GH5 GH5 V-Log Noisy With High Bitrate and Low ISO

Or maybe it's infrared pollution that causes noise with too much ND? I forget which one, but since they sell ND filters with IR reduction I guess it must be infrared-caused noise (as opposed to UV radiation). Anyway it's one of those two wavelengths of light that is not visible to the human eye which nevertheless can get recorded as noise, and is the reason why it's better to use a faster shutter speed rather than more ND.
 
RE: VND

For my tastes I hate adjusting shutter for exposure on video and hate it when I see people do that. I always go for ND. I think it's fine as long as you do a few things:

1. Buy some VNDs that are overpowered if you can so you aren't maxing it out
2. Re-white balance anytime you make a significant change to the VND
3. Spend the $$ on a good VND. But it doesn't have to be crazy. I've had good success with SLR Magic VND over Tiffen for minimizing color shifts. I might try out some of these once they've been on market and tested/reviewed for a while as well:

https://www.kickstarter.com/project...xnd-mark-ii-the-best-variable-nd-filters-1-11

RE: Log VS Raw

I think the future is undoubtedly RAW, hands down. LOG is a temporary hold over until the tech fully catches up. It's already happening today and I think will accelerate rapidly, but, I mean, fast forward some years when 12 TB SSDs are $150, 20TB HDDs are the same cost, v90 SD cards and other media are as cheap as v30 are today for double the size, etc. etc. Why would you ever not shoot RAW? Especially with all the new "smart" RAW codecs like ProRes RAW, BMD's RAW, etc. I think it will just be the defacto way to work even for quick turn projects. Because...

RE: Grading Log / Working with RAW

This is true about getting it right, but it has gotten exponentially easier. I mean, really, I hear a lot of people talk about all the added complexity and it just doesn't have to be that way. You really can treat it almost the same as shooting CineV if you do a batch copy/paste or adjustment layer of a LUT filter, especially if you monitor with that same LUT. You're essentially adding 30 seconds to your post workflow and using a "preset", except you can change the preset in post and/or have way more grading flexibility if you choose to. Or, just don't choose to.

I think with RAW and LOG workflows this is going to get increasingly easier as software and hardware builds more features in intuitively. How long will it really be until Premiere recognizes metadata tags from a camera clip and can be set to auto-apply LUTs or preset RAW grades right on ingest, or in an easy flick of a switch on a per clip or per project basis, etc?
 
filmguy123 said:
RE: VND

For my tastes I hate adjusting shutter for exposure on video and hate it when I see people do that. I always go for ND. I think it's fine as long as you do a few things:

1. Buy some VNDs that are overpowered if you can so you aren't maxing it out
2. Re-white balance anytime you make a significant change to the VND
3. Spend the $$ on a good VND. But it doesn't have to be crazy. I've had good success with SLR Magic VND over Tiffen for minimizing color shifts. I might try out some of these once they've been on market and tested/reviewed for a while as well:

https://www.kickstarter.com/project...xnd-mark-ii-the-best-variable-nd-filters-1-11
Click to expand...


That looks like a cool ND filter. I love that you can put the lens cap on it! That really bothers me about my current B+W VND filter, that I can't. Really takes away from the run and gun capability and ups the chance I won't even get the chance to use it. Ok, best not to mess with the shutter angle and keep it 180 degrees.. but sometimes you might make a creative decision or for doc purposes, you might.

Or maybe it's just that not having a built in VND is too annoying when shooting documentary/run and gun, and I should finally give up on using DSLRs. With C100s now so cheap...The catch is how heavily invested I am in m43 lenses, it's a big move to make.
 
In my experience switching to a larger body camera will solve your ND problem and introduce new ones.

I’d be more inclined to invest in Xume filters, good VNDs, rubber and metal lens hoods, etc

In body Electronic VND solutions are bound to be right around the corner. Patents are even showing they’ll be on sensor where the camera could dim the sensor at a pixel level to control light gathering and work as a sort of sensor level ND equivalent.
 
mothmachine said:
OP I think your problem might possibly be that you are shooting in bright sun and you might be using too many stops of ND and/or have a not good variable ND filter. If so what you may be seeing is IR pollution causing ultraviolet noise.
Click to expand...

WHOA! Mothmachine! I think you may have something there! Yes, I was shooting in bright sunlight and yes I had many stops of ND on a Tiffen VARIABLE ND filter (what pros warn against!) I notice the noise mostly in the trees and through the screen of my gazebo. I may have to try this all over again indoors on smoother surfaces with no filtration! Thank you for bringing this to my attention.
 
Bassman2003 said:
Which LUT are you using to process the V-Log-L footage? This makes a big difference. I have had good luck with these - https://crftshodigital.com/gh5-luts/

Leeming LUTs are good as well.
Click to expand...

soarprod said:
I'm a big fan of speed boosted EF lenses with the metabones adapters. Especially the sigma 18-35
Click to expand...

