Getting a 'Look'... Better in camera or in Post

T

tippert

Member
Lately, I've been doing a lot more color correction in post with tools like Magic Bullet Editor. They suggest that you shoot everything 'Normal' in camera so you have the most color info. available when working with their 'filters' (like deacons did in "O Bother, Where Art Thou') . This brings up some questions:

1. what would 'Normal' be on the HVX? Zero out all the settings?

2. Are you better off getting your look in the camera or in post? Obviously, you save time/money if you do it in the camera, but that aside, are you significantly degrading the image by shooting things straight in the field and then correcting in post with tools like Magic Bullet Editor and Colorista?

-tom
 
But I beleive that it is far better to do all the image manipulation in post, so that you can fine tune the look you want. That is how all professional productions are done. But yes, there will be some image degradation. Hardly noticable.
 
keep your settings flatish. Liek master peD -2, but kick the chroma up. like +3 +4

This way you can have as much chroma info as possible. desaturae it to normal evels in post. the point fo Digital it so retain as much information as possible in the image. getting proper color levels are important too. youcan aleways take away with digital, its hard to reclaim it and maintain quality.
 
Try it and see. Create an "in-camera" look and match it in post, or the other way around.

The in-camera manipulation happens on the full resolution uncompressed image.

In my opinion the tradeoff is the quality of the look you get by in-camera versus the flexibility you get by being able to change your mind in post.

The quality of coloring before compression, in my opinion, can't be matched by manipulating a compressed image in post.

The bad news is (just my experience) that once you've altered the color in-camera and compressed it, there's no way back to a "normal" look in post.

So... if you want the quality of the look, or if you need the speed and don't have time for rendering in post ... then in-camera is great. If you can't risk having the wrong look and if you can afford the time to tinker in post ... then shoot flat.
 
thanks for the pros and cons- very helpful.

If I want to go the post route, in addition to master ped -2 and chroma +3/+4. Do I want my Gamma at 'HD Norm' and my Matrix at 'Norm'?
 
24fps4ever said:
I think hd norm looks horrible, screams video all throughout
Click to expand...

..that would be the point of tweaking it ;)

Like previously stated, the more infromation you have in the image to start with, the better off you are later.

- Kyle
 
There are two methodologies on this subject. The first says not to alter the footage in-camera either by changing camera settings or adding physical filters in front of the lens (other than ND to accomodate proper exposure). The concept being that if you shoot something "filtered" in-camera you can't remove it later in post if you decide you don't want or like it.

The other - and the method I've personally used which comes from my years shooting commercial-print - is to get it as perfect as possible in camera first and reduce the amount of work in post. This method however assumes that you have a desired "look" already planned for and have figured out camera settings, exposure values and or filters that will supply that look. For example, I can easily get about 98% close to final color when I use the custom settings (and proper exposure) I've created in-camera for my "film/chrome" look and only have to correct for "broadcast safe" whites in post whereas if I shot with camera default settings I'd have a ton of work in post to create that same look.

It really comes down to your own preferred workflow; either method will give you the end results you want, it's just a matter of which way is best suited to the production workflow you're using and, whether or not you can trust your own in-camera work to get the end result you want.
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to achieve better in camera results myself, and make wise use of filters. I think it makes for smoother editing (and definitely saves PC resources). I've recently been in therapy for magibulletitis.
 
The formula is simple: whatever you add/do in-camera is FINAL, meaning you can't take it out in post... If you change your mind, or even worst, your client changes his/her mind you are in a bit of trouble... All movies get their "Look" in post... I rather put all of my effort into good photography, which is lighting and contrast. If this is done well, then grading in post is a piece of cake.

Of course, filters such as ND's, Polarizers, etc... are often needed for good lighting...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top