I didn't notice that at all. I transcoded to ProRes 422 HQ using L&T in FCP7 and then reverse telecined using Compressor. Shot 1080. Everything was nicely exposed. Shot away from the sun. Looked great!
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Smooth V Standard
- Thread starter ROne
- Start date
I didn't notice that at all. I transcoded to ProRes 422 HQ using L&T in FCP7 and then reverse telecined using Compressor. Shot 1080. Everything was nicely exposed. Shot away from the sun. Looked great!
I spent a lot of time at the weekend playing with settings/resolutions and more importantly for me - playing out to a 1080p projector for proper evaluation. It really tests the camera.
Things that I've learnt:
Standard is definately the better preset for my useage, none are perfect and all of them struggle in bright conditions to not crush dark areas and clip highlights. But standard is the better of the group.
None of the presets produce anything like accurate colours and more spefically the limits of AVCHD are much more frustrating on the big screen. Colours just look mushy. 720p looks almost SD in its colour representation. 1080p looks better as you obviously have more samples in the first place. But I'm not liking 4:2:0 generally after being spoiled with 4:2:2.
As for the settings ... contrast -2 for sure, this helps flatten out the scene. There is no roll off of high-level whites either and contrast doesn't affect these (yet it should as contrast is the white level control) but bizarrely affects shadows the most.
Sharpness, as Barry Green said, for codec variation it helps but more than 0 creates horrible ringing on the projector which itself set for no sharpness enhancement as you shouldn't need it at 1080p. I reckon 0 is a good setting, almost mandatory for 720p and possibly for 1080p too.
Noise reduction helps but also increases colour bleed on bright areas particularly reds, I thing 0 is a decent limit.
Saturation benefits from one notch lower than 0, at -1 things look less "sun - burned."
As mentioned standard is the most appropriate for me. Smooth robs the image of blue and reduces shadow detail, though possibly has a more linear response in the mid-tones. It's a real shame there is no cine-like D equivalent here.
In Summary:
Standard.
Sharpness -2 to 0 (depending on format, 1080p needs it less.)
Sat -1
Contrast -2
NR -2 to 0 (It can look very mushy quickly.)
This was all viewed on my very revealing 1080p projector which is calibrated to D65 and in a dark room, connected using HDMI. The sad thing is if most people saw this camera in these circumstances they wouldn't be impressed.
I checked all this on the Plasma and things are much more forgiving and much less noticeable.
Things that I've learnt:
Standard is definately the better preset for my useage, none are perfect and all of them struggle in bright conditions to not crush dark areas and clip highlights. But standard is the better of the group.
None of the presets produce anything like accurate colours and more spefically the limits of AVCHD are much more frustrating on the big screen. Colours just look mushy. 720p looks almost SD in its colour representation. 1080p looks better as you obviously have more samples in the first place. But I'm not liking 4:2:0 generally after being spoiled with 4:2:2.
As for the settings ... contrast -2 for sure, this helps flatten out the scene. There is no roll off of high-level whites either and contrast doesn't affect these (yet it should as contrast is the white level control) but bizarrely affects shadows the most.
Sharpness, as Barry Green said, for codec variation it helps but more than 0 creates horrible ringing on the projector which itself set for no sharpness enhancement as you shouldn't need it at 1080p. I reckon 0 is a good setting, almost mandatory for 720p and possibly for 1080p too.
Noise reduction helps but also increases colour bleed on bright areas particularly reds, I thing 0 is a decent limit.
Saturation benefits from one notch lower than 0, at -1 things look less "sun - burned."
As mentioned standard is the most appropriate for me. Smooth robs the image of blue and reduces shadow detail, though possibly has a more linear response in the mid-tones. It's a real shame there is no cine-like D equivalent here.
In Summary:
Standard.
Sharpness -2 to 0 (depending on format, 1080p needs it less.)
Sat -1
Contrast -2
NR -2 to 0 (It can look very mushy quickly.)
This was all viewed on my very revealing 1080p projector which is calibrated to D65 and in a dark room, connected using HDMI. The sad thing is if most people saw this camera in these circumstances they wouldn't be impressed.
I checked all this on the Plasma and things are much more forgiving and much less noticeable.
Last edited:
Was this in sunlight with or without an ND filter? What other lighting conditions did you test? What was the white balance setting? What source does look more impressive on the projector (in other words, what are you comparing the GH1 with in that respect.Standard is definately the better preset for my useage, none are perfect and all of them struggle in bright conditions to not crush dark areas and clip highlights.
Very interesting info, just a bit more detail would be useful if you can post it.
Was this in sunlight with or without an ND filter? What other lighting conditions did you test? What was the white balance setting? What source does look more impressive on the projector (in other words, what are you comparing the GH1 with in that respect.
Very interesting info, just a bit more detail would be useful if you can post it.
With and Without ND filter - both, and ND8.
Tested mainly outside bright sun, as this is where the trouble starts.
White balance preset, Sunny and Manual.
Tested on the projector: 1080i on this camera compared to 1080p on the HPX171, and (unfairly blu-ray authored discs of mainstream movies and material I've shot). Would love to get an EX1 to see how the colour resolution stacks up on that.
Thanks for that. In reviews, GH1 colour reproduction has been given lukewarm comment, though I recall one reviewer saying something along the lines that while the GH1 didn't measure that well in some respects, the actual real world results were better than the measurements might suggest.
I wonder whether the colour (in)accuracy of the GH1 is actually a problem when it comes to getting the right look in postproduction?
I have a 42" Bravia LCD TV in our lounge (which in daytime has lots of natural light) and there's bookcases either side of it filled with colourfully bound books, and a window to the garden behind it - I must get around to the simple test of recording a bit of that side of the room, then replaying it on the TV, to instantly compare the room colours with the reproduction thereof on the TV (which I have set up with theoretically neutral colour presets), in the various film modes.
I wonder whether the colour (in)accuracy of the GH1 is actually a problem when it comes to getting the right look in postproduction?
I have a 42" Bravia LCD TV in our lounge (which in daytime has lots of natural light) and there's bookcases either side of it filled with colourfully bound books, and a window to the garden behind it - I must get around to the simple test of recording a bit of that side of the room, then replaying it on the TV, to instantly compare the room colours with the reproduction thereof on the TV (which I have set up with theoretically neutral colour presets), in the various film modes.
Thanks for that. In reviews, GH1 colour reproduction has been given lukewarm comment, though I recall one reviewer saying something along the lines that while the GH1 didn't measure that well in some respects, the actual real world results were better than the measurements might suggest.
I wonder whether the colour (in)accuracy of the GH1 is actually a problem when it comes to getting the right look in postproduction?
While I'm far from Lab conditions I understand the primaries to be somewhat offset to what they should be. I don't think we're talking about a simple white-balance correction.
Also, given the codec I feel that the averaging out that 4:2:0 makes of the colours - gives even murkier results.
That said, most of these issues are very critically targeted to realise what makes a camera this price, rather than the camera being unusable in any way.
But, I'm already on the cusp of thinking that this camera has too many limitations for me. Especially given I've access to the HPX171, but the size and convenience of a stills camera is what makes the GH1 the purchase that it is.