I'll state up front that this has nothing to do with Vegas at all, but it does have to do with film making and the future of it. As the host says,
"This is coming, you just have to work out how long it is before you have to deal with it".
Its a great watch. It is Michael Cioni speaking about Filming, editing, file management etc while making the feature film "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo".
Michael Cioni prepping for a 4 K World - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qztrb9arZl4&feature=player_embedded#)!

That was great! Thanks for the link. Terrific!

HD wasn't around long then.....

HD will be around for many years. 4K has its main advantage in theatrical release or perhaps home cinema, rather than other means of distribution like broadcast TV, which have large infrastructures and capital investments. Unless 4k can increase sales of TV advertising there will be no incentive for the companies to make the investment.

There's also 3D, and I suspect the current state of the world economy doesn't allow for both in the broadcast world.

I found the workflows most interesting, and the volume of drive space is frightening.
But the one thing I'm very excited about is the first reasonably priced 4k camcorder that comes out- I can imagine doing a live event with your 4k cam as the long shot.
Being able to zoom in in post, then follow the singer, dancer etc around the stage with the pan crop tool, and still be at 1080p, 720p, even DVD size ( if we still deliver to DVD by then) at full res, while zoomed in will just be amazing.
One cam for long shot and close ups, Ha.

Wonderful! We won't have to pay over the odds for skilled cameramen who can compose shots any more - just shoot wide and crop in post. (I suppose it's what stills photographers have been doing for years...)

Moved to UHD from Vegas. Thanks for posting this, but please use the *entire* site and post to the appropriate forum.

Sorry Chris, Noted for the future.
cheers

Although in theory this the cropping idea sounds great, its going to end up at the point where your spending time trying to fake a camera pan. I've done something similar before and it didn't look very good.

hmm...
not just simply applying keframes to pan/crop? (thinking Vegas)
even without motion panning, I've seen successful cropping like this in cut shots. It looked like the guy had a 3 camera set up. It was pretty awesome!

I guess we can consider the JVC HMQ10 the first reasonably priced 4K camera. $5,000 for 4K sounds reasonable to me. I want the camera - but I'm not sure why! I have no need for 4K - yet.

hmm...
not just simply applying keframes to pan/crop? (thinking Vegas)
even without motion panning, I've seen successful cropping like this in cut shots. It looked like the guy had a 3 camera set up. It was pretty awesome!

Unfortunately, the perspective doesn't change, so it's not really the most dynamic film making.

Unfortunately, the perspective doesn't change, so it's not really the most dynamic film making.

I expect cropping is much more useful when covering an event where the motion is unpredictable than film making.

Perhaps as a rescue, the best coverage at an event will probably continue be done with a zoom lens. You'd need a lot of pixels to allow you to enlarge 10 or more times. The zoom is also quicker if you've got a tight schedule, when you don't want to spend time in post re-framing all your shots.

Cropping is probably better for the refining the last little nuance out of the framing. Although, with good camera operator who's in the zone, you mightn't always have that much excess to work with. Perhaps it's more for advertisements than event coverage, where sharp camera operating always makes the difference when taking you into the moment and so producing better quality work.

For getting all your coverage from fixed camera positions, using one focal length and then cropping it sounds more like one big compromise, unless it's part of portraying how the subjects are entrapped.

Still photographs are different, they're stand alone images that exist mostly on their own, moving images have a developed a different grammar over the last 100 plus years. They take references and influences from stills photography, painting, the novel, but they've also created their own language.

Unfortunately, the perspective doesn't change, so it's not really the most dynamic film making.

Why should the perspective change? It doesn't change when you pan, or tilt, or even if you zoom -- perspective only changes if you pedestal, or dolly, or truck ...

I've been using a modest reframing zoom in post for some time now to add emphasis on interviews, or to give me a cut-point -- to achieve that without losing resolution would be great!

Cheers,
GB

Indeed, but changing the camera position for each shot does and just enlarging the image can become lazy if used to excess (like many of these things). A small change in post is fine, but just leaving the camera locked off and getting all the framing sizes in post perhaps isn't the most inspired means of covering a scene.

Using different focal lengths also adds to how you cover a scene.

There are better ways than 'doing it in post' but in my thirty years as a director, sometimes I'm conducting an interview without benefit of a cameraman. I could have course refuse such commissions, or not do such projects, but in the interest of getting it done, I sometimes make do. So locked off cameras are not unknown ... And post gives you all the options of panning, tilting and zooming exactly as you could do with camera on a tripod, once cameras with 'better than HD' output are available.

Cheers,
GB

Indeed, but changing the camera position for each shot does and just enlarging the image can become lazy if used to excess (like many of these things).

I like the idea of slow-motion replay with digital zoom that preserves quality. Such footage would also be useful when creating a highlights reel to showcase a particular player.

This using it for an effect, rather than general coverage. Although, if you're shooting with a high frame rate (for slow motion) and high resolution, this could add up to a lot of data.

I've used QuadHD (4K) sample ProRes LT from the JVC HMQ10 in FCP X. During import, ProRes proxy is automatically generated.

I'm also experimenting with 2K 12-bit, 4:4:4 RAW DNG footage. Import into AE, make a one-light setting, export as ProRes 4444 (no alpha), import into FCP X where during import ProRes proxy is automatically generated. While the DNG footage is huge, the PR 4444 is not.

Editing speed is fantastic since one is dealing with PR Proxy.

In both cases, the Ken Burns FX works very nicely to create a 1920x1080 movie.

My experience is that 4K and 2K are not very different once you have your workflow understood. Turns out FCP X works well since it has 4K and 2K settings.

"It records in H.264 MP4s at roughly 48mbits per second. That’s not very high for four times the resolution of HD. It needs to be a much less compressed recording or ideally a newer, stronger, more efficient and 4K centric codec. H264 is not really it.

I recorded in 30p. There may well be a 25p or 24p option. I didn’t have time to look for it. Doesn’t matter though, as I shot 30p and brought it into the computer via the rather lovely full size USB 3 port at the bottom of the phone, and then converted to ProRes HQ with MPEG Streamclip and then conformed to 23.98p in Cinema Tools, giving me a slightly stronger image and slightly slower but now much nice filmic movement. I really like 30p recording slowed to 24p or 25p. It’s a lovely “not slow motion but not normal motion” look."

4K video recording on a phone? Is there any point? A look at the Samsung Galaxy Note 3′s 4K video | Philip Bloom (http://philipbloom.net/2013/10/24/note4k/)

Flightpath: 4K Samsung Galaxy Note 3 - YouTube