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

filmguy123 said:
Yes but what's the point?
Click to expand...

Taking advantage of Panasonic's normal color gamut in HD with a high bitrate, knowing exactly what I'm getting, as opposed to squeezing out two more stops of dynamic range in V-Log L with all of the hand wringing that goes along with it. Kinda sucks being a V-Log L neophyte. None of the big boys wanna hang out with me :-(
 
Hugh DiMauro said:
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.
Click to expand...

I understand the hesitation to move away from something one is accustomed to. I wouldn't do this on something mission critical. Maybe just set aside a day, some day when you have time, to commit to experimenting. TBH it's not that hard, it's just a matter of taking a smidge of time to experiment and read a little. The juice is worth the squeeze - I can't image not shooting in LOG modes in 2019, *that* seems insane to me!

The easier way to get started:

Get Leeming LUT
Install the monitoring LUT on your GH5 monitor and/or external monitor, for WYSIWYG monitoring (What you see is what you get)
Import Premiere. Use adjustment layer with Leeming LUT applied.
It looks just like you saw on your monitor.
End of story.

Now, play around with a couple different luts. See what the footage likes when you disable the monitoring LUT and reenable the monitoring LUT. How the zebras and exposure respond. Try under and over exposing. Try a couple of different LUTs out. Read a Barry Green article on vlog. Shoot a couple CineD / CineV vs the same shot on Leeming LUT / LOG tests.

All of this could be done in an afternoon.

Sure, you have to get a little "uncomfortable" learning something new but that isn't that also par for the course in this industry? It's uncomfortbale to switch any piece of camera, gear, software, workflow. We do so when the benefits of doing such outweigh whatever the learning curve here is.

IMO, the learning curve to make LOG footage match your flexibility with non LOG footage is very low. The benefits are very high.

BEYOND THAT - you open a door to a steeper learning curve where the rabbit hole goes endlessly deep on how advanced you want to get with grading. But you don't need to touch that to already be better off that a preset profile, and you can dabble into certain topics on an as needed basis. You don't need to understand everything about electricity to reap the benefits of flipping on the lights.
 
Hugh DiMauro said:
Taking advantage of Panasonic's normal color gamut in HD with a high bitrate, knowing exactly what I'm getting, as opposed to squeezing out two more stops of dynamic range in V-Log L with all of the hand wringing that goes along with it.
Click to expand...

Some people like to make Vlog sound harder than it is. The best way to learn is just do. See above post, just go play for a day.

With a monitoring LUT you still know exactly what you're getting. A two stop increase is MASSIVE, you've seen the curves right? For example, if you get 1024 brightness values and you have 2 stops more than that... that's 2048 values at +1 stop, 4,096 values at +2 stops... it's literally 4 times the brightness range. That's not squeezing out a couple more drops, that's completely changing the game on how much range is being captured.

I don't know what you mean by hand wringing, unless you aren't doing it right. You're using a good monitoring LUT and matching that to the LUT you use in post? That literally does all of the work for you.
 
filmguy123 said:
I understand the hesitation to move away from something one is accustomed to. I wouldn't do this on something mission critical. Maybe just set aside a day, some day when you have time, to commit to experimenting. TBH it's not that hard, it's just a matter of taking a smidge of time to experiment and read a little. The juice is worth the squeeze - I can't image not shooting in LOG modes in 2019, *that* seems insane to me!

The easier way to get started:

Get Leeming LUT
Install the monitoring LUT on your GH5 monitor and/or external monitor, for WYSIWYG monitoring (What you see is what you get)
Import Premiere. Use adjustment layer with Leeming LUT applied.
It looks just like you saw on your monitor.
End of story.

Now, play around with a couple different luts. See what the footage likes when you disable the monitoring LUT and reenable the monitoring LUT. How the zebras and exposure respond. Try under and over exposing. Try a couple of different LUTs out. Read a Barry Green article on vlog. Shoot a couple CineD / CineV vs the same shot on Leeming LUT / LOG tests.

All of this could be done in an afternoon.

Sure, you have to get a little "uncomfortable" learning something new but that isn't that also par for the course in this industry? It's uncomfortbale to switch any piece of camera, gear, software, workflow. We do so when the benefits of doing such outweigh whatever the learning curve here is.

