Canon releases new flat picture profile - X-Series Look

Don't bother I did a quick test on a 650D and their was a lot Chromatic aberration, more contrast and a lot sharper as my own settings which is neutral picture style with less sharpening, contrast and saturation.[h=1][/h]
 
It has by far the least contrast and lowest saturation of any official Canon picture style. I don't know how it compares to Canon log since I do not own a camera that uses it. Compared to neutral and faithful, it has much lower contrast, lower saturation, and less pop. Unless some fatal flaw is found, I'm willing to say this will be the NEW go to picture style for many people. By Default sharpening is 2, everything else is at the usual middle settings.

My recommended settings: 0,-4,0,0

Sharpness 0
Contrast -4
Saturation 0
Color Tone 0

You saw it here first. :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
 
Back when I was shooting on a 60D, I was starting to become less enamored with the "ProLost Flat" kind of settings, i.e. neutral with sharpening turned way down. Seemed like a lot of the bigger shoots I was on had their DSLRs set to "Standard", and it was an admittedly better-looking image coming out of the camera, mostly because the sharpness wasn't cranked way down.

Given that a lot of my stuff doesn't go through correction in the end, I was going to shoot more in that style, but then I went GH2 and then C100.

That was a lot of verbiage to say that if Canon kept the sharpness at 2 for this new picture style, it was probably the right call.
 
i just did a test of cinestyle vs "video camera x series look" on my 60D. Then I set the levels on cinestyle in my edit to bring the rgb curve down (cinestyle always pushes the blacks up to about 8% instead of 0%). They could have been identical then, but to my eye the saturation consistency was better on the cinestyle. The darker areas on the "video camera x series look" looked slightly desaturated compared to the midtones. (I am wary of that kind of thing because I find my GH3 does nasty things like that. )I still think I prefer cinestyle for its completely "natural" rendition. I guess technicolor had a reason to lift the blacks to 8%?
 
greg copeland said:
i just did a test of cinestyle vs "video camera x series look" on my 60D. Then I set the levels on cinestyle in my edit to bring the rgb curve down (cinestyle always pushes the blacks up to about 8% instead of 0%). They could have been identical then, but to my eye the saturation consistency was better on the cinestyle. The darker areas on the "video camera x series look" looked slightly desaturated compared to the midtones. (I am wary of that kind of thing because I find my GH3 does nasty things like that. )I still think I prefer cinestyle for its completely "natural" rendition. I guess technicolor had a reason to lift the blacks to 8%?
Click to expand...

I'm glad there is someone out there who likes cinestyle. I've been shooting with it since it was released. Tried every other flat style but nothing comes close to the simulation of how film negs used to come up on telecine before digital film came along. Technicolor does have a little history with film. I'm also an old friend of Josh Pines from Technicolor who worked in the development of Cinestyle. He worked many years for ILM, and I beleave these guys have created something really great. Now if Canon could just up the sensor resoltion it would be great.
 
ROCKMORE said:
Tried every other flat style but nothing comes close to the simulation of how film negs used to come up on telecine before digital film came along.
Click to expand...

That's because cinestyle was made for exactly that purpose. To match film negs. But film negs look that way just because they were scanned that way. Blacks were raised, colors were muted. The only reason to raise the blacks to 8% is to match a film neg scanner.

But nothing is worse than getting some canon 7d shot stuff at ISO 1600 with cinestyle. Holy s*%t, it looks bad.
 
^ +1 to all of that. Except I know there are some cases when cinestyle is just what you need. But it's not my case 99.9% of the time, that's why I had to make Flaat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top