C100: zebra
- Thread starter tom1
- Start date
Eric Coughlin
Veteran
I'd never let zebras get on the face. If you really want zebras on your subject, it's best to let the lower legs of your subject have the zebras, though even that is still not advised. I'm talking about 100% zebras. 70% zebras can cause abnormalities.
Last edited:
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I do this, have for decades, has always worked out well for me for exposure. I do have a look at the waveform too though, I rely more on that when shooting handheld as it's easier to see in the Blade screen in bright sunlight.
I only messed with the waveform recently, on my last C100 shoot. I'm not sure how you can really read the waveform in a run & gun situation, as far as which parts are the skin tones vs anything else in that part of the frame (shirt, sky, environment, etc.). I guess you just get used to it?
As for zebras, I've had them set at 90 or 100 too and that keeps from being miles off, but for precision I really think you need them on the thing you're exposing for (usually skin). Not sure what you mean about abnormalities with 70% zebras, unless you mean problems with consistency across shots (like being too anal with getting just the right amount of "zebes" on the face could make you change exposure slightly shot to shot and then they won't match).
There's usually a very specific point where the skin looks exposed "just" right. . .highlights aren't too bright and you're not underexposing either. If you're doing a movie or something this is different, but for typical corporate/ENG applications I generally want to be "just right", and I also think human skin is probably the most unforgiving thing to be wrong on. . .a little over and it looks way worse to me than animals, plants, architecture, etc.
As for zebras, I've had them set at 90 or 100 too and that keeps from being miles off, but for precision I really think you need them on the thing you're exposing for (usually skin). Not sure what you mean about abnormalities with 70% zebras, unless you mean problems with consistency across shots (like being too anal with getting just the right amount of "zebes" on the face could make you change exposure slightly shot to shot and then they won't match).
There's usually a very specific point where the skin looks exposed "just" right. . .highlights aren't too bright and you're not underexposing either. If you're doing a movie or something this is different, but for typical corporate/ENG applications I generally want to be "just right", and I also think human skin is probably the most unforgiving thing to be wrong on. . .a little over and it looks way worse to me than animals, plants, architecture, etc.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
I typically expose skin highlights at 70 IRE with the zebras and just use my eyes. The waveform I typically use to evaluate overall exposure when I am shooting b-roll on set and I generally just go for a "chunky" overall exposure without a lot hanging off of either end and little blown out, although shooting in the Sahara during mid day as I recently was, that is difficult. I have shot literally thousands of interviews and promos over the years and I can pretty much eyeball correct exposure for my camera, with my lighting package and the camera at ISO 850, if I am starting with a dark room and truly lighting it from scratch, I know I will be at F2.2 to 3.5 tops, that's all of the output my LED panels have. I agree, with the 8bit of the C100, you need to get the exposure pretty nailed, you don't have a ton of latitude to work with.
Last edited:
When shooting in WIDE DR, after some suggestions from this very forum, I've been setting zebras to 70-75, and exposing so faces are one notch below any zebras on the face (in a "normal" lighting environment).
In C-LOG, I found having skin tones hovering near 50 IRE seems to be the sweet spot, when using official Canon LUT's to start grading the footage. After all these years, it is still a profound mystery to me why we can't set the zebra's on the cinema line below 70. Surely it would be a simple firmware tweak!
In C-LOG, I found having skin tones hovering near 50 IRE seems to be the sweet spot, when using official Canon LUT's to start grading the footage. After all these years, it is still a profound mystery to me why we can't set the zebra's on the cinema line below 70. Surely it would be a simple firmware tweak!
There are quite a few threads about the waveform and C-Log (since zebras don't go below 70% and 70% is apparently hotter than you want ANYTHING in C-Log). I don't have enough experience with the C100 but zebras to 70-75 and then getting zebras completely off the face on an EX1 leads to a slightly underexposed look, to my eye. Not BAD, just a little darker than it ought to be.
That's only what I find useful for the WIDE DR gamma. For a regular rec.709 gamma, a touch of zebra at 70 tends to look about right, in my opinion and experience.