So these days, can any camera be made to look like any other camera?

J

Josh Bass

Veteran
Don't know if this is the right place for this, but it's not camera specific so here goes. Some of you have probably seen my posts in several other threads about me thinking about considering pondering contemplating ruminating about vacillating about buying a camcorder. I mentioned on "another message board" being drawn toward a certain brand because of the "look" their cameras had, and someone brought up the interesting point of how these days, the cams are sophisticated enough that through menu tweaks they can probably be matched to look like each other. E.g. you can give you HPX170 an EX1 look, and vice versa. Now, obviously we are limited by differences caused by sensor size and lens sharpness, things that probably can't be compensated for unless the differences are very minor to begin with.

But generally, given same sensor size and equally competent lenses, do you guys agree with this? Could you give your Sony a Pansonic look? Can you make your JVC look like a Canon? Or does each camera have certain root things about that just can't be overcome no matter how much you try?
 
Well yes and no.
Each camera is different and reacts to light differently, but with the proper charts and tools and a lot of time, you can create a Look Up Table (LUT) to match the cameras together. Only pro cameras have LUT, so yes you can with pro cams, no you can't with DSLR and other small cameras.
 
I would tend to agree with Macgregor, but not quite as emphatically. I think you can tweak and optimize a camera's image so it looks somewhat like another, but it isn't easy (or always possible) to make them look exact.

However, I do think it's possible to make great footage with any modern camera, barring there being any inherent defects (like shooting handheld "cops" footage on a Nikon D90, the rolling shutter makes that just not possible. )
 
Menu tweaks are definitely not enough. As an example, I shot something back in June with an HVX and my XH A1. The HVX had to be corrected in post because the lows were too saturated compared to the A1. In the end, I got them to look VERY similar, but a characteristic like that isn't adjustable through scene files or custom presets.

What David said is true also, my A1 looks totally different from some others I've worked with. I had to send it out to Video One for some repairs right after I got it and according to the tech I was speaking with, they often get two of the same cameras from someone that just need to be calibrated to match perfectly.
 
Josh Bass said:
... the cams are sophisticated enough that through menu tweaks they can probably be matched to look like each other. E.g. you can give you HPX170 an EX1 look, and vice versa. Now, obviously we are limited by differences caused by sensor size and lens sharpness, things that probably can't be compensated for unless the differences are very minor to begin with.

But generally, given same sensor size and equally competent lenses, do you guys agree with this?
Click to expand...


Pretty close, but each different sensor (and lens to a large extent) transpose color information slightly differently and sensor size has less to do with the biggest difference to my eye (color). That said, you can get very close if you know what you're doing. I've been shooting 2 camera and 3 camera setups with EX1R, 5D, and 7D, and in the past, 5D with HVX200, and there are always slight color variances that you can't adjust for between different sensors.
 
And that was my instinct...but i havent dealt much with hd footage in post (generally hand my stuff off to client after shoot when freelancing) and had been nothing but animation for my personal shorts until last year when i finally used a 5dm2 for something of my own. ) and ive certainly never tried to match two cams or their footage in post.

So im guessing the "right" answer then is go with a cam that has the look you want already, rather than trying to make something else look that cam.
 
I would look at footage made with the better cameras to determine what you like the look of and go from there. There are no major differences between footage made with cameras in each respective price range.

A 7D, 60D, or 5D will make footage that's comparable to that made with a GH2/GH3 but there are subtle differences in how the footage looks between those. The specs may be much different, but the end result is similar. I've seen commercials that combined 5D footage and Red footage and it's very hard to tell which is which when watching the end result online or even on TV.

Then again, when I watch movies shot on Red (on my computer), I can pretty much spot it right away. There's one main reason some prefer Arri Alexa over Red and it has to do with the "look." Some feel the Alexa has more of a true film look and more forgiving highlight handling. Can you get a similar look from Red? Yeah, I'd say you probably can get close, especially with the right lens choice.

But really, it comes down to who the footage is for in the end. Some can't tell the difference between nicely shot footage from a current DSLR and a Red and an Alexa, even when there are noticeable differences extant.
 
I'd echo Chris' point about who your audience is.

An audience of filmmakers will likely pick the difference in camera. An audience of general public will often not even notice if you grade it to be pretty close.

A good example is when I went and saw Captain America. Towards the end, I noticed jarring cutaways that were quite obviously shot on a 5D. I went with a group of non-filmmaking friends and they didn't even know what I was talking about, and didn't really notice the different look.
 
