Leaderboard

I bought an Atomos Ninja external recorder after reading a good deal on the internet, and watching a ton of YouTube videos that tell why 10-bit color depth is superior to 8-bit, how it makes a huge difference during color grading, etc. In theory, 10-bit gives each pixel the ability to pick from over 1 billion shades of color; compared to 16 million shades offered by 8-bit. This allows for smoother color gradations, avoids banding, etc. I got that part. But what about in reality? Does it make a noticeable difference? I searched everywhere, for a side-by-side comparison of the same subject shot on 8-bit 4:2:0 internal vs 10-bit 4:2:2 external. I found none. Everybody explained why 10-bit is great, but offered no visual proof. At least nothing my eyes could spot. So I made these comparison tests myself, after getting the Atomos Ninja. Same test subject. Filmed using EOS-R. Three clips: 8-bit 4:2:0 internal H.264; 8-bit 4:2:2 ProRes external; 10-bit 4:2:2 ProRes external. All are 4K. All are CLOG. On the first look, there's one obvious difference. 8-bit 4:2:0 CLOG internal footage looked noticeably flatter than the external CLOG footage (both 8-bit and 10-bit). I don't know if that's a good thing or bad. I'd expect CLOG to be quite flat. Why is the external recorded footage less flat? Is the ProRes codec used by Atomos Ninja playing with the contrast levels before recording it? Internal 8-bit CLOG recording, when viewed through waveform monitor, showed more room for brightness and darkness adjustments before clipping - compared to the external recordings! Isn't it supposed to be the other way!?! Other than that difference in flatness, I can't find anything else. 10-bit or 8-bit, both externally recorded clips didn't give me any additional leg room while color grading - compared to the 8-bit internal clip. What more, 8-bit and 10-bit external recordings looked exactly the same untouched, as well as after applying the same grades. No matter how hard I tried to look (zooming in, for instance), I can't find a difference. It may have to do with ProRes encoding everything as 10-bit 4:2:2 irrespective of the source bit depth. It is said that extreme color grading breaks apart 8-bit while 10-bit holds pretty good. This argument is backed by a strong theory. But if I can't see how much more better 10-bit is than 8-bit, what's the point with these external recorders? Is Atomos Nijna merely an overpriced monitor? (It does a good a job of that, for sure). And, assuming 10-bit makes color graded videos have less artifacts, what happens when the edited video is exported using an 8-bit codec, and viewed on an 8-bit monitor? There may be rare cases where 10-bit is useful. But for most scenarios, I started to believe 10-bit isn't any better than 8-bit. What am I missing? I'd be glad if somebody could prove me wrong and confirm that 10-bit is worth it.

I'm basing this on an interaction with him, plus his Twitter feed and likes, not the fact that he's on LBRY. I only mention it here because I mentioned previously he was on LBRY, and given the stuff he believes it makes sense why. While much of it disappeared as Q-anon accounts were banned, there's still enough to see on his account that shows he embraces toxic views. He literally supported the military stepping in to keep Trump in power. When you believe and help spread disinformation and the same delusional stuff that caused the capital riots to happen, you're a part of the problem. This stuff should be called out in the filmmaking community.

I can tell you that I'm a believer. I have the S5 and have had to recover from some really horrible lighting and had to push the WB to the other side of the spectrum....and the footage held up flawlessly, I am able to recover from situations where I had no control over the lighting in ways that I simply was not able to when shooting 8 bit. I am the first one to say I think something is overrated....like I personally think ALL-I is just a waste of storage space, RAW footage for YouTube and Vimeo is an even bigger waste of storage space (unless your editing machine really can't handle LongGOP), external recorders are a waste of money for most people, etc, etc. I have reached the conclusion that for anything short of TV quality commercial work, documentaries (maybe), and feature length films, LongGOP, H.264, and H.265 are good enough. But after shooting 8 bit for years and fighting with the color grade especially when the WB was off, I am a believer in 10 bit. I also think 10 bit handles highlight roll-off better than 8 bit which is something that even YouTube viewers will notice if you don't manage to get it under control during editing, but anything beyond that (ProRes, BRAW, etc) as I mentioned before I think is a waste of space, time, and money. External recorders for certain cameras do let you record higher resolutions (like 6K for example) but unless you really do need to crop and recompose that much I think anything over 4K is also a waste. There is a video that shows 8 bit vs 10 bit side by side on YouTube, I don't remember the title now, but in his side by side tests he reached the same conclusions that I reached on my own; there is no noticeable difference in the final footage, but 10 bit handles highlights and WB correction better. I think 8 bit is the better way to go if you have the time to properly WB, expose the footage, etc. but when you are shooting hectic events like I typically shoot, or real estate where the lighting is always some weird mixture that you can't control; the extra editing latitude that 10bit provides is very noticeable.

Oh, that's cool. Only being able to copy one node at a time is occasionally frustrating. One of the things that I am very aware of is that Resolve is the software component of an ex $100K+ hardware solution. The heritage of hardware solutions really came from tape cutting/splicing rigs for editing and things like colour timing machines: On such machines the workflow is determined by doing whatever the hell the hardware wants you to do, and the user-experience is that the engineers push the potential of the technology and the user learns to jump through whatever hoops are required to make the machine go. The reason I bring this up is that these limitations are often still hidden deep in the way that something like Resolve works. For example, a machine such as the above would be configured with the settings for the whole roll of film, then the roll would be processed. I ran into this "configure things on the input" philosophy in Resolve when I was half-way through an edit and was looking for some function in the edit page to change settings on a clip, and the answer was that I change it in the Media Pool, because (you guessed it) the workflow is designed for you to ingest and configure / code all your media before you edit. That's one example, but there will be many things that are constructed in a certain way that was relevant back in the day but is no longer required, but is kept, either because they haven't thought to change it, or because it's baked into the workflows of Company 3 etc.

