Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 60
  1. Collapse Details
    #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    251
    Default
    If the change isn't consistent with the many white papers and specs they've published for Canon Log, they screwed it up. If you can't get the same levels when you record internally and externally, they screwed it up. If you can't get the same levels on the C300 Mark II as on all of the other Cinema EOS cameras, they screwed it up.

    If they decided all of a sudden they wanted to redefine Canon Log, that'd be one thing. But they didn't publish any new specs or papers or anything. All we've got is one line in a firmware change log for one camera.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    251
    Default
    Can anyone with 1.0.6 firmware and FCPX 10.3.2 tell me what percent black is at in the scopes now for Canon Log 1 or 3?

    How about the percent of black for firmware 1.0.6 Canon Log 1 or 3 in DaVinci Resolve on the Mac with Clip Attributes Data Levels set to Auto ?


    I'm in touch with Canon and I want to make sure I give them the right info. I already have numbers for Premiere Pro in Windows, VLC, and QuickTime Player.


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    218
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by balazer View Post
    Can anyone with 1.0.6 firmware and FCPX 10.3.2 tell me what percent black is at in the scopes now for Canon Log 1 or 3?

    How about the percent of black for firmware 1.0.6 Canon Log 1 or 3 in DaVinci Resolve on the Mac with Clip Attributes Data Levels set to Auto ?


    I'm in touch with Canon and I want to make sure I give them the right info. I already have numbers for Premiere Pro in Windows, VLC, and QuickTime Player.
    Apologies in advance that I can't be more definite in my findings, but I can share what I've got.

    UHD, 10 bit, with Cap on, Clog and Clog 3: Cinema Gamut
    Firmware 1.0.6
    Did ABB

    In FCPX:
    CLog Black Level ≈ 12.5 IRE
    CLog 3 Cinema Gamut Black Level ≈ 12.5 IRE

    In Resolve (on Mac, Clip Attributes Data levels set to Auto):
    CLog Black Level ≈ 7.5 IRE
    CLog 3 Cinema Gamut Black Level ≈ 7.5 IRE

    Hope someone else can verify this. Good luck with your investigations and thank you for taking the time.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    251
    Default
    That was exactly what I needed. Thank you very much.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #45
    Senior Member cpreston's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    1,252
    Default
    I recently purchased a C300 II and I have one into a similar issue discussed on this thread. I have the newest firmware and everything is updated. All of the Clog settings are reinterpreted by FCPX to press 110% IRE shot in camera down to 100% IRE once imported. This does not occur with WideDR or any of the none Log gammas. I am surprised this is still happening. It seems that a pass through the program edit ready removes the tag that causes the reinterpretation. Has there been any further info on why this occurs?


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio USA
    Posts
    554
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by cpreston View Post
    I recently purchased a C300 II and I have one into a similar issue discussed on this thread. I have the newest firmware and everything is updated. All of the Clog settings are reinterpreted by FCPX to press 110% IRE shot in camera down to 100% IRE once imported. This does not occur with WideDR or any of the none Log gammas. I am surprised this is still happening. It seems that a pass through the program edit ready removes the tag that causes the reinterpretation. Has there been any further info on why this occurs?

    Out of curiosity, is it actually clipping the whites at 100%, or is the whole waveform pressed as you say to 0-100%? If it's not clipping, does it hurt anything having the whites pressed to 100% You wouldn't want to ever deliver a video with whites over 100, and you're not losing anything the camera recorded right?


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #47
    Senior Member cpreston's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    1,252
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by drummondb View Post
    Out of curiosity, is it actually clipping the whites at 100%, or is the whole waveform pressed as you say to 0-100%? If it's not clipping, does it hurt anything having the whites pressed to 100% You wouldn't want to ever deliver a video with whites over 100, and you're not losing anything the camera recorded right?
    It's not clipping the whites, it is just pressing them. Interestingly, Canon allows you to press the whites to 100% (235) rather than allowing superwhites to be recorded, but FCPX also reinterprets these values as well.

    It isn't an unworkable situation to have the footage reinterpreted, but it definitely causes problems in multicamera situations with an XC15 or C100 for which FCPX doesn't reinterpret the IRE.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio USA
    Posts
    554
    Default
    Yeah, it just seems like a feature and a benefit to me. Just saves a step during the color grade, and it avoids the problem of someone who doesn't now what they're doing encoding a final file with whites above 100. Though I imagine that's less of a problem with a camera as spendy as a C300/II.


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #49
    Senior Member cpreston's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    1,252
    Default
    The whole thing is a bit confusing to me. Whites vs superwhites and what file types encode superwhites vs clamp at 100% IRE. I am guessing that it is left over from analog signal days. I've also noticed that youtube will reinterpret the gamma and white levels in different ways. Does anybody know of a resource that explains how this works?


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio USA
    Posts
    554
    Default
    I don't know the whole story either. But what I do know is if you have picture information above 100 on your waveform monitor, that detail will likely be clipped at 100 and lost on many displays. It's a simple step in most color grading tools to simply bring those highlights above 100 down to below 100, and poof, you've recovered a bit of detail in your highlights.

    This article is a bit old now, but it got me thinking about superwhites a while back: https://mattdavis.pro/2012/07/12/dea...at-goes-to-11/


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •