The Footage from Leo's shoot...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I hadn't watched the Vimeo streaming version yet and just did that. Because of the compression the noise appears less noticeable. It could be that because of the compression the noise just hasn't been noticed much on other AF100 footage, including Philip Bloom's.

Again, I'll reiterate that the footage from AF100 from this shoot looks impressive. I can't wait to get my camera.
 
FWIW, I am watching playback @1080p through my MXO 2 to a (calibrated) Panasonic 42" monitor in my suite and I am not seeing objectionable noise at normal iso's.
 
Duke M. said:
The noise is in the scenes with the 10 candles, it was pushed up to 3200 ISO. You're always going to get noise that high.

As far as the GH1/2 being a different number of pixels as the AF100, they are all three about 3.4 Megapixels, the same as the F3 and Alexa BTW.

The DSLRs aren't all that impressive. I've had two. They take good still pictures.

You're probably one of those guys that just needs to test it yourself side by side. Barry is right.
Click to expand...

Really the GH2 has 3.5 mega pixels? Then why does it have 16 mega pixels?

I'm gonna do a side by side right now actually.

BTW, that's even less impressive if that was pushed up to 3200 ISO. I'd expect WAY more of the scene to be visible at that number.

Anyways, does the AF-100 also have that 1:1 cropping mode that just uses the center 1920x1080 pixels?
 
Last edited:
For people seeing lots of noise in shadows, the gamma curve of your display will play a part in that also. Many will be emphasising noise that should be almost invisible (barely above black).
 
As I understand this was recorded in H.264 transfered into Pro Res 422 HQ edited then up loaded to Vimeo where I assume it get re-compressed, the down load comes in H.264, is it possible that at some point in this chain the noise was introduced? Could some one check the original clips from the camera and see if there is the same noise as we are seeing from Vimeo?
 
Hey Barry, here's where I'm seeing it. Again, I'm looking at this compared to all that other AF100 footage, on a PH9UK Panny 50". One thing about this Panny, is it's not like the usual consumer plasmas and LCDs, that seem to process out, and soften noise and compression. Although it's a beautiful monitor, it's very precise and fine, you see everything.
Noise:

:19 Midtone greys in background, especially upper right
:24 Lemon Squeeze WS, dark background, lots of very fine grain noise.
1:00 Midtone Greys, lower right especially noticed.
All the low light stuff was surprisingly noisy, obviously 800, which I thought looked unusable as is. Neat Video might help, but it also tends to soften quite a bit on that much noise.

And at 1:29, what's up with the dark edge-line on all her skin in your pre-matted green screen shot? Looks similar to what I noticed in the edge of the older man's arm from the German dance video.

Btw - your lighting on the Girl for the green screen shot was particularly beautiful, very soft. Nice!
 
Yak said:
As I understand this was recorded in H.264 transfered into Pro Res 422 HQ edited then up loaded to Vimeo where I assume it get re-compressed, the down load comes in H.264, is it possible that at some point in this chain the noise was introduced? Could some one check the original clips from the camera and see if there is the same noise as we are seeing from Vimeo?
Click to expand...

I believe the flow of it would have been AVCHD -> ProRes HQ for edit -> ProRes HQ output from FCP -> H.264 compression (I'm guessing they used Compressor) for upload to Vimeo

The file Vimeo lets you download is the original file that was uploaded to Vimeo. So Vimeo never got a ProRes HQ file.
 
Yak said:
As I understand this was recorded in H.264 transfered into Pro Res 422 HQ edited then up loaded to Vimeo where I assume it get re-compressed, the down load comes in H.264, is it possible that at some point in this chain the noise was introduced? Could some one check the original clips from the camera and see if there is the same noise as we are seeing from Vimeo?
Click to expand...

This is why I want to see camera native. No compression, no nothing. Just the real thing.
 
I'm also seeing serious banding in the smoke during the credits. Is that something shot with the AF100 or something they had stock for the edit?
 
Mike@AF said:
I'm also seeing serious banding in the smoke during the credits. Is that something shot with the AF100 or something they had stock for the edit?
Click to expand...

Yeah man I saw that too, and I'm looking at the file downloaded from vimeo at 1080p on a plasma. I think there's a substantial compression chain going on by the time we're seeing it.
 
Mike@AF said:
I believe the flow of it would have been AVCHD -> ProRes HQ for edit -> ProRes HQ output from FCP -> H.264 compression (I'm guessing they used Compressor) for upload to Vimeo

The file Vimeo lets you download is the original file that was uploaded to Vimeo. So Vimeo never got a ProRes HQ file.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info I was not sure how Vimeo works, so if the download file is the same as what was uploaded, then if the noise was not in the AVCHD original I suspect the noise may be a result how and what setting were used to compress the edited timeline into H.264.
 
I thought everything was beautiful up until the lowlight stuff.. I was actually shocked by the noise. Then I thought, hmmm maybe it's just me....guess not.
 
Duke M. said:
The noise is in the scenes with the 10 candles, it was pushed up to 3200 ISO. You're always going to get noise that high.

As far as the GH1/2 being a different number of pixels as the AF100, they are all three about 3.4 Megapixels, the same as the F3 and Alexa BTW.

The DSLRs aren't all that impressive. I've had two. They take good still pictures.

You're probably one of those guys that just needs to test it yourself side by side. Barry is right.
Click to expand...

Uh....chief, did you read the text in the bottom left corner, ISO never went over 800 for the candle scenes.
 
What are those artifacts the candles are making? Is that what people refer to as blooming? Curious, since I've never seen this on my 7D or 5D.
 
Mike@AF said:
I'm also seeing serious banding in the smoke during the credits. Is that something shot with the AF100 or something they had stock for the edit?
Click to expand...

Okay, this is about where I quit. If people are going to complain about the stock footage that they inserted, then there is no way to win.

Can I just ask all of you to please consider that the guy who shot this is a 30-year veteran of the industry, who has been shooting for the biggest clients in the world (guys like Allstate, GM, Chrysler, etc), owns the biggest production company in the state, and owns his own VariCam and Red One. He's not exactly blind. He looked at the footage and said "I'm selling my VariCam."

Or his DIT, a professional of I don't know how many decades, calibrated the monitor and said "I have never, ever seen a camera that looked that good, that accurate, right out of the box."

Or the editor, Joe Walker, a guy who the last short he worked on was nominated for an Oscar, had this to say about the footage >in this very thread<...
yeah...playing out of my FCP timeline through an AJA Kona 3 to a Sony BVM monitor and a Panasonic Pro LCD, I can tell all of you that it looks stunning. Period.
Click to expand...

Now, either we're all blind, or there's something haywire somewhere. And I'm pretty sure we're not all blind. I really don't care if anyone likes the footage or not, but when someone tries to tell me that the footage we were all drooling over, looks like they could have got it on a ******* 7D at 1250 ISO, then there's one hell of a disconnect going on.

I'm not gonna try to talk any of you into, or out of, anything. So think what you want. Or don't. Buy whatever you want. Or don't. But I can't stay here in Bizarro World much longer as it's gonna drive me insane. We were there. Those of us who were there, just like those of us who were in Osaka, were universal in absolutely loving everything this little camera did. So if you're not seeing it that way, then either you've got way better eyes than Philip Bloom, Emmanuel Pampuri, Vicenc Ascencia, Leo Ticheli, Joe Walker, Filippo Chiesa, and all the rest of us put together... or maybe, just maybe, there's something else going on.

All I can say definitively is -- it ain't the camera's fault, and the footage looks fantastic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top