C500: 1D-C Users

[Guest]

I too miss the Wide DR profile that I had on the C100. It puts black back to zero and has the same 800% (or 12 stops) as Canon Log, but with less data reserved for roll off. I think in a world of compromises where you want something "pretty much done" in camera, the Wide DR should be an option on the 1Dc. I wonder if there is a technical limitation involved...

Would be nice to have something like wide DR on the 1d-c. Not to have a flat image, but to have an image without thinking about clipping the highlights all day, and not having to push the files so hard in post to get contrast back.


C-Log is great for what it is. And it shows that the highlight data can be retrieved in an organic way. Last night I was shooting a scene with candles, and I was amazed at how much more highlights I could recover with C-Log vs Neutral. Ofcourse once it is graded the difference will not be as big, but sometimes it is the small things that make a big difference.

I will have to experiment more with C-Log to see how versatile it is. I got scared off by the banding and noise comments, as well as some of my own initial experiences. Sometimes i need to be at iso100 and sometimes up around iso6400. And sometimes I need to jump around, and switching picture styles is not very effecient workflow. So, I'd rather have something more moderate, but also takes full advantage of the sensor.


I agree with Marvin, that I am liking the colors from C-log so far. And having that extra bit in the highlights makes for a better image.

These images were pushed in post to emphasize the clipping, and C-Log just so obviously has better highlights than the others.

Screen Shot 2013-07-01 at 11.35.14 PM by onesielaff, on Flickr

I would have to under expose in other picture styles.

Screen Shot 2013-07-01 at 11.33.59 PM by onesielaff, on Flickr

 

[marvinhello]

I will have to experiment more with C-Log to see how versatile it is. I got scared off by the banding and noise comments, as well as some of my own initial experiences. Sometimes i need to be at iso100 and sometimes up around iso6400. And sometimes I need to jump around, and switching picture styles is not very effecient workflow. So, I'd rather have something more moderate, but also takes full advantage of the sensor.

Banding won't occur above ISO400, which is the native sensitivity and this ISO offers the best overall dynamic range. You could put ND filters in front of your lens to avoid using lower ISO (that's what I usually do, sometimes I also add a polariser in sunny outdoor shoots). I use circular ones to keep the cameras mobility.

Regarding noise, we are talking about a camera that has THE best low light perfomance. From my experience, noise in C-Log is no issue at all between ISO400 and 3200, and very manageable between 3200 and 12800.

If you want to get a quick grade on your C-Log footage, use FilmConvert Pro, it has C-Log preset and does a great job of making the C-Log shine

 

[Guest]

Banding won't occur above ISO400, which is the native sensitivity and this ISO offers the best overall dynamic range. You could put ND filters in front of your lens to avoid using lower ISO (that's what I usually do, sometimes I also add a polariser in sunny outdoor shoots). I use circular ones to keep the cameras mobility.

Regarding noise, we are talking about a camera that has THE best low light perfomance. From my experience, noise in C-Log is no issue at all between ISO400 and 3200, and very manageable between 3200 and 12800.

If you want to get a quick grade on your C-Log footage, use FilmConvert Pro, it has C-Log preset and does a great job of making the C-Log shine

I'll download the trial. Thanks! =)

 

[AndreeOnline]

And be adviced regarding ISOs <400 on the 1Dc in Log: even if you over expose an image to the max, the signal clips at about IRE80. There is something unholy going on and the white paper is missing.

Canon Log was developed for the C100, 300 and 500 sensor. But since the 1Dc is what it is and costs what it costs it had to be included there as well. But I think Canon had to wrangle it in there to fit the 1Dc components. It needs ISO400 or higher, and the way the signal behaves below that, I don't even think the lower ISOs should be selectable in Canon Log. It's wonky.

That said, at 400 and above it's beautiful, even if I personally would have loved a user editable black point setup. But there is a reason that it is what it is.

It's funny about the clipping at IRE80 though. I just noticed one day and I had never heard anyone mention it. Even Hurlbut mentioned filming at lower ISOs and I brought to his attention on Twitter. He basically said the histogram on the back of the camera is "good for nothing", but I maintained that it looks the same in FCPX. He hasn't replied after that so I don't know what his take is.

But until I know what's actually happening behind the scenes I'll definitely use 400 and up and add filters after that.

 

[marvinhello]

And be adviced regarding ISOs <400 on the 1Dc in Log: even if you over expose an image to the max, the signal clips at about IRE80. There is something unholy going on and the white paper is missing.

Canon Log was developed for the C100, 300 and 500 sensor. But since the 1Dc is what it is and costs what it costs it had to be included there as well. But I think Canon had to wrangle it in there to fit the 1Dc components. It needs ISO400 or higher, and the way the signal behaves below that, I don't even think the lower ISOs should be selectable in Canon Log. It's wonky.

That said, at 400 and above it's beautiful, even if I personally would have loved a user editable black point setup. But there is a reason that it is what it is.

