While i have been fairly happy with my GH2 since moving from a 550D i never seem to get the same skin tones with the panasonic as with canon,there is no way that i could ever match the skin tones on this film http://www.vimeo.com/6496808 with my GH2 does anyone think it is possible.:angry:
Skin tones
- Thread starter flinty
- Start date
GH2 has a smaller sensor, there is fewer pixels and on a smaller surface that the light has to come in on. The Canon dslr's have a higher dynamic range. (This was also proven in the zacuto shootout with GH1, and GH2 for sure has no higher DR; rather I suspect about a stop less, maybe not because of the sensor itself, but because GH2 threats video output in harsher gradients).
I'm not a professional but from what I hear directors do prefer the 5D when you show up with a Af100 aswell. The "Canon look" hasn't gone past anyone's ears. The consumer always decides.
I'm not a professional but from what I hear directors do prefer the 5D when you show up with a Af100 aswell. The "Canon look" hasn't gone past anyone's ears. The consumer always decides.
Last edited:
LC_Digital_Art
Member
I found the GH2 skin tones more accurate than Canons. It's all about aesthetics . If you want the Canons colors (i don't) ,you can always achieve it in post. As for the dynamic range , yes indeed the 5D has wider DR but not the 550D - 600D - 7D - 60D , at least not much. Shoot as flat as possible and play with the levels , saturation , curves and contrast in post.
Last edited:
Well i would like the skin tones in that film from my GH2 ,and my 550D could achieve it better strait from camera ,the video look on faces is the biggest downer for me with this camera,playing with footage in post is not my thing just editing is hard enough compared to hdv and the canon mov files.
Dont tell me what i bought wrong,for country scenic and wildlife this things fine but i wont say blacks white for anyone and canon skin tones are better,i dont know where more realistic is coming from,but as many have said it could be a matter of taste.
IMO, GH2's skin tone is a bit duller, but it's also more flat, so you can tweak it to your taste in grading.
Canon's will be locked in the "Canon" color, which is very hard to get rid of if you don't like it. Canon's footages are not as flat, so harder to grade.
I also saw footages shot in Red, which have skin tones more like the GH2 and very different from any canon's.
Matter of fact, that's why I'm getting my GH2 since its footages are reasonably close to red's, and any Canon's are not.
Canon's will be locked in the "Canon" color, which is very hard to get rid of if you don't like it. Canon's footages are not as flat, so harder to grade.
I also saw footages shot in Red, which have skin tones more like the GH2 and very different from any canon's.
Matter of fact, that's why I'm getting my GH2 since its footages are reasonably close to red's, and any Canon's are not.
roei z
Veteran
egg-zacktly !!
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
This like many other threads on this sort subject, really require you give examples of what you get from your GH camera, and then compare what the Canon <anymodel> produces for the same scene...
If you shot the wedding example using both cameras, or even the same subjects under similar lighting... then 'we' could really see what you are talking about.
In a similar themed thread, "can't get Canon's color from a GH-1/2", someone produced a 'flaming example' of how the GH produced a 'dull yellow' cast... I personally have never seen that from my GH-1... but in any case, several posters including myself offered solutions that not only got rid of the 'dull yellow' cast, produced skin tones that were more likely 'true' to the actual scene, than the supplied Canon produced image...
As it is, even one one goes to 'art', as in 'painting', there have been any number of color casts for 'human skin', even when narrowing the set of 'humans' down to northern european fair skinned. These cast range from green, yellow, blue... while maintaining something of red/peach/pinks...
What is even more problematic is that when one sees a reproduction in book or 'on the web', very often someone has 'corrected' that image, and so, unless you are standing in front of the actual work, it may be anyone's guess as to what the actual cast may be...
Ian-T
Veteran
You said....
LC_Digital_Art's response was....
And then you replied.....
If the hilighted statement is what you really believe...then I'll say it again..."You bought the wrong camera for what you want done." If not...then you're going to have to do some work in post production to get the look you want.
Jester2138
Well-known member
The GH2 has more accurate colors than the Canon's.
If you want accurate skin tones that can also be changed in post use a Panasonic.
If you want ugly skin tones that can't be fixed in post use a Canon.
If you want accurate skin tones that can also be changed in post use a Panasonic.
If you want ugly skin tones that can't be fixed in post use a Canon.
Its pointless GH2 owners on here are biased to the extreme http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/panasonic-lumix-gf-gh-series/ at least owners on here will admit to defects with the GH2,if GH2 owners are convinced skin tone is better on the GH2 fine but why are all big productions done with canon[the pana has not been out long i know]moire and ailising are better on the pana ,resolution is better on the pana, ease of use use is better on the pana, lack of pal region 25P is bad ,banding is worse on the pana,maybe human faces can be made to look less video like but i dont have the kit to do it ,its ups and down on both sides but no one will convince me that strait from camera skin tone is as good as canons,but i wont have it being said i bought the wrong camera when no one knows until they use one what its like [none localy to try.Anyway overalL i prefer the GH2.
