First shoot and footage looks awful;(

F

funkytwig

Active member
Just took out my AF101 for a spin. There was a meeting at the volunteer run cinema I help at and they had some arcitects in for a meeting so I offered to film it for people who could not attend. The resulting video looked awful. Here is a still.

Screen Shot 2015-02-04 at 01.39.56.jpg

I was using a Linux 12-35 f.2.8 lense and even with that I had to use ISO 2500 (even at 25fps). I was expecting noise but not smeary images. Scene file is:

FILM CAM
PH 1080P
VTR OFF
DETAIL LEV -5
V DETAIL LEVEL -5
CORING +2
PHASE 0
COL TEMP (A/B) 0
MAS PED -3
A.IRIS LEV 0
DRS OFF
GAMMA B.PRESS
KNEE MID
MATRIX NORM2
SKIN TONE DTL OFF

I am kind of surprised I had to use such a high ISO but that is another story.

Any idea what is going on?

Ben
 
Last edited:
OK...

First, practice a few times using the straight bland all-0's Scene File #1.

The AF isn't a very sharp camera, dialing down detail levels does give it that mushy "early Canon DSLR" feel.

B.PRESS crushes the blacks a bit, and you also have MAS PED at -3 which is further crushing your blacks.

Location looks like a stage, probably using gelled stage lighting. Set it to 3200K and hope for the best.

I have no idea what the interior lighting was like, so I can't comment on exposure... you know it's underexposed, but I couldn't clue you in on how to rectify that. Make sure your shutter angle/speed isnt too fast, that you don't accidentally have ND engaged (ask me how I know), and if all else, that your lens' iris isnt sticking shut.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that. These settings were what the guy I brought the camera from had. I have been using the Alex 1 settings and it looks a lot better. I have also read the AF100 book, this got me thinking, it seems to me it is best to have a file for high iso and one for low.

It is gelled stage lighting, and it very warm. That does not bother me too much.

Did a little playing around and 2500 seems OK but 3200 does make the image seem quite a lot less sharp, guess this is to be expected.

Seems everybody is concerned with grain, and rightly so but if I have a low iso settings what should I change (I am guessing controling grain will be at the detriment of something).

I have low set to 400, mid to 1000 and high to 2500. Be good to have settings for each.

I am also thinking that a bright day (i.e. to maximise dynamic range) would be another possible setting, which would be based on low gain setting.

Ben
 
I didn't see your shutter angle and iris settings in your post. Is it possible those settings caused your underexposed? Perhaps you forgot to check them, or thought they were on auto when they were actually on manual (and were inappropriate)? Just a shot in the dark, but maybe worth mentioning.

Kevin
 
It doesn't look good because of 2 reasons. It is underexposed and you have used ISO 2500 which not only adds noise to the image, but actually limits the DR and negatively influences the colors of the camera. As a bonus reason, there is a lot of red in the image / light and unfortunately our digital camera's aren't as good with reds as they are with other colors. Especially when underexposed.

So there you have the reasons. Now what to do about it? You can't change the lighting of the venue. However, you do have some influence on the amount of light you let reach the sensor.

Next time, bring an f1.8 lens or even an 1.4 lens. Preferable with a Metabones Speedbooster so you can even have more light and you will be able to stop the lens down 1 stop for better lens performance while still shooting at a high f-stop. Keep the shutter speed at 1/50, but if it's still really to dark you can lower it to 1/40. Usually without much problems and only slightly more motion blur which is preferable over going higher in the ISO's.

Now I have never shot with the AF-101 but I shoot extensively on the GH3 and often find myself in similar situations where it is dark and lighting is harsh. That's why I use the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 on a Speed Booster. My friend has the Lumix 12-35 f2.8 but that one mostly simply doesn't cut it. There is a huge difference between f1.2 and 2.8. It's the same difference as ISO 800 (usable!) vs 3200 (unusable!)

The highest ISO setting I use on the GH3 is 1600. Like i said, I don't use the AF-101 but I can't believe it has a better ISO performance so most likely this advice can be taken seriously :)
Also, on the GH3 at least, ISO 2500 is more noisy than 3200. The same as 1000 is more noisy than 1250. Do some tests with your camera to find the optimal ISO settings but simply never take it higher than 1600.

Last, but not least, your white balance settings could have been better. To counter balance all the red in the lighting, I would lower the white balance to around 3000-4000K.

Hope there is something helpful in here!
Cheers.
 
I'm looking at your still on an iPad with the screen brightness turned up, and the brightness looks reasonable for what the lighting seems like. The light behind them is quite bright on the stage floor and their faces seem bright enough. I am wondering if the people look soft because the camera wasn't focused on them. To me the signs above the door in the left background seem reasonably sharp. Could the focus accidentally have been on the background? If you were at f2.8 then the DOF might not have been enough to put the people also in focus? Just a thought.
 
