Super8

It wasn't showing up on the back of the P6k's in daylight. I trust these guys. One P6K was worse than the other.

I agree. Back to the Canon R5. I will check in with my Canon contact and see when I can get my hands on a prototype for testing. I know it was the shooters fault. They had no clue and they own RED's and a ton of gear. They are good guys and it never showed up on the directors monitor or on the back of the P6K.

Do you mean to tell me shooting RAW means each camera produces the same color science. What? And color profiles only matters to amateurs who don't know how to color correct? WOW. Do you mean the color accuracy test we all click on was really an accuracy test for the default color profile from each camera. WOW. And that JPEG in the test had 16 million colors vs RAW 12 bit and 68 billion colors. WOW. https://pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/

I am certainly not a liar. If you knew or worked as a colorist then you would know that your job is not to capture footage but grade and correct it when needed. You're given what you get and your job is to make it look better and get the most out of it. Most P4k and P6k users don't shoot RAW because of file size and because they don't need to. Footage might be record in RAW but by the time it's move from producer, down thru editing and into your hand you might only have ProRes to work with. Example #1 (already mentioned) We crew I hired shoot with 2 BMP6K's and the footage was delivered in ProRes not RAW, the footage had massive IR pollution. I shot with a third camera that was not the P6K. This was one example I gave. Example #2 (already mentioned) Big Agency that I worked with had production crew from all over the world go out and capture footage for a massive world wide project. All footage delivered was not RAW, zero was RAW. It was shoot on RED, BM and down the line on Sony A7III because multiple cameras and crew were capture footage in different cities. My job was to color correct / grade footage on an edited timeline. Can you give us all an example and link of a A7III shooting RAW? And please share your RAW footage link with everyone. Good luck correcting the IR footage in this link. By the way. I had to junk P6K footage from our shoot from two days and massively color correct P6K footage from multi day shooting because IR pollution was on all P6K footage.

I am curious though. I posted videos showing Canon color vs BMP6K color that almost no one responded to except to say the C500 was a much higher priced camera so the color science would be better than the P6K. Why is that that no one took the time to have an opinion about a side by side color test between two cine cameras but a hand full of people have asked to see links to my work? Why is that? Is it off limits to talk about color based on video samples? We do see color with our eyes right? You can't really see color just by reading the words that someone types can you?

That test uses standard color profiles. Change your profile and those results are different. That test is for stills images and not video color reproduction. Is photography a thing on the EOS? That test is not a industry standard test. The rankings speaks volumes vs real world results. You're an audio guy, is that why you haven't replied to my request for comments on the camera text videos?

The majority of users don't post links do they? Why does it matter if i post my work or not? What did I claim that was dependent on showing my work? Showing my work doesn't make Canon's color science any different or BMP6k issue any better. I never asked what you do and I don't care. I'm not avoiding anyone. The attitudes of the ones asking for links to my work is a turn off.

So the guy that ask people to look and comment at video comparison and still image captures for the sake of sharing and learning is being called bullshit and fake user? Everyone that's said for me to post my work has made zero comments on the video links or screen captures.

Because that test is b.s if that's all you need to go by to decide which camera produced the best color.

You make sense my friend. With all the Canon glass being used by everyone it's an easy move to jump on board the Canon ship. Canon knows this and I see a shift happening in the industry. It will be interesting to see what Black Magic does later this year. With the price drop of the P6K you have to expect Black Magic to drop a new camera in the fall.

You've gone on record many time about Sony color and after long threads and comments from you you final came out and said "WB in auto" issue. Sony color has more than a Auto WB issues and Andrew has pointed this out. And now you bring up the Canon 7D and lower end Canon DSLR's to make your point. Keep on with Sony.

What Sony model were you using?

Look, I've kept everything above board and tried to reply to people in kind. You used the word argue more than once and you make comments about how well I'm received and the number of "likes" I have. I get it. You want to tell me that I'm wrong for talking about color science and wrong about posting screen captures into the conversation because "how do we prove accurate colour when we all have different eyes," anyway. So no need for my to reply to you anymore on this topic. You want to be proven right as you pick up @IronFilm strawman question of "who decides what accurate color is". What color looks are subjective, what color you like is subjective, but accurate color is not.

