Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Ideal settings for GH3? (color grading and a first example)


81 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

A new name should be found. I don't like the name 'video' personally, because it derives from an unfitting historical background. From when 'video' meant recordings of events, not creating and editing images.

 

But the name 'film' will only cease to be generally used once the videomakers stop looking for cinematic travesty. And this will take a long time, unless you and the other 'pioneers' are just about to change this.

 

On wednesday, a local TV-team made a report about my restaurant, with a C500 and a 5D. I didn't see the finished video yet, but I saw clearly that they tried hard to make it look like film. Everybody does, if I didn't miss the latest trend.

 

People want to emulate the look of film with digital cameras because it's WAY cheaper than shooting with film to begin with.  People want the aesthetics of film, not the prices that comes with it.  

 

I never said to use the word "video", but shoot or shot.  Then if somebody was to ask what you "shot on", you would reply "digital" or possibly even "digital HD" or possibly even "digital 4k"

 

So no, it won't take long for people to drop the use of "I filmed this" because they will be PROUD to let you know  "I 4K'd it" lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The term "film" does and has had meaning beyond a direct reference to the physical medium, be it emulsion or print.  This isn't new.  Not within the actual "film industry" or language itself.  

 

If someone said "I 4K'd it" around me that would be an instant red flag for "noob".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

@burnetrhoades

shhhh, i'm trying to make "I 4K'd it" the new cool thing to say

 

and I will disagree, that there are TONS of people to take this to heart, myself included.

if it wasn't shot on FILM, it wasn't FILMED.

if you are watching a movie in a theater that was shot on digital, we can just say "motion picture"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

@burnetrhoades

shhhh, i'm trying to make "I 4K'd it" the new cool thing to say

...

 

Say no more, wink-wink, nudge-nudge...

 

 

Still, it's 100% valid to say you watched or made a "film" whether you used celluloid or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

try telling Tarintino you just watch "the new Film, The Hobbit" and see what he says lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

He isn't often given to pedantic pseudo-intellectualism but it doesn't change the fact of the term's common usage in this way predating digital anything.  Even if he did decide to eat a brain tumor for breakfast, the argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny...or even a dictionary.

zaz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

the dictionary lost credibility with me when it started using internet slang words like LOL and BRB along with "aint" lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Well, good luck with your campaign "taking it back" and all.

zaz likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

To 4k sth would be least telling verb for what one actually tries to achieve. I am as much rooted in analog audio-visual communications as possible and used to think of digital video as the poor mans film. Now that celliloid/acetate/polyester are history, there will be new things to explore, and within ten or twenty years from now the 'films' ( completely irrelevant at which resolution) might no longer resemble those of today. Pioneers will use techniques that are digital-only and add new vocabulary to the language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

thats why it was such a big deal the hobbit was 48

 

and i'm not trying to "take back" anything

I will just laugh at those that call digital "film" If Peter Jackson is calling The Hobbit a "film" he is an idiot in my book.

not to mention the hobbit was garbage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

@Grav...

In dutch the verb used when making moving pictures :rolleyes:  digital or tape is filmen 
If you speak about a video you would use Filmpje or Film 

If you go to a festival or a cinema no matter if it's digital, celluloid or whatever, you say - Ik ga naar de film...... 

 

Glad my language isn't so confusing!

 

 

Now lets go ON TOPIC again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I did some research on the noise grain in 50Mbit long-gop vs 72Mbit ALL-I

 

Actually the noise grain is the same in 50Mbit 24p and 72Mbit 24p. But it is different between 50Mbit 50/60p and 72mbit 24p especially in motion. Less noise in the 50/60p codec.

 

But the difference is quite small. 50p is on the left versus 25p (I have PAL camera hence EU frame rates).

 

gh3-50p-vs-25p.jpg

 

 

@EOSHD

Thanxs for posting this, Andrew!

What settings would you suggest are best for the GH3 achieving the 'Film' Look?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

@blance

 

achieving the "film" look can't be done from the camera itself

it takes a combination of things, starting with 24p, and a nice quality lens that isn't super sharp.

if you want to better achieve the "film look" as of this very second, sell your gh3 and buy a gh2 ; ) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The quest for the filmlook of course renders the whole crusade against the insulting word 'filming' pointless. A digital intermediate, used for 99% of all feature films of the last ten years, after grading is absolutely indistinguishable from modern digital video with same post applied. There is of course the theoretically better DR, but look at the Zacuto shootout and what place the GH2 reached between Alexa and Epic. And what is more, stylish grading means reducing tonal values to a degree where, again, a higher DR seldom shows.

Owner of both, I don't understand what you mean by saying the GH2 provided the better filmlook than the GH3. The filmlook is not generated by the camera, you said so yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Trying to "emulate" film with digital is A LOT differrnt than and actually calling digital "film"

It's the same as saying "I want the sin city/matrix look"

Also, as a owner a both, I can say, that having a higher bit that 72 is a better option, if it isn't, you will have no need to ever patch your gh3. Have you seen the video of the guy proving the gh2 has more DR than it gets credit for. Do you know for a FACT( has a 2 vs 3 shoot out been done) that the gh3 has the better DR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I did some research on the noise grain in 50Mbit long-gop vs 72Mbit ALL-I

 

Actually the noise grain is the same in 50Mbit 24p and 72Mbit 24p. But it is different between 50Mbit 50/60p and 72mbit 24p especially in motion. Less noise in the 50/60p codec.

 

But the difference is quite small. 50p is on the left versus 25p (I have PAL camera hence EU frame rates).

 

gh3-50p-vs-25p.jpg

 

@Andrew - I like the 50mbit 60P because the noise is easier to remove with Neat Video.  For some reason the 72mbit isn't consistent and is very hard to make a reliable noise profile.  And I haven't seen a real quality boost for the 72mbit.  I'm really amazed at the 50mbit 60P codec, it really works well.  The only downside is I can't use EX TELE mode, I have to go back to 72mbit.  I'm trying to get more long glass since we all want to achieve a look optically.  And the noise in EX TELE mode is really bad past ISO 800.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I just took some test shots with new settings in Mov following your answers in this threat .
They look ok! So the following two days I will shoot my next video on:

- MOV
- 24 p - 50 Mbps

- Contrast -5
- Sharpness -5
- Color -3
- Noise reduction -4


1. There is one thing which I don't understand completely - the noise reduction in relation to Iso. What kind of figure