Ian-T
Veteran
That might or might not be true but I'm certainly not. I've owned the 7D, GH-1 and now the GH-2 and believe from my own experience I can give a fair opinion.
I'm a long time member of that site also who owns a GH-2. Trust me....there are issues with this camera.
This question has been asked here before and I keep coming accross the same answer.....marketing. Canon marketed their products a gazillion times better than Panasonic. The GH-1 could have been built to perfection (could have) but the Canons would have still trumped them in popularity based on....excellent marketing.
Ok.
Rory_B
Well-known member
I've found Playing with a custom colour temp and edging towards magenta in the WB adjustment settings gives overall really accurate and nice skin tones.
The gh2 has a tendency depending on the situation to have a green cast which most owners here are aware of, so playing with the camera settings yields a pretty nice picture to work with in post production.
http://www.youtube.com/#/watch?v=qPYv3KfqMuQ
That link is to a segment I sent my interns out to shoot with the gh2 to see how it holds up in a Run n Gun ENG setting. Shot in 1080i, but watch in HD and I defy anyone to say the Canon would have better colours in the opening shot. I've used the 5D, 60D, 7D and they have great colours when you dial everything down, but there was eplenty of times when skin would come out quite yellow and pastel depending on the light.
So it's all a matter of tweaking settings and then from there you need to get creative with shooting.
The gh2 has a tendency depending on the situation to have a green cast which most owners here are aware of, so playing with the camera settings yields a pretty nice picture to work with in post production.
http://www.youtube.com/#/watch?v=qPYv3KfqMuQ
That link is to a segment I sent my interns out to shoot with the gh2 to see how it holds up in a Run n Gun ENG setting. Shot in 1080i, but watch in HD and I defy anyone to say the Canon would have better colours in the opening shot. I've used the 5D, 60D, 7D and they have great colours when you dial everything down, but there was eplenty of times when skin would come out quite yellow and pastel depending on the light.
So it's all a matter of tweaking settings and then from there you need to get creative with shooting.
Last edited:
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
Flat out, Panasonice 'pro' division has absolutely no interest in selling a $1500 camera when they can sell you a AF100 for 4-5K, and I will bet dollars to donughts, the cost of manufacture the AF100 is under 1K, maybe even less now that they don't have to put a lense on it.. Canon had their DSLRs at NAB, Panasonic gave me the party line, the GH is in the 'consumer' division and they don't do this show...
As for 'out of the box'... I've not had access to a Caonon in years. During the early days of digital it seemed to me Canons had a distinic 'yellow' cast... apparently they've shifted to magenta/violet...ish... Nikon had a bluish/cyan... ish... cast...
And all still DSLRS benefit by the use of 'unsharp mask'...
Which brings me to... most of the advice found here for setting up any camera tends to be 'turn off all enhancments', get a 'flat as possible original capture', and color grade, noise reduce, and sharpen in post...
Which means... one has to 'play with footage in post'... The poster Flinty gave a sample... unless Flinty shot it, they have no idea whether that is 'straight out of the camera', or 'played with in post'...
As a note, it is not 'playing with footage in post'... it is post production processing to create the image that one wants. The only 'straight out of the camera' images I ever do are family happy shots... not stuff I want to put in front of people to watch...
When I did darkroom work... I never had an occasion for 'just printing'... most prints that I would mount required tweek... that's because even while using the Zone System for getting the image captured, there is always an asthetic requirement beyond just the image capture, and that requires at least 'tweeks'...
Otherwise get a point and shoot... hook up the HDMI cable and play directly off the camera, and join the millions of boring relatives who show their 'slide carousel' of their summer vacation to a trapped family audience...
I am actually a canon 5DMKII owner, I've ordered a GH2 but haven't got it.
God I hate my canon. Hue shift, lens distortion, inability to resolve, you name it. I'll maybe keep it for that "canon dream glow" of a scene where ducks cross the road in a sunny morning, but for my studio shots (which my canon has ruined plenty of), I'll try the GH2 instead.
The basic formula for the "Canon" look is:
- Warmer color-balance
- High color saturation ( especially reds )
- Higher contrast
- Crush the blacks to eliminate deep shadow detail
- Reduce image detail
Pretty much any good NLE will enable you to do this to your GH-2 footage, you just have to figure out how to do it.
- Warmer color-balance
- High color saturation ( especially reds )
- Higher contrast
- Crush the blacks to eliminate deep shadow detail
- Reduce image detail
Pretty much any good NLE will enable you to do this to your GH-2 footage, you just have to figure out how to do it.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
With all this talk about 'film look', and disparaging about 'looking like video'... it would seem that Canon is playing to... video people, as video does have the 'more saturated color', 'higher contrast to appear sharper', and 'reduced image detail at the same time to avoid moire effects'...