Do you really take someone commenting back at you as arguing? Why do you take issue with that? It's seems you comment based on who made the statement, who well they're received and how many like they have. This is why you keep making your strawman argument that "How do we prove accurate colour when we all have different eyes,"

How is my commnet back at the 1DX III owner arguing?

It would be nice if you commented on what's being discussed. That was kinda my point in my last comment.

You have been objective with your comments. Others have defended what they own but can't take the time to comment on moving visual links and still visual images. I have to re-think posting links and images because no one seems to take the time to view and respond to them. We do create visual content right? We do use the cameras and gear we talk about don't we? I'm starting to thing people like to argue the written word over looking at examples from the craft that we supposedly love. @IronFilm still hasn't responded to the video links I posted and has ignored all request to reply.

The 1DX III would be the better camera to compare to the Ursa Mini Pro G2. Not for features but price and color science. Why? Because the R5 color science latitude should fall in line with the 1DX III.

I'm also not getting into the debate about accurate color and how we prove it. You want to play strawman on this thread then go for it. You're kinda making yourself look foolish. Andrew and EOS HD color profiles is based on improving color science from multiple camera manufacturers. What is EOSHD Pro Color? "EOSHD Pro Color improves upon a range of issues with Sony’s default colour science. Your straight-out-of-camera footage will get a professional cinematic treatment." Your "How do we prove accurate colour when we all have different eyes, " comment is an insult all around. I know you didn't mean it that way and that your playing the straawman but it's an insult to everyone on the EOS. You can't make a blanket statement about color and color science that let's everyone become lazy and doesn't hold cameras to a higher standard. " Oh, don't worry, don't color grade that footage because we all have different eyes and someone will like it".

My CS discussion is based on Canon and this thread is about the R5. People are coming down hard on the R5 specs and claiming the "cripple hammer is coming". I brought up Canon color science because it's relevant and not on the spec sheet. Out of this discussion we have BMP6k and Ursa Mini Pro being talked about as not as good as Canon because of the cost of the camera. I used Deep Impact because as a case study because it showed great color all around. This is what we all strive for except for the ones that said they didn't need accurate color that they embraced what the BMP4K gave them. People have become blinded by the brand they bought into and not the craft that they create with.

Yes we work with what we have. No one said sell your BM camera. But as a person that cares enough to spread some knowledge or want to learn new information, we all should learn and help each other. A little information that's straight out of Hollywood blockbuster team that made Deep Impact. Here are a set of screen captures that show great color. Now my take on the look of this film is it's has a classic color look that driven from scene to scene. You have scenes that are set up to give a feel or emotion. The goal to have great color has not changed. You always strive to capture accurate color. Where you take it and what you make it up to you. These captures are for all the people that replied and said "they didn't need accurate color" and "who's to say what accurate color is?"

You really don't understand color science, color grading and you clearly don't understand the final video clips that you see on You Tube. You do understand that unless someone says "straight out of camera" then you have some what graded footage that you're looking at. Anyone can throw a LUT on footage and you don't seem to know the difference. My experience with the P6K over the last 7 months, two big projects and massive IR pollution, is that ALL Black Magic footage has massive built in color science that's almost as bad as Sony's mirror-less line up. Based on this thread all comments about BM and it's cine line up have said they're color science cannot compare to Canon's 1DX III and never to the much higher priced C500. If you don't agree with my comment about ARRI and Canon being easier to grade or that that's a fact or subjective, the one thing that seems a given is that Canon has superior color science over Black Magic.

Why is it foolish to compare the Pocket6K to the Canon 1DX III for color quality? It sounds like you will ignore color comparison of the 1DX III and call out specs and features. You do have a trade off between the two. This makes the R5 specs even more a game changer along with Canon color. Here's the 1DX III color again. This is what we'll get with the R5. And for the record Canon color is very close to ARRI and it's clean balanced color. If you look at the footage below and look at he color you can see that you can do anything with that color. You can move it around, bleach it, pull it, take it down, crush it and give it any look you want. Let's remember with great color you have great color depth. Great color depth takes you to cinema quality world.

Did you just compare the 5D, 6d and 7D to BRAW from the pocket? I'm actually speechless and don't know what to say.

Get Davinci Resolve that came with your Ursa and use the scopes to check your footage.