C300: Color Matrixes: Can you tell the difference?

chris f

chris f

Veteran
For the longest time I had just been arbitrarily using "Production Camera" because, well it says "production camera" and that sounds like the right one to be using, but when I was doing all of my C70 vs. C300MKIII tests I decided to test the Color Matrix settings on both cameras as well to finally figure out exactly how those settings affects the image since to my eye they seem to be fairly subtle.

What color matrix setting is everyone else using on here?

I just posted the results of my latest deep-dive to YouTube and thought everyone here might find it helpful:
 
I always found any of them to be pleasing (they truly barely have changed in like 10 years, haha), and probably wouldn't even notice a difference in a longer piece of work if you randomly switched back to an interview/etc. with a different matrix.
 
I did a bunch of tests a while ago when I was trying to match earlier generations of the cinema cameras. There were certainly subtle gradations in skin tones, but the most pronounced differences could be seen in comparing color charts. Blue in "video" could turn into purple in "neutral". Also, if you are dealing with saturated LED lights, the choice of the color matrix can drastically change the way things look in camera.

I have also found that neutral tends to be the easiest way to get the closest match between Canon cameras. Production camera was designed to mimic Arri, and video is closest to Sony.
 
Is it still accepted wisdom that c-log 2 plus Production is intended to mimic Alexas/Amiras and that the Arri luts work well on it?

Also Chris, love the videos man. Keep 'em coming. Although I watched the color matrix one on my 1080p home theater projector in decent lighting, and I couldn't tell any difference in the three matrixes :)
 
drummondb said:
Is it still accepted wisdom that c-log 2 plus Production is intended to mimic Alexas/Amiras and that the Arri luts work well on it?

Also Chris, love the videos man. Keep 'em coming. Although I watched the color matrix one on my 1080p home theater projector in decent lighting, and I couldn't tell any difference in the three matrixes :)
Click to expand...

To be honest since putting out that video is the first time I've heard that Production Camera is supposed to mimic the Arri look (but I've heard it quite a bit now).

Thanks for the encouragement on the vids - to be honest web compression makes it hard for some of these subtleties to come through which is always the irony of doing image quality tests and comparisons on YouTube..... definitely more noticeable on my editing timeline - but for sure depends on how much you boost the saturation during the color grade.
 
chris f said:
To be honest since putting out that video is the first time I've heard that Production Camera is supposed to mimic the Arri look (but I've heard it quite a bit now).

Thanks for the encouragement on the vids - to be honest web compression makes it hard for some of these subtleties to come through which is always the irony of doing image quality tests and comparisons on YouTube..... definitely more noticeable on my editing timeline - but for sure depends on how much you boost the saturation during the color grade.
Click to expand...

You might try uploading a video in a lossless codec. I use cineform 5 10-bit, but I imagine ProRes would work well too. Obviously the file sizes are massive, and youtube does have a cutoff at about 120gb I think. But you skip a whole generation of h.264 compression. I do it when I want to retain 4K film grain on youtube.
 
drummondb said:
You might try uploading a video in a lossless codec. I use cineform 5 10-bit, but I imagine ProRes would work well too. Obviously the file sizes are massive, and youtube does have a cutoff at about 120gb I think. But you skip a whole generation of h.264 compression. I do it when I want to retain 4K film grain on youtube.
Click to expand...

That’s great to know, thanks for the tip!
 
chris f said:
For the longest time I had just been arbitrarily using "Production Camera" because, well it says "production camera" and that sounds like the right one to be using, but when I was doing all of my C70 vs. C300MKIII tests I decided to test the Color Matrix settings on both cameras as well to finally figure out exactly how those settings affects the image since to my eye they seem to be fairly subtle.

What color matrix setting is everyone else using on here?

I just posted the results of my latest deep-dive to YouTube and thought everyone here might find it helpful:
Click to expand...


Just wanted to post this here because I came across it again. It is interesting that the two color matrix that were the most unique on the C300ii are not available on the Mkiii. "EOS Standard" and "Cinema EOS Original." There is a lot more gold / yellow in the Mkii, definitely a lot more red in this Mkiii.

"I ran a similar series in Rec709, but I felt the skin tones were too red to be of any use. Not sure if this is a LUT issue or what. Overall, very pleased with the color from the camera in BT2020 and either CLog or CLog2."
 
Last edited:
You've been vocal about the differences you're seeing between the II and the III and I support it because continued critique is essential, but I also really feel that some of the differences you're seeing are due to post-production.
___

I ran a similar series in Rec709, but I felt the skin tones were too red to be of any use. Not sure if this is a LUT issue or what. Overall, very pleased with the color from the camera in BT2020 and either CLog or CLog2.
Click to expand...

I think this is important to take note of because if handled incorrectly, 709 LUTs introduce very saturated reds into 2020 footage without a proper conversion.

Barry most likely discovered this because of specifically pointing it out in the description (or something of that nature).

IMO, I think that every Canon camera has always been very neutral, so a more desired result may be obtained through a minor workflow tweak more often than not.
___

This isn't a Canon camera and it's a rudimentary sample, but here's the difference between the same exact LUT and processing it as 709 followed by 2020 on Rec. 2020 footage. I'm assuming a lot of YouTube footage is finished with improper conversions hence all the red (not saying the video above is and I didn't watch the entire thing so I don't know about its workflow...but just saying).

bV0uWpF.jpg


vaKEOjO.jpg
 
NorBro said:
You've been vocal about the differences you're seeing between the II and the III and I support it because continued critique is essential, but I also really feel that some of the differences you're seeing are due to post-production.

IMO, I think that every Canon camera has always been very neutral, so a more desired result may be obtained through a minor workflow tweak more often than not.
Click to expand...

I definitely think this is a post production issue for the most part, yeah. Almost all of the RAW C300 Mkiii footage I have seen has kind of a filtered or extremely stylized look to it. Either that or it looks really dull.

I do own the C70. The included LUTs most of the time don't even hit the skin tone line. The baked in profile options have been greatly reduced and they all feel kind of off. I suppose a custom baked in LUT could solve that problem as well.
 
Last edited:
Even if the colors were drastically different when accurately comparing apples-to-apples, I would understand (new sensor, whatever)...but dropping some of those profiles in the newer camera(s) just makes no sense. Like why do that?

I know things change and maybe they decided to consolidate, but IDK.
 
NorBro said:
Even if the colors were drastically different when accurately comparing apples-to-apples, I would understand (new sensor, whatever)...but dropping some of those profiles in the newer camera(s) just makes no sense. Like why do that?

I know things change and maybe they decided to consolidate, but IDK.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's weird. I am bummed they left out CLOG 2 / BT.709. They also removed Cinema EOS Original and EOS Standard. I mostly shot log with the C300 Mkii, but I remember it being nice to lock when shooting Wide DR to lock in a profile that worked well for the scene, based on the talent.

Gamut.jpg
 
Canon's current offerings for 3D LUT's translate the log profiles into their WideDR gamma curve. It used to be that Canon offered narrow range LUT's to translate the log footage into a standard REC 709 gamma curve, but they don't anymore as far as I can tell. Canon never intended for WideDR gamma to be used as a finished image so if you still want a REC709 gamma curve then you are going to have to add some saturation and contrast to the image even after adding the LUT. I realize that the WideDR looks more like a contemporary color grade than the classical "EOS STD" look, but that is part of the issue with people just slapping Canon's LUTs on the image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top