NX1 Video Settings Test Results (4k)

caseywilsondp

caseywilsondp

Well-known member
so I just uploaded a bunch of stills over at eoshd with some screen grabs of my recent test to find the best settings to shoot with on this camera. for me, when i say that, i mean what will give me the best workable image in post? on the a7s that meant slog2/sgamut even though many other people HATED that combo because it was difficult, it undeniably gave the most information to work with for coloring in post.
first i tried a very flat profile of gamma dr, saturation -4, contrast -10, master black level +10 and luminence 16-235. this produced a very flat image that had a TON of latitude (much more than i was expecting). but it also produced very unsightly and prominent banding.

NX1_Color_Test2.jpgNX1_Color_Test1.jpg
you can see a ton of detail from the bulb itself, to the statues on the chair, all in a range that appears to be usable in post. but when you look at the graded version, the banding is very obvious.

so then i tried 11 different combinations of settings, and hopefully one will prove to be the 'best'

here is a link to all the images and their uncompressed tiffs for you to play around with:

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/18661-your-ideal-nx1-settings/?do=findComment&comment=128471

i thought i'd post this here in case anyone on these forums aren't also over on eoshd
 
Thanks Casey.

Recently got an NX1 but have not yet really dived into how I want to acquire with it yet.... I am VERY spoiled on RAW these days.

Curiously, I DON'T really get banding on my old GH2 even though I shoot it incredibly flat and MUST push it a lot in post. But then I am using a 150mbps hack. Codecs are neat-o and all that, but there's no substitute for DATA RATE...
 
I'm on a phone right now. I'll take a look, but I would also appreciate your own thoughts after working with the source files on a decent monitor.

I would also be interested in how these results might apply to the NX500?

I bought one to test out about a month ago, but I have only really used it for stills so far. I understand that it is the same sensor, but the 4k readout is from a more limited crop of the sensor? And I think it doesn't have all of the same video settings, though maybe it has the same profiles available?

Thanks! I appreciate the sharing.
 
DPStewart said:
Thanks Casey.

Recently got an NX1 but have not yet really dived into how I want to acquire with it yet.... I am VERY spoiled on RAW these days.

Curiously, I DON'T really get banding on my old GH2 even though I shoot it incredibly flat and MUST push it a lot in post. But then I am using a 150mbps hack. Codecs are neat-o and all that, but there's no substitute for DATA RATE...
Click to expand...

You're right, data rate would be the most beneficial thing we could likely change with this camera (doubt we could get it to record to a different codec with higher bit depth or color space), but i think there is a small amount of hope to get the camera to record at least 100mbps vs the 80 it currently does. that could definitely help with how quickly things fall apart in the flat look.
BTW that flat look is just fine for things without gradients in them, and super useful for high contrast scenes like this:
NX1_CineAlta_Test.288.Still001.jpg
(it might not seem high contrast now, but to keep the sunset and snow from blowing out her face was very shadowy in the original acquisition).


unadog said:
I'm on a phone right now. I'll take a look, but I would also appreciate your own thoughts after working with the source files on a decent monitor.

I would also be interested in how these results might apply to the NX500?

I bought one to test out about a month ago, but I have only really used it for stills so far. I understand that it is the same sensor, but the 4k readout is from a more limited crop of the sensor? And I think it doesn't have all of the same video settings, though maybe it has the same profiles available?

Thanks! I appreciate the sharing.
Click to expand...

lucky for you there are people already hacking the nx500, hopefully that gets transferred to us nx1 guys one day!
these tests are probably useful to you as the codec is (from what i know) essentially the same, from the same sensor.
i'll try and update this forum with anything useful that gets posted on eoshd.
 
The NX1 footage is 8-bit. The whole "Flat profile" craze could bite you in the rear pretty quickly. My opinion is get as close to your final look as possible on set if you're charging someone for the footage.

Master ped in 8 bit is risky too - it's not adding any light to the shadows. I've been fine with +2 or 3 and the DR profile. It's been "just right" for me. The DR profile really seems as flat as I feel safe with for 8 bit.

Before & after, nothing very drastic. Nikkor 85mm.

frame.jpg
 
@caseywilsondp, does this really look better to you than what you were getting out of the A7s? I realize that these are just quick tests but it looks to me like there is something weird going on with the skin, kind of reminiscent of that auto-smoothing skin glitch that some of the Sony cameras have in video mode.
 
Michael Carter said:
The NX1 footage is 8-bit. The whole "Flat profile" craze could bite you in the rear pretty quickly. My opinion is get as close to your final look as possible on set if you're charging someone for the footage.

