eric geurts lakin
Active member
Actually I've just realized that DENWA posted a message on how to check the back-focus earlier on in this thread, so I'll follow his instructions.
My 150 recordings when viewed on a full screen are soft and lacking in sharpness!
- Thread starter eric geurts lakin
- Start date
Actually I've just realized that DENWA posted a message on how to check the back-focus earlier on in this thread, so I'll follow his instructions.
That's a good place to start--make sure your cam is focusing correctly.
But I cannot overstate the value of having a good way to monitor your cam's output so you know what you've got. For me, investing in that Panasonic plasma with the built-in card reader really went a long way in helping me verify what I was actually capturing. Helps you to really appreciate what that cam can do.
After a shoot, I start my post work by first plugging in my chips to the 50" plasma and looking at it with a critical eye. I judge the quality of my finished productions on it as well.
But I cannot overstate the value of having a good way to monitor your cam's output so you know what you've got. For me, investing in that Panasonic plasma with the built-in card reader really went a long way in helping me verify what I was actually capturing. Helps you to really appreciate what that cam can do.
After a shoot, I start my post work by first plugging in my chips to the 50" plasma and looking at it with a critical eye. I judge the quality of my finished productions on it as well.
eric geurts lakin
Active member
Yes...I quite agree with you. I shall certainly look into getting a better monitor. Thank you.
I also find my footage to be a bit soft on the computer monitor when looking at it fullscreen. But if I play the same file on my TV (panasonic HDTV that supports AVCHD files) it looks twice as good as it does on the computer. Also, a lot less noise on the TV than on the computer.
Barry had this theory when talking about AF100 footage (both the HMC and AF use same type of codec and so on) that a computer seems to compress the AVCHD file so it can play it more smooth. While the TV plays the clip properly and shows it for what it really is.
In my scene files, I turn down detail and v detail to - 2, after some testing I saw a big difference in noise (much less of it) and almost no sharpness was lost, anything below that and you would notice that the image got a bit more soft. So even with this setting, I find it quite sharp. Try to have the camera around f 5.6, this is where the lens works the best with this camera.
Barry had this theory when talking about AF100 footage (both the HMC and AF use same type of codec and so on) that a computer seems to compress the AVCHD file so it can play it more smooth. While the TV plays the clip properly and shows it for what it really is.
In my scene files, I turn down detail and v detail to - 2, after some testing I saw a big difference in noise (much less of it) and almost no sharpness was lost, anything below that and you would notice that the image got a bit more soft. So even with this setting, I find it quite sharp. Try to have the camera around f 5.6, this is where the lens works the best with this camera.
eric geurts lakin
Active member
Thats excellent to hear!... I've also just tried some scene files with your detail and v detail recommendations and there was certainly less noise! (especially with the cine-d gamma)
Thank you for that Admir.
I'm just glad to help you out =).
Also remember, video nor pictures are made to be studied or looked at that near. Move away a bit from the screen when judging your footage, at least 1.5-2 meters.
Beofre I used different scene files depending on what and where I was shooting. One scene file for my 35mm adapter, one without, and one in low light situations.
Now I use only one, it gives the best dynamic range, low noise, and a lot of space to play with the colors in post (if you want your image just the way it is in the cam just change from Cine D to Cine V.
My scene file:
Detail: -2
V Detail: -2
Detail Coring: +2 (to hide some noise, any more on the plus side and you will start to lose detail)
Master ped: +3
Cine D gamma
HD Norm 2 Matrix
I would not use the Cine Like marix, it is really noisy, and represents "cinelike" picture really bad since "cinelike" is many times achieved by lowering the saturation and not increasing it. Also, it can make it more difficult to work with in post with CC.
eric geurts lakin
Active member
Since I started the original thread (above) I have tested the back-focus, and this appears to be okay. I have also been advised to use a better monitor and to reduce my detail levels. I am now not so concerned about the "softness" issue, ironically enough, my videos are now even "softer" (be they at full zoom or extreme wide angle) but thats okay! because they display much less noise now, and if I want more detail, then I simply increase it in post. I can also use my favourite gamma "cine-d" more often now then before (because of less noise) So I'm really grateful to all you people out there for being so helpfull with your suggestions. Thank you very much!
Well it might be different for others, but for me and my crew it's like that =). One thing that is a fact is that CineLike matrix will give you more noise, that's a fact. We find the CC a bit more difficult sometimes because of the extra colors that matrix gives. It dosen't give much space to play with since all the colors gets much more present.
I think I am going to do some playing around with the matrixes on some test footage. Like I said, I like what I have been getting but sometimes we get stuck on what has been working and it has been a while since I played around with the matrix settings. What made you pick HD Norm2?
Yea it's really easy to just get stuck with one thing and go with it while you really miss out on some really cool things your camera can do, belive me I know...
I went with HDNORM 2 because I found the HDNORM 1 a fringe warmer in the colors than the HDNORM 2. Also, the NORM2 gave me a bit deeper black. If you study it closely, you'll see that the NORM1 tends to go a bit more red-ish. Since my scenefile is all about keeping noise down, and leaving as much room as possible in post with CC, NORM2 was the one for me.
I also belive that NORM2 is recomended for PAL countries (Sweden is one of them), and NTSC should go with NORM1 accordingly to Panny.
