Emanuel

So, let's put the personal stuff addressed to my PM box (I am waiting for your time in my mother language) and be on topic now. Your post's topic, though BTW. Chris Nolan and Spielberg or alike then, humm? With an exception, Ed (Ed, my fellowman, no more pro-tests this time, your self-esteem can not deny ; )) And the rest of the world...? Frankly, my brother, how old are you? No, it is not a personal question (I doubt you'd privately reply anyway LOL), it concerns the subject matter. Age, experience, whatever, anything related counts to understand the way the audience here (in this case, you) should particularly be addressed to.

Mate, so you decide to be my tutor and correct my nonstandard English? LOL C'mon, give a break to your own sanity for your own sake. Yes, it happens people to have some other mother tongue. Your point is? I guess I've just started to repeat myself. We had crossed each other in some other thread earlier today, isn't it? Let me see, the discussion let you move it to here?! ;-) For the sake of your spontaneous invectives, who wrote "the single credible authority on cinematography"?? You : P And don't be disrespectful with EOSHD or you are with every single member used to post here. Go figure if someone would dare to subjectively criticize your own. Ad hominem atacks are a very dirty sport to begin with. They tell a lot about the quality of the man behind an alias. My name and background is in my signature. Yours? Who is the man I have now the commission to chat with? Be a gentleman to this community and reach me on my PM box. You can try to send your message in my native language in order to clear up the things a little bit to me... haha

Should I call you dude too? Very well... hey dude, no clue on your age but something I can tell you even if this can sound too harsh. No pun intended. I am used to eat cinematographers at breakfast. For twenty years now. :-)

YOU say so...

?

I see you want they may pass 10-bit 4:2:2 and go straightforward skyrocketing : D Sony mirroless has one solid advantage, though. Before NAB next year. About 2 kilograms below ;-) - E :-) PS: Some of these preditions are hilarious but one I think we can pocketly dream about. http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=36195

Sure, I see banding is your main concern on your testing... Her neck is revealing!

Jokes aside, that's correct. Figures say too little, at times even to those used to handle them. Some other time, they correspond to marketing. To others, they serve as show off. Just when you have some improper annoyance as banding, you pay attention to the significance and extension of their role.

You said it is "not as conclusive as I would like to" based on apparent conclusive stuff. Actually, it is not (as my previous post allegations can detail). At least, we can agree on the sum up, very well. But please don't tell me I don't much like sunyata's test. Even though, his failed introduction as me and other two posters were able to point out. When finally served for something worthy (you call it better, I would say complementary entry), it is welcome and taken as valid. Except it doesn't touch the other one nor the points observed. The only remark in your behalf is exactly the complementary nature of those other variables beyond the basics 8-bit vs 10-bit dichotomy. And when I see people to still pop up to underestimate 8-bit, I just see the need to reiterate it. And your point now is? :-)

PS: In any case, if you want to "blame" the codec or bitrate for the bigger difference, be my guest. I don't see where this doesn't match the discussion. Your 10-bit request is far away to be mandatory to kill banding. You just need the right balance of some variables. If you read what I'm used to post in these boards, that fits perfectly the equation. Let's not stuck up in our own likings and pay attention to facts with an open mind instead. 10-bit is just a number as any other.

No, no. Others, who? I've just seen someone saying inaccurately the comparison was done with uncompressed 4:2:2 when actually it was ProRes (COMPRESSED) 4:2:2. Another one who is trying to convince the other side with "I don't know" (his exact words) and after one bet and three "maybes" in the same post (only because internal 4:2:0 was recorded simultaneously) ...and you come here to tell me so as some scientific truth?!! Oh c'mon, man... I am not a child, my friend. - E :-)

I guess that example posted up there proves exactly the contrary.

Have you followed the basic example I posted up there? (I mean, the A-B-C case). That's the whole point. In any case, I bet the new BMD cameras will stop the usual whining on 10-bit like a savior mantra. HDCAM was 8-bit 3:1:1 and all that began the replacement of film for digital. Anything higher is better, yes, but the difference can be pointless or of lower importance when you're able to rid off banding when necessary. No need for an Uzi to hunting birds. PS: IIRC, it was ProRes and not uncompressed. The comparison is still worthy.

sunyata, read the post of Karim... :-)

Symbols. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?340174-new-4K-iPhone-6s-can-edit-4K-video-in-iMovie-on-the-phone&p=1986574974&viewfull=1#post1986574974

Very true, on 4:2:2 vs 4:2:0... those figures mean color! In any case, don't forget we're speaking about banding, not exactly full grading...