Master ped in 8 bit is risky too - it's not adding any light to the shadows. I've been fine with +2 or 3 and the DR profile. It's been "just right" for me. The DR profile really seems as flat as I feel safe with for 8 bit.

Before & after, nothing very drastic. Nikkor 85mm.
Click to expand...


It depends on the quality of the "8-bits" still.
Here is an example of what I would typically get from my GH2's. I have almost never had any banding problems at all - but again, this is 1080p all I-frames at 150mbps bit-rate. Few DSLRs can record that much data, and I assure you - it makes a huge difference.
Flat as acquired on top and my typical grade below.

GH2 Flat and Graded.jpg
 
Last edited:
QuickHitRecord said:
@caseywilsondp, does this really look better to you than what you were getting out of the A7s? I realize that these are just quick tests but it looks to me like there is something weird going on with the skin, kind of reminiscent of that auto-smoothing skin glitch that some of the Sony cameras have in video mode.
Click to expand...

definitely not better than what I was getting out of the a7s. BUT, to be fair, I did a lot of testing on that camera before I started getting results I really liked, so this seems like my due diligence for this camera. Let me be clear though, I do not think the nx1 is capable of as much latitude as the a7s, however in my short testing, shadow detail, color and sharpness are a little better. That should be fairly obvious though as its 6k supersampled to 4k, not so unlike the F65 supersampling an 8k sensor for one of the best 4k images available (imho). the skin smoothing on the actor is definitely the aggressive de-noising i did, to attempt to get rid of banding. if you look at the other tests (which honestly I should have posted here, but I thought because eoshd has a bigger following for nx1 that it would be more appropriate there... but i definitely like this forum better, but i digress) you'll see the skin smoothing isn't much and could probably be attributed to the filter i shoot with, if anything.

DPStewart said:
BTW - frikkin' lovey our work Casey. Bangin' stuff.
Click to expand...

You are too generous amigo. I really wish the nx1 had a hack to allow a higher mbps, I really think that could help it along.

I'm not certain yet, but after going over every clip the best quality (least banding and blocking) is somehow in the "normal" gamma with no adjustments. I can flatten it out in post and get about 1 stop away from the highlight detail that the ultra flat image had, and about another stop away from the shadow detail it had. Today I'm going to hopefully try and shoot one more test in "normal" and see if I can find some settings that would allow me to get those extra 2 stops back AND keep banding from occurring. Banding isn't the worst thing in the world, and it certainly isn't an issue in every scene, but if it's the difference between 12 and 11 stops, where 11 would pretty much never band, I could live with that.
 
I haven't used it for an edit yet, but playing around with Invisible Chainsaw's Variable Diffusion plugin, which looks like a nice tool for the NX1; does a good job emulating specific filters (black ProMist and so on), you can tweak or create your own, and has skin tone detection and tweaking - even a "remove shine from skin" tool. Kind of a massive plugin when you dig into it, but being able to say, track a subject's eyes and mask out the diffusion is something I'll play with more. Using diffusion for corporate gigs scares me - you can't take it back off - but for the $$ it's looking like a slick addition to the toolbox.

That sensor is capable of really impressive detail. Did some stuff with an old push-pull 80-200 2.8 Nikkor @ 200mm, wide open, and it was crazy-lovely. Just-right detail where I wanted it, and really luscious backgrounds.

I can't wait to do a green screen project with this thing. May be a disappointment but I suspect it will be really kickass for a $1k body.

Got an adapter for my 1960's era Canon FL glass, too. Would be easy to build a set of primes if the look is cool. Old-school coatings but respectable sharpness. Just walking around the studio and yard, my initial impression was "hey - this is yummy". I only have a 50 and a 35, but - other than the 85mm and the 100, they're stupid-cheap lenses.

Amazing what a tiny flange distance plus an APS-C sensor opens up for lens choices… glassless adapters and infinity focus. Can't wait to stick a Helios 44 on it, too. Buying up all the adapters, chargers and batteries I imagine I'll need for a couple years.
 
Michael Carter said:
I can't wait to do a green screen project with this thing. May be a disappointment but I suspect it will be really kickass for a $1k body.

Got an adapter for my 1960's era Canon FL glass, too. Would be easy to build a set of primes if the look is cool. Old-school coatings but respectable sharpness. Just walking around the studio and yard, my initial impression was "hey - this is yummy". I only have a 50 and a 35, but - other than the 85mm and the 100, they're stupid-cheap lenses.
Click to expand...

my guess is with the right shooting profile, green screen will be just dandy. as for the vintage lenses, they're probably a great match with how sharp the image is already!
 
