GH4 Best settings for skin tones?

awelgraven

awelgraven

Well-known member
I shoot a lot of "talking head" corporate videos, and recently switched to the GH4 (from the GH2.) I was using the GH2 with the "Smooth" profile, and always thought the skin tones looked really great. Of course, I lost some DR with the Smooth profile, but these interviews are in controlled locations that I'm lighting, so I don't need maximum DR.

So with that in mind, what are your favorite settings to capture accurate, natural looking skin tones on the GH4? I've tried CineD and CineV... CineD seems to flatten out the skin tones and just make them flat/orange looking, while CineV seems to be a little to contrasty.

I also don't necessarily want to shoot CineD (I will if there's some variation that makes it the best for skin tones) because alot of my work is fast turn around stuff, so I don't have time to take a flat image and do right by it. I'm trying to get great skin tones, in camera, with some light color correction in post.

Any thoughts? Apologies if this has been posted before... I poked around the GH forum and on google but couldn't find anything specific to skin tones... most tests/settings are geared toward DR. Thanks!
 
I'm curious what others have to say, but I'm trying the portrait profile to see if it works better than the cine gammas. The skin tones are, for me, the big weakness with the camera so any insight is welcome...
 
Ditto. I was wondering if it was a problem with my camera, but apparently there are a few guys with it... so it must be a standard problem.vlcsnap-00001.jpg

CineV
-5
-5
-5
-3
+1
 
Last edited:
I've been doing some testing and for my corporate talking head stuff I'll be using standard "STD" as it matched extremely well with HD Norm on my PX270. Looks amazing.
 
After testing, I have found the best settings for out of camera footage. The skin tones are rendered beautifully. The image has a tiny bit of latitude in post, but does not require grading for delivery.

CinelikeV
Contrast: +0
Sharpness: -5
Noise Reduction: -5
Saturation: -2
Hue: +2

No i.Dynamic
i.Resolution at Standard
Master Pedestal at +10 (This is a whole separate discussion in itself, but trust me... it will help.)
Luminance Level: 0-255 (This will give you more "rescuing" latitude in post.)
Highlight / Shadow: Higher Contrast Preset - Shadows: -2, Highlights: +2
 
Last edited:
Dont mess with Highlight and Shadow setting. Smooths skin and really doesnt help.

I prefer to not drop contrast either.

Always take Noise Reduction to -5

iDynamic works pretty well set to standard.

Pick a profile that gives the look you need if you dont want to grade. You really need to run some test yourself if you have the camera.

Highly recommend getting a good monitor setup and go through a bunch of profiles with the type of interviews you do the most. This will give you what you are looking for much faster.
 
I just got my GH4 and little time to test things yet, but I have had the same question. I watched a video yesterday that I like the skin tone results. In the notes, he says:

I use the Natural profile because for me Cine V and Cine D just didn't looked... well... natural.
I set Sharpness & Noise Reduction all the way down because they looks ugly at 0. Then I dial contrast and saturation down depending on the light of the scene. But I rarely go below -3. In the end the picture is very much like the Prolost profile on the 5D with a little bit more latitude and a little more grading possibilities. I also use the Master Pedestal up to +10 not to crush the blacks. But they look a bit noisy, even at 200. So I crush them back in post but at least I have a choice.

https://vimeo.com/98463281

I will test this out soon.
 
I've been shooting cineV with all zeros and have been very pleased with the skin tones and colors. It's the LUT's folks are using in conjuction with cineV and cineD that are giving such crazy colors and weird skin tones from what I've been seeing.

On a side note, has anyone posted any side by side sample images of NR 0 and -5 ??? I'm not seeing in my own filming of where it is ever a bad thing to be at zero. The only time I see image degradation from NR at 0 is when the scene is so under exposed that it's junk either way. All the rest of the time it seems to be very good in the shadows in parts of the scene we don't want to draw attention to anyway. Just curious what others are seeing and why they are going so low on NR?

Cheers,
Pete
 
The perception that the GH4 has a problem with skin tones is a myth. I agree completely with c3hammer above. the use of Filmconvert and Osiris LUTs create wonky skin tones. Out of the box, Natural and Cinelike-V have great skin tones. Cinelike-D with contrast added in post looks fantastic and grades with much flexibility.

I've also noticed a tendency for some GH4 users to overexpose their image a touch, and this can lead to plastic skin tones because a) the red channel may be clipping and b) the skin is just too bright and doesn't look right. Much of the perceived defects of the GH4 are actually operator error.

