Footage with 2.0 firmware upgrade (cinematone 1 gamma)

Postmaster said:
Andy on Twitter:



Haven t compared them though.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I misunderstood. I just saw this on his pic profile page and took it to mean he was still using the old pic profiles.

" EDIT: You can now download and load the Picture Profiles directly in to your camera. You must have firmware version 2.0 installed first.
After you uncompress the file, drag the “Private” folder to the root directory of an SDHC card or Memory Stick. In the “Others” menu of
the camera, you can load all of the Picture Profiles via the “Camera Profile” option. This will overwrite any menu and assignable button settings you have! "
 
Kholi said:
It's pretty interesting... I think the "grade everything" explosion really sort of took everyone a step backward,
Click to expand...

That's kind of my dilemma. Much of the stuff I shoot, I don't have time to do a lot of grading. So, for me, getting the best straight in the camera is a high priority.
I'm definately not a Pic profile expert, but I'm finding even minor tweaking to the default profiles is getting good results for me.


PS, skin tone on those pics looks great to me.
 
Great thoughts and tests all around! Definitely agree with Nirv and others who think setting the black level high is unnecessary. I tested my original profile with a black level of 0 and it turned out well. Thanks everyone!
 
I did a bit of testing today and I never had tons of problems with
highlights before. I always had issues with overly red skin tones however.
I made a profile that fixed it quite a bit but this new profile with the new
firmware is a huge difference I believe.

Did a bit of testing earlier like I said and skin tones are normal. What you
see with your eyes is what you get with the profile it seems. This wasn't
as easy to do before the firmware. I assume something has changed.
I'm quite open to people testing this, however, I feel it's changed and
for the better.
 
Here is something I wanted to share. I pushed the saturation right up on this piece of footage, and the red's just fall completely apart, the green's to me don't look that bad, and this is an extreme (nothing I would actually use)

7117747283_bbb69cab87_c.jpg


for me, the red problem... still stands.
 
Last edited:
Edit: oops ya took the other still down before I finished. xD

Anyway, you kinda just want to either hit a look that you've got in mind, or stick to the basics: people should look like people, and objects that are familiar should look like what you imagine it to look like. And, color theory is also pretty important.

As for the reds, you just isolate them before you push saturation. Then reign em in.
 
Yeah took those other ones down, because well... they looked like ass.

And yeah, I had my look down pat, but after the firmware upgrade, it's turned the profile I use to use into something that just makes white turn to yellow...
 
Between rain showers yesterday I shot some footage in Cinegamma2 with Black level at -15. The RGB parade showed info between -10 ire and 109. The image on the LCD looked like there couldn't be any info in the blacks. Well in post it was all there and the blacks could be lifted up with detail intact and no additional noise. The scopes and the eyeballs don't lie and it was a huge surprise not just because the black detail was there but because it was so clean too.

I shall be using -15 for Cinegamma 2 from now on. Cinegamma 2 really pulls the lower mids and black down rapidly and -15 opened out the bottom of the gamma curve. I'd love to combine this setting with an external recorder.

It's a shame the onboard LCD doesn't compensate for the gamma curve i.e. have a viewing LUT or false colour at both ends of the scale because it leads you to over expose especially with the cinegamma 2.

Unfortunately the UK weather has put pay to paying work and getting out and shooting test footage at various lighting conditions. My profiles are still work in progress as a result. When I can get out and get some real footage under my belt I'll post the findings.
 
Here is some un-corrected footage straight off the camera using Kyle's PP, I waited in-between the sun popping in and out to make it have that muggy moody feel. Blacks were -5 and I only wish the blue skies that were out where in the top of my shots not those god awful white clouds!!!


password: leachy
 
Frank, unfortunately Andy's spoken to Sony and they said there's no changes to cinetone :( ...

from Andy's twitter:
"Spoke with Sony about this and they did not change the CinemaTone curves."

I won't believe it till I see a comparison test though. Hint ;)
 
Nirv said:
I shall be using -15 for Cinegamma 2 from now on. Cinegamma 2 really pulls the lower mids and black down rapidly and -15 opened out the bottom of the gamma curve. I'd love to combine this setting with an external recorder.
Click to expand...

This is interesting. How can you have -10 IRE? I though that was a voltage measure?
0 IRE is supposed to be 0 RGB, 100% IRE is 235 RGB

So we're kind of suggesting that even at 0 blacks aren't RGB0 in the source file? I wonder whether you're seeing some kind of mapping thing in FCP X, i can't believe the source AVC file has none zero RGB as black?

Or is the -15 black level affecting the black gamma in a way we didn't realise. We thought (I thought) that the black level was like the clipping black point in photoshop, move it up and it lightens the blacks but reduces range, move it down and it clips the blacks at 0.

I'm confused!

cheers
Paul
 
Showman Media said:
Frank, unfortunately Andy's spoken to Sony and they said there's no changes to cinetone :( ...

from Andy's twitter:
"Spoke with Sony about this and they did not change the CinemaTone curves."

I won't believe it till I see a comparison test though. Hint ;)
Click to expand...

I've just posted one and Andy seems to be 100% correct, it's wishful thinking, and a placebo effect.

You know, our cameras are better than we think. If we just avoid messing around too much with impossible secret sauce PP profiles!

NIRV is heading in the right lines, looking at the shadows for detail.

cheers
Paul
 
paulcurtis said:
I'm confused!
Click to expand...

Not as much as me!

FCPX has proven extremely reliable and its scopes very accurate.

