cinelike D and highlight handling

A

Amos Kim

Active member
Anybody read Adam Wilt's article about the bad highlight handling of the Cinelike D setting? In this article about the hvx200, he states it's the worst of the gammas in that regard:

http://www.dv.com/article/11394

He also states that Cinelike V has the best skintone highlight handling.

And assuming the gamma settings in the hmc150/hvx200a/hpx170 are exact replicas of the gammas in the original hvx200, as mentioned in this review of the hpx170

(http://provideocoalition.com/index....anasonic_ag_hpx170p_1_3_3ccd_p2_camcorder/P1/),

has anybody noticed Cinelike D's bad highlight handling in the hmc150? Or the purported excellent highlights of the Cinelike V?

thanx
 
Hi Amos,

I am a novice with videography and have just been tinkering with my HMC-150 for a few months. But The camera manual (page 50) states that F6 Cine D emphasizes dynamic range. While F5 Cine V contrast. Barry Green's book on the HMC-150 states on page 79 "that (Cine-Like D is) very different from all the prior gamma curves. The overall contrast is flattened and latitude is stretched, the brights and midtones are pressed down, and more headroom is provided at the top of the scale. This actually gives the overall shot more latitude, especially in the brighter parts of the picture . . ."

If I am interpretting all this correctly, I take this to mean that Cine D is sorta like using an audio amplifier with a graphic equalizer with all frequencies set at 0, which produces totally flat sounding music. By adjusting the equalizer you tweak/enhance the bass and treble sounds and the music comes to life and sounds more natural.

I think the Cine D may work like this . . . it may provide a very "uncolored" or flat/wide dynamic (color) range so that the editor/colorist can tweak to their hearts content. I think the other Scene files are sorta pre-colored to someone elses preferences. The Cine D is like a flat, naked, unretouched image that can be shaped by the user as they please. So if someone (like those authors) looks at it, without taking this into consideration, YES, they might say it is harsh or blown-out or whatever, etc.

I was planning to use this for my first attempt at an indie video--so if my guessing here is all wrong, someone please speak up!

Dean
 
thanks for the input. yes, if anybody knows more about how the cinelike gammas function, please do share.

Another thing is that Adam Wilt said that overexposed (+2 stops) highlights render an ugly yellow under Cinelike D and clear white in Cinelike V.

A
 
In my experience, believe or not, Cinelike V has MORE latitude than Cinelike D, try with zebras at 100 IRE on very bright areas, when you switch from V to D you can notice that the zebra areas build up (sorry for my bad english) because the Cinelike D flattens the mid tones but BOOSTS the extreme higlights and blacks like a reversed S curve instead normal S curve of Cinelike V, also the color rendition in bright areas is far better with CL V with a natural, film-like desaturation of highlights. Sorry again for my bad english.
 
Amos Kim said:
has anybody noticed Cinelike D's bad highlight handling in the hmc150? Or the purported excellent highlights of the Cinelike V?
Click to expand...

Cine-D has all sorts of issues. Indeed -- it does have the broadest dynamic range -- and capitalizing on it properly can seriously boost the value of the 200/170/150 cameras. The manual tells you to underexpose when using it -- and in part that relates to those blown out highlights issues.

In theory -- Cine-D gives you more options in post. In practice -- I and others have yet to figure out how to truly get Cine-D footage to "pop" in post -- meaning to preserve the ranges you want and achieve an overall powerful (not flat) image.

So -- if anyone reading this has some proven tricks or links to great techniques for getting Cine-D to shine -- I thank you with all my heart for sharing.

Have I noticed problems with Cine-D handling highlights? Sure. But, regarding skin tones, one of the benefits of using Cine-D appears to be less emphasis of shadows on the face, and that is particularly good for promotional type stuff (politician talking on camera), as opposed to more artistic/drama stuff (criminal plotting a conspiracy in an alley).

The major issue/problem with Cine-D is NOISE -- it's a noise convention/party/rave -- with noise dancing on any kind of surface you can film. The challenge is that underexposing creates noise, and overexposing blows out highlights -- resulting in a difficult gamma setting.

Cine-V is the out-of-the-camera "movie" look -- often resulting in what people call the Panasonic "mojo" or "look." It's A LOT less noisy with much more contrast -- resulting in a more pleasing image straight from the camera -- and it certainly does not have the "dynamic range" of Cine-D.

In conclusion -- 1) yes, Cine-D can be difficult with highlights, and 2) if anyone has tips/links to share on post/color techniques with Cine-D -- many people will be grateful.

If you haven't yet read the Scene File Handbook -- you can get it at the PASS web site. That gives base level explanations of the intended uses for the scene file/gamma/matrix settings.

The best learning experience for me was to go out and film different scene files and gamma and matrix combinations -- using the audio to identify each camera setting. Yes, it takes forever and yes, it's boring -- but I learned well.

Good luck!
 
In http://www.dv.com/article/11394, adam states:

"I photographed a Stouffer Industries TLF4110, a 41-step transmission grayscale with 1/3 stop steps (www.stouffer.net). I shot this scale with all eight gammas, using low knee when possible (the Cinelike gammas don't allow knee selection) because I'm interested in maximizing usable dynamic range. I looped the clips on a CRT monitor, both as-is and after applying a black-stretching gamma adjustment in Final Cut Pro 5, and counted the number of distinguishable steps in the image to determine each gamma setting's latitude. I recorded the output of a Magni MM400 rasterizing waveform monitor WFM to make the composite gamma chart"

Then concludes:

"gamma curves offer different looks, but largely capture the same dynamic range, at least with Low knee. I measured 8 stops for SD Norm, Low, Black Press, and Cinelike V gamma, and 8-1/3 stops for News, HD Norm, High, and Cinelike D gamma. With some fairly drastic black stretching in Final Cut Pro, I could eke out 9-1/3 stops in all gammas, albeit with some fairly severe noise in the shadows"

So, 1/3 stop benefit from cineV to cineD
 
Amos Kim said:
In http://www.dv.com/article/11394, adam states:

"I photographed a Stouffer Industries TLF4110, a 41-step transmission grayscale with 1/3 stop steps (www.stouffer.net). I shot this scale with all eight gammas, using low knee when possible (the Cinelike gammas don't allow knee selection) because I'm interested in maximizing usable dynamic range. I looped the clips on a CRT monitor, both as-is and after applying a black-stretching gamma adjustment in Final Cut Pro 5, and counted the number of distinguishable steps in the image to determine each gamma setting's latitude. I recorded the output of a Magni MM400 rasterizing waveform monitor WFM to make the composite gamma chart"

Then concludes:

"gamma curves offer different looks, but largely capture the same dynamic range, at least with Low knee. I measured 8 stops for SD Norm, Low, Black Press, and Cinelike V gamma, and 8-1/3 stops for News, HD Norm, High, and Cinelike D gamma. With some fairly drastic black stretching in Final Cut Pro, I could eke out 9-1/3 stops in all gammas, albeit with some fairly severe noise in the shadows"

So, 1/3 stop benefit from cineV to cineD
Click to expand...


I read that article YEARS ago -- and it's a helpful introduction -- but it's not "The Bible." The CCDs have changed a bit since then.
 
ic, the newer ccds can affect how the same gammas render picture. Also, I was wondering if the BPress with low knee and tad increase in master ped can mimic a better version of CineD. The logic being that BPress inherently increases dynamic range in midtones, low knee can smooth highlight handling, and increase master ped can soften the harsh contrast inherent in Bpress. Anybody have experience with BPress?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top