Standard vs Superflat

but it doesn't provide more flexibility... it actually makes it impossible to grade... unless you use a preset grade that makes false colors anyways then it is the dumbest thing ever....
 
If you don't understand or don't want to use custom picture profiles that's your choice, but they provide a lot of flexibility in post color correction.

And as I mentioned earlier there is no "making of false" colors. There's no magic. once you convert your footage to ProRes (if your on a Mac) or something like Cineform (on a PC) you can color correct in 32 bit float. Just because you don't see the information does not mean the color information isn't there.

Picking or making a custom picture profile simply enables you to spread the histogram out. If you don't know what I'm talking about or don't know how to color correct then just use the standard profile and don't worry about it.

But for people who do understand how to work with DPX and Cineon files it would be nice if they could have a discussion without having to debate whether picture profiles are the dumbest things ever...
 
Jean Dantes said:
I don't understand exactly what you mean? How does it make grading impossible?

Here is some before/after 7D footage shot with Super-Flat, then graded:

http://i.imgur.com/vqp3L.jpg
Click to expand...

Those examples are exactly what I was talking about... The color looks washed out in the superflat shots but the range is great... But the color corrected footage doesn't look any different then something that would come right out of the camera, the blacks are crushed, and the range is nothing to right home about... what you guys arent understanding is that I am saying, what is the point of using the superflat picture style to increase your dynamic range in the black levels if you are simply going to crush them in post any ways, why not save yourself some trouble and shoot that corrected footage right out of the camera... I can understand using it if you werent going to color correct in post and that was the style you were going for... but instead of washing out your color just light the scene better...
 
Jean Dantes said:
Also, this example again:

http://www.vimeo.com/7764570

Colours don't seem "false" to me?
Click to expand...

really what was the point of shooting those shots in superflat... the color corrected footage looks exactly like the footage that comes right out of my cam. crushed blacks, and for the shots that werent crushed and all he did was bump the sat, the flesh tones are way off everyone looks like a Zombie(the shot through the window of the people cooking) and look at the shot at 1:08 the brightness wasnt turned down and the sat. was bumped, not that sexy red sign is blow out with crazy hot spots, and is no longer broadcast safe... The middle of the sign looks like an F-in stop sign its flashing so much... don't get me wrong this footage is amazing, but so is all of the 7D footage, and the superflat was pointless...
 
Last edited:
I notice big differences is in the highlights as much as the shadows. Shooting superflat can mean the difference between blowing out the sky and not blowing it out. And when it's blown out, it's gone. But if you have the information, you can preserve it even if you monkey with the foreground. A good colorist can take that shot and fix portions while leaving others relatively intact.

But if you're happy with the standard settings, by all means stick with it. It doesn't make superflat pointless. It's just not for you. That's why those options in the image settings exist, because we all want different things from the camera.
 
+1 to the Beebs on shooting with low-contrast picture styles. I just completed a shoot with the 7D using superflat and I just color graded the footage two days ago. Worked like a charm in dramatic color and luminance shifts, even with the original H.264 compression, although I did do the color grading in a 16bpc color space. The latitude was as good as one could get from an 8-bits-per-channel image...as long as you realize that superflat or similar low-contrast picture styles is delivering more color range but not a true raw file. It's a tweak, and it's not magic, but I'm super pleased with superflat in a real production setting.

Let's also remember that accuracy is nice, but color correction/color grading is a sauce one adds to tilt the emotional content of an image. High-contrast "accurate" footage sometimes is tough to really push, in terms of latitude, without significant visual artifacting. Diff'rent Strokes, Willis! :)
 
I dont actually like the standard setting I never shoot in it becuase it is garbage as well... my whole thing was against the superflat... I only shoot in Marvel Cine setting which is like superflat but it preserves the color...
 
Beeblebrox said:
I notice big differences is in the highlights as much as the shadows. Shooting superflat can mean the difference between blowing out the sky and not blowing it out. And when it's blown out, it's gone. But if you have the information, you can preserve it even if you monkey with the foreground. A good colorist can take that shot and fix portions while leaving others relatively intact.
Click to expand...

Why not just use an ND filter and get even exposure to start with?

Guess what I'm asking is... what benefit does superflat offer over exposing correctly and as close to the finished image you want to start with?
 
Columbo said:
Why not just use an ND filter and get even exposure to start with?

Guess what I'm asking is... what benefit does superflat offer over exposing correctly and as close to the finished image you want to start with?
Click to expand...

Columbo,

I guess superflat is an attempt to emulate a "blackstretch" function found in traditional production cameras. I use blackstretch in certain shots that i need to tweak later.

