Your Experience with EX1 EX3 and detail setting

M

mico

Veteran
Would like to hear about anyones opinions or experiences to what detail setting they think is the best after viewing on a screen or large quality monitor.

Or has anyone used the cam on a TV job, tell us what was set details at.

I've had detail off but recently have set a new Picture profile cine gamma and cinema matrix with a -10 detail setting with crispening at +20 and frequency at +30 which looks great. Just wondering about how it would look on a larger quality screen and don't have the access.

this is for a look without a 35mm adapter.

thanks
 
You are going to get a lot of people telling you to turn detail off. The EX1 looks pretty good, but it just seemed to lack a crispness that I wanted. (My background is still photography. My experience in film/video is limited, so I may have different expectations.)

I borrowed this from Tom Roper.

Setting: On
Level : +1
Frequency: +65
Crispening: 0
H/V Ratio: 0
White Limiter: +75
Black Limiter: +75
V DTL Creation: Y
Knee APT Level: 0

It gives clarity, without obvious sharpening.

Pete

Now, let the games begin.
 
Pete,
I was intrigued by your detail setting in the positive range and just today i picked up HDvideo pro magazine and there was an article on the making of Crank2 and the DP talks about how they turned up the sharpness and details setting on the canon XH A1 because the directors wanted it so sharp that it hurt your eyes. He describes the image as super crispy.

I know that the EX cams are sharper than the canons and it will be interesting to see how this translates on the big screen. As with all things I guess its up the individual to decide if it fits content. I was concerned that turning detail up might create unacceptable problems and that may not be the case.

The Dp also talks about using the EX1 which had just been released at the start of shooting and that they used it for the slow motion work at 60fps.
 
Assuming you will be editing the footage, the crispness factor can be achieved in post too. Why not give yourself more leeway and turn detail off while shooting and then sharpen to please afterwards?

I used to shoot with detail on and yes, it's friggin' amazing to see such sharpness right out of the camera, but it couldn't retain this sharpness during motion/panning, even slow pans, so I turned detail off and I'm much happier with the way motion looks. And when the camera is still, I can simply sharpen it to get that amazing high-def sharpness.
 
Buck,

If you have the time or the inclination could you try these settings and tell me if you see motion problems with it. I use it and don't see any but it would be interesting to hear from another person.

Matrix - Cinema
level - +35
Black- -2
Detail- between -5 to -10
crispening- +30
Frequency- +30
Gamma- cine 1

The frequency and the crispening thin out the edges of the sharpening so it won't be as noticeable when panning stops. This is a good area of investigation because it might help alleviate motion to no motion shots.

I remember a thread about how sharpness snaps back in when panning stops but I can't find it. ( if anyone can link to it i would appreciate it) I can see how this would be a problem but playing with these settings might eliminate it

I have not used post sharpening. I did it in the DV days but was never happy with the outcome and am a little gun shy about it when working with compressed footage. Would love to be rid of this assumption and any link to info or images would be appreciated. The fact that Crank 2 DP did the sharpening in camera instead of post also makes me question the dilemma of in camera or post sharpening. With their budget the certainly could have dialed in any post sharpening they wanted.
 
Last edited:
Hey mico, I'd be glad to give it a shot, sounds good! I'm with you, if it can best be done in camera, then that's the way to go, for both time and messing with codec as little as possible. I'll be out of town for a week on business without my camera, but I'll try it when I get back. I'm always open to trying/tweaking new things. Gracias.
 
I just got the EX-1 but have always used the theory Buck presented about sharpening in post.

Right now, I am using a -30 detail setting.

The main thing I try to avoid in all of the my cameras is edge fringing. To me, this is what film looks like, soft but sharp at the same time.

By turning the detail lower, the edges have a much better appearance and draw less attention which means less of a video look to me.

Also, editing software sharpening is much more powerful than in camera, so the end result will be better and more controllable.

