I'm now a Panasonic convert...

Yeah, I agree with you. I misspoke or at least remembered my test incorrectly. When I commented, I thought I had lost much more detail in the black piece of furniture in the background. On review, it's not really crushed at all and the detail in that dark area is fine. The first one has grayer blacks for sure. I little flatter. It's all testing for me trying to get the best setup for different shoots. BTW, great good luck with your feature!
 
I see you set the Coring at -7. Barry seemed to like it set at +2. Which setting is going to give a softer image and less noise? I would assume the -7. What does a setting of +2 give you other than more noise? Or am I wrong?
 
D10S said:
I see you set the Coring at -7. Barry seemed to like it set at +2. Which setting is going to give a softer image and less noise? I would assume the -7. What does a setting of +2 give you other than more noise? Or am I wrong?
Click to expand...
-7 means a sharper image with more noise, +2 means a softer image with less noise.
 
That's so funny to me that even setting it at -7 I was getting very clean images. Granted, that required the proper light, but it's amazing that basically with no noise altering functions on, it was still that great.

Barry, is +2 your sweet spot where you don't see it causing any actual issues in the image or softening? +2 is your sweet spot? Why? Just curious. The settings in my post aren't perfect at all, and I still have plenty to learn here.
 
Nevermind, I understand now why I had it set to -7. A quote from Barry's book:

"Hand in hand with DETAIL LEVEL is DETAIL CORING. Coring is designed to suppress edge enhancement on noise...If the detail level is very low, then there won't be any edge enhancement happening on the noise, so there won't be anything for detail coring to do."

I remember now, that's why I had it off.
 
If you choose some of the more noiserfree matrixes and gammas like Cinelike V and Norm2/Fluo there's little need to juice up coring. When you start to aim for the noisefreest image, you'll run into banding. So I would keep some noise to make an overall great image.

Everytime I put clips from this camera onto my plasma screen it just looks gorgeous. My laptop screen is probably the worst screen ever when it comes to how footage looks (good resolution but poor contrast and such) but on a proper screen it's just wow!
 
Last edited:
editman said:
If you choose some of the more noiserfree matrixes and gammas like Cinelike V and Norm2/Fluo there's little need to juice up coring. When you start to aim for the noisefreest image, you'll run into banding. So I would keep some noise to make an overall great image.

Everytime I put clips from this camera onto my plasma screen it just looks gorgeous. My laptop screen is probably the worst screen ever when it comes to how footage looks (good resolution but poor contrast and such) but on a proper screen it's just wow!
Click to expand...

Hmm...I don't know I don't see banding really at all in my images. I really don't want to use Cine-V because it doesn't allow me use of Knee and according to Barry's book it and Cine-D are most likely to give you uneven handling of R-G-&B in any clipping that might occur. Also I totally agree that on a Plasma the camera looks amazing. I took shots that had noise in them on my computer (which didn't look so great) and played them back off the camera onto the Plasma and the noise was handled totally differently. It seems that any annoying blocking in the shadows especially gets hidden quite a bit by a properly calibrated TV. Gives me hope that when my footage looks a little too noisy it might be just fine all things considered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top