DPStewart

My thoughts exactly, mate!

OK...it SHUTS DOWN. That's beyond software. That's something in your Operating System being triggered to do that intentionally (like as a safety precaution - overheating of the processor etc..) or something is causing a massive root-level error. It's one thing to crash a program, but it's something entirely different to kill the whole system itself. My suspicion is the enormous demands placed on the processors by Optical Flow and everything else running at that same time is overwhelming some physical tolerance within your core. I'm not a super PC tech guy, I've just been through almost every typical problem myself already because I never have $5,000 to get some monster computer. My first suggestion would be to super-uber-totally back up your Resolve Database, then uninstall Resolve 11 and install Resolve 12.1 or 12.3. Again - word around the farm is that 12.1 has been the most stable. I don't think there's any reason to stay with 11. 12 is really a great advance, and you'll figure out where they moved things to in just a matter of minutes.

Mercer, The shots at :25 and at :48 - YES. Those are good examples of the conditions that will definitely produce the blue blob on the Mitakon Version 1. I can't speak for the newer version as I've never had a chance to use one.

You get into a LOT of variables in a situation like this. Everything from Motherboard compatibility issues to bugs in the Software App itself. At a glance your system seems decent enough - one of mine is nearly identical to yours - but again, from driver incompatibilities to version conflicts and on and on and on...... The usual Editing Computer madness.... First question: Which exact version of Resolve are you running? (FWIW - V.12.1 has been reported to be the most stable even though 12.3 has other aspects more straightened out...) Also: Exactly what file formats are you using in Resolve? And exactly how are your creating the Transcodes? Are you even using Transcodes?

So... you spliced me and Zak together like Brundle Fly. Well, I suppose I've had people do worse to me than that. LOLZ!

Wasn't me either. I don't have a blog. (Unless you mean a comment posted here.) And the only reference I made to anything that mentioned 10% of anything was when I said that you'll earn less money from 10,000 people watching your movie for free than you will from 1,000 people paying to watch it. But of course that's so obvious as to be ridiculous. I included it more as an observation that it feels good on our egos to have a lot of people see our work even if it's for free - but that the ego stroke won't pay your sound guy, or your grips, or your cast, or your food services.

In North America it will NEVER default to anything other than "Auto" now. As was suggested earlier - it's likely that this new change has not been rolled out to Europe yet. My tests (and others) are that it's auto-selecting a quality below what our connection could support. Their adaptive streaming is "playing it safe". Again, that's a good move if your primary goal is only to never have a video stutter for a viewer. But remember they also removed buffering. Which means they took away the viewer's choice to simply pause it for a moment to let it buffer so they could then continue and watch in a higher quality than a 100% glitch-free adaptive stream can provide therm. We're not saying that it's 100% worse in every single possible situation. It's not. We're saying that the specific things we PAY Vimeo for instead of just using YouTube have been severely compromised.

Actually yes. I have both the Metabones and a Mitakon that cost only about $130 USD. Both are equally sharp. The Mitakon's sharpness falls off a tiny bit at the edges where the Metabones does not. Also the Mitakon is vulnerable to the "blue spot" artifact wherein a large light blue-ish blob shows up in the middle of your frame if you get too much REALLY bright light in the frame - like looking at all into the sun or having really bright sky in the shot. It's a problem, but it's manageable. You can work around it once you get familiar with exactly what bright light conditions will cause it. But for the amount of money you save it's still a great alternative because that is the ONLY area where it's not as good as the Metabones. Generally speaking.

It's the lens - not the camera. Each different lens design has its own auto-focus abilities and accuracies. There is also the ever-present possibility that your particular copy of that lens is not performing as well as it should be. Some lenses have the ability to have their auto-focus mechanism updated or adjusted - either by downloading firmware into the lens itself, or by making adjustments to the lens' back focus. Check into what other folks' experiences have been with the exact lens model you're having trouble with. And NO, not "any DSLR would focus instantly". Not by a long shot. I have a Canon T2i and a Canon 6D and 'some' lenses focus nearly instantly while other lenses, even Canon's own cheaper ones, take so long to focus I could call Stevie Wonder to come manually focus the lens and he'd be faster. Also, my GH2's, which are technically not DSLRs just like the NX1, focuses so fast with the 14-140mm kit zoom that I'm not even aware it's doing it sometimes, while some of their other auto-focus lenses are FAR slower. It's the LENS.

No, it won't change your depth of field at any chosen f-stop. That's a built-in property of the lens itself. It will just increase the amount of light that hits your sensor, thus giving you an obviously cleaner or brighter image. And obviously it will give you a wider field of view.

"Infinite" is not a word that can really be applied to any aspect of any camera or lens. It's not that they make the image or the lens better - it's that they increase your incoming light by at least one full stop - that's A LOT - and they widen the field of view of the lens you're using. This is exactly the same effect as a). using a faster lens, b). having a larger sensor that does significantly better in low light. c). in many instances any focal reducer will have the effect of slightly sharpening the image - it's an optical property of a focal reducer. It's not a lot, but it's there. No. Not "hands down". That's just you own opinion - and everyone will have them. Very very few people who have used both say that about the GH4. I've used both and I completely disagree with that. The ONE big thing misleading people to think that is the SAMSUNG lenses are very clinical and can give a more "video" look. But there's no reason that you have to use those. I don't even own one.

Your position seems extreme...but it's not wrong. The biggest problem is people FEELING ENTITLED to take and spread YOUR product for free. If the ONLY way for you to not get totally robbed is to lock it down, then LOCK IT DOWN. The ego stroke of 10,000 people seeing your movie won't put a dime back in your pocket for your next one. But only 1,000 actually paying to stream it will. The choice is up to each individual.