You can use Color Space Transform to convert your footage to REC2020 color space and ST.2084 and grade it by hand after that. You will need to connect it to your OLED TV using Decklink card in order to view it properly on the screen.

The new update will be coming next month... to counter the new Sony release? https://www.canonrumors.com/the-next-canon-eos-r5-firmware-update-is-coming-next-month-cr2/

Can they just not fire these old geezers and let someone with common sense run it.

Personal work I am trying to match the look of the BM with the Sony. I really enjoy the look of the micro and the modern tech of the Siii. I love the look of the BM for interviews and would love to get the look on the Siii as well with AF being so damn good. Plus the ability to punch in if needed. I do a lot of product YT/IG ads that need the modern look that the Siii does wonderfully. I hope I can make the Siii a work horse like my 7iii and Rii have been for me. I will share a few clips in the coming weeks.

That's a fantastic tutorial and the difference the technique makes, even to well-exposed footage, is very noticeable.

I can only speak from my own experience, but the experience of grading the 10 bit HD output from my FS5 is very different (in a good way) to that of grading the 8 bit HD I used to get from my C100 (I've had both the Mk2 and the Mk1). Loved that Canon colour, but given that the artistic vision I'm pursuing involves quite extensive grading as I chase the elusive 'film' look (my ideal would have my footage looking like a moving 35mm still print) the lure of 10 bit on the FS5 was too much to resist. Simply, it holds up to the grade in a way that the Canon's recordings just couldn't - in terms of artefacts, banding and grain.

Come on man, being on LBRY doesn't make you "Q-pilled". Tom Antos isn't the only one there, lots of others with non-political channels are there too! Would you call Curtis Judd a crazy Q-pilled madhatter?? Of course not! His YouTube videos are some of the most level headed, calmest, sensible, reasonable, and insightful videos there are. But yet, it is SMART for Tom/Curtis/etc to have a presence on odysee.com as well. As you never know what might happen months, years into future when YouTube will censor you and remove your entire channel at less than a moment's notice. Don't put all your bags into one basket.

Really was bummed out to find that Tom Antos is one of those delusional Q-pilled Trump supporters. It explains why he started posting stuff to LBRY, seems he probably found out about them from the far right vloggers that have moved there.

While a bold statement, its 8K RAW certainly can punch above its weight class, so to speak. Pretty good for a non-video 8K video camera that people aren't buying for video...🤔

Yes that is correct that has always been possible in DR16, you can also use remote grades, create a gallery image and apply the grade from there, hit SHIFT + = to copy a grade from a previous clip, store a color grade in a memory slot, etc....NONE of those ways are intuitive nor do they work the way EVERY other program works which is a simple CTRL A > CTRL C > CTRL V to copy anything to anything. Only with DR17 and even then only with the latest build can you finally simply go into the color grade node tree, select all nodes, CTRL C, go to the clip where you want to apply the grade and CTRL V. With every previous build you could only use this method to copy the first node which made no sense.

So happy I went with Sony a7S III

Yeah, if folks haven’t figured it out by now... Canon is gonna Canon. It’s an overtly abusive approach to product lineup/development from a customer perspective, but it’s just their chosen philosophy. I follow all camera release news aggressively, because I find the technology advancements very engaging, but there’s no way I’d jump in on a multi-thousand dollar piece of kit before it has been well proven out in the wild, because all camera companies have their weak spots. They’re just tools, good tools will prove themselves through use. Canon makes some good tools, even if the peripherals are less than honest. I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be called out or pushed to change their approach, but it’s also important for consumers to step back and just take an objective look at the available tools, ignoring somewhat all the noise and baggage around brands, especially new release hype.

Well it depends on what you want or your tolerances are. If you want max image quality, the r5’s 8k raw is arguably among the best for any camera. The dynamic range figures have to be contextualized with NR. If you want great useable dynamic range straight out of the camera, the c70 is great. The R5 8k raw requires work in post, but that’s any raw camera. With some NR its DR and high ISO end up being quite competitive or even better than the A7s iii. But the 8k raw’s detail and color are superior to anything under $15k.

If internet has proved something is that the same people who buys a 45.000€ BMW car or has a 1200€ iPhone, refuses to pay 12€ a year to read a website. Even if s/he thinks it is the most interesting website ever.

For an older guy like me, these examples are the reasons I'm a bit loyal to this EOSHD. It's a website, not a marketing "platform." And the way it's run reminds me of the young-information-super-highway-idealism of what the internet had potential to be. Also, I especially like the irony that the title of the website is now an anachronism...in less than a decade. And that titular company is routinely and harshly critiqued here. That's simply something backwardly pure. That would never exist if it had to get filtered through a corporate system; probably would have ad 3 re-branding launches by now if that was the case. EOSHD, I guess, is kind of like visiting an awesome chef-run-restaurant in a town that only has corporate fast-food franchises in it. You can get fed in both, but you can only get a proper meal from one.