Subforums
-
The EOSHD YouTube Channel (23,258 visits to this link)
17,286 topics in this forum
-
- 5.8k replies
- 1.8m views
-
- 9.1k replies
- 2.6m views
-
- 1.2k replies
- 459.1k views
-
- 0 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 700 replies
- 304.5k views
-
- 1.8k replies
- 750k views
-
- 8 replies
- 215 views
-
- 3 replies
- 175 views
-
- 18 replies
- 890 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 61 replies
- 5.9k views
-
- 2 replies
- 483 views
-
- 7 replies
- 274 views
-
- 7 replies
- 2.9k views
-
- 120 replies
- 62.7k views
-
- 3 replies
- 321 views
-
- 560 replies
- 257.5k views
-
- 18 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 2 replies
- 233 views
-
- 20 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 57 replies
- 18.4k views
-
- 46 replies
- 2.6k views
-
- 60 replies
- 19.2k views
-
- 3 replies
- 699 views
-
- 126 replies
- 57.2k views
-
- 88 replies
- 57.9k views
-
- 71 replies
- 34k views
-
- 14 replies
- 853 views
-
- 19 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 10 replies
- 755 views
-
- 79 replies
- 55.3k views
-
- 26 replies
- 19.6k views
-
- 3 replies
- 2.8k views
-
- 105 replies
- 42.3k views
-
- 1 reply
- 458 views
-
- 15 replies
- 926 views
-
- 33 replies
- 6.5k views
-
- 9 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 0 replies
- 561 views
-
- 4 replies
- 621 views
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.3k
-
Total Posts351.7k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
To add to the above, Matti Haapoja (perhaps the king of pixel peeping "cinematic" YT) uploaded a bunch of videos that were edited in 1080p (and upscaled to 4K for export) and he tracked all the comments and not a single person commented that the videos looked different or whatever. In a blind real-world test literally not one of the pixel-peeping techno-fetishist pedants could tell. Of course you'd still want a good 1080p image, some 1080p cameras were better than others. The added bonus of this approach is you only need 25% of the computing power to edit it. Or if you go with h264 instead of h265 then it's even less! -
How interesting. I guess something like that would be very difficult to determine for cinematographers etc, but if you're a lens manufacturer with all the test equipment then buying all your competitors lenses and then testing them and taking them apart would be pretty standard operating procedure.
-
There's a touch of gate weave in there, but I can definitely increase it. I was surprised about the grain actually. The amount I had dialled in was about 0.16 and I uploaded a test sequence that had 0.1 / 0.2 / 0.3 / 0.4 and the 0.2 was clearly far too much, so the above was just 0.1 as I figured if it's too little then it would be similar to when people upload and YT compresses it a lot and removes most of the grain. I guess there's two approaches.. The first is to make it look like film in the NLE and then upload it and YT will remove lots of grain but it will look like real film uploaded and processed by YT. The second is to do whatever you have to do in the NLE to make the final YT stream look like film. The more I look at my references the more I realise there is incredibly variation between them and that I have tonnes of leeway.
-
By fuzzynormal · Posted
I contend that the old GX7 looks better than a GH5. -
By Clark Nikolai · Posted
It's really good. I'll have to watch a few times again to analyze more but my first impression is that this type amount of grain I associate with the 1970s and the cameras used back then for 16mm had some gate weave. Maybe try a touch of that and see.
-
