GH2 and once more: SMOOTH vs CINEMA ???

Ok, I found the test Barry Green did with the GH-1, which I have, and has the 'smooth', and 'nostalgic' curves.

Here's Barry's set of images:

GH1-All-Gammas-100-Off.jpg


Here's my plot of the 'smooth', and the 'nostalgic' step charts.

attachment.php


It's pretty clear the curves 'track' very closely, (blue = smooth), and (green = nostalgic), and only differ at the very 'whitest' step 'significantly... like the difference between a value of 243 for the 'nostalgic', vs. 250 for the 'smooth'...

There's a littel lowering in the lower than 'middle grey' range on the 'nostalgic'.

Since I don't have such a step wedge, I'll not be able to run this to verify on my camera, using video... etc... I do have a Kodak photo guide with a step wedge in it, but that's only about 10 steps...

But it looks like I'll just keep my 'smooth' setting as my default standard...
 
me too!
smooth has minimal contrast crunch, but the main reason i've chosen it is that it is the most accurate for skin tones. Standard is good too, but every other film mode does weird things to skin tones or greens or reds! I find it very hard to correctly fix this sort of coloring in post. Its not like normal white balance, or at least it doesn't seem so straightforward, and is tricky to correct for. Smooth and Standard don't mess with your colors. Images recorded with 'smooth' look most realistic to me...most like what I see with my eyes.
btw, this is on a GH1.
 
averan said:
me too!
smooth has minimal contrast crunch, but the main reason i've chosen it is that it is the most accurate for skin tones. Standard is good too, but every other film mode does weird things to skin tones or greens or reds! I find it very hard to correctly fix this sort of coloring in post. Its not like normal white balance, or at least it doesn't seem so straightforward, and is tricky to correct for. Smooth and Standard don't mess with your colors. Images recorded with 'smooth' look most realistic to me...most like what I see with my eyes.
btw, this is on a GH1.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'd like to see a step wedge shot for the GH-2 and see what folks are preferring. However, I'll probably not be upgrading, unless I get a bonus in the next few months... and who knows... when is a GH-3... coming out... I'm sure it will compete with a Baby Red...

But the Wife has been whining about her Fuji S5 showing its age... so I may be buying a Nikon D7000 next... but that would be for her anyway...
 
I find Cinema to be the flattest one:

When you underexpose Smooth and Nostalgic to match Cinema, they seem more contrasty. Take a look at this test:

 
Nature is very close to smooth as well. One thing to remember is that Smooth will use 1/3 of a stop lower indicated ISO value than Nature, Cinema, Standard, Dynamic, and Nostalgic to achieve the same exposure.
 
I use cinema because it holds highlight detail better than any of the other settings at the same exposure settings. It does not keep as much in the shadows as some of the others, but I don't really care too much about shadow detail.
 
improser said:
Please explain this :s
Click to expand...

Shoot a RAW file with all of the settings. The Smooth setting will have an indicated ISO that is 1/3 of a stop less than Nature, Cinema, Standard, Dynamic, and Nostalgic. Vibrant will be 1/3 of a stop greater than Nature, Cinema, Standard, Dynamic, and Nostalgic and Smooth B&W will be 1/3 of a stop greater than Vibrant. Try that simple test and you will see as well.
 
Smooth does seem to retain the most dynamic range, although Cinema definitely less likely to blow out highlights. However, as a GH13 owner I'll stick with smooth in lieu of a Cinema film mode.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top