I disagree with the use of Master pedestal at +10. Lifting up the blacks only to crush them back down reduces dynamic range and can create banding and artifacts in the shadows.

I agree that setting NR to 0 has no perceivable negative effects, especially on talking head shots where maximum resolution can actually reveal skin flaws. A little noise reduction and softness actually makes skin look better. And at ISOs above 800, NR at 0 really helps reduce unwanted noise in the shadows. The only time I set NR to -5 is when I'm shooting day exteriors.

iDynamic is not good in my opinion. Perhaps at 200 ISO it can be of some use, but any higher than that it introduces so much noise into the shadows that it isn't worth it. Using it at 800 ISO makes the footage unusable.

Try either Natural with contrast at -1 or 0.
Or try Cinelike-V with contrast dialed down to -4 or -5.
From my tests, I find Natural is closest to the Smooth setting on the GH2.
 
Last edited:
dvbrother said:
The perception that the GH4 has a problem with skin tones is a myth. I agree completely with c3hammer above. the use of Filmconvert and Osiris LUTs create wonky skin tones. Out of the box, Natural and Cinelike-V have great skin tones. Cinelike-D with contrast added in post looks fantastic and grades with much flexibility.
Click to expand...

This has been my experience as well.

dvbrother said:
I've also noticed a tendency for some GH4 users to overexpose their image a touch, and this can lead to plastic skin tones because a) the red channel may be clipping and b) the skin is just too bright and doesn't look right. Much of the perceived defects of the GH4 are actually operator error.
Click to expand...

Yes, very much so. It helps to set zebras at 70% and then adjust your light source or Vari-ND filter until just the facial highlights are registering zebra lines.

dvbrother said:
I disagree with the use of Master pedestal at +10. Lifting up the blacks only to crush them back down reduces dynamic range and can create banding and artifacts in the shadows.
Click to expand...

This has been my experience too.

dvbrother said:
I agree that setting NR to 0 has no perceivable negative effects, especially on talking head shots where maximum resolution can actually reveal skin flaws. A little noise reduction and softness actually makes skin look better. And at ISOs above 800, NR at 0 really helps reduce unwanted noise in the shadows. The only time I set NR to -5 is when I'm shooting day exteriors.
Click to expand...

Interesting approach. I've always left NR at -5. I will try experimenting with NR at 0 for interviews.

dvbrother said:
iDynamic is not good in my opinion. Perhaps at 200 ISO it can be of some use, but any higher than that it introduces so much noise into the shadows that it isn't worth it. Using it at 800 ISO makes the footage unusable.
Click to expand...

This has been my experience too.

dvbrother said:
Try either Natural with contrast at -1 or 0.
Or try Cinelike-V with contrast dialed down to -4 or -5.
From my tests, I find Natural is closest to the Smooth setting on the GH2.
Click to expand...

Yes, agreed.
 
I do a fair bit of talking heads stuff and have had fantastic results with the settings below:

Cine D, 0 con, -3 sharp, -5 NR, -3 Sat, 0 hue, 16-235, Mast ped 0, shadows 0, highlights -2, iDyna off, iRes Low

This only needs a tiny bit of contrast brought back in in post but retains DR and lots of detail and really nice colours.

The main thing i've noticed is MAKE SURE YOU GET THE WHITE BALANCE CORRECT!!! If you don't get a good white balance in camera then skin tones can be too off, especially towards the orangey direction.

I shot using this in a two camera set up recently, and this matches beautifully with a Canon 5D Mark III using Technicolor profile.
 
maybe our skin tone fail perceptions are based on previous experiences of shooting DSLRs with all thier skin toned orange pushed coloring? Man, I got tired of having to try to dial that back in on Canons weirdo orange tinted everything
 
wwjd said:
maybe our skin tone fail perceptions are based on previous experiences of shooting DSLRs with all thier skin toned orange pushed coloring? Man, I got tired of having to try to dial that back in on Canons weirdo orange tinted everything
Click to expand...

I'd agree with this... I used to shoot with a 60D/5DmkII, and always struggled with the orange/plasticky skin tones. When I got the GH2 and Smooth profile, I loved it because I felt it was pretty natural looking.

Then with the GH3, and now GH4, I felt like out of the box, everything was sliding back to that orange/plasticky look again.

I'll test some of these suggestions out, and I appreciate you all taking the time to list out what works for you. I wish I had the time to test out every variation of every setting, but realistically I don't.
 
in the above good example, I see makeup, lighting and counter-contrasts of blue helping out. that's all good.
In the scopes and parades I'm looking at, I do see lots of RED from GH4 video
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top