The GH4 is an infinitely more usable video camera than the Sony a6300, but the NX1 is superior to the GH4 in almost every way. As for the speedboosters - F*CK YEAH they make that big of a difference. If you have a camera with an MFT mount they should be attached to your camera by default.

Hahahaha! That's them totally NOT UNDERSTANDING what you're telling them! "No, no, no dude...there's no 'technical difficulty'...everything's working fine. But the way you've just changed it to work is not the product I signed up and paid for!" Head...brickwall...head....brickwall...

Un-foogin-believable. The rendering of the smoke was like nothing I've seen before - looked like it was going to come right out of my screen. This 8k thing is a whole new world for Documentaries, educational, and other types of super-realism stuff. But I'm becoming more convinced than ever that 4k is the cutoff for "Movies". It's just too sharp and it starts hurting the feel of the experience instead of helping. In fact the 2.8k Alexa or even the 2.5k Blackmagic Cinema Camera are about all I'd want to deal with if the intention is something that "looks like a movie". But it's interesting - we now have cameras so advanced that they are creating new genres. That's fantastic. And the ability of 5k, 6k, and 8k to convey a realistic experience is a gift to Humanity. As a teaching and world-sharing tool there has never been anything like it before. There is very much a parallel in Music recording. - Audio technology has advanced just like video technology has, but when the audio you want to make is MUSIC then the new advanced tech sounds 'worse' and everybody reaches for "tube this" and "tube that" and "tube emulators"... all that DEGRADES the audio - but it does it in a very specific way that just so happens to sound "better" to most people in the context of songs. So "movie" cameras will be the ones that render a technically less advanced image - but one that is far more suited to the particular application of creating a "movie". Interesting times.

Of course Mars. ~Cheers!

This! Haha! Yup...it's a fantastic box full of controls that generates some ugly-ass video. The highlight knee/rolloff is terrible. Not very good DR either. They flopped in the Image Quality area in a year when many makers were advancing Image Quality to levels almost unheard of before. Sorry Charlie.

+1 But some interview material (the more artistic kind) and travel video in ML RAW with Canon colors will look more (Insert adjective here to describe ARTFUL as opposed to CLINICAL REAL LIFE).

mmmmYeeeahhhh.......... They're missing our point. They want a smoother end-user experience and that pretty much ONLY means less stuttering due to any bandwidth issues. The solution is to kill the quality. That's ALWAYS BEEN the solution. YouTube has been doing it for years. Now I WILL give them this: "Adaptive" is indeed better than simply defaulting to something really low like 320p. DUH.... Our point is simply this: Many of us PAID subscribers NEED folks to see our stuff is as high quality as is possible. ESPECIALLY if it is clients. And EVERYBODY understands a little stuttering. NOBODY goes: "Oh my gosh, the video just stuttered for a second or two, I guess that means it's no good and I'd better turn it off!" DUH... And don't forget the BIG one that affects everyone in an even worse way - EMBEDDING. In MANY embedded video situations (websites etc,.) the little "HD" icon where you select playback quality DOESN'T SHOW UP. What you gonna do NOW? DUH... So, in summary - DUH. They WILL respond to paid subscribers cancelling if they don't return to at least the OPTION of a selectable minimum quality playback. BIG THANKS, BIG THANKS, to everyone who has sent an email to Vimeo about this. Especially Paid subscribers willing to cancel.

Don't forget to be clear with them! Use Kaylee's words: " Hi friends, I've enjoyed using Vimeo very much over the last several years, and I have been looking forward to upgrading to a Pro account to support my first feature film, but it has come to my attention that Vimeo's public playback structure has changed insofar as it will now "Auto-Select" a playback quality for viewers; and the tab where one could specify what playback quality is assigned has been removed. Since controlling playback quality is the one and only reason that I would pay for a Plus or Pro account, I am no longer planning to do so. I wanted to share this feedback in hopes that your product team will take it under advisement. Very best wishes, Me" HERE"S THE LINK TO THEM- https://vimeo.com/help/contact

Mattias - post a link here to one of your Vimeo videos. We'll play it here in the USA and we'll see if your video displays itself for us at the lower "Auto" resolution. I bet it will no matter what setting you choose on your end. So far for me - EVERY video defaults to this low-resolution "Auto" even though my connection and PC play 1080p streams just fine all day long if I go into the selector and manually choose 1080p

Thanks mate! Here in the USA, under that section called "UPGRADE THIS VIDEO" - beneath it "Choose the HD format(s) for this video" is now greyed out and I cannot make any selection. But here's the biggest problem, as I wrote originally: "To be certain - ANYTIME I have watched any of YOUR Vimeo videos recently, my stream defaulted to their "Auto" setting EVEN THOUGH THE "HD" INDICATOR WAS STILL ON. My system and connection plays 1080p perfectly smoothly all day long - and ALL of YOUR videos are displaying at a drastically reduced quality for me because of this "Auto" YouTube-style setting." When I say "drastically" I mean LESS than 720p. It won't "say" what it is because it just says "Auto" until I go in and change it to one of the other quality sizes. Again - we PAY for the ability to control; that - YouTube already has that "default to 'Auto' thing" and so for many of us Vimeo users it is the ONLY reason we PAY for Vimeo instead. If viewers are going to randomly get DEGRADED playback streams ONLY UNLESS they take the extra step and go in to the playback settings and change that - then what the hell am I paying for - that's already YouTube. But we know that MANY users won't do that EVERY SINGLE TIME. And we also know that that choice is very often not even available if the video has been embedded.

No. I am a PLUS member and that tab where we select a pre-determined stream quality has been removed. In the email exchange shown in the first post you can see that they are aware they did that, and that they are to some degree proud of it. Now I cannot yet confirm if European Vimeo users are seeing anything differently.

Ooh...dayum. You're good with the warrior words there Kaylee. Nicely done.