The Black Level parameter is the setup level but it seems to also have a large effect on the shape of the bottom end of the gamma curve.

One thing I can say with confidence is that this camera captures a whole lot more in the blacks than can be seen while monitoring. You can hold onto much more highlight detail by stopping down with confidence the black detail is not being lost.
 
Nirv said:
Not as much as me!

FCPX has proven extremely reliable and its scopes very accurate.

The Black Level parameter is the setup level but it seems to also have a large effect on the shape of the bottom end of the gamma curve.

One thing I can say with confidence is that this camera captures a whole lot more in the blacks than can be seen while monitoring. You can hold onto much more highlight detail by stopping down with confidence the black detail is not being lost.
Click to expand...

I agree with the detail in the blacks, but i totally don't understand how -15 is giving more detail in the blacks when i would assume it would clip anything < 0 as you say it's got to be modifying the black gamma. I don't have a proper calibrated greyscale chart, that's what you'd need really to see what was going one.

I would like to understand how the RGB source is mapped in FCPX firstly before doing any tests. I don't understand how you can have negative IRE (you can switch to millivolts and see -140mv which surely means the image is sucking voltage from thin air!)

FCPX has been pretty reliable however i would like the ability to apply a LUT to the source which i don't believe you can do.

cheers
Paul
 
Black Level is the setup level so I guess it also determines the datum of the waveform and that means -ve values if set low enough.

The important point is how it seems to affect the shape of the gamma curve down low especially in cinegamma 2. As I've said before cinegamma 2 crunches up the black detail and there isn't much resolution there if you need to find something in the grade. By extending the black level down it appears there's more values to play with.

I reserve the right to be wrong!

:)
 
I'll see if can get some screen caps from my external scopes later today, it's really easy to see the advantage of lower black settings.

d
 
Nirv said:
Between rain showers yesterday I shot some footage in Cinegamma2 with Black level at -15. The RGB parade showed info between -10 ire and 109. The image on the LCD looked like there couldn't be any info in the blacks. Well in post it was all there and the blacks could be lifted up with detail intact and no additional noise. The scopes and the eyeballs don't lie and it was a huge surprise not just because the black detail was there but because it was so clean too.

I shall be using -15 for Cinegamma 2 from now on. Cinegamma 2 really pulls the lower mids and black down rapidly and -15 opened out the bottom of the gamma curve. I'd love to combine this setting with an external recorder.

It's a shame the onboard LCD doesn't compensate for the gamma curve i.e. have a viewing LUT or false colour at both ends of the scale because it leads you to over expose especially with the cinegamma 2.

Unfortunately the UK weather has put pay to paying work and getting out and shooting test footage at various lighting conditions. My profiles are still work in progress as a result. When I can get out and get some real footage under my belt I'll post the findings.
Click to expand...

If you post or PM me your settings, I can try them with the Nanoflash today.

It's VERY interesting that you posted this. With the GH2, I shoot Cinema in broad daylight because it pushes everything down before I have to cut light at the sensor. That means a cleaner image altogether, of course. If Cinegamma 2 does something similar, and I don't have to underexpose to the point of actually losing a bit of detail, I'd like to explore it.

In fact, after a simple run of the FS100 AVCHD footage through 5DtoRGB on Full Range (just to open up the image, and for cutting purposes in OSX) you can see it all appear.

This isn't surprising to hear, though. I've been trying to tell people using the GH2 that it's not as crushed as you think, and when you're looking at the entire range there's a LOT of information in the darker and lighter areas. You just have to get used to looking at the LCD and knowing that. Although, on the GH2 you can adjust the LCD and EVF to the point where you can literally see that information. I tried to find an LCD brightness and contrast setting on the FS100 but not there.
 
Kholi said:
If you post or PM me your settings, I can try them with the Nanoflash today.

It's VERY interesting that you posted this. With the GH2, I shoot Cinema in broad daylight because it pushes everything down before I have to cut light at the sensor. That means a cleaner image altogether, of course. If Cinegamma 2 does something similar, and I don't have to underexpose to the point of actually losing a bit of detail, I'd like to explore it.

This isn't surprising to hear, though. I've been trying to tell people using the GH2 that it's not as crushed as you think, and when you're looking at the entire range there's a LOT of information in the darker and lighter areas. You just have to get used to looking at the LCD and knowing that. Although, on the GH2 you can adjust the LCD and EVF to the point where you can literally see that information. I tried to find an LCD brightness and contrast setting on the FS100 but not there.
Click to expand...

There's nothing ninja about my settings, black level -15, cinegamma2. Black gamma on default settings. No colour adjustments. I have tried to keep things really simple so I can see the effect of the parameter changes without confusing myself.

I must stress that I'm only concentrating on cinegamma2 with -15 BL as it has such a strange curve in the black area. It may be counter productive to do this with other gamma curves but if anyone wants to test the other curves and add to the community understanding please feel free.

There is a LCD brightness setting but it's crap.

Would love to see what less compressed footage with 422 looks like.

Try and do a comparison with clip straight off the nano flash and the same clip with the blacks lifted. If you have time please post the screen grabs and if you can include waveforms that would be great.

Cheers
 
Nirv said:
Would love to see what less compressed footage with 422 looks like.

Try and do a comparison with clip straight off the nano flash and the same clip with the blacks lifted. If you have time please post the screen grabs and if you can include waveforms that would be great.

Cheers
Click to expand...

No problem. I'll do it in the next like hour or two, but I probably won't be able to find a human to shoot, if that's okay.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top