The perfect settings? For me, at least...

disjecta

Lucky Duck
In my endless attempt to get the perfect picture from the DVX, I think I have finally found a combination that looks really good to me. Keep in mind that this is all subjective and it may not be good for someone else.

I have found that video noise is very prevalent in this camera using the presets for f5 or f6 and, as noted by others on this board, I can attribute it to the Cine matrix. I changed that to NORM and made sure gamma was set to Cine-Like (not D or V) and the noise level during low light shooting is drastically reduced. V Detail and Detail Coring are left at 0.

I'm shooting in Thin mode with the IRIS stopping down -3 in the settings...

You will notice quite a difference when you change the matrix to norm as far as the color is concerned. It flattens the color and makes it look more video-like. Interestingly, when I captured the footage and applied a simple levels adjustment (enhanced both blacks and whites), I found that the color richness returned but the noise level was still at a minimum.

Another thing that frustrated me about the DVX was it's inability to render detail in far away objects, such as trees on a horizon. I cranked the sharpness to +5 and it made a significant difference to the perceived detail. I tested the footage on a NTSC studio monitor as well as a widescreen plasma TV and did not notice any line twitter. My test footage consisted of lots of very thin diagonal lines.

Now I know in critical testing using test cards, etc., you will probably notice some synthetic edge ehancement happening with the sharpness cranked so high, my concern is seeing real world examples, not theoretical results.

Bottom line, I am getting footage that is clear of noise (relatively speaking), rich in color and sharper than I've ever been able to get from any DV camera.

Try it if you are interested but I just thought I'd share my findings because there have been a few people experiencing problems with video noise recently.
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

[quote author=disjecta link=board=Events;num=1098303335;start=0#0 date=10/20/04 at 13:15:35]I changed that to NORM and made sure gamma was set to Cine-Like (not D or V) and the noise level during low light shooting is drastically reduced.[/quote]

You mention low light shooting. Do you also use these settings with well lit shots?

(btw - Thanks for all the info you have been providing)
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

Yes, I am using these settings for all light situations and results are equally as good.
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

Have you viewed the +5 sharpened footage on a large screen or at high res? I'm just curious how obvious the sharpening artifacts are/will be.
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

Viewed it on a 50" HD plasma display and it looked really good.
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

Great, thanks for the info :). No sharpening artifacts at all then?
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

Not that I can see and, to be honest, that's all I care about :D I'm my own worse critic.
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

detail at +5...

well, we all know (or think we know) that "using a video cam you must decrease detail in order to have a more filmlike image"... i never even tried to increase detail...!

how does it goes for you, you seem to like it but is it on u "purely technical" meaning? but maybe you are not seeking for the film look and just triyng to have the best video image possible with your DVX ?

Just curious... but i'll run some test anyway.

Nico
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

Here's a still using all of the above settings. Shot on letterbox and then uprezzed to 16:9 using Photozoom:

You'll have to download it because it's a tiff image.

http://www.pinelakefilms.com/images/duck.tif

Now granted, this is a close up, I don't have any long shots at the moment to post.

And yes, my goal is still to have it look like film, not video....the best 35mm transfers you see are ultra-sharp so making it soft is not necessarily a requirement for a fiilm look.
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

so making it soft is not necessarily a requirement for a fiilm look.

I couldn't agree more. I understand the point of limiting artifacts for projection but sharpness in and of itself is a good thing I think. Never did understand the soft=better mentality. ESPECIALLY if you are going to project this... it will add another layer of softness!

That TIFF is absolutely amazing... I can't see any artifacts at all. This is great news IMO! Anyone else see [possible] artifacts I [may have] missed?
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

We are talking about setting the sharpness in the camera to +5 and then observing how that sharpness comes across on a TV....is that what you are asking?
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

Yes. Thanks for the suggestion. I am starting my slasher movie this weekend. I have learned so much from this forum. I will metion it in my end credits. I have a print out with settings all across the board. It will be a kick ass movie with tons of gore and tits.
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

The last link didn't work.  The duck looked fantastic, though...as all your work does.

I shoot with almost the exact same settings (except I lower the master ped and increase the chroma to compensate for the normal matrix), and get great results.  Very, very little noise, especially with the 3200ºK white balance (one of my next toys will be an 85B filter to eliminate noise in the 5600ºK white balance.)  However, I disagree about +5 detail.  The detail setting doesn't add any more resolution, just artificial sharpness, and while it's easy to add sharpness in post, it's darned hard to remove edge artifacts.  I find slightly blurry footage up-rezzes more easily, too, and sharpness can be added later.

This is uprezzed in photoshop (no s-spline or anything) and was from a blurry motion shot with a slow shutter speed (1/24th), and softness cranked up:
wideshot.jpg

The detail can still be recovered in post with sharpening (which I used here), without any risk of messing the image up.  The duck has inspired me to shoot with 0 detail, but +5 seems like it could introduce ugly artifacts in areas of high contrast.
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

That's a nice shot....I fixed the link...should have been "trees"...

I have my master ped set to -5...chroma level set to +4

I'm still experimenting and you make a good case for keeping the detail lower, I may end up going much lower but I need to see how it does under a bunch of different conditions...so far so good.
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

My browser doesn't mind showing TIFF images...after clicking all those annoying Quicktime prompts. :)

Dan
 
Re: The perfect settings? For me, at least...

Here's the three examples as jpegs....I wanted to show these with the least amount of compression, hence the original TIFFs...

duck.jpg


malemallard.jpg


trees.jpg


I cropped the landscape shot slightly because there was vignetting from my teleconverter (these were just tests so I didn't care about that at the time)
 
Back
Top