Something new from Canon on Nov. 3rd...

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Jack Zhang

Please remember that this is Wikipedia. AVC-Ultra was Vaporware for the past 3 years. I don't see citations or references, so this could all be hokum.

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

An overview of AVC-Ultra (in English, with Spanish subtitles):

Chris - that only refers to the I-frame only 200Mbs codec which has been talked about for quite a while - what Lawrence Bansbach referred to was a newer announcement: "its AVC-Ultra "family" of codecs. One is AVC Long-GOP which is indeed 10-bit 4:2:2 at up to 50 Mbps".

The wikipedia link talks of broadening the term to include three new codecs under the "Ultra" term - the original 200Mbs "AVC-Ultra" now becoming "AVC-Intra Class 200". (Confused? :-) )

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst

Eight bits is enough when you...
1) Expose properly (that's the goal, but some extra headroom can save expensive, non-optimum footage.)
2) Get the S-curve and gamma just right, and
3) Don't grade.

But if you want to fix a non-ideally exposed image, mess with it's curve, and grade colors beyond reality while maintaining smooth gradients and natural texture, you need more bits.

But you don't just need more bits - you need to record something other than the fully processed video signal - S-log, RAW etc to get the most benefit out of any 10 bit system. Otherwise overexposure is overexposure and can't be clawed back no matter what the bitdepth. Yes, such will give far more control, but will require every shot to be graded - not a problem for some work, far too time consuming for other.

Unfortunately "10bit" just seems to have become a marketing silver bullet - "use a 10 bit system and it'll give you far more control, sir". The reality is a lot more complicated, and 10 bit is only one factor. Don't confuse 10 bit S-log with a 10 bit video codec.

[Glen Vandermolen]

Originally Posted by Robert Sanders

The problem with using the word ULTRA is.... then what? What do you call the codec once you implement 1080p 4:4:4? AVC-MAX? And then what? What do you call the AVC flavor that supports 4K in the future? AVC-SUPERDUPER?

AVC- Flux Capacitor!

[Jack Zhang]

Still, even with that initial announcement, no products officially implement it yet. And furthermore, all references to the original announcement in official press form have long been down. That's what I call vaporware.

[Chris Hurd]

And in today's news:

Canon Hollywood Professional Technology and Support Center Premieres in Los Angeles at DVInfo.net

Related to this Nov. 3rd announcement? You decide...

[Chris Barcellos]

Kind of lends credance to those who postulated the big announcement was about a working arrangement with the Studio in question......which for most of us would mean nothing. Only a couple of weeks off now... Will this thread be sent to Area 51 ?? We will know soon...

[David Heath]

The fact that that announcement was made today tends to mean that it isn't the one scheduled for Nov 3rd. :-) However, it does tend to lend weight the theory that the Nov 3rd announcement is more likely to be about something more relevant to the cinema industry than a photocopier......

[Robert Sanders]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

And in today's news:

Canon Hollywood Professional Technology and Support Center Premieres in Los Angeles at DVInfo.net

Related to this Nov. 3rd announcement? You decide...

Very very exciting.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

Will this thread be sent to Area 51?

I can assure you that it most definitely will *not* be sent to Area 51.

Nor will I be able to offer any more speculation in this thread after tonight...

[Jim Martin]

See, See, Canon is taking over Hollywood & buying Paramount & RED!!

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

[Chris Hurd]

Or could it be the other way around? Hmm.

[Don Parrish]

"" Canon’s customer service and support network includes Factory Service Centers in Irvine (Calif.), Jamesburg (N.J.) and Newport News (Va.) as well as five broadcast lens service centers located strategically throughout the United States.""

I guess that means the Irvine crew will not move into the new facility, what will Hollywood work on ??


another interesting paragraph;

""The facility will also support business opportunities by offering 1:1 meetings with major clients (studios, production houses, television networks, rental facilities, and others) to further build relationships and assess their needs. The new facility and local Canon staff will also offer hands-on education to current and potential clients on the latest Canon professional products. Courtesy visits by both existing and potential clients in the industry can be arranged to explore opportunities and assess Canon’s full capabilities"".