I used to have a set of Nikon lenses with the Metabones F mount Speedbooster. I liked the look and F stop bump but I had one hell of a time changing lenses because tolerances were way too tight. I was afraid I was going to break something just changing a lens! I have since switched to a set of native M4/3 lenses and they change like "buttah!"
 
Bassman2003 said:
Which LUT are you using to process the V-Log-L footage? This makes a big difference. I have had good luck with these - https://crftshodigital.com/gh5-luts/

Leeming LUTs are good as well.
Click to expand...

NorBro said:
The Voigtlanders are phenomenal! But make sure to understand that you will most likely not be able to use them until 1.2/1.4 like filmguy mentioned. Even 1.8-ish for some.
Click to expand...

That's a deal breaker for me then. I am glad you shared this info with me. I don't want any softness at .095.
 
Bassman2003 said:
Which LUT are you using to process the V-Log-L footage? This makes a big difference. I have had good luck with these - https://crftshodigital.com/gh5-luts/

Leeming LUTs are good as well.
Click to expand...

filmguy123 said:
I recommend it! FWIW, Color Grading can be infintely complex and a lifelong, full time pursuit. Also, it can be much easier than you think thanks to tools and resources so readily available today.

A good place to start: Leeming LUTs, $25 or so, https://www.leeminglutpro.com/

Lumetri color sliders for blacks, whites, curves, etc. A few tutorials on those controls.

That'll get you started well. I like to use an adjustment layer with Lumetri color and a LUT applied to all my clips. Or, copy/paste the Lumetri Effect with the LUT applied batched onto everything. And then I use a second lumetri effect to do basic adjustments.

Want to get more advanced, Red Giant Colorista IV plugin is great. You can get it usually about 50% off every December.

You don't need to go full board Davinci Resolve and every complicated facet of color grading to get better results than a stock profile. You can even cheat secondaries using multiple layers of Lumetri effect with masks, just draw a circle mask on a face, feather 100-150, then copy/paste it and invert that effect to control everything "not face" for example. Stack, add, layer mask as needed.

Just shoot vlog in 10-bit always.

Good luck... it's not so bad. If that's all too much, a LUT on adjustment layer is essentially back to ground zero and often just as good to export as if you shot CineV to start with, but with more DR!
Click to expand...

I always shoot 10 bit, ALL-I content (I cannot think of a reason not to). I use the boxed copy of Premiere Pro CS6 Production Premium (five disks) which does NOT come bundled with Lumetri (damn it!) and I have Magic Bullet Looks installed which has one helluva learning curve attached. I knew this day would come sooner or later: Shooting and editing just don't cut it anymore. To compete with other projects I'm gonna hafta learn color grading. Shooting beautifully lit video just isn't enough anymore. I mean, is it even possible to perfectly light my scenes and avoid V-LOG altogether? Isn't that what the early pioneers of the Sony CineAlta F900 did? I don't think Michael Mann shot Miami Vice or Public Enemies in a log profile. Nor did George Lucas shoot his Star Wars movies on the F900 with any kind of log profile, right? Or Robert Rodriguez with his F900 and Once Upon a Time in Mexico? Correct me if I'm wrong. I read alot of online articles about their digital workflow and do not recall any kind of Log algorithm. Please correct me if I missed something.
 
Hugh DiMauro said:
I use the baked in, REC 709 LUT on the GH5 menu.
Click to expand...

When I first started shooting with LOG I tried the Panasonic LUT in my NLE (Edius) and it was horrible. Still do not understand why the company who made the camera offered up such a poor LUT? Purchased the Craftshow for $10 and all was well. So you might want to venture beyond the Panasonic LUT just for a reference.
 
morgan_moore said:
To use log you need to consider ...

exposure
the 'toe' in the curve using post

Simply you need to set up a controlled scene with some DR and shoot it at many settings (different iris)
You then need to take all of these shots into post and pull the curves to make the best image from each shot.

95% of noise complainants are underexposing log footage.
Click to expand...

I thank you for this. The whole color grading business is certainly not for sissies. I will do this but indoors for now.
 
Bassman2003 said:
Hopefully LOG shooting will go away in close future generations. I do not like shooting with it and would rather have the camera maker get a profile right or offer RAW.

If you are going to do anything with color grading make sure you have a good calibrated monitor in the mix. Otherwise you are making decisions based upon untruths.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why I hesitate to use V-Log in the first place. My editing system does not have a proper, calibrated display monitor. I use a video card with Displayport out jacks. I have gotten by thus far with shooting high bitrates, CinelikeD (first with the Panasonic HPX250, HPX370 and now the GH5 and GH5s) and carefully lighting and exposing my scenes to the best of my ability in order to avoid any kind of extensive color grading/correction in post which, I understand, is an art which takes many years to master. I am learning as I go along.
 
mothmachine said:
Or maybe it's infrared pollution that causes noise with too much ND? I forget which one, but since they sell ND filters with IR reduction I guess it must be infrared-caused noise (as opposed to UV radiation). Anyway it's one of those two wavelengths of light that is not visible to the human eye which nevertheless can get recorded as noise, and is the reason why it's better to use a faster shutter speed rather than more ND.
Click to expand...

