i see. im ok with saturation actually i just prefer pushing it in post than having it baked in
overall it looks great! really sharp and detailed
Some footage...please!
- Thread starter pbarry
- Start date
overall it looks great! really sharp and detailed
Barry_Green
Moderator
I played with settings, but I didn't get to D.I.T. it to the degree I'd like. We didn't have monitors. I made some preliminary guesses based on my experience with the prior cameras, then did some sample stills and then made a couple of changes. But I certainly wouldn't call these settings optimized.
Barry_Green
Moderator
I'm an old-school film guy, where we didn't even really HAVE a post path... back then, you chose your look by choosing a specific film stock, and maybe some filters on the lens. So I prefer to get it where I want it in-camera, or at least close. You kids with your newfangled technology...i see. im ok with saturation actually i just prefer pushing it in post than having it baked in
overall it looks great! really sharp and detailed
Basically I aim for minimizing the post correction, and then letting JDS or David Jimerson work their grading magic to make the images really sing.In our lighting DVD Macgregor said that it's (I don't remember the exact ratio) something like 30% art direction, 30% lighting, and 40% grading, to make a complete image. So yes, grading is important. But the closer you get in-camera, the less you have to push or pull in post, and I think you'll get the best results that way.
polfilmblog
Well-known member
"i just don't see how people are impressed with that dynamic range? Can someone explain to me? All the leaves still look blown out to me just as they would on any DSLR. The colors and tonality of the clip looks identical to gh1 footage. Honestly I can't see any difference between AF100 and Gh13 yet at all."
"+1" is the usual sign of agreement.
It doesn't look bad, except when there's direct sunlight somewhere in the background -- then it does, to me. Blown highlights are my #1 enemy with all these camera systems. People seem to have gotten so used to them that they forget how god awful they are.
I want a camera that can handle being outside in the sunlight. All these are just stop gaps on the road to a "real" camera and sensor solution to capture light, as it is. I know panties get twisted whenever Panasonic is criticized around here, but I've seen nicer GH1 footage, and so I find the gushing Panafanboyism as some find the Redfanboyism.
It's just another camera, in a sea of cameras (some much better).
"+1" is the usual sign of agreement.
It doesn't look bad, except when there's direct sunlight somewhere in the background -- then it does, to me. Blown highlights are my #1 enemy with all these camera systems. People seem to have gotten so used to them that they forget how god awful they are.
I want a camera that can handle being outside in the sunlight. All these are just stop gaps on the road to a "real" camera and sensor solution to capture light, as it is. I know panties get twisted whenever Panasonic is criticized around here, but I've seen nicer GH1 footage, and so I find the gushing Panafanboyism as some find the Redfanboyism.
It's just another camera, in a sea of cameras (some much better).
I'm assuming these shots with the blown out highlights were shot kneeless (Cine-D w/ Cine-like matrix). Is that correct, Barry? In which case you'd need to adjust your shooting style to match that setting, just like a kneeless film camera. Also, dynamic range isn't necessarily going to be noticeable until you're grading--the magic of the telecine suite.
This serves no purpose but to inflame.
If you want to talk cameras, I'm in.
But you're talking about other users here, and that serves no purpose in my view.
Peter J. DeCrescenzo
Veteran
Yes, thank you.
Just as having a built-in ND filter wheel is like coming home again (for some of us), using a polarizer to counteract glare -- and not as a poor substitute for ND -- feels like all is right in the world again. :happy:
polfilmblog, here's a quick and dirty correction I did using only standard included FCP tools. But to get a real idea of the scope of dynamic range, you really need to take it into your NLE or CC app and start jacking up your 3-Way CC or whatever your default is for testing footage. I can clearly tell the difference between this footage and the original HVX footage (7-8 stops exposure vs. 10.5) that I'm used to. The Canon DSLRs come in around 8-8.5 stops of exposure I believe.
Click me, then click Next
Click me, then click Next
Click me, then click Next
Click me, then click Next
maranfilms
Veteran
I disagree completely, I see movies shot on film all the time where there's blown highlights. And film has the best latitude of all. For instance, I just watched Platoon, there's blown highlights all over many scenes. I noticed, didn't bother me, But who cares. people dont go to the movies to look for flaws in the work. They go to be entertained by a story. There's no perfect camera as there's no perfect DP. I think the footage is decent looking. Im starting to regret not making a deposit.
Madaspy
Active member
Quick question, at about :13-:15 when Berry zooms out, it looks like there is a slight change in exposure when he completes the zoom. Do others see this or am I the only one who notices this. Basically my GF and I are looking in to this camera and we both own 7Ds currently, and as many of you know that when you zoom you get a change in aperture when using variable aperture lenses. I was wondering if that were the case with the 14-140, because it is a variable aperture lens and if we will see this phenomenon with other electronically controlled lenses?
Blown highlights from film footage has less to do with the 14-16 stop dynamic range inherent to film, and more to do with the fact that film cameras don't utilize a "knee" to prevent blowouts like a video camera does by utilizing sensors and dynamic adjustments to the highlight end of the gamma curve (at least that's how I remember it from HD Bootcamp). And of course, in some instances a DP may stylistically choose to intentionally blow out the highlights for a scene.
Steve Kahn
Well-known member
That probably is it. it was the 14-140. Looked like a quick focus of the lens. Barry should have turned AF off is my guess.
Homunculus
Carbonite Member
that's because blown highlights on film look far different and mroe pleasing than blown digital highlights that look like pure shi#
Madaspy
Active member
I see the artifacting for lack of a better word during the zoom out which does look like an AF issue, but what i am referring to is a light change in exposure at the end of the zoom. It is most pronounced in the jacket the gentleman is wearing. It is very very slight, and significantly less pronounced than the 7d with EF lenses.
Dino
Veteran
I don't believe all digital cameras are created equal. The Panasonic palmcorder blown highlight look is different to a P2 Varicam in Film-Rec 600%, is different to an Arri Alexa, etc. Sensor size, pixel sites, A-D conversion bit depth have a bearing on latitude, noise, tonality. The camera setup has a large amount to do with it as well, detail level, knee, slope, gamma, matrix, color correction/multi-matrix(in camera), and of course latitude, which even the recoding codec has an impact on from a usable noise floor to highlight perspective.
I have seen my HPX2700 P2 Varicam look very much like Super 16mm at times. I don't like the way lower end Panasonic cameras handle highlights nearly as much, there is a lack of tonality and a super saturation that takes us out of the filmic realm immediately.
Homunculus
Carbonite Member
ofcourse but
1. even the high end digital you're talking about still don't blow out like film. period.
2. I'm mostly referring to low end digital. no one here is complaining about Red MX blowing out considering the fact it has just about identical dynamic range to film. if you blow out something like Red MX or other high end cams (Alexa etc) then that's your fault.
If you blow out these low end DSLR's well it's pretty much unavoidable because their latitude is terrible
Homunculus
Carbonite Member
and to the guys talking about polarizers believe me i know about them. I have a very good glass polarizer. it's not a magic solution and does not control blowouts, makes minor blowouts perhaps look slightly better but it's not an end all tool to abysmal low end digital latitude
Of course there will be an exposure change when you zoom out with that lens, it has a faster f stop when it is wide than at telephoto, the camera may have been in auto exposure so it's not going to adjust accurately frame by frame.
John Foundas
Well-known member
Was not impressed with the clip on Vimeo. I was expecting a "wow"and I got an "Ehh?"