IMO, the learning curve to make LOG footage match your flexibility with non LOG footage is very low. The benefits are very high.

BEYOND THAT - you open a door to a steeper learning curve where the rabbit hole goes endlessly deep on how advanced you want to get with grading. But you don't need to touch that to already be better off that a preset profile, and you can dabble into certain topics on an as needed basis. You don't need to understand everything about electricity to reap the benefits of flipping on the lights.
Click to expand...

Let me see if I get this: Using an in-camera LUT helps me see the footage normally, but is it also burned in so that's what it looks like when I import it into Premiere? OR, need I import the same LUT into Premiere, apply it and I'm done? Can it actually be that easy? No tweaking?
 
Yes, it can be that easy but it needs to be the correct LUT(s).

I have been applying all kinds of LUTs to all kinds of footage for 5+ years, and I'm 99% there with my final products (only do minor tweaks for difficult lighting or human error).

And no camera burns in a LUT into the image besides a few (the GH5 is not one of them).

Most people/productions use LUTs on an external monitor (or built-in assisting looks/LUTs in the camera) to help see what a final picture may look like, but the footage that is imported is flat.
 
filmguy123 said:
Some people like to make Vlog sound harder than it is. The best way to learn is just do. See above post, just go play for a day.

With a monitoring LUT you still know exactly what you're getting. A two stop increase is MASSIVE, you've seen the curves right? For example, if you get 1024 brightness values and you have 2 stops more than that... that's 2048 values at +1 stop, 4,096 values at +2 stops... it's literally 4 times the brightness range. That's not squeezing out a couple more drops, that's completely changing the game on how much range is being captured.

I don't know what you mean by hand wringing, unless you aren't doing it right. You're using a good monitoring LUT and matching that to the LUT you use in post? That literally does all of the work for you.
Click to expand...

My God! I think I get it now. Did you know the GH5 automatically applies any installed LUTS to a connected monitor (through a menu setting), negating the need to install the LUT on the monitor itself? And this same LUT you speak of can be installed on Premiere? Apply it to clip and VOILA! It looks like what I saw on my on set monitor? Is that it?
 
NorBro said:
Yes, it can be that easy but it needs to be the correct LUT(s).

I have been applying all kinds of LUTs to all kinds of footage for 5+ years, and I'm 99% there with my final products (only do minor tweaks for difficult lighting or human error).

And no camera burns in a LUT into the image besides a few (the GH5 is not one of them).

Most people/productions use LUTs on an external monitor (or built-in assisting looks/LUTs in the camera) to help see what a final picture may look like, but the footage that is imported is flat.
Click to expand...

Is that "Leeming" LUT FilmGuy spoke of a good one to buy then?
 
OH, did I forget to say I also own an Atomos Ninja Inferno? (You're either all rolling your eyes now or laughing your arses off). I believe the Inferno has internal tweaking... Go easy on me, gents.
 
It is a popular one (Leeming). If no one else mentioned it earlier, download Resolve (free) and YouTube how to apply LUTs to your clips inside that software. They provide you a bunch of built-in ones and you'll be able to see how they affect your clips and you may start to understand a bit better.

Unfortunately now everyone is selling their own LUT so it's difficult to know what's good, but there are also packs out there that may provide you 200-300 (different cameras) that you can try as well.

I never follow the rules and will easily use an Olympus LUT on a RED camera (just trying to make a point) if it looks good.

The best part is experimenting (which is when you really learn) and Resolve is one of the only free ways you can do that besides other built-in NLE LUTs.
 
You can burn in LUTs with the Inferno. Now that's where it gets really complicated!

(And it's something I do myself because it can be amazing if you're sure that's the look you're going with.)
 
After a year with V-LOG I think it is good but not that good. It does not give you an obvious 2 stops better looking footage imho nor is the monitoring the same on my external monitor compared to a normal profile. I have learned to work with it but it is not perfect. With 10bit nice bitrate footage you have some room to push and pull in post anyway which can make up a lot of the difference between profiles and LOG footage. I can shoot the same seen in "Natural" and in V-LOG and get the same end look, but the V-LOG colors are a bit more accurate from the LUT used.