In my experience the following settings might help

FILM CAM
PH 1080P
VTR OFF
DETAIL LEV -5 - set between -2 & 0
V DETAIL LEVEL -5 - Reset to -2 & 0
CORING +2
PHASE 0
COL TEMP (A/B) 0
MAS PED -3 - Bump up ped to +2 or +3
A.IRIS LEV 0
DRS OFF
GAMMA B.PRESS - Use Cinelike V
KNEE MID - turn off
MATRIX NORM2
SKIN TONE DTL OFF

try setting shutter to 1/25 in really low light to avoid having to take ISO above 2000, it will smear with fast action though
dial down chroma level to -4 or -5 to reduce the red channel blowing out
white balance looks off
 
Note: your shutter speed should only be used as an exposure tool in the direst of circumstances. That's not what it's for, and it affects the image considerably in ways having nothing to do with brightness.
 
kwoff said:
I didn't see your shutter angle and iris settings in your post. Is it possible those settings caused your underexposed? Perhaps you forgot to check them, or thought they were on auto when they were actually on manual (and were inappropriate)? Just a shot in the dark, but maybe worth mentioning.

Kevin
Click to expand...

Thanks for replying. Shutter 1/25 (I gather shutter angle is the film way of saying this). F2.8.
 
David Jimerson said:
Note: your shutter speed should only be used as an exposure tool in the direst of circumstances. That's not what it's for, and it affects the image considerably in ways having nothing to do with brightness.
Click to expand...

It was dire, it was either that or 3200 iso. I know it affects motion blur but is there other issues it causes.
 
Stab said:
It doesn't look good because of 2 reasons. It is underexposed and you have used ISO 2500 which not only adds noise to the image, but actually limits the DR and negatively influences the colors of the camera. As a bonus reason, there is a lot of red in the image / light and unfortunately our digital camera's aren't as good with reds as they are with other colors. Especially when underexposed.

So there you have the reasons. Now what to do about it? You can't change the lighting of the venue. However, you do have some influence on the amount of light you let reach the sensor.

Next time, bring an f1.8 lens or even an 1.4 lens. Preferable with a Metabones Speedbooster so you can even have more light and you will be able to stop the lens down 1 stop for better lens performance while still shooting at a high f-stop. Keep the shutter speed at 1/50, but if it's still really to dark you can lower it to 1/40. Usually without much problems and only slightly more motion blur which is preferable over going higher in the ISO's.

Now I have never shot with the AF-101 but I shoot extensively on the GH3 and often find myself in similar situations where it is dark and lighting is harsh. That's why I use the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 on a Speed Booster. My friend has the Lumix 12-35 f2.8 but that one mostly simply doesn't cut it. There is a huge difference between f1.2 and 2.8. It's the same difference as ISO 800 (usable!) vs 3200 (unusable!)

The highest ISO setting I use on the GH3 is 1600. Like i said, I don't use the AF-101 but I can't believe it has a better ISO performance so most likely this advice can be taken seriously :)
Also, on the GH3 at least, ISO 2500 is more noisy than 3200. The same as 1000 is more noisy than 1250. Do some tests with your camera to find the optimal ISO settings but simply never take it higher than 1600.

Last, but not least, your white balance settings could have been better. To counter balance all the red in the lighting, I would lower the white balance to around 3000-4000K.

Hope there is something helpful in here!
Cheers.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. I do actually have control of the lighting (I do stage lighting there) but generaly bounce a cople of PAR64s off the ceiling (which is light coloured) but it turns out the bulbs were blown and even replacing them did not work (I run out of time).

The sharpness was my main issue, but a lot of the problems probably effect perceived brightness. I was using a GH3 previously but found the DSLR thing a nightmare (I stuck at it for a few years).

the ISO think is interesting. I seem to remember with the 550D increments of 160 worked best. I did a few ISO 3200 tests last night and it seemed to make the image more smudgy but need to do more tests. The alex 1 Scene File seems massively better than what I was using (although I was testing at my studio and not shooting in very red situations.

Does the shutter speed cause any other issues apart from motion blur, for this shoot people were not moving very much and a bit of it on people waving around there arms is no biggie.

Would love to get a speedbooster, will be my next major purchase. I stop always helps. This type of thing needs to be done with a zoom (was using 12-35 2.8) so fast primes would not be doable (have a 20mm 1,7).

In the end of the day I managed to document the meeting and it was a freebee, and a learning experience. I did the job but would of liked it to look a lot better.

Ben
 
BobPilz said:
I'm looking at your still on an iPad with the screen brightness turned up, and the brightness looks reasonable for what the lighting seems like. The light behind them is quite bright on the stage floor and their faces seem bright enough. I am wondering if the people look soft because the camera wasn't focused on them. To me the signs above the door in the left background seem reasonably sharp. Could the focus accidentally have been on the background? If you were at f2.8 then the DOF might not have been enough to put the people also in focus? Just a thought.
Click to expand...

DOF is certainly part of the issue. Was using peeking and when I watched bits back (it is over an hour) I could work out where the focus was (such that there is some). I had to turn up stage floods to get light in auditorium, there is a cinema screen whitch are designed to replect.

Seems that using focus peeding with viewfinder detail turned off is a lot more accurate, with it on it showed a lot in focus.

Ben
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top