But, this only works if you edit your own material...
 
Bassman,

Thanks. Can you do a test try and bring detail up to around -10 and then play with the detail frequency in a positive direction and see what you get. The frequency will changes the width of the detail correction making the edges thinner. Just dont go past +40 as that will introduce aliasing, twitter and such. Would like to hear your opinion.

I would love to see examples from anyone between in camera and post sharpening in HD. Like I said I don't understand why Crank 2 did it in camera as opposed to post unless post sharpening stresses the codec. And if thats why then t would be good to know in camera settings for detail.
 
I have no experience with sharpening in post, so I can't speak to that. But when experimenting the other day with various pix profiles on the ex3, the Detail off setting was just unacceptable. Too much information was lost (tire ruts in the ground, individual branches, etc), visible in the viewfinder and then much more so on a 42" later. Maybe there's a setting in between, but I thought I was looking at SD, not HD, with if off.

As for motion on pans, I was detecting no loss of edge detail when panning with detail on. It sounds like Buck has, though. This was a big honking landscape with a slow pan, locked down. Where I noticed the effects of the pan was when I was at 24p, rather than at 30p. I've always loved the "film look" of 24p, but the judder was unacceptable and I've switched to 30p. This, too, was visible both in the viewfinder and especially on the big screen.

BTW, the BBC profile worked out the best for me. (But with detail on)
 
I'm a little embarrassed to admit that I haven't noticed much difference since I turned the detail off. But then I've never done any side-by-side comparisons yet. I guess I need to try that. (shoot a shot with it on, and then again with it off)

Maybe it's because I'm normally shooting through an adaptor and that gives the footage an organic look.

BTW, I'm viewing my footage through an AJA Io HD connected to a 24-inch JVC pro LCD panel, supposedly designed for critical viewing.
 
When I am shooting something in HD that will air in SD, I leave the detail on at zero. I edit with an Avid that can down convert in real time. The SD image stays sharp with detail on and any noise created by detail does not show in the image.

When I am shooting something that airs in HD, I bring the detail level down to -25. This makes the image a little softer, but gets rid of a lot of artificial sharpening noise (that's what I call it anyway). I think the image becomes more film like. I also turn on the skintone detail and bring that level way down (-75). It makes skin look a lot more pleasing (gets rid of the pores!). To me this setup makes the EX1 camera look a lot like our very expensive varicam. The only downside to this setting is that this video down converted to SD seems a little soft from our Avid.

I guess what I am saying is that detail depends on what you like (softer look or super detail) and how the footage will air (SD, HD, WEB, ETC...).

I also don't crank up the chroma or crush the black levels in camera. You can do that in post later. I am sure that compression prefers less chroma info too (maybe I am wrong).
 
I just remembered something...abou a month ago I shot some footage without the adaptor, but with the factory detail settings turned on. I then converted it to SD MPEG-2 for DVD use and I saw a lot of noise in the hard edges of objects. I assumed this was because I had the detail turned on. Since then I've been shooting with the detail off, but I haven't converted anything to SD MPEG-2 yet. I'm crossing my fingers that when I do, it will look better.

If that doesn't help, the next step is to try different compression software (other than Apple Compressor). I've heard good things about BitVice. But that's a topic for another thread.....not this one. :)
 
Compressing HD to SD with software is always a little tricky. I love editing systems that can down convert in real time. The higher end Avids spit out very nice HD to SD footage.
 
Around -10 detail is what i'm liking and I don't want to go softer. I guess it comes down to personal preference and the monitor you're looking at which is crucial.
I just got the EX1 field guide book and the detail setting Jensen uses is also -10.

I'm also curious if anyone has done any tests upscaling 720 24p slow mo footage to 1080 24p and if they made the 720p sharper to compensate for the 1080p upscale.

Nothing bothers me about this camera at all and the only thing I would want is 1080p variable frame rates. Seems the rumored Canon cameras have that option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top