All this to say, if you have reservations or are happy with your current footage don't sweat it. Just pick it up little by little and see if it helps your workflow.
 
Yes Hugh, your lightbulb moment is basically it. Use a monitoring LUT, apply a LUT via adjustment layer or copy paste in Premiere. Done. Easy. Boom.

Obviously there's always a little more to it... and others have pointed out some things that I recommend pausing your brain on, and just going and do ^^ that first.

My 2 cents don't worry about Resolve yet IMO because it's just one more thing to learn. Lots of people like it. It's a great tool. It's nothing scary. But in no way is it needed or required, its just one more thing to learn. Pause here.

It won't burn it in if its a monitoring LUT. They call it that because you're monitoring. Yes, some pieces of gear have options to burn in the LUT. It's an option. Don't use it :)

As far as Bassman / WWJDs comments, I'd push forward on LOG. There's a reason so many pros use it, and use it only. Really, it's easy. And it's worth it. No, you won't always get an obvious 2 stop advantage. That's not how DR works. You're displaying your footage on limited DR monitors. Most TVs and monitors do about 8 stops. Most cinema cameras do about 14 stops. It's all about mapping the DR after you shoot. You can use a Lumetri color mask with feathering to pull out more range on a clip. But that's the next step. Pause here. It's super cool. Don't worry about it yet.

Even if you do none of this, and just use the monitoring LUT and premiere LUT, you're still better off in captured range and post grading options. You can save a shot better if you need to. You have an infinite pallete post shoot to redo all colors and everything without any look baked in. Even in shots without more DR immediately noticeable, the gradations between brightness can look smoother. IMO, it's so easy to do, it would be foolish in 2019 to being baking in a look that you can't change later, when all you have to do is use a LUT in post and monitoring LUT and work basically as always, but get better iQ and a robust "insurance policy" on all your shots.

The other thing I'll add is, I'm glad for your excitement. It also reveals you're talking about how hard it is without having done any reading or tutorials ;) I'm not criticizing that, you are just asking questions, rather I am encouraging you. Everything seems hard when no one has explained it to you. Of course you feel overwhelmed! Why don't you read something from Barry Green on working with LOG footage, read the manual on the GHx vlog, watch a youtube video on it. Be careful on Youtube, lots of misinformation.

And then most importantly, just take a few hours to go PLAY and experiment. Be excited about it. Don't treat it as a to do list. Treat it as a free, massive camera upgrade and all you have to do is pay with a couple of fun hours of playing with stuff.

Honestly, it's really easy. And the benefits are there even if you only use it to 10% of it's potential.
 
You may also want to try HLG available on both the GH5 and GH5S which ( depending on who one believes ) has about 1/2 stop wider dynamic range than V-Log. Will play out directly to HDR TV's with no grading that accept HLG. There are also several LUT's for HLG too.
 
Bassman2003 said:
After a year with V-LOG I think it is good but not that good. It does not give you an obvious 2 stops better looking footage imho nor is the monitoring the same on my external monitor compared to a normal profile. I have learned to work with it but it is not perfect. With 10bit nice bitrate footage you have some room to push and pull in post anyway which can make up a lot of the difference between profiles and LOG footage. I can shoot the same seen in "Natural" and in V-LOG and get the same end look, but the V-LOG colors are a bit more accurate from the LUT used.

All this to say, if you have reservations or are happy with your current footage don't sweat it. Just pick it up little by little and see if it helps your workflow.
Click to expand...

Never used natural. Always stuck with Cinlike D. Would natural be the best way to go to get the cleanest most natural image possible if I decided to take that route and gently tweak in post if it needed post manipulation?
 
filmguy123 said:
Yes Hugh, your lightbulb moment is basically it. Use a monitoring LUT, apply a LUT via adjustment layer or copy paste in Premiere. Done. Easy. Boom.

Obviously there's always a little more to it... and others have pointed out some things that I recommend pausing your brain on, and just going and do ^^ that first.

My 2 cents don't worry about Resolve yet IMO because it's just one more thing to learn. Lots of people like it. It's a great tool. It's nothing scary. But in no way is it needed or required, its just one more thing to learn. Pause here.