Of course its a given that you try to light or expose well , but see, the 7D in particular seem to have presets that crush the blacks, a wee more than others.

When you do a simple brightness/contrast tweak, and not even a 3 way correction, you'll see that the standard preset, even when lit well, doesn't give you much wiggle room in the shadow areas.

This is what users are attempting at, to raise detail in the shadows.

The preset called "superflat" which was available for download seem to have created other issues rather than solve a problem.

I myself am switching to neutral then turning down sharpness to 1 and contrast to zero.

Still a bit punchy, but until I can figure out what voodoo the custom curves of superflat does to my skin tones, I'm sticking to that for now.

One thing I'm looking at is what white balance setting users of superflat are using.


Ted
 
Thanks teddybear, makes sense.

Yes I've noticed skin tones look a bit odd with some of these superflat videos, like a slight neon hue. The tones don't look natural to my eyes.

So if people are using superflat to preserve more details in the shadows couldn't you do this just by "exposing to the right" instead, and avoid these colour issues?
 
this is a statement of the "superflat" creator over at cinema5d:




- i am flattered that you guy like my "superflat" preset so much
BUT
I found that switching to "NEUTRAL" with sharpness and contrast all the way down, and saturation 2 notches down, gives a slightly better result as the "superflat" -





There should be no color shifts anymore.
 
you will also notice in super flat when areas of the image are under exposed, there will be these strange vertical lines running through the image.
 
stip said:
this is a statement of the "superflat" creator over at cinema5d:




- i am flattered that you guy like my "superflat" preset so much
BUT
I found that switching to "NEUTRAL" with sharpness and contrast all the way down, and saturation 2 notches down, gives a slightly better result as the "superflat" -





There should be no color shifts anymore.
Click to expand...

whew! finally... SUPERFLAT :violent5:
 
Hey everybody. I worked with Beelblebrox on the footage in question (we both directed and dp'd), and so I wanted to weigh in. First I want to say that the short we shot is a camera test among other things, just a way to get familiar with the camera. We shot some tests beforehand, but we're new to the 7D.

I'm not convinced that superflat per se is the best possible custom curve, but it's much better than standard. Standard mode, for one thing, gives you a curve, so it doesn't make sense to criticize superflat even academically BECAUSE it's a custom curve, because -let's face it - the camera doesn't do raw, and whatever we shoot is going to have a curve of some sort. Apparently the guy who create superflat has switched to neutral mode with less contrast and saturation and prefers that, and that makes sense.

Now, what I noticed in the test is that, yes, the blacks have more range, but the real benefit is in the highlights. So I wouldn't say that simply stretching the blacks would be good enough. Specifically we did a test of a dark parking garage. With standard mode, the lights reflecting in the floor were clipped to white, but superflat gave a nice, smooth taper not unlike film or raw. Even when corrected so that the clips look roughly the same, the superflat is way smoother, more organic in the highlights and shadows, and I didn't notice any extra noise or weird coloring.

There were lots of situations where we shot actors with a strong key and virtually no fill, and the superflat gaves us a response much closer to film or raw. Switching to superflat just crushes the darks. It's sort of like 50 ASA without the range in the highlights. I know people are asking why you don't just fill in instead of shooting superflat, but the reason to me is that the look you end up with with lots of fill and a sharp curve is simply a different look (again, like a slow film stock). So I prefer the look with the stretched blacks and highlights. Academically I myself would guess that flat would seriously hinder the midtones, but so far we haven't found that to be the case. Superflat is just a little more agnostic as to where the "good tones" are, and if you're one of us who learned the zone system, superflat is closer to what you expect, whereas standard feels exactly like someone is grabbing the footage and adding an s curve before you have a chance to protest.

Ultimately, I think the custom curves are a great tool. This $1800 camera is just that, but thank goodness it has custom settings for us to monkey with. Happy hunting.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone have an idea as to how to simulate or generate a saw pattern with the 7D?

When I attempt to create a gamma curve (and that's what these PS simulate) I set the cameras to generate a saw pattern then while closely watching a vectorscope I can bend and shape the curve to the point I am happy. I can do this very easily with the Sony EX1 and F900R as they internally generate a saw pattern. If I could do that with the 7D then I could start to see what these PS files are doing and perhaps create one that doesn't have the bad tradeoffs of SuperFlat or Marvel's.

Anyone with an idea of how to do this please chime in.

BTW, I shot a sit-down interview on set the other day with Marvel PS engaged and although I was happy with the overall look of the shot, the skin tones were pumpkin and chalky as others report - so I'm now using Neutral with Contrast, Sharpness at 0 and Saturation down 2 as mentioned in a post above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top