I went with HDNORM 2 because I found the HDNORM 1 a fringe warmer in the colors than the HDNORM 2. Also, the NORM2 gave me a bit deeper black. If you study it closely, you'll see that the NORM1 tends to go a bit more red-ish. Since my scenefile is all about keeping noise down, and leaving as much room as possible in post with CC, NORM2 was the one for me.
I also belive that NORM2 is recomended for PAL countries (Sweden is one of them), and NTSC should go with NORM1 accordingly to Panny.
SPrimeau
Well-known member
Don't you have the 3 years extended AVCHD warranty? It is when you go on the P2 asset website and register the HMC.
The test should be done with the camera connected via HDMI on an HD TV.
You zoom in fully, adjust the focus, then slowly zoom out with the iris wide open.
eric geurts lakin
Active member
Yes I have in fact tested the camera and it seems okay to me. I've read all the replies and good advice sent in to this thread...and so now I'm really quite happy with my 150.
eric geurts lakin
Active member
Thank you very much.
HiI have had the same concerns about sharpness etc but a few Days ago I tried to play some footage (720 50p) I had just sharpened very little in post. I had used the "spark" scenefile (nr 3 default scenefile) and while filming used the waveform monitor heavily to be sure light and colour was ok. Played it at my Dell 27" monitor and it looked ok, but then I tried to watch it on a Sony Bravia 42" tv and it looked just so nice!!! At 2.5-3 meters distance it looked sharp and crisp and the colours I had turned a bit down using Looks was looking so Pro. Wauv. So it seems that one have to watch final Productions on a 42" plasma/LCD tv to get a real feelings of what this camera is capable of? I still haven't bought a 42" myself - thoughed the pc monitor would be enough, but I must say it really impressed me how much better it looked at a dedicated television and*at a distance. I keep getting excited about this camera even after I have been using it for over two years now.
Morten
Morten
Last edited:
Keep in mind a lot of Plasma/LCD TV's default to "torch" mode so they look so bright and colorful in the store. Not all of them seem to have a quality HDMI input either.
When I first got my cam in fall of 09 I hooked it directly to a 46" Sharp Aquos via HDMI and I was disapointed to say the least. I then tried component input and it looked great.
When I first got my cam in fall of 09 I hooked it directly to a 46" Sharp Aquos via HDMI and I was disapointed to say the least. I then tried component input and it looked great.
eric geurts lakin
Active member
Well actually...since I posted the above quote, I'm not so sure that I'm altogether happy with the hmc 150 afterall, because I recently purchased a Canon 550d (and there is nothing about this camera that is in anyway better then the hmc 150) except for one little thing! and that is... when I set up both the cameras to record identical scenes etc, the 150 will always display some sort of noise, but the Canon has no noise present at all! and the picture is also sharper. So I'm really confused as to why this is the case. Maybe the AF 100 is the way to go?
Hi
What kind of noise do you see?
The HMC 150 is capable of producing quite a lot of noise, but that is almost everytime because of too low light and too much gain. If I record in studio enviroment I use plenty of light - i allways uses 1 x 1200 W for front light and 2 x 500 W for backlight and then 2 x 1200 for front side lights. That gives me the abillity to go to LOW gain and only use ND filters and iris to get the best light/colour. I use the waveform monitor to make sure light is right and the picture is well exposed: the waves should be filling up the waveform and npot have too much in top og bottom. I also use Zebras to be sure the light will not burn through - just keeping it at 100% at keep an eye on it - I like the picture with no zebras at all - others like a bit of zebras and maybee sets it to 110%.
Use the ND filters - if the light is too low, try to get some more light (using lamps or wait for the sun to get up ;-) or use the ND filters and the Iris at start - first use the gain if ND and iris is not enough to get the picture well exposed. But if you use the gain expect some noise. You can also get rid of some of the noise by using Barrys low noise scenefile. But I do not experience so much noise anymore after following the rules I´ve just mentioned. Try it out and see for your self. And try 720 50/60P instead of 1080 25P - it looks more clean to me - at least in some cases. And still looks great on a 42" if you have folllowed some basic rules and made it look the best in post.
I know there are a lot of new cameras with better specs in many ways - and SLRs with great DOF etc. but they lack other features that the HMC 150 has onboard - like vectorscope, XLR inputs, waveform monitor etc. And remember - the corny, noisy, film-look is still quite popular as well. If the GH2 was able to film 1080 50P I would by one - its vheap and the video looks great - but I would still keep my HMC 151 for more seriuos stuff. If you don´t like the HMC 150/151 after all - wait for the new Pannys in the fall - they look like HMC 150 without noise and better res to me! I ´ll sure be checking them out when they come soon.
I´m not an expert, but I bet you will be happy witht he HMC 150 when you learn to use it. It just takes some time and practice as so many other things in life. The more you try and practice - trying different settings, scenefiles, light-situations etc. the better you will get. Write your settings down or say it loud and record it as you go, so you can see for your self afterwards. Comparing wich settings that works for you and wich does not. By the way - you can do a lot of things in post as well - using Looks for fancy coloureffects, vignettes etc. and neat video noise reduction for eliminating noise etc.
Happy filming!
Morten
Last edited: