Sony F35 Codec Resolution Tests

rbirnbaum

rbirnbaum

Well-known member
So a while back I did some tests and I received questions here and on my Vimeo about sharpness. The shots had different level of detail but it was a focusing issue. I have done a very simple test to clear this issue out. Soundtrack from Se7en. Coz otherwise I’d fall asleep looking at these clips.

What do you guys think? Is detail different?

All shot at f8, on Sony Cinealta 85mm

Fresnel 650W pointed at item.

Single CST mode on Timeline for sgamut slog conversion. To rec709 and simple luminance selected. All clips at Full data range in clip attributes.

Original files here: [URL="https://www.dropbox.com/sh/y7qu6paxw1071fk/AABHAmJ8CvplfezRrSRa3tHja?dl=0"/URL]
 
Last edited:
Very cool! What would you say should be the codec I capture 4:4:4 material with in FCP 7? I've been using Prores 4444 but I feel like Im not getting the full luminescence information in my capture... S Log and PanaLog never look quite flat enough compared to playback. I'd capture Uncompressed RGB Log but my computer and SSDs cant keep up with it in realtime when I capture my SR Tapes.
 
Mike, if FCP7 isn’t giving you the option to show full range values on your ProRes files, you are going to be missing data and your file will be compressed to 0-100 IRE vs mapping it between 0-110 (though slog caps at 104- don’t know about Panalog). I don’t know what FCP7 is capable of in terms of luma. Maybe someone else can help. In resolve you select it on your clip attributes or project settings.

Resolve ironed out all these issues a while back. I know your system is a little limited, try an older version like 12.5 that already offered those features and may run in your machine. That’s all I can think about for now.
 
rbirnbaum said:
Mike, if FCP7 isn’t giving you the option to show full range values on your ProRes files, you are going to be missing data and your file will be compressed to 0-100 IRE vs mapping it between 0-110 (though slog caps at 104- don’t know about Panalog). I don’t know what FCP7 is capable of in terms of luma. Maybe someone else can help. In resolve you select it on your clip attributes or project settings.

Resolve ironed out all these issues a while back. I know your system is a little limited, try an older version like 12.5 that already offered those features and may run in your machine. That’s all I can think about for now.
Click to expand...

I do have resolve on my mac so I will give that a try. I have this capture software from AJA that came with my KONA 3 card and breakout box but for whatever reason I get these small vertical lines in my footage when I capture with it, yet when I capture in FCP7 its clean as can be. Strange... Hopefully I wont encounter that problem in Resolve. Thanks for the tip :)
 
rbirnbaum said:
So a while back I did some tests and I received questions here and on my Vimeo about sharpness. The shots had different level of detail but it was a focusing issue. I have done a very simple test to clear this issue out. Soundtrack from Se7en. Coz otherwise I’d fall asleep looking at these clips.

What do you guys think? Is detail different?

All shot at f8, on Sony Cinealta 85mm

Fresnel 650W pointed at item.

Single CST mode on Timeline for sgamut slog conversion. To rec709 and simple luminance selected. All clips at Full data range in clip attributes.

Original files here: [URL="https://www.dropbox.com/sh/y7qu6paxw1071fk/AABHAmJ8CvplfezRrSRa3tHja?dl=0"/URL]
Click to expand...

Thank you so much for the test Rick. Resolution looks identical in all 3 iterations. That is very good to know. The Pix E5 is so light and tiny and allows me to forgo the IF box (less weight and volume). If Prores 422 proves to be almost identical to dpx, then this is great news indeed on so many fronts.
I take it this is Beneditti's translation of An Actor's Work, which is highly superior to the old Hapgood translation.
 
I found this video fairly useless as you could have zoomed in maybe 800% to see any differences.

Also 444 has more COLOUR RESOLUTION than 422 not spatial resolution. ONe would only expect that to show when grading fine tonality?
 
morgan_moore said:
I found this video fairly useless as you could have zoomed in maybe 800% to see any differences.

Also 444 has more COLOUR RESOLUTION than 422 not spatial resolution. ONe would only expect that to show when grading fine tonality?
Click to expand...

Yes, grading is a different thing... but in the description there is an explanation as to why these specific tests were carried out.
Theory is 422 and 4444 are identical resolution... seems like DPX is too...
 
Interesting but it doesnt seem like Resolve is picking up my KONA 3 card for capture... Guess I cant capture using that software, bummer.
 
Resolve wouldn't detect the Kona 3 or 3g that I have now, I think they only support their own cards and maybe some newer cards from other manufacturers
 
Hi Mike, yes Blackmagic won't recognise non-BM products for I/O.
I'm inclined to agree with you, although I've seen them defend the decision before and it makes business sense for them, or at least did a whole lot when Resolve was their big draw card (before the cameras etc).
As more and more new users jump ship or experiment with Resolve each day, they're required to purchase their IO hardware through BM to make it all work on the output side and that's how they can make money from those using the free version.
Turning Resolve from an expensive specialist app into something that's available to everyone in the world, with a near full featured edit suite and making (the lite version) free was a pretty genius idea I reckon.
I see all kinds of people with zero tech skill or knowledge getting into Resolve now because they want to experiment and grade their camera footage, or try out editing which is incredible to think.
Annoys me that I can't use my AJA XT though!

And yes it sounds like you're dealing with a limited vs full range problem, I've run into that when monitoring F23 stuff on my Sony monitor.
If you can do any processing from full data to limited video range, aim for that.
 
Yes, Blackmagic gives the software away for free so they have the right to make money with it some other way. It's only fair it works only with their own hardware. Nothing wrong with that. Those who don't agree are free to go pay for Nucoda, Baselight etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top