I tend to consider external recorders as sort of "two flavors" - the 1080 boxes and the 4k recorders.

With the new Video Assist, you get a lot of horsepower to get 1080 prores for under $500; I could see that being really handy when you hand-off footage or need to deliver an edit same day (it's rare for me, but I've shot things and done a quick edit to upload to the media on my laptop). The extra time to convert H265 could really hurt in those cases, and the camera's downconversion has been reviewed well.

The 4k recorders are what, $2k and up? (Haven't looked lately). Same deal as far as handing footage over on set - if the client wants 4K prores, it's gonna be pretty quick. I could potentially see it for motion graphics/keying if you wanted to eke every last bit of quality from a clip, or for a full day's shooting where conversion time to ProRes could be hours.

I could see, at some point, investing in a 4K unit, as shooting 4K has been a real game changer for me as a one-man interviewer. Punching in and still being crisp and gorgeous @ 1080 is really, really nice.

A lot of this is tempered for me by the fact that I really need a new computer - 2009 Mac Pro is brought to its knees by EditReady and 30gb of conversion can take an hour or more. Trying to decide on a config for a new box, and it will be a pricey move, going Thunderbolt for my raids and externals. I'll miss those 4 internal drive bays in the Mac Pro tower!
 
You can get hmdi 4k recorders for $1500... maybe even less now. I'll probably continue to use my shogun with the nx1 as it does clean up the shadows nicely and allows prores on the fly (actually thats not a benefit for me at all, on a decent pc h265 will run better), but a lot of editors prefer prores. I just don't think I'd really tell anyone it's a game changer for this particular camera.
 
caseywilsondp said:
...as for the vintage lenses, they're probably a great match with how sharp the image is already!
Click to expand...

Now that I have some hours on the NX1, it's kind of like I also got new lenses. My aperture-ring era nikkors that have been my go-to glass? Many of them I shot around F4 on 1080 sensors, seemed like eyes and hair really got nice and crisp at that point. I have an old push-pull 80-200 that's got mojo for days, but always felt too soft at 2.8. But on the NX1, shooting wide open is almost like having a different lens. Sharpness is still fantastic, but out of focus areas and overall contrast look just-right in many cases.

I did a lot of interviews the last 2 weeks and in many cases I had very little room to separate the subject from the background, shoots I'd usually be at F4, so I tried 2.8 and eyes and facial details were still really zing-pow-bam but I got the backgrounds less distracting. Really pretty looks. But when I'm one-man, I'm the eye-line too, have to sit there with a monitor in my lap set to 1:1 and peaking and glance down to check the eyes a lot. I really hate breaking eye contact in an interview - it just feels rude - but some subjects can get a little animated and F5.6 can really help.

The NX has also got me using the 28-70 2.8 vs. the 85 1.8 more often. The 85 has a real magic to it for faces, but I'm liking shooting a bit wider (70mm) and pushing in a bit in post. I can really kind of flow my interview edits and go tighter as statements get more punchy or emotional. (the 28-70 just looks so impressive when rigged all up, it's very cool when clients are like "that camera cost more than my house, right??) 70mm is also about right for having the camera next to me with a 12" focus whip hanging my way and a screen in my lap. I wish I could hire someone to just be an eye line - every interview question would be "Now tell my assistant how great this product is…"

frame-c.jpg
 
Thanks guys. NX1 is really a joy to use. Opening the footage after the transcode and… it's not insanely earth-shattering, but still, "damn, that detail!!" Even punched in, it just looks tits.

I think that shot was ISO 320, F2.8 with a quad biax, ripstop clipped to the doors. There was some window light just hitting the back of her hair (though kind of blue).

If you shoot uncontrolled stuff with the NX1, in my experience - the rendering of cyan-blue stuff is really poppy. I've dialed the blue down some on the DR profile. But… white balancing through an 82A filter (it's close to 1/4 CTB but a photo filter vs. a gel) ties in with that somehow and adds just a hint of warmth to "not the real sun" sources like LEDs, flos, etc. I now keep a 77mm from my old film days in the bag.

Try it sometime, it's one of those deals like adding some spice when you're cooking but not enough for someone to say "nutmeg??" but still works well. If I'd added 1/4 CTO to the light, you'd think daylight balance would render the same, but in my testing, WB though the filter is more subtle - nice for pale-skinned people, too. (I found I was warming footage up in post consistently and noticed the 82A sitting on my shelf…). All I did to the frame above was push the blacks up a hair with levels, not even a 3-way in the mix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top