Super8

8K is a big jump from 4k but it seems like it's sensor specific. As long as we get high quality 8k from camera makers then it's all good. At the end of the day we are paying the same $3-4,000 for an 8K camera that we spent on the 1080p camera back in the day. We will spend the same for glass and gear as we did 15 yeas ago. One thing a Sony that bothers me is the delay in announcements and that we'll get the same Sony flavor in the A7SIII that we did with the previous lineups. Sony has always been brilliant with marketing and I don't understand why they can't announce specs like Canon did. Even Panasonic announced the S1H months ahead of it's release.

How does colorblindness affect you? I have a friend that can't see orange colors very well. I agree with your comments about Canon being expensive and lacking features in the past. The reason I brought up Canon color in this thread is because a lot of people are being negative about the R5's specs but they're missing the point about how important color is.

I didn't ignore your question. I got tired of posting the sane-thing and posting a video links that you ignored and didn't respond. You are missing the point. I would also say you have never seriously color corrected any footage from any camera that we've been discussing. I posted links with examples from the Sony Venice, Black Magic, RED and Canon. You have real world color in those links. You keep parroting the same line about how do you decide what's color science is good or not. That answer is through experience and research. Now it's your turn to reply to the links I posted. Isn't the definition of a troll look like your post? Someone who doesn't comment on the subject, brings nothing to the conversation and trys to stir up trouble?

I was surprised by the Ursa Mini's color science in that clip. Based on my experience with the P6K I think you the Ursa Mini's is better than what it looks like in that clip. What do you shoot with? What do you prefer?

I said nothing about the people who made the Sony Venice. I based my opinion on the clip that I posted. I'm not arguing with anyone. The Sony Venice is priced high enough that it should be able to stand up to any comments. I stand by my comment about that footage.

Here's Canon C500 vs BMP6K This shows just how far off the BMP6k color performance is compared to Canon color science. Sorry I pulled the wrong link.

I determine who has the best color on real world production but my own experience and research. Colorist get paid for a reason, not only do they move color but they have to have an eye for color. Here's 3 videos. The BMP6K looks horrible but people defend it and say that the color is great. They don't know what they don't know and they accept bad color quality. The Sony Venice has ok color but it looks painted on, looks fake and lost color depth and value.

That's part of what I was talking about. I mentioned this.

I would say the video does show the complete dynamic range from latest to darkest. Not how many stops but from light to dark. Look in the mid to dark shadows and what do you see? You see good color rendition, you see actually color choices in the shadows that don't get muddy or dull. You have separation or color and separation of reflective color. Can you tell what color is in the mid shadows and darker shadows. If you go the other way, you can tell how the lighter areas react to color. I like the latitude you have with the P6K and think it's great. I am seeing a lot of issues with color that doesn't play well across the board with the P6K.

You don't seem to understand color and light and how it works in film and photography. You've already thrown out this about Canon "it gives pleasing skin tones". I've already mentioned this is not what accurate color is about. You're looking at the largest area of color in an image and making you comments about color being accurate. 99% of all cameras produce pleasing and acceptable skin tones. We all know you have a lot more that makes a good image or a great image. Until you've pushed and pulled footage as a colorist you don't understand. Colorist are artist and see and understand color differently then you do. That's what they get paid to do.

I wasn't arguing about big production choices and the options they have and why they make them. Any choices made are for a artistic choice and not choosing a flawed color science. No one chooses BlackMagic and says "They produce a really nice green cast and that's the one we're going with." You make comments like "accurate color" doesn't matter because it's subjective and the artist choice. This sounds like someone defending short comings produced by brand loyalty.

I said from a colorist stand point ARRI and Canon are the best and easiest to grade and correct. Everyother camera footage I've worked with you're moving the color space to match ARRI and Canon. You didn't watch the video I posted did you?

You start with best color over all. Why wouldn't this be the goal? You make it sound like you shoot with any camera and leave color correction to the colorist and just pray it comes out right? I never said I was doing a this vs that comparison. Where did you get that from?

Take a look at this video from the 1DX III. It gets good at the 00:30sec mark. Do you know how much color grading you would have to do to get the BMP6K to get it to look like this? This is a perfect color test because you have so many reflective colors bouncing around on the face, on the dress and back up to the face. For colorist this color a piece of cake to grade.

Yes what you like vs what I like is subjective, of course. I'm talking about cameras that produce footage that's closer to "correct natural" color, i.e. this in turn means it's easier to color grade. Everyone knows as you move up and down ISO you get color shift. What does ARRI do? It's more consistent all around. So you have excellent color to begin with and great color latitude. I'm talking about pure color quality in the image. Which cameras handle color better is not really subjective. Which image you like is subjective. Does that make sense?

I haven't followed the firmware updates. Has the problem been solved?

No not even close. Where did you come up with that logic? You don't be a brand or camera that has that "dark horror" look or another brand that's "cheerful romantic comedy" look. Everything starts with best and then you move it in the direction you want in color grading.

What are you filming in day time that you can't use the view finder? How much research have you done with the issues you talk about? That sounds like an Atomos problem. They seem to over promise and under delivery all the time.

What you like or what i like is subjective. That's your opinion based on what you see. That's not what I'm talking about. It's a fact footage that's produced by specific camera companies capture the color spectrum better than others. What you see in a graded video has been pushed and pulled and adjusted by the editor or colorist. The final image is no different than the photo from Nikon or Canon camera. Unless you are on set and capture the image or see it happen, then you have no reference point to say it was good or bad. So unless you as an audio guy have spent time, alot of time as a colorist then all you're doing is saying I like that photo better than that one. Arri and Canon get shadow color right and have the best all around balance of color.

Of course people have different preference in color choice. That's not my point. Like what you like. If you keep it simple you could say Arri is top in the field in color reproduction. That's fine and I agree with that. When you professional color grade you can do a lot with most footage. What not up for debate are what camera footage is easier to grade and what camera color science lines up with the most accurate pleasing color that mixes perfectly with what we see with our own eyes. Arri does this and Canon does this the best.

Nice!

I asked that question because I noticed it when grading BM footage, using BMP6K (x4) on two different shoots. If you look all over the web you'll see the same-thing. You have a BMP4. What's your take on this? For the record I love the BMP6K. But you have to dial it to get it to look good. If you start going over or under it loses control and can look horrible. This means you have very little forgiveness with how they've pushed that sensor. The S1H has much better color latitude and color science compared to the BMP6K.

Color is not subjective if you color grade for a living. All color is connected and Canon and Panasonic are not the same. If you had to pick Canon or Panasonic based on color you would pick Canon all day long. This can be proven as a fact. Yes color is objective if we're debating a final color grade on the latest Top Gun film. Have you worked with both cameras?

You took my S1H comments the wrong way. IBIS is great on the S1H but I would argue that the S1H IBIS looks great (stable), you get a unnatural treatment of 3D space with parallax issues. S1H build quality is great, I never said Canon build quality would be better. I'm not sold on Panasonic color. Users are also having issues shooting with Netflix specs. I also don't think the S1H is flying off the shelf either.

Doesn't it make you wonder why BM footage always has a vintage look?