It's beginning to sound like I won't be able to afford an ND filter for this thing.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Or could it be the other way around? Hmm.

Well - I speculated much earlier in this thread that whilst I don't see either Red or Canon buying the other one out, there remains the possibility of a joint venture in a single area. I still haven't seen a single informed comment which categorically rules that out.

Many are taking some quotes by Jim Jannard as being such, taking comments about a forthcoming "battle" as Canon v Red. As said before ( http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-...ml#post1683761 ) all the comments I've seen could be taken the other way - Canon AND Red versus "the rest".

Whether or not it WILL happen I simply don't know, I have no inside knowledge - but it would make a lot of business sense.......

Ah well. Chris at least will soon be in a position to know the truth. Roll on Nov 3rd for the rest of us....... :-)

[Les Wilson]

For those with long memories, we went through this a year ago discussing the absence of a solid state exchangeable lens model in the XF lineup. As I recall, the leanings were toward a solid state large chip XL in the fall of 2010 that was wrong or was cancelled when the market shifted:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xf...down-line.html

Canon's historical behavior and Japanese management style would say they won't rock the boat in a huge way as that might cause embarassment. I read some analyst that claimed the big hit of the 5DM2 was unforeseen and unintentionally brash.

Personally, I think Canon's usual "last to enter the market" behavior and strategy to eat away at the broadcast market from below (they have no upper end market to erode or threaten) point to a high end model. Coupled with the announcement of a Hollywood service center for filmmakers, it seems to me that it makes sense for the Nov 3 product to be targeted squarely at hi-end digital filmmaking.

If there's a price driven aspect to this market like there was at the time of the XL-H1 (Camera Review: The Canon XL H1 By Dirck Halstead / The Digital Filmmaker /), then the "Historical" aspect of the announcement is probably the acquisition specs (color space and buss width) at a pricepoint ... aka a quality digital filmmaking camera with good enough specs to take away some Red and low-end Arri market all at a price where you can buy several for the price of an Arri.

[Allan Black]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

I can assure you that it most definitely will *not* be sent to Area 51.

Nor will I be able to offer any more speculation in this thread after tonight...

Looks like Chris will know after tonight .. but there's a Non Disclosure Agreement pending ?

IMO it's a new big pro cine camera to rival Arri and Red. They couldn't let it dribble out on to the market.
Probably be followed closely by a cut down prosumer version .. maybe even announced on Nov 3.

Cheers.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

A lot of landmark broadcast programmes have been shot using 8bit HDCAM, many of which have been graded in post. Exposing correctly is one of those skills DPs need to develop, although it's not as difficult with video as shooting reversal film.

While this is true, 8-bit HDCAM - or 8-bit DSLR - doesn't give the latitude and bit resolution needed to allow us to push things to their creative limits. And while the goal is to expose properly, in high contrast environments, this is subjective. Do you expose for highlights or shadows? You can't have both. And, if the contrast is low enough to capture the extremes, you lose nuance in the mid- skin tones.

My son recently did the post work on a music video with content from two different DPs. It was daylight DSLR content shot before CineStyle was available. Sure enough, one DP exposed high, the other low. Neither was "wrong", but it made things tough in post, even for a fairly conservative grade. In essence, 8-bits is "brittle".

Originally Posted by David Heath

But you don't just need more bits - you need to record something other than the fully processed video signal - S-log, RAW etc to get the most benefit out of any 10 bit system.

True. By requesting "more bits", I'm really asking for a more gradable, less brittle output. Whether this is 14-bits linear, 12-bits S-log, or whatever is up to the manufacturer.

It would be nice if there was metadata included in video files that told NLEs what default lookup table to use. Drop it on a timeline or in a video player and the image would look nice right off the card. But you could still grade it to extremes. Best of all worlds - aside from the need to buy more memory cards and hard drives, of course. :)