Who said 4:2:2 is more important than 10-bit? The difference between 8-bit 4:2:2 and 8-bit 4:2:0, it is more significant for your grading. Much different statement. Of course, for certain type of grading. No mention of raw or alike where even 10-bit is short by default. People too much focused on the 10-bit holy grail tend to forget ; ) But, banding was the topic (hence my "the-real-difference" of my post; numbers help but like machines need i-n-t-e-r-p-r-e-t-a-t-i-o-n :-D) : http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9390-sony-a7s-ii-is-out/?do=findComment&comment=106562 Speaking of math, let's see with a very simple case: 1) 100,000; 2) 1,000,000; 3) 10,000,000. Where's the bigger difference? Now, take these figures as bucks and your single expense as any number between 100,000 and 1,000,000. Which step will make the whole difference? Here goes your single example on pictures, posted and reposted more than once: http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/9355-canon-announces-development-of-8k-cinema-eos-camera-and-120mp-dslr/?do=findComment&comment=105935

Right. Explain now to the consumer who spent some hundred bucks today on that brand new 4K display in the place of the great grandparents' crucifix in the Catholic family's living room (choose the Bible to Orthodoxes, Pentecostals, Baptists, Adventists and so on, other sacred books to other confessions): resolution... who cares?! - Emanuel http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?340174-new-4K-iPhone-6s-can-edit-4K-video-in-iMovie-on-the-phone&p=1986574974&viewfull=1#post1986574974

Very true.

Scarlet? What Scarlet? 3K for 3K aside, now converted as 4K4all (the only point is that's a bit late actually...) Scarlet doesn't exist. There is Mini-Epic or, better put, RED. Once Epic Dragon, whatever is, will be converted soon in Weapon. That's the actual truth. BTW, RED One was a prototype. Sold to thousands of developers or beta testers who rather than to be paid for, paid the R&D. A couple of big names (v.g. Peter Jackson, Steven Soderbergh) as forfait of their own name and reputation, but probono. The deal comprehended to inscribe their lettering in the history of 4K acquisition. People always forget RED is more than a camera company, they are simply the best dream sellers the industry has ever met. With a little bit but significant difference, they sell real IQ + QC based on supply and demand. PS: Last but not least, ...with success as usual.

Ebrahim, you're unique. Pity I am not in Egypt or I know where I'd let someone to care the front page of my real expression... Greetings only a little bit more to Northwest from you, - Emanuel :-)

So, we have here a very demanding viewer... LOL : ) You are right. This or that camera can give you less than what you're looking for. But. There's no 'pictures' without post. This doesn't exist. And if exists, you can't complain. Much effort on post is mandatory. And that is the territory where you can provide the deterritorialization for reterritorialization* of your material, as you wish (e.g. that Japanese sample/video). For a simple reason, flat is higher because comprehends the wider. Hence the fashionable logs nowadays. Straight out of the box means nothing. What are we expecting for? Godard said motion picture is the truth 24 frames a second. He was right but only in a half. The other half is that actually is a big lie whatever frames you decide to tell. How can't they give you what you're looking for? Trust me, you're just looking for a decent capture device and post. It is useless to say I like this or that camera in a way or another. The best you can say to yourself is if that camera is decent for your purpose/proposal or not. Believe me that you'll find a lot of decent cameras in the track. The trouble is when we blame technology when this one is already available. It only requires much work to find out the best balance and know-how from all of it. No teal + orange stamp (others would call it look of their own which makes them happy with) will affect the countless options on your choices of and for your set(up). BTW, Ed is very good & versatile. E :-) * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterritorialization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reterritorialization

People are too focused on 10-bit versus 8-bit, when the-real-difference between 4:2:2 and 4:2:0 is higher than 10-bit 4:2:2 vs 8-bit 4:2:2.

Correct. Loans too. Writes a Canon's customer who has invested the most part of his share in gear made by Canon. True, Canon means quality and rules on IQ. As same as Sony has tried to steal the thunder. And has succeed as a legitimate one.

http://www.photographybay.com/2015/09/10/close-up-with-canons-cinema-eos-8k-camera-lens/ http://www.canonrumors.com/first-photo-of-the-cinema-eos-8k-camera/