It's funny about the clipping at IRE80 though. I just noticed one day and I had never heard anyone mention it. Even Hurlbut mentioned filming at lower ISOs and I brought to his attention on Twitter. He basically said the histogram on the back of the camera is "good for nothing", but I maintained that it looks the same in FCPX. He hasn't replied after that so I don't know what his take is.

But until I know what's actually happening behind the scenes I'll definitely use 400 and up and add filters after that.

Canon is working on a solution in the next firmware revision.

 

[AndreeOnline]

Canon is working on a solution in the next firmware revision.

Sounds great!

 

[Guest]

Canon is working on a solution in the next firmware revision.

That will be nice.

 

[Guest]

What about EVF's?

I like to shoot primarily with an EVF/OVF when I can.


Been working mainly with the Cineroid Retina EVF. Looking at the dimensions, it seemed smaller than some of the other options, so I was able to get it in closer to the camera side, which is a constant battle for me.


I pretty much like the Cineroid, but the Canon batteries are not very stable, and get disconnected too often. On music videos, this didn't bother me, but in run and gun documentary situations, it was pretty bad. I will switch over to an alternative power solution, as the Canon battery holder is just not secure enough for professional use.

Start up time could be faster, but still it is at least as good as the Zacuto and a few others.

Resolution is good. Even with the image windowed down to show wave forms, there is enough resolution for focus.

There is some smear when panning. But again, at least as good if not better than some other evf's out there.

From an operators stand point it is all right, I have not put it through a production using all the ins and outs.


I like having more buttons (4) than the old smalHD monitors(2), for instant one step access to functions.

The focus assist is good, but I do not use it.

LUT simulator is nice too.

1:1 pixel shows interlaced (EDIT, there is a setting on the 1D-C to change this, so this is no longer an issue, 1:1 is great!), so doesn't really help me out. But glad to have it, and it is relatively fast switching back and forth.

Build quality is actually good, functional, and ugly. Optics could be better in this price bracket (though I just compared it with a new zacuto and didn't think the zacuto was and better function wise. The zacuto seems nicer because the diopter is heavier and cushier, but function wise is actually worse, too close and too heavy.)

The flip function is AWFUL! the manual is no help in finding a simpler way. But if you want to flip and mirror, you have to go deep into the menu, and change each flip axis individually! Really puzzling and very bad.

Overall, I prefer this monitor to many others, because of the resolution and waveform. I will wait till some new product comes out before I upgrade again, as I can't imagine anything else being all that life changing. It is superior to the Zacuto in almost every way.

The technical support is open and honest, though sometimes they take sometime to reply.

(The 1DC body just fits in the Cineroid case. Nice free compact 1DC case.)

 

[Guest]

While not scientific, this was my experience in jumping over to C-Log from Neutral:


candle_neutral

candle_clog
pretty cool, since neutral already has a good amount of dr.

 

[marvinhello]

What about EVF's?

In situations that require utmost mobility, I just use LCDVF attachment on the on-camera LCD, it adds another point of contact and (with some training) you can focus accurately even in 4K from that screen.

I'm saving to get an Alphatron EVF just for an extra option.

 

[Guest]

In situations that require utmost mobility, I just use LCDVF attachment on the on-camera LCD, it adds another point of contact and (with some training) you can focus accurately even in 4K from that screen.

I'm saving to get an Alphatron EVF just for an extra option.

The alphatron may be the way to go. The cineroid is slimmer and lighter, so i like it, as I prefer that. Ha, also, I use the camera's LCD quite often too. For a light weight option, I use a long L shape flash bracket, usually $12, turn it upside down and use it as a butt-stock. That and the diopter and it is ultra light weight solution.

 

[Guest]

Banding won't occur above ISO400, which is the native sensitivity and this ISO offers the best overall dynamic range. You could put ND filters in front of your lens to avoid using lower ISO (that's what I usually do, sometimes I also add a polariser in sunny outdoor shoots). I use circular ones to keep the cameras mobility.

Regarding noise, we are talking about a camera that has THE best low light perfomance. From my experience, noise in C-Log is no issue at all between ISO400 and 3200, and very manageable between 3200 and 12800.

If you want to get a quick grade on your C-Log footage, use FilmConvert Pro, it has C-Log preset and does a great job of making the C-Log shine

Looks pretty good. Day before yesterday, I played around with a low light c-log. But didn't go above 1600 yet. I'll do a stress test some time. This setup was six candles, a diffused 40wattbulb and a 25watt lighting the background.

Obviously film convert, haha...


testframe

testframe_orig
iso1600, C-Log

 

[marvinhello]

Looks pretty good. Day before yesterday, I played around with a low light c-log. But didn't go above 1600 yet. I'll do a stress test some time. This setup was six candles, a diffused 40wattbulb and a 25watt lighting the background.

My low light exposure strategy is to overexpose about 1/3 to 1/2 stop depending on how the highlight behaves. In the frame grab you posted, there is certainly room for overexposure since the highlight is only diffused skin reflection. The reason is to maximise SNR because C-log works by lowering the tonal range and pull it back with LUT or grading, overexpose moderately under low light avoid too much "pull" which may introduce unmanageable noise or compression artifacts.

