That looks like a good filter! Anyone out there able to try this?
5D Moire Work-around
- Thread starter commanderspike
- Start date
That looks like a good filter! Anyone out there able to try this?
ROCKMORE
Veteran
Ok, I see the white halo now that I know what I'm looking for, but don't you think that the Commander is on the right track? After all, he did get rid of the horror show on the left?
If I were the client pressed for time and the meter was running on the set or in post, I would honestly say,
"Great, done move on to the next scene", Before loosing my shirt on a project.
It may not perfected yet, but this is really a step forward in disaster control.
Thanks Commander, keep up the good work.
Last edited:
ROCKMORE
Veteran
I've used the SoftFX filters mostly to make video look a little less nasty. Video is still video, but they work pretty well to soften the edges.
The dimple design in the glass seems to refract light on bright contrasty clipped areas while not effecting dark areas as much or at all. I have a #1/2 #1 #2. They produce a very light effect unlike ultra contrast filters which are very obvious. I have stacked them for heavier softening as well.
I don't know how they will effect the Canon 5D / 7D, but would be interesting to see.
Barry_Green
Moderator
Well, not really. What this would do is permanently lower the perceived sharpness of the camera on every shot, and try to compensate with artificial sharpening.
In effect he's put a blur filter in there to blur all the fine detail. Which does help, it does solve the problem, but it also removes all that aliased detail which is the only reason these types of cameras look sharp at all. So, in other words, using a method like this will permanently make your camera lower perceived resolution on all shots. Is that what you want?
You can instead just roll off the focus very slightly until the moire goes away and achieve the same result, but without compromising all your other shots.
Tim Joy
Veteran
Interesting... Just a thought for those that are daring-
Would it be possible to remove the AA filter that is on the sensor now and replace it with one that is optimized for video? Or simply add a new filter on top of the existing one? Or would that achieve the same result you're talking about Barry, effectively lowering the resolution?
Would it be possible to remove the AA filter that is on the sensor now and replace it with one that is optimized for video? Or simply add a new filter on top of the existing one? Or would that achieve the same result you're talking about Barry, effectively lowering the resolution?
Barry_Green
Moderator
Same thing. The actual resolving power of the camera is around 550 lines horz, 550 lines vert (in 1080 mode) so if you put on an AA filter that was truly optimized for its video resolution to get around aliasing, you'd be left with a camera that was between standard-def and 720p. That's in 1080 mode; in 720p mode it's much worse, it's about 350 horz and 350 vert, so truly a standard-def image that's about 360p. So depending on what mode you put it in, the actual real resolving power is between a standard-def and a 720p camera if you ignore the implied sharpness boost that the aliasing adds.
Repeating, the aliasing is the only thing that makes the images look as sharp as they do. If you take it away, you'll have standard-def. But no moire or aliasing issues.
If you leave the aliasing in, you get the perception of very sharp images, but you also get moire and bendy lines and stairstepping and shimmering and all the other things that CAN happen (not necessarily that they always DO happen, but they can).
All DSLRs of this technological vintage are going to have similar issues. What they really need to do is design a sensor that can be read out at full video frame rates, and an onboard scaler that can downconvert high-quality full-sensor readouts down to 1080p in real time. And that's not likely to happen any time soon (except perhaps from Red), nor will it be cheap. The DSLRs can produce astonishingly good pictures at amazingly low price points specifically because they embrace the aliasing, for good or for bad.
Repeating, the aliasing is the only thing that makes the images look as sharp as they do. If you take it away, you'll have standard-def. But no moire or aliasing issues.
If you leave the aliasing in, you get the perception of very sharp images, but you also get moire and bendy lines and stairstepping and shimmering and all the other things that CAN happen (not necessarily that they always DO happen, but they can).
All DSLRs of this technological vintage are going to have similar issues. What they really need to do is design a sensor that can be read out at full video frame rates, and an onboard scaler that can downconvert high-quality full-sensor readouts down to 1080p in real time. And that's not likely to happen any time soon (except perhaps from Red), nor will it be cheap. The DSLRs can produce astonishingly good pictures at amazingly low price points specifically because they embrace the aliasing, for good or for bad.
Last edited:
ROCKMORE
Veteran
So I assume Red One sensor and processing is still the best solution for now in commercial work, and possibly what Red comes out with in the next year. Still an affordable rental option till you have enough work to support one of your own.
In many cases DSLRs will do a great job, but in commercial shooting situations, with a client looking over you shoulder, you have to be covered for what ever the client wants in front of the camera, or they will move on to another director in one second. You may be thinking your client is creative, flexible, and a great guy, but when something goes wrong, he will put all the blame on you in the end to cover his ass. Believe it.
In many cases DSLRs will do a great job, but in commercial shooting situations, with a client looking over you shoulder, you have to be covered for what ever the client wants in front of the camera, or they will move on to another director in one second. You may be thinking your client is creative, flexible, and a great guy, but when something goes wrong, he will put all the blame on you in the end to cover his ass. Believe it.
Last edited:
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
Indeed, totally understandable in the commercial environment. Nobody wants to pay moire ;-)
But seriously, the above situation is one of the reasons its better to do amazing experimental creative work for yourself and leave the more traditional EX1s and REDs to the commercial work unless the client understands what trade offs they might have to put up with by taking the amazing potential of DSLRS over the traditional route :happy:
At least since DSLRS cost so much less, the client can pay less and thus be happy unless they're a complete bastard and want moire free hollywood style production standards for bottom dollar.
