GH5 GH5 - Best non-log setting?

J

jdv

Well-known member
So, I'm a caveman. I hate using LUTs, Logs, or other post-heavy grading tricks to get better dynamic range.

And as I'm getting ready to shoot a new zombie series, heavy grading even less of an option. Bottom line, I like to get my look in-camera.

I've looked around, but I can't seem to find a whole lot on what's the best general setting for both good dynamic range and pleasing in-camera colors for the GH5 (everything seems to be about the V-log). I use the EOSHD color profile on the a6300, so if you're familiar with that, that's kinda of what I'm after. I'm brand new to Panasonic (well, other then owning a FZ80 for a couple of months)....

Any help would be greatly appreciated!
 
Cinelike-D seems to be the general consensus for best non log profile, but consider doing your own tests as others have said Standard or Natural are best.
 
jdv said:
So, I'm a caveman. I hate using LUTs, Logs, or other post-heavy grading tricks to get better dynamic range.

And as I'm getting ready to shoot a new zombie series, heavy grading even less of an option. Bottom line, I like to get my look in-camera.

I've looked around, but I can't seem to find a whole lot on what's the best general setting for both good dynamic range and pleasing in-camera colors for the GH5 (everything seems to be about the V-log). I use the EOSHD color profile on the a6300, so if you're familiar with that, that's kinda of what I'm after. I'm brand new to Panasonic (well, other then owning a FZ80 for a couple of months)....

Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Click to expand...
Why not test it yourself with various options? As soon as we talk about looks things become subjective.

But in general I would not tinker too much with the color and contrast settings, if I do not use V-Log L I use the Natural profile, everything default except sharpness at -5 and noise at -2.
 
Question: do the settings on the GH4 act the same on the 5? CINE-D salmon color, NATURAL probably the best, don't push settings more than +/-2... that sort of stuff? Or is that all out the window and new feels must be found?
 
wwjd said:
Question: do the settings on the GH4 act the same on the 5? CINE-D salmon color, NATURAL probably the best, don't push settings more than +/-2... that sort of stuff? Or is that all out the window and new feels must be found?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say out the window, but for me a straight transfer of settings didn't work, and I needed to approach the GH5 as if it were a new camera. The only thing I retained was the profile.
 
wwjd said:
Question: do the settings on the GH4 act the same on the 5?
Click to expand...

Generally? Yes, but I find GH5 color to be better than the GH4, especially once your ISO goes above 800.

wwjd said:
CINE-D salmon color, NATURAL probably the best
Click to expand...

Natural is nice, but Cine-D gives you an extra stop of dynamic-range. I've never experienced "salmon color" from Cine-D, but I've had the best color results by applying a LUT made for Cine-D. ( like Paul Leeming's Leeming LUT One )
 
Last edited:
Color rendition is *very* different between the GH4 and GH5. Blues and skintones in particular are quite different between the two cameras. You've got to re-evaluate for yourself. Some general notes:

- Standard is actually quite accurate out of the box. Adjust contrast and saturation to taste and you actually have a usable image straight out of camera (not the case with GH4)
- Cine-D, especially at 10 bit, is much more usable on GH5 compared to GH4. The nearly impossible to correct skintones and highlight issues of the GH4 are managed with the GH5.
- Cine-V another nice choice for straight out of the camera editing with less of a video look than Standard.
- Natural looks even nicer than it did on the GH4, but on the GH5 it is no longer the most technically accurate profile (that goes to Standard.)
- V-LOG L. I know you don't want to mess with LUT's, but they're actually brain dead simple, and with the addition of in camera preview and in camera 10-bit recording, V-LOG L is actually quite usable on the GH5. I think that Panasonic's V-LOG > REC709 Lut is crap, but there are others that do a great job.
 
joe12south said:
- V-LOG L. I know you don't want to mess with LUT's, but they're actually brain dead simple, and with the addition of in camera preview and in camera 10-bit recording, V-LOG L is actually quite usable on the GH5.
Click to expand...
I agree with Joe, V-Log L is my default setting and I only divert from it in very low contrast or very dark situations.

The actual conversion from log is a purely technical process, after that you have much more latitude with your footage.
Furthermore shooting in log is more future proof, perhaps now you only need Rec.709 but a few years from now you will regret it when you show your video on a device that supports HDR and a wider color gamut.
 
Cary Knoop said:
I agree with Joe, V-Log L is my default setting and I only divert from it in very low contrast or very dark situations.

The actual conversion from log is a purely technical process, after that you have much more latitude with your footage.
Furthermore shooting in log is more future proof, perhaps now you only need Rec.709 but a few years from now you will regret it when you show your video on a device that supports HDR and a wider color gamut.
Click to expand...


Futureproofing is a reason for me too. Converting to ACES, REC2020 etc. is a breeze with V-Log in 10 Bit on the GH5.
 
This might be a bit off-topic, but what is the best luminance setting? I've heard originally Premiere Pro had some issues with the full range, is there a reason to not shoot 0-1023 now that it's patched. Am I missing a significant bit of data without going to such a setting?
 
ParagonFilmworks said:
This might be a bit off-topic, but what is the best luminance setting? I've heard originally Premiere Pro had some issues with the full range, is there a reason to not shoot 0-1023 now that it's patched. Am I missing a significant bit of data without going to such a setting?
Click to expand...
The other mappings are for legacy compatibility. If your pipeline doesn't require you to do otherwise, there's not a compelling reason to capture anything other than full range. (Remember, you can always output to the "safe" range if you need to.)

In regards to data loss, at 8-bit, the loss of 36 steps might sometimes be appreciable...at 10-bit it's hard to think of a scenario in which it would be visually noticeable.
 
Future-proofing something I'd not considered....

But, because I am a just a simple caveman videogragher, how does using log future-proof the footage?
 
jdv said:
But, because I am a just a simple caveman videogragher, how does using log future-proof the footage?
Click to expand...
Because it allows you to capture a wider dynamic range than the other profiles. With this information, you can remaster footage for HDR display (HDR10, Dolby, HLG.) If you shoot with the standard profiles (other than HLG) that data is lost forever.
 
Even without my LUT, I'd pick Cine-D as the next best setting to V-Log. You'll get excellent dynamic range and quite good colour with my recommended settings (PDF). Adding the Cine-D LUT at the end is just raising it to the next level of accuracy. From there, it's up to you on the creative side.

HTH!

Cheers,

Paul :)
 
I've found that Cine-V with NR & Sharpness at -5 and -1 Saturation gives me a nice image with really full skintones. DR isn't the best, but I don't think it's the strong point of this camera in general.

I've used V-log with varying results. The patches of green/magenta are disappointing and were even present when outputting 10 bit to Atomos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top