7D Picture setting better than superflat?

T

Thomas Lew

Well-known member
Has anybody found a picture setting better than the infamous superflat? Although it is certainly good, I feel it adds a little bit of an orange tint and I am convinced I can do better.

I guess the trick is finding out how to flatten the image without losing too much color or information that can't be gotten back in post.

:bath:
 
There is some good topics on here a good search would find. I think superflat is one of the worst picture styles out there. Personal opinion of course. Neutral is what I use for most of my work.
 
Certainly there are other posts, but none recent. I was wondering if anybody has found anything else that works well after the last months of shooting on the 7d.
 
Thomas Lew said:
Certainly there are other posts, but none recent. I was wondering if anybody has found anything else that works well after the last months of shooting on the 7d.
Click to expand...

hence a search.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=202853&highlight=picture+style
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=204973&highlight=picture+style

there is a couple to get you started. all I did was type "picture style 7d" in the search window. The guy who made superflat stated he thought neutral with everything turned down a few notches was better. I forget exactly what I shoot but just mess around with them and do some test and see what work best for you.
 
Thomas Lew said:
Has anybody found a picture setting better than the infamous superflat? Although it is certainly good, I feel it adds a little bit of an orange tint and I am convinced I can do better.

I guess the trick is finding out how to flatten the image without losing too much color or information that can't be gotten back in post.

:bath:
Click to expand...
Superflat is overkill unless you want to end up with a superflat image. I would stick to neutral and dial down contrast and color from there. Killing your color and contrast till gone just to bring it back to life in post makes little sense to me. Find a good middle ground somewhere to start with and you will have less artifacts later. Some people seem to think making everything superflat makes it look like film. It just looks like washed out film. I've been shooting film for years and always trying to capture true color and contrast from what's infront of the camera.
 
Last edited:
the only benefit you get when using super flat is that the curve on the mid/high section crushes your hilights a tad so you get apparent better dynamic range in the highlights, which is something I really like. Even though you bring the contrast back a little bit in post, i generally keep the highlights where they are and bring the blacks down a bit, so there is a gain to be had with superflat.

I did find it to be a little too much, so i created my own curve that is slightly less extreme than superflat and is a bit of an inverted S. Give it a try, it really helps.
 
IMHO I have found superflat to give an ugly peach cast over the image. I know it was meant to be adjusted in post in terms of color and contrast but I feel as a starting point this is not an ideal picture style. Even just going into the Picture Style Editor and adjusting the curve to give a more flat image I feel would give better results because I feel that "superflat" is very "overflat"...or "ugly flat". I feel it is better to have a good starting point with and image than one you're gonna really have to tweak out to get something good. Just my two cents.
 
I'm using Stu M's settings from his 5D on my 7D, sharpness all the way down, color down two from middle and contrast down all the way. This gives me a low contrast "negative" and preserves a lot of the highlight information. I'm also experimenting with underexposing a full stop to further control the highlight information.
 
WhiteMonkey said:
I'm using Stu M's settings from his 5D on my 7D, sharpness all the way down, color down two from middle and contrast down all the way. This gives me a low contrast "negative" and preserves a lot of the highlight information. I'm also experimenting with underexposing a full stop to further control the highlight information.
Click to expand...

what about the color tone?
 
draven4 said:
I feel it is better to have a good starting point with and image than one you're gonna really have to tweak out to get something good. Just my two cents.
Click to expand...

I completely agree. Even though I do heavy grading for a lot of work, I have found that it is best to get a good native image, because CC stretches the color information plain and simple. The only time I would focus on post work is if I'm working in ProRes or something with more headroom, but for 98% of my work, I have found that in-camera is the way to go. Of course I realize this is a bit of a challenge with the DSLRs, but I digress...
 
not a huge fan of super flat... it ads a softening to skin and even odd skin tones... I shoot in Marvel cine for all of my work...
 
Perry Wilson said:
not a huge fan of super flat... it ads a softening to skin and even odd skin tones... I shoot in Marvel cine for all of my work...
Click to expand...

I don't like Marvel Cine for skin.

I use Gavin Films film curve.

I'll shoot something today in contrasty environment (shade and sun) to see if I need to tweek it more. Be right back.
 
Ok, here is a still from the stock Gavin Film Profile

STOCK

stock.jpg



Here is the same profile with a bronze grading

Bronz.jpg



same profile with a PUNCHED color.

punched.jpg
 
Last edited:
I prefere to do it like that and in CMYK
schowek1.png


Blown out whites dont look good.
You can get this nice Cyan like in modern films after CC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top