Samsung NX1 Log Gamma Dynamic Range

diegocervo said:
Thank's a lot :)

I use Hoya PRO NDs and set the luminance levels at 0-255, since I noticed slightly less banding with that setting.

The frame grabs that I posted are all from videos...which are basically identical to the pictures I take of any scene. I do stock photos and videos during the same job.

Recently I'm not using anymore the NX1 for stills and went back to the Sony A7R, as the only way to get great skin tones with Samsung is to shoot JPEG. Raw is still not supported very well either in Lightroom or Capture One and some colors tend to have a weird hue that is not easy to correct.

The nice thing of doing 4k on the NX1, is that quality is so decent that sometimes I've been taking screengrabs from videos and put them on sale on stock agencies as still images.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. So, you're using screw on fixed or variable Hoya ND's?

And which program are you using to transcode your H.265 files? Going to H.264 or ProRes (LT, HQ, etc.)?

Sorry for all the questions, but I'd love to know some of your "special sauce." With the right tools (and the right talent, of course) the NX1 seems to put out fantastic UHD video (though it's only 8 bit, 4:2:0 with Rec. 709 gamut) and you have some of the best looking shots I've seen so far (that isn't color graded up the wazoo).
 
It's not a rumor: Samsung has given the ML guys access to the UI part of the code. What I believe they expect to get out of this is a quick implementation of false color and thigs like that. They didn't give them access to the parts of the firmware where the encoding happens, so I think the ML devs can't unleash RAW video without hacking the firmware themselves.
 
Samsung seems to be 100% all-in committed to the acceptance of this camera from video folks. Very nice to see. Too bad about the non-option of using Canon EF glass. I hate the idea of buying more glass when I already own nice Canon glass, but this camera has my attention.
 
JohnTollwannabe said:
Thanks for the info. So, you're using screw on fixed or variable Hoya ND's?

And which program are you using to transcode your H.265 files? Going to H.264 or ProRes (LT, HQ, etc.)?

Sorry for all the questions, but I'd love to know some of your "special sauce." With the right tools (and the right talent, of course) the NX1 seems to put out fantastic UHD video (though it's only 8 bit, 4:2:0 with Rec. 709 gamut) and you have some of the best looking shots I've seen so far (that isn't color graded up the wazoo).
Click to expand...

No problem.
I prefer fixed ND Filters, I don't like variable NDs even though they are easier to work with.
Zume makes brilliant accessories for attaching/detaching filters. Hoya Pro ND in my opinion are among the best, with almost 0 color shift.
I use Rocky Mountain to convert to h264, then I ingest in FCPX and convert to prores 422.
Hope this helps.
Diego
 
Magic Lantern and Samsung could really be a great deal to us in the Samsung game. The NX1 is even after todays Sonys A7r talk hard to beat. Its the best of both worlds.
 
diegocervo said:
No problem.
I prefer fixed ND Filters, I don't like variable NDs even though they are easier to work with.
Zume makes brilliant accessories for attaching/detaching filters. Hoya Pro ND in my opinion are among the best, with almost 0 color shift.
I use Rocky Mountain to convert to h264, then I ingest in FCPX and convert to prores 422.
Hope this helps.
Diego
Click to expand...

It does! :D Thank you so much. Do you leave the conversion quality level on Rocky Mountain at 10 or do you go to a higher quality level? Thanks again!

I haven't been able to successfully Google Zume products. Do you happen to have a web link?

Oh, now I see. It's Xume Adapters. I had looked at those before and now I will again...
 
Last edited:
why do you convert to h264 instead of prores directly? can't FCPX edit h264 natively, what convert to prores at that point?
 
Rocky Mountain handles the h264 conversion very well, whereas it produces heavier banding when converting to prores. It is based on ffmpeg, so I think this is something that has to do with the settings that are hidden behind the process.
My macbook pro retina doesn't handle 4k h264 well. That's why I edit in prores. Much better experience IMO and it shines when it's time to export the timeline.
 
diegocervo said:
Rocky Mountain handles the h264 conversion very well, whereas it produces heavier banding when converting to prores. It is based on ffmpeg, so I think this is something that has to do with the settings that are hidden behind the process.
My macbook pro retina doesn't handle 4k h264 well. That's why I edit in prores. Much better experience IMO and it shines when it's time to export the timeline.
Click to expand...

Do you have any test on this? I haven't noticed any difference on this so far.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top