I slap my variable ND ON TOP of my UV lens protector filter. I wonder if I just have too much "stuff" in front of my lens?
 
filmguy123 said:
RE: VND

For my tastes I hate adjusting shutter for exposure on video and hate it when I see people do that. I always go for ND. I think it's fine as long as you do a few things:

1. Buy some VNDs that are overpowered if you can so you aren't maxing it out
2. Re-white balance anytime you make a significant change to the VND
3. Spend the $$ on a good VND. But it doesn't have to be crazy. I've had good success with SLR Magic VND over Tiffen for minimizing color shifts. I might try out some of these once they've been on market and tested/reviewed for a while as well:

https://www.kickstarter.com/project...xnd-mark-ii-the-best-variable-nd-filters-1-11

RE: Log VS Raw

I think the future is undoubtedly RAW, hands down. LOG is a temporary hold over until the tech fully catches up. It's already happening today and I think will accelerate rapidly, but, I mean, fast forward some years when 12 TB SSDs are $150, 20TB HDDs are the same cost, v90 SD cards and other media are as cheap as v30 are today for double the size, etc. etc. Why would you ever not shoot RAW? Especially with all the new "smart" RAW codecs like ProRes RAW, BMD's RAW, etc. I think it will just be the defacto way to work even for quick turn projects. Because...

RE: Grading Log / Working with RAW

This is true about getting it right, but it has gotten exponentially easier. I mean, really, I hear a lot of people talk about all the added complexity and it just doesn't have to be that way. You really can treat it almost the same as shooting CineV if you do a batch copy/paste or adjustment layer of a LUT filter, especially if you monitor with that same LUT. You're essentially adding 30 seconds to your post workflow and using a "preset", except you can change the preset in post and/or have way more grading flexibility if you choose to. Or, just don't choose to.

I think with RAW and LOG workflows this is going to get increasingly easier as software and hardware builds more features in intuitively. How long will it really be until Premiere recognizes metadata tags from a camera clip and can be set to auto-apply LUTs or preset RAW grades right on ingest, or in an easy flick of a switch on a per clip or per project basis, etc?
Click to expand...

I understand V-LOG just adds more DR, not more bitrates. Kind of like an electronic "cheat" to add more DR to a video image (believe me I'm grateful for the technology). But can't I also get by without V-LOG with a carefully, well lit scene at a high bitrate and minimal color correction/grading if I so choose?
 
V-LOG is a way to get the most out of the sensor in the camera. To do this you have to capture images in a sort of awkward way compared to normal profile shooting. Another thing that you can achieve with V-LOG is more accurate colors. The LUTs you use can be created to be better than the profiles in the camera. Those are the benefits - DR and more accurate color but at the expense of awkward monitoring and learning to maybe overexpose in certain circumstances. Plus more time in post.
 
Don’t forget you are using a limited version of Vlog (Vlog-L). Caps out at 75-79 IRE which makes it harder to expose. When shooting on a GH5 I always use the built in waveform to help expose my subject properly it also helps to see the image outputted to a decent monitor (on camera or production monitor). I often change my exposure settings once I look at it on another display with the standard Panasonic LUT applied.
 
Bassman2003 said:
V-LOG is a way to get the most out of the sensor in the camera. To do this you have to capture images in a sort of awkward way compared to normal profile shooting. Another thing that you can achieve with V-LOG is more accurate colors. The LUTs you use can be created to be better than the profiles in the camera. Those are the benefits - DR and more accurate color but at the expense of awkward monitoring and learning to maybe overexpose in certain circumstances. Plus more time in post.
Click to expand...

I hesitate to stray from my tried-and-true on set monitoring to which I've grown accustomed. I don't trust myself enough in post to use V-Log L. The other day I experimented with the V-Log L I shot and literally agonized myself to death tweaking it in post, wondering if my non-calibrated monitor was giving me a close representation of how it will look on YOUTUBE, a TV or the big screen. This is insane!
 
soarprod said:
Don’t forget you are using a limited version of Vlog (Vlog-L). Caps out at 75-79 IRE which makes it harder to expose. When shooting on a GH5 I always use the built in waveform to help expose my subject properly it also helps to see the image outputted to a decent monitor (on camera or production monitor). I often change my exposure settings once I look at it on another display with the standard Panasonic LUT applied.
Click to expand...

I discovered when using V-Log L my waveform maxes out at 80% and I kept the highlights just at 80%, thinking that is what I am supposed to do. It's a scary thing not trusting new technology when it takes u away from what you are accustomed to using. I need to just keep using V-Log L until I develop the confidence to trust what I am seeing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top