Subforums
-
The EOSHD YouTube Channel (23,250 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
- 458.7k views
-
- 0 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 700 replies
- 304.3k views
-
- 1.8k replies
- 749.5k views
-
- 1 reply
- 42 views
-
- 59 replies
- 5.5k views
-
- 3 replies
- 79 views
-
- 15 replies
- 798 views
-
- 2 replies
- 212 views
-
- 5 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 7 replies
- 217 views
-
- 7 replies
- 2.9k views
-
- 120 replies
- 62.6k views
-
- 3 replies
- 303 views
-
- 560 replies
- 257.2k views
-
- 18 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 2 replies
- 215 views
-
- 20 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 57 replies
- 18.4k views
-
- 46 replies
- 2.4k views
-
- 60 replies
- 19.1k views
-
- 3 replies
- 687 views
-
- 126 replies
- 57k views
-
- 88 replies
- 57.8k views
-
- 71 replies
- 34k views
-
- 14 replies
- 832 views
-
- 19 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 10 replies
- 742 views
-
- 79 replies
- 55.2k views
-
- 26 replies
- 19.5k views
-
- 3 replies
- 2.7k views
-
- 105 replies
- 42.2k views
-
- 1 reply
- 448 views
-
- 15 replies
- 913 views
-
- 33 replies
- 6.5k views
-
- 9 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 0 replies
- 551 views
-
- 4 replies
- 610 views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.3k
-
Total Posts351.7k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
Very interesting. I've been looking into this for a long time and hadn't heard some of these insights. Very useful. One thing he got wrong, at least for v3 of their colour science is that there isn't anything luma-specific done to the image inside the camera, it's all done in the LUT. The evidence for this is when people do under/over tests, where the camera is deliberately under and over exposed, when you correct the image in post to the correct exposure the colours are all the same. If they were warming the highlights or cooling the shadows in-camera then when you overexposed and brought the exposure down in post then that warmth would be baked-in and your mid-tones would be warm (or they'd be cooler if you underexposed) but that's not what we see. It's also no secret that they compress the skin-tone hue range and also tend to skew yellow, especially compared to Canon which skews magenta/red. The IR-cut filter letting in a bit of far-red so the skin-tones get that scattering is interesting. To a certain extent it might be 'recoverable' in post (ie, perhaps we can guess what might have been there based on what info we do have). Perhaps the key aspect of any such attempts would be to blur this new channel once it's been simulated, as this is the information coming from deeper in the skin and is scattered a bit. It's been hinted at that part of the 'Cooke Look' was that they used materials that slightly blurred light at a range of frequencies within skin tones, so the lenses sort-of worked like a skin-hue-only diffusion filter. Potentially anyone with a full-spectrum camera (OG BMPCC BMMC anyone?) could seek out IR-cut filters that are designed to let in more far-red. Potentially even people with IR-cut filters on their sensors could get strong ND filters to boost the relative proportion of IR coming into the camera. I'm guessing that the right amount of the right ND might do it - have enough ND that the IR is boosted but not so much that the blacks become polluted. It's funny he mentioned that the iPhone has a strong IR-cut filter - I was testing my iPhone 17 Pro the other day with lots of ND (because it doesn't have an iris!) and I got a ton of IR pollution, including getting a non-trivial amount of it when using the same vND I use on my GH7 which I've never seen any IR pollution on. So the iPhone must have less IR filtration than the GH7. It's worth adding that a lot of these things are also accomplished by film emulation. -
-
thanks guys! Really appreciate the answers! Yeah, I'll probably will focus on getting mic and lighting setups firsts -
I thought the title was slightly clickbaity but I’m glad I clicked on this one. There are a lot of “Arri look on your xyz camera” videos but I think this is a far more interesting take on it. The question is are you doomed to never match it because it is baked in (not least the IR cut filter) and it can’t be reverse engineered in post? Can anyone who has bought the Arri license for their supported Panasonic camera chime in with their thoughts? -
For the talking-head stuff, almost any camera will be good enough if given enough light, so I'd suggest you concentrate on getting 1) enough light so your camera is at its native ISO, and 2) lighting that is flattering and creates depth and contrast in the image. There are lots of videos on YT that show this, and the before/afters show what is possible. You don't need expensive lights either, there is tonnes of info on home DIY hacks using lamps and cheap shower screens as diffusers, etc. The standard approach is 3 Point Lighting, like this: This video is a good primer and talks about how to use (or avoid) existing light sources like natural light and ceiling lights etc. Other videos that might be useful: This video is longer but starts with a complete setup, so acoustics etc too. Cameras get all the attention, but in the real world are some of the least important parts of the whole setup. You're lucky in that you're building something indoors for one specific use in an environment you control and (hopefully) doesn't have to be portable and easy/quick to setup and pack away. With a bit of effort you should be able to get a great setup that works really well and doesn't cost much at all.
-