I shoot a project last summer where we had to match footage shot with a Sony FS-100 to footage shot with a Canon T2i and 5DMKII. We did not have to match footage within a scene, but different scenes were shot with the different cameras because we busted out separate shooting units to get the project done in the time we had (30 pages in 3 days). I was able to get the different footage pretty close in the grade in the end, but I think that doing that, to match the DSLRs, I really had to compromise the footage that I shot with the FS-100. The baked in contrast of the DSLRs really killed me. However, the audience, at a large screen showing of the film didn't seem to mind and actually gave me accolades about how it looked. To be honest, I was very uncomfortable about that.

To the OP, in regard to the experience that I had, I am very skeptical that you can get any low end (Under $10K) camera to give you the "Best" look that is available from other cameras in that price range. With the FS-100, I am confident that I can get an equivalent look to the best look that someone can man-handle out of a camera like the Canon T2i, but there is no way that a person is going to be able to use the a camera like the T2i to give an equivalent look to the best that I can get out of a FS-100. Now, I will qualify that and say under the same lighting conditions.
 
Last edited:
Thats what i thought. Im not in the market for the higher end cams, small sensor in the $4-5k WITH BATTS AND MEDIA is what im looking into. My client base and rates dont justify your f3s, f700s, c100s, etc. (Can rent on those occasions when im wrong). Who is my audience? Strangely my client base runs the gamut from small individual/end clients who dont care about what cam i use to subcontractracting for production companies who have very specific requirements, sometimes even down to the cam itself. For my own projects (for which i would likely use the cam--dont care about the lack of shallow dof), i would still like a less "videoish" look. I think that stuff works well for corporate video, reality, commercials, really anything. Up to a point that is. We dont all want our shadow regions falling into black oblivion ALL the time.
 
I have a good amount of time spent matching different cams, what I find to be the most important setting are below.
1. contrast
2. white balance/ in cam color temp, (which vary from camera to camera, as does contrast)
3. saturation
4. exposure
5. latitude
5. grain
I also find that diffusion helps huge in blending the cams together,
 
Contrary to the majority above, I think any camera with high precision signal (and decently wide gamut) can be made to look very much alike any other camera. It has nothing to do with grading skills because the process is both well defined formally and entirely technical. There is nothing mystical about it, you are only doing a transform from one XYZ color subspace to another XYZ color subspace. All you need is densely sampled transform 3D LUTs with lots of color samples at different brightness levels AND at different light color temperatures (and green-magenta offsets, if you want). Yes, you will lose some precision in the process, hence the need for good precision source signal that can stand some pushing around.
 
maranfilms said:
sure, it's more less a filter that gives both images a characteristic thats the same. I think it helps to bring them closer to the same look. But it's not always needed, thats usually when it's drastically different.
Click to expand...

That would be a post filter then, "Feather" and adjusted to match between the footage, and not on camera diffusion, correct?
 
sorry, I should have mentioned from the first that I meant, "with IN-CAMERA tweaking". It makes more sense to me that if you like the look of "x brand" camera (without having to alter it in post), you should go for that rather than try to get "y brand" to look like x brand by tweaking its menus. In other words, why fight uphill battles? It's one thing if you're required to use a certain cam, but I'm talking about given your own choice.

If you're wondering, this all came about from me stating that I liked the look of the old Pana DVX cams, thinking (and still do, someone tell me if I'm mistaken) that the HPX series inherited that look (same design team, right?), and being told that there really is no "Panasonic" look anymore because of how customizable each camera is, and therefore whatever one liked about these cams could be matched by, say, comparable Canons, JVCs or Sonys with menu tweaks.
 
Last edited:
No. Each camera has its own look, like film stock. There's a reason why the Alexa is as expensive as it is. Nothing else (yet) offers that look or the almost unlimited highlight detail and the excellent skin tones and tonality.

Can you match a bunch of cameras acceptably well? Yes. If you shoot intelligently with them. If you're using a red as a b cam for Alexa you might want to put some diffusion over it to get the warmth and avoid bright areas in the frame (use it with the tighter of two lenses) and run NR and then put a layer of noise over it to match. Even the highest end colorists will agree that cameras aren't just interchangeable. But in terms of achieving a look, they are only a small part compared with the DP's choice in lenses, filtration, and lighting and what the colorist does with the footage...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top