GH4 Am I going mad / going blind? GH4 noiseless in the dark?!
- Thread starter Paul Walker
- Start date
It is basically dithering which breaks the hard lines of banding. Editors may have dithering settings. I have sample frames of GH4 banding removed by this deband filter on Potplayer. Images have strong sharpening so that you can see more easily how it works. With such dithering and 4k screen there are more tones visible than normal 8bit can show. The result looks a bit like 10bit video.
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57489279
vesku, what picture profile are you using to film with? I have two years worth of video from the GH4 and have never seen banding like that sample of yours in any scene I've ever recorded with the sky in it.
As I have said since the beginning with this cam, if you use cineD or now v-log and/or any sort of iDynamic the middle of the range is robbed to feed the extremes and you get blotchy compression artifacts in mid range solid color surfaces. If you shoot cineV at 16-235, you get all the bit rate right in the middle where you want it and never get these sorts of blotchy artifacts. CineV with all zero's in 16-235 produces the most color bit depth in the middle and the least noise in the shadows. Like the original poster said, I just don't get what all the fuss is with these other profiles and I have never understood why people insist on filming at the extremes to just squash it back in the end of the day so you can actually watch it?
Cheers,
Pete
As I have said since the beginning with this cam, if you use cineD or now v-log and/or any sort of iDynamic the middle of the range is robbed to feed the extremes and you get blotchy compression artifacts in mid range solid color surfaces. If you shoot cineV at 16-235, you get all the bit rate right in the middle where you want it and never get these sorts of blotchy artifacts. CineV with all zero's in 16-235 produces the most color bit depth in the middle and the least noise in the shadows. Like the original poster said, I just don't get what all the fuss is with these other profiles and I have never understood why people insist on filming at the extremes to just squash it back in the end of the day so you can actually watch it?
Cheers,
Pete
My example was an extreme shooted with Natural -5 contrast. I over sharpened it to see better that smoothing effect.
The interesting part of the use of de-banding filter is that I can use even iDynamic and curves without any visible noise at iso200. The de-banding filter makes my GH4 videos so clean that I can add sharpness or make big color adjustments without image breaking. Blurred areas are "full frame" clean. It is like there is no compression at all. It is the same with pixelated and banding Youtube videos. It almost recovers the original quality.
joe12south
Veteran
Simply put: dynamic range. Cine-V gives you *maybe* 9 stops of usable dynamic range. Hardly what anyone would consider a cinematic exposure. Cine-D and V-LOG L expand that meaningfully...unfortunately with trade-offs.
If you really want the most accurate, balanced out of the camera profile, that's actually the Natural profile. But given advancements in LUT, CIne-D is now probably the closest thing we have to a "have your cake and eat it too" profile for internal recording.
Batutta
Major Contributor
I use CineV with I dynamic low and shadow plus 3 for more dynamic range and don't get banding in skies either. Also, it's been established there is no real difference between 16-235 and 0-255, it just sets a flag for your NLE on how to interpret the range. Premiere can't read it, which is where the confusion came from with people thinking it gave you more headroom to recover whites. In FCP X which can read the flag, there is no difference. http://blog.josephmoore.name/2014/10/29/the-three-most-misunderstood-gh4-settings/