AF100 -Production Model Test, NYC, 01/03/11

F

Fotojorno

Well-known member

The purpose of this test was to experiment with different camera scene settings, trying to eliminate the noise in the shadows/gray area's that a number of people, including myself have experienced. These settings to my eye have succeeded in that.

The camera was set to scene file F5, the only items listed below are the one's changed from the default. ISO 400 was used on all shots except for the first three night clips which were at 800.

Film Cam
PH 1080/24P
Detail Level: -5
V Detail Level: -5
Detail Coring: +2
Chroma Level: -2
Master Ped: -2
Matrix: Fluo

All night shots were at Cine V. The day shots alternate between Cine V and then Cine D. If there is not a duplicate day shot, then it is Cine V. Footage was shot to internal SDHC card and then transcoded to ProRes in FCS Log & Transfer.

Lenses used:
Manual focus Nikkor 85 f1.4, 16 f2.8 and a Contax/Zeiss 50 f1.7
 
Nice stuff, looks very clean! The Cine V looks great. What made you choose Fluo Matrix?
Interesting to see the strobe go off at 4:15, I guess it's to be expected with CMOS, but that's the first strobe I've seen shot with an AF100.
Last shot is one of my faves!
 
Cine V = Very Contrasty. Almost like shooting on slide film. Hard crushed blacks, no shadow detail.
Cine D = Like Negative Film. Looks like a 35mm movie, beautiful definition in the shadow detail and midtones of dynamic range.

Cine V may be used to 'hide' the noisy blacks, but Cine D just looks like the real deal: digital cinema. It's gorgeous. And even if we have some noise in the image, to me that looks like grain and may actually compliment the experience.

Let's remind ourselves not to get carried away with trying to hide noise at the expense of the emotional response to our viewers. Cine D looked much more like 'the real deal'.
 
pannyfreak said:
, but Cine D just looks like the real deal: digital cinema. It's gorgeous. And even if we have some noise in the image, to me that looks like grain and may actually compliment the experience.
Click to expand...

Exactly how I feel after watching the footage. Much better treatment of the lighter range. Easy enough to crush the darks later in post,.
 
astigmatic said:
Cool, nice shots. I like the look of CineD. I see a dvxuser @ 2:48 lol.
Click to expand...
Haha.. I'm glad someone picked that up, I knew it would be appreciated on this forum.

The whole area I was filming on Wall St. was in the shade so Cine D looked extra flat, but as you guys said, it's better to have the shadow detail and be able to crush it later if you want.
 
Fotojorno said:
it's better to have the shadow detail and be able to crush it later if you want.
Click to expand...

Interesting perspective: Perhaps another way of thinking of this is it's easier to take what you have and drop it into blacks in post, but it's harder to pull out detail from the blacks because the data simply wasn't written to file?
 
CineV is great if you like the MichaelBay look. Add a few lensflares and you are done.

CineD has apparently to be handled with care to avoid noise and blown highlights. So that´s the one for controlled environments.

But this is one of the best looking tests so far in terms of noise. Thanks for sharing!
 
great stuff!

my camera should be arriving today which is very exciting after watching this.

What's up with the strobing on the right side of the frame @ 3:35 ? In the lower exposed area of the building.
 
Wow, this is great, thanks much for putting it together. Well chosen location for a test. Any reason you didn't shoot any CineD at night?
 
PaPa said:
great stuff!

my camera should be arriving today which is very exciting after watching this.

What's up with the strobing on the right side of the frame @ 3:35 ? In the lower exposed area of the building.
Click to expand...
Wow.. good eye. I saw that too and the only thing I can think of is a bus or big truck drove by and threw a quick "fill Light" on it. In the same scene, a small black splotch appears on the steeple for millisecond. That scared the hell outta me till I realized it was the shadow of a bird flying by real quick. Haha..


From DrHST: "Any reason you didn't shoot any CineD at night?"

At the time the Cine V with Fluo Matrix was proving successful for some, so I basically got lazy and did just Cine V. Now I really wished I had because some of the night shot could of used it.


From alpi69: "But this is one of the best looking tests so far in terms of noise. Thanks for sharing! "

With these exact same settings except for the Matrix set to Cine-Like instead, a test I did on Friday of tree's in a snowy, shadowy forest were very noisy in the gray light shadows. Only on my MBP screen though, on my Bravia 46" direct from the card, the same images were 100% perfect. Even with my nose 2 ft. from the screen.
 
Last edited:
pannyfreak said:
Interesting perspective: Perhaps another way of thinking of this is it's easier to take what you have and drop it into blacks in post, but it's harder to pull out detail from the blacks because the data simply wasn't written to file?
Click to expand...

Pretty much.

Once your blacks hit zero in a digital environment, any detail there is gone.

I've been shooting "flat" like that since the Varicam.

It's always better to have the control to crush the blacks *if you want to* in post.
 
Nice Test! Interesting to see how flashes behave @4.14.....and I did see some white ants in the dark side of the bull :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top