I recently shot a MV exlusively using C-log and 1080p60, ISO mostly at 3200 or 6400. I can't post frames though due to NDA, but the results are amazing and I'll post a link once it's up!

 

[AndreeOnline]

My low light exposure strategy is to overexpose about 1/3 to 1/2 stop depending on how the highlight behaves

I agree. And it's important to keep the over exposure close to those limits and NOT "expose to the right". At the high end there's simply too much compression and lost tonality if you use it for other things than highlights.

I'd also say that it's a valid strategy for all lighting situations—not just low light. Just because it's a log curve, it doesn't mean you can't let the signal clip at the top. In many situations, even with lots of light, I find it better to let the brightest highlights and speculars clip in order to control what's really important in the image.

Season to taste, basically.

 

[Guest]

I recently shot a MV exlusively using C-log and 1080p60, ISO mostly at 3200 or 6400. I can't post frames though due to NDA, but the results are amazing and I'll post a link once it's up!

I am very interested to see that. It was the 60p in low light under exposed that scared me away from C-Log in the first place, but I recently read in the user's manual that 50/60p are the most likely to exhibit noise when C-Log is active, even in iso400.

At the time, I didn't think the different modes would be that different, but there it was in the user manual.

My low light exposure strategy is to overexpose about 1/3 to 1/2 stop depending on how the highlight behaves. In the frame grab you posted, there is certainly room for overexposure since the highlight is only diffused skin reflection. The reason is to maximise SNR because C-log works by lowering the tonal range and pull it back with LUT or grading, overexpose moderately under low light avoid too much "pull" which may introduce unmanageable noise or compression artifacts.

That is good to hear. Thanks for the tip. I will start implementing that in the future.

 

[Guest]

I agree. And it's important to keep the over exposure close to those limits and NOT "expose to the right". At the high end there's simply too much compression and lost tonality if you use it for other things than highlights.

Agreed, I see that extra info strictly as roll off, and still a digital roll off.

I'd also say that it's a valid strategy for all lighting situations—not just low light. Just because it's a log curve, it doesn't mean you can't let the signal clip at the top. In many situations, even with lots of light, I find it better to let the brightest highlights and speculars clip in order to control what's really important in the image.

Season to taste, basically.

Good words.


In the scene, I was noticing a lot of room on the cameras histogram. I could have bumped up, or rather should have, but wanted to see what it looked like (rather i was lazy). It was an informal test shoot for a TV series. Just the writer and I where there with the 'actor'. He's actually a three fingered calligraphy artist, not an actor. I only brought the camera body and 3 primes, so levels were only read off the histogram. Majority of those shots had the candles in them, so I was under exposing most of the time. Even this shot ended up tilting down to the white hot candles, though I did not use it in the edit. Hearing that film convert was using a bunch of presets, I was curious to see what it did with under exposed footage. Which is why I used this frame. Film convert was surprisingly versatile and able to adapt, which was a big concern of mine. A lot of my documentary footage has exposures all over the place.

Thank you guys for sharing your experience on C-log. Definitely prompting me to try new boundaries.

 

[AndreeOnline]

I kind of like Filmconvert's stand alone app's functionality. It's got a few solid tools to work the image, and of course the film grain and response curves.

While the plugins only offer a reduced feature set, the missing components could be replaced with the NLE's native tools (contrast and gamma adjustments). A downside of this though, is that you can't build as powerful presets as you could in the stand alone version. Hmmm... I'm not even sure that the plugins allow for saving of presests come to think of it...

I could see myself getting the plugin for FCPX if it were faster (slugish as it is now) and the price came down to about $99.

Obviously, as a 1Dc owner I'm not thrilled about the 2k limitation for ProRes export in the stand alone. This isn't a problem when using the plugin, as the export would be from FCPX (in my case). I also find the homepage a bit lacking in describing the specs for their tools and the precision that they work in when converting.

All in all, it's a cool option to have. But since I try to avoid any extra steps in my workflow, my hope would be for the plugin to become a bit snappier, if possible.

 

[Guest]

Obviously, as a 1Dc owner I'm not thrilled about the 2k limitation for ProRes export in the stand alone.

hmmm, didn't realize that. I haven't used the plugins yet.

 

[AndreeOnline]

You can export still frame sequences at 4k, but that adds steps.

The plugins offer the core functionality of pre-exposing and white balancing, and adding grain and the custom film stock curves, but you don't get the color corrector wheels or the black point/white point and gamma correction.

You'd have to perform these missing operations with the NLE's own tools.

 

[Guest]

What kind of settings have you guys been using?


I am still experimenting with picture styles, but c-log has nearly taken over that, and I think I will end up with that.


But as far as button configurations?

I have the dial cneter button configured for zoom, and I am playing around with the buttons near the lens (dof preview and user defined buttons). I have them set to start record for now. I have left the shutter button alone, and use the custom buttons for rec start/stop. Switching between stills is easier that way. Although, I still haven't got into the C1,C2,C3 much. Though, that is one of my to-do's this week.