phone will mimic pro equipment...

Possible answer, Dolby paid them. I'm someone who thinks the Dolby Vision workflow is incredible, doing HDR and SDR in single grading pass is witchcraft but their system pulls it off, only problem with it is it is proprietary and expensive.

I haven't used a tripod yet. In the video above that was all handheld.