"10 bit color has a large "hide" amount of color information, once its recorded into 8 bit, all these "hide" information is lost FOREVER,."

Unfortunately it means quite big lack of logic. Please check link I provided above. To oversimplify - 8bit/10bit is not magic, it is electrons count (in linear case of raw, in same logic apply in nonlinear spaces). If you get four buckets that each can contain from 0 to 255 electrons and put their contents in large bucket you'll clearly get from 0 to 1023 electrons. Is it clear?

Also 420 or 422 also does not mean that it is inferior by default, it just means that encoder is using human vision properties to reduce amount of information (in color sampling).

I do agree that is no magic, but resuming my meaning is that ok to get 10bit, but kinda false 10bit comparing to a native 10bit (or at least coming from a source more than 10bit). The math makes 10bit but the reality colors don't. The algorithm cannot imagine and re-create the color that has already been destroyed by lowering the bit depth. As you said its already encoded "using human vision properties to reduce amount of information". So, 4k 420 has only the human vision amount of color, all the "deep" color has already been destroyed, you just get better reproduction of these colors, better pixel sharpness in 2k, and of course some better gradation if this 2k frame is stored into a 10bit file.

I mean 2 kind of losses: one is by lowering the bit depth and other is codec losses. If you get 12bit RAW and compress into 8bit compressed codec. These are permanent losses.

Your logic is based on the "visible information", I'm talking about invisible, but stored, information. Higher bit depth plus less compressed codec can store more these "invisible" information. The invisible, but stored, information can be pushed in post. 4k 8bit 420 already "kill" all the invisible information. So how it can be achieve in 2k? The invisible, but stored information, can be used to increase the dynamic range. I'm not only talking about color, but data. Proper exposure doesn't save data loss.

By "invisible information" I mean all the data that is stored but its hided by highlights or darkness. If 10bit, they can be retrieved, once 8bited, they are all lost. That's simple.

All the data you try to "restore" is already an averaged data

What does this mean at all? Again vague and wrong terms like "perceived Dynamic range".

This data has not only has been output from sensor in a limited way to ADC (and nothing has to do noise over here) but in the moment it enters the codec pipeline data is INTRINSICALLY LOST, due to the nature of a codec. If

And this is bunch of crap. What is "limited way to ADC"? Who the hell said that no noise happens in pixel level and in ADC readout? What is "codec pipeline" and "nature of codec"?

All intra is used diffrent results from IPB compression may occur.

With same bitrate IPB always preserve more data and for most cases much more. It is whole point of adding P and B frames to use data from different frames to increase quality.

@endotoxic compression doesn't mean loss of information. There is destructive and non-destructive compression. You don't loose data with ZIP. And if you have a ZIP file you can get the original uncompressed data without a single bit loss (or I think zipped software wouldn't work properly)

this information is converted to digital interpretation, 01000101001 when original is a wave so....data is loss damnit!! , why i even bother to explain this shit if you even know bayer patern aint even a pixel per pixel pattern so more interpretation happening!

Original is wave? What? Original is analog value (charge of pixel well), but not continuous (as it is proportional to electrons number :-))

if you even know bayer patern aint even a pixel per pixel pattern so more interpretation happening!

What? May be you wanted to say that each sensor element only can get specific range of wavelengths :-) And to get full RGB at sensor interpolation is used? Yep, in fact this interpolation produces correct 422

The nature of EVERY codec is to COMPRESS so data is loss by different compression methods.

No. Data can be lost, can be visually lossless, can be lossless, and compression can even increase file size :-). Even H.264 can be lossless, yes.

any compression get rid off data, non destructive only replaces things already loss.

Incorrect.

To be short all your points are partly or fully incorrect. Please geed good book or article on sensors, raw to RGB conversion and about H.264 compression. As it is almost pointless to explain anything at this level now.

all analog signal is measured by wave. Can be square, but wave. The value of the pixel well is not continuous, giving a dynamic measure in time, interpreted by a wave in the ADC.

It is called flame topic, not bullshit topic, if you noticed :-)

Thing that you just said is very incorrect as you even do not understand that you are talking about.

And this

all analog signal is measured by wave.

Must be added to famous citations :-)

As I said, please READ SOMETHING and THINK before posting.

This was discussed a few years ago. Extract below from http://www.ambarella.com/docs/1080p60.pdf ( it's no longer online and I can't find a copy)

"This creates the opportunity to use 1080p 60 4:2:0 60p at 8bits-per-sample as a unifying format for both contribution and distribution. This is the case because down conversion of 1080p60 4:2:0 at 8 bits-per-sample can deliver 4:2:2 with increased dynamic range (almost 10 bits) at both 1080i and 720p resolutions"

This is not about compression, I mean it is, but not in the sense that software that would do the up-sampling or whatever the proper term would be, must create missing information out of nothing, it just rearranges the existing color information into new pattern with more color resolution. So the up sampling uses the information that would be thrown away in simple down-scaling (I am over simplifying I know), and ads +2 and +4 to Cb and Cr to make 444. Luma is 4 anyways.

Am I even close to the logic behind this process?

Scaling a 4k image to 1080 will improve colour rendition to a close approximation of 4:4:4 colour sampling but 8 bit is 8 bit and stays 8 bit. Bit depth is a measure of how many luminance samples there are between black and white limits. Colour sampling is the resolution in the spatial plane i.e. X/Y axis. So we will see an improvement in colour resolution but not bit depth. Banding will still be an issue.

I already posted this link - http://www.personal-view.com/faqs/camera-usage/general-camera-usage-faq#more-megapixels-is-worse-isn-t

For 4k to be downsampled to something equivalent to 10-bit, it will need extensive dithering.

What kind of dithering? Did you read link above to understand from where 10bits can come from?