It won't burn it in if its a monitoring LUT. They call it that because you're monitoring. Yes, some pieces of gear have options to burn in the LUT. It's an option. Don't use it :)

As far as Bassman / WWJDs comments, I'd push forward on LOG. There's a reason so many pros use it, and use it only. Really, it's easy. And it's worth it. No, you won't always get an obvious 2 stop advantage. That's not how DR works. You're displaying your footage on limited DR monitors. Most TVs and monitors do about 8 stops. Most cinema cameras do about 14 stops. It's all about mapping the DR after you shoot. You can use a Lumetri color mask with feathering to pull out more range on a clip. But that's the next step. Pause here. It's super cool. Don't worry about it yet.

Even if you do none of this, and just use the monitoring LUT and premiere LUT, you're still better off in captured range and post grading options. You can save a shot better if you need to. You have an infinite pallete post shoot to redo all colors and everything without any look baked in. Even in shots without more DR immediately noticeable, the gradations between brightness can look smoother. IMO, it's so easy to do, it would be foolish in 2019 to being baking in a look that you can't change later, when all you have to do is use a LUT in post and monitoring LUT and work basically as always, but get better iQ and a robust "insurance policy" on all your shots.

The other thing I'll add is, I'm glad for your excitement. It also reveals you're talking about how hard it is without having done any reading or tutorials ;) I'm not criticizing that, you are just asking questions, rather I am encouraging you. Everything seems hard when no one has explained it to you. Of course you feel overwhelmed! Why don't you read something from Barry Green on working with LOG footage, read the manual on the GHx vlog, watch a youtube video on it. Be careful on Youtube, lots of misinformation.

And then most importantly, just take a few hours to go PLAY and experiment. Be excited about it. Don't treat it as a to do list. Treat it as a free, massive camera upgrade and all you have to do is pay with a couple of fun hours of playing with stuff.

Honestly, it's really easy. And the benefits are there even if you only use it to 10% of it's potential.
Click to expand...

Thanks to all for your encouragement and pushing me in this direction. I have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by trying all of this out on a wide dynamic range scene in my home. I guess I never trusted my own eye when it came to grading but, then again, it's all a personal preference, right? Who knows, I may stumble on what Conrad Hall called a "happy accident!" I will monkey around with V-Log, natural and Cinelike D and form my own conclusion. I will be happy to share my findings with all of you professional comrades out there! I'll be the first to embrace the hell out of it if I actually get it right. I'm that guy who gets it then runs outside in his underwear, screaming at the top of his lungs, trying to to tell everybody how great I am figuring out V-LOG!

One other thing: if I don't have a pre-installed LUT in Premiere, what would be the best color correction menu item to manually tweak the image? Fast color corrector?
 
Last edited:
Ron Evans said:
You may also want to try HLG available on both the GH5 and GH5S which ( depending on who one believes ) has about 1/2 stop wider dynamic range than V-Log. Will play out directly to HDR TV's with no grading that accept HLG. There are also several LUT's for HLG too.
Click to expand...

I read up on this but I was under the impression you need an HDR TV to see the image properly. I will experiment with that too. I believe HLG (HDR) shows a "normal" image in the viewfinder?
 
HLG is also a LOG curve generated by BBC and NHK so that they can transmit files that SDR and HDR can see acceptably. Can think of it as an extended Rec709.
 
Hugh DiMauro said:
if I don't have a pre-installed LUT in Premiere, what would be the best color correction menu item to manually tweak the image? Fast color corrector?
Click to expand...

You will fail - just get the LUT. Most here, self included, will recommend Leeming LUT. Worth it. Cheap. Good. Walks you through everything too in the PDF.

Alternatively, you can get the official Panasonic LUTs. Why not start there? But I will say, I've had a better experience, better image, better results, and more guidance with the Leeming LUT. It's really not that much.
 
There was mention previously of needing a calibrated monitor. Not really.

Your audience is unlikely to have a calibrated monitor.

Best is to look at your work on 2 or 3 consumer devices and get a 'feel' for your grading - learning to make an image look OK on those multiple devices.

I have an Imac with a crappy dell monitor attached - I look the image on both and grade for a midpoint.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top