ROCKMORE
Veteran
Don't get me wrong, I love these DSLR's. For development, Indi projects, music videos, and yes many commercial projects they will kick serious ass at any price. I like your solution in this case, because you saved the shot from disaster, or better put "brought it back from the dead". There are always trade offs that have to be made with electronic media. Anyone who shoots film that gets transfered to tape has always had the same things to avoid that will cause aliasing and moire.
In the course of a shoot day this kind of bad situation you've illustrated may only come up 1% of the time and the other 99% may be full resolution bliss with no issues. As long as you have a trick like this one to save the day, (and it doesn't take all day) your client will love you for saving his ass.
Here is a Quote from a 5D shooter on Cinema5D who had the problem more like 99% of the time. In the thread he mentioned your fix he spotted after the fact, so I will be interested to see how it works in the fashion cat walk arena.
http://www.cinema5d.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=6410
Highlights from the post/
So,what about the bloody awful aliasing?
I don't see this being corrected anytime soon and it is a real problem on almost every shoot I have.
Imagine doing a lingerie fashion shoot and both the lingerie and the jewelry has aliasing EVERYWHERE. That was my problem today. Honestly do I have to take away all the benefits and sharpness of the camera in order to deal with it?
Even clients who don't know anything about technique can see it.
Later Wrote/
Commanderspike over at DVXuser may have found a terrific solution!
Last edited:
ROCKMORE
Veteran
How do all these resolution figures stack up against the GH1? Your chart test showed the aliasing & moire issue to be solved to a greater extent on the GH1 than canon 7D and 5D, so has the GH1's HD resolution really been filtered down to become a standard def resolution as well?
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
I my experience of owning the 5D and GH1, the 5D has a slightly softer image overall but it's higher bit rate codec keeps hold of a broader range of detail over one shot. With camera movement, time that by 10. The GH1 is fine when it's staring at a chart but in the real world, with highly detailed scenes it pukes with the slightest provocation. The codec smears detail on a regular basis compared to with the 5D, namely in low light situations or scenes with any camera movement - however slow and steady. Sometimes it's not so noticeable versus 5D but still it makes a mockery of the charts because the 5D is out and out the better camera for real world image quality. But the really downer I have with the GH1 is that sometimes it can be an out and out disaster with the more serious issues (mud and banding).
In the real world, the 5D's video output whilst in motion looks more like it's stills output (especially in terms of colour, subtle roll offs, etc), whilst the GH1's look like a highly compressed clipped JPEG version of it's stills output and I have issues with it's colour output more often than I care to mention too.
In the real world, the 5D's video output whilst in motion looks more like it's stills output (especially in terms of colour, subtle roll offs, etc), whilst the GH1's look like a highly compressed clipped JPEG version of it's stills output and I have issues with it's colour output more often than I care to mention too.
Last edited:
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
Our experiences with camera movement and detail creating "camera puking" obviously differ. The only issue I ever had with the GH1 was the "color shift" as mentioned in another thread. I'm not dismissing your experiences, Spike, just providing my own.
And in the interest of keeping this thread on the topic of moire and aliasing, I can't say I ever noticed either one while using the GH1. To be clear, most of what I was shooting with the GH1 was in 720p mode. I have seen both on the 7D, mainly in 720p. I can't speak to the results or implications of Barry's tests, but in real-world shooting with the GH1, I never noticed any aliasing or moire on my footage.
This is pretty much it, man. The reality of a working world. For the small shoot that's just going to the internet or SD, it's fine. The technical half of my mind will always say "no way" to the 7D for anything major. It'll always be RED or better aka 16mm or 35mm...
That's not to say I haven't tech advised on pretty big shoots using both the GH-1 and 5D and NOW the 7D, but baring in mind that these projects were going to SD anyway or Web it really didn't matter all that much.
I can't afford to screw up someone's footage because I want to start some revolution. I gotta eat... This isn't a hobby for me. And I know a host of others that feel the exact same way.
Now, with that said, I just bought two more 7D's bringing the total to 4... and I still have my MKii. =T
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
The feeling's mutual, amigo.
DVXUser is such a love-fest.
It is, unless you criticise the GH1 :happy:
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
Wait, didn't I criticize the GH1 also?
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
Yes but not as much as me. I've pissed everyone off :grin:
I like the fishing video. There are loads of great GH1 videos out there. It's also true that the camera doesn't suffer from moire and aliasing. Maybe on Barry's chart but it's never been noticeable to me in real life.
What lens did you use for the majority of the shots in the fishing video? Was it a c-mount?
I like the fishing video. There are loads of great GH1 videos out there. It's also true that the camera doesn't suffer from moire and aliasing. Maybe on Barry's chart but it's never been noticeable to me in real life.
What lens did you use for the majority of the shots in the fishing video? Was it a c-mount?
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
All but two of the shots in that piece are the GH1 and the kit lens.
commanderspike
Carbonite Member
What were the other two lenses? There is a big of vignetting in one shot and wondered if you'd used a c-mount.
Maybe if you'd have shot that video on a 5D you would have got terrible aliasing on the rippled water surfaces.
The GH1 did a great job.
Had it been shot at night, the 5D would have done a better job.
Just saying - two cameras, with different strengths and weaknesses. In terms of image quality, moire and aliasing aside the 5D is 'better' in but that doesn't mean to say the GH1 is not 'good' and capable of amazing stuff.
Maybe if you'd have shot that video on a 5D you would have got terrible aliasing on the rippled water surfaces.
The GH1 did a great job.
Had it been shot at night, the 5D would have done a better job.
Just saying - two cameras, with different strengths and weaknesses. In terms of image quality, moire and aliasing aside the 5D is 'better' in but that doesn't mean to say the GH1 is not 'good' and capable of amazing stuff.