Kisekae Creations Post 'em here!

[B3Guy]

Digital cameras just don't have the dynamic range, and the manufacturers are still stuck in a huge pissing contest over megapixels (in reality, 16MP is more than enough for 99% of all work). Its too bad. They need to work on dynamic range, then film will be truly obsolete.

 

[Cagey]

Digital cameras just don't have the dynamic range, and the manufacturers are still stuck in a huge pissing contest over megapixels (in reality, 16MP is more than enough for 99% of all work). Its too bad. They need to work on dynamic range, then film will be truly obsolete.

Right. But, engineering works on what the marketing weenies tell management will sell. More's law usually applies - Some's good, more's better, and too much is just right. The general public is conditioned to believe bigger numbers are better, so a 12MP sensor is obviously better than a 10MP sensor, right? Of course, few people know about sensor size, dynamic range, etc., so those things are rarely part of the equation except for the esoteric types who demand such things and have the money to pay for it.

CPUs follow a similar path. A 3.4Ghz clock is better than a 2.8Ghz clock, right? I mean, it's faster! Except, everybody was getting fooled for a long time using clock ticks as a basis for judgement. Motorola chips had a flat address space, so they were naturally faster due to a lack of having to calculate segments and offsets. Then, while AMD and Intel had very similar architectures, the AMD parts had a much higher IPC (Instructions Per Clock) number, so for a given speed they were always much, much faster than the Intel parts. But, few people knew about any of that. All they knew was "I need more ticks!" Hence, the gigahertz wars.

 

[line6man]

 

[B3Guy]

Digital cameras just don't have the dynamic range, and the manufacturers are still stuck in a huge pissing contest over megapixels (in reality, 16MP is more than enough for 99% of all work). Its too bad. They need to work on dynamic range, then film will be truly obsolete.

Right. But, engineering works on what the marketing weenies tell management will sell. More's law usually applies - Some's good, more's better, and too much is just right. The general public is conditioned to believe bigger numbers are better, so a 12MP sensor is obviously better than a 10MP sensor, right? Of course, few people know about sensor size, dynamic range, etc., so those things are rarely part of the equation except for the esoteric types who demand such things and have the money to pay for it.

CPUs follow a similar path. A 3.4Ghz clock is better than a 2.8Ghz clock, right? I mean, it's faster! Except, everybody was getting fooled for a long time using clock ticks as a basis for judgement. Motorola chips had a flat address space, so they were naturally faster due to a lack of having to calculate segments and offsets. Then, while AMD and Intel had very similar architectures, the AMD parts had a much higher IPC (Instructions Per Clock) number, so for a given speed they were always much, much faster than the Intel parts. But, few people knew about any of that. All they knew was "I need more ticks!" Hence, the gigahertz wars.

I'm pretty apalled that the video world has yet to see a RAW format (apart from RedRAW, which is for douchebags with too much cash, or Peter Jackson shooting The Hobbit in 3D :icon_biggrin. We're still stuck with AVCHD and MotionJPEG (ugh). and where's the 4:2:2? I'm running top of the line DSLR with my GH2 and I'm still stuck with 8 bit color. (Color banding anyone?) Don't get me wrong, its an amazing camera (yes, it does kick the 5D mkII's buttocks, and quite soundly), but it still isn't quite there. Blowout/blackout is unavoidable, and the color banding is a pain. It stands out like a sore thumb as soon as I try to do anything more than the lightest of grading. Oh yeah, and then there's the rolling shutter.

 

[Cagey]

I use a Canon A570 for 95% of my shots since they mainly just get posted on the World Wide Wibble, so I'm a long way from worrying about it. The other 5% gets done with a Nikon D80, but that's just too much trouble for most of what I do and the image improvement is wasted on the 'net. I suspect the vast majority of the population is the same way, which is why attention isn't being paid to the esoteric performance details that most people wouldn't appreciate anyway, even if they knew what they were and could recognize them.

 

[B3Guy]

well I'm hoping to pull off a feature length film sometime in the not too distant future, so I must admit I was a bit of a pixel peeper during my camera shopping phase. That's over now, though, and its time to flesh out the concept into a script, then get going with some serious story-boarding and location scouting. Guerrilla filmmaking, anyone?  :cool01:

 

[AGWAN]

I'm a pretty darn good production designer/ prop master.

Just saying.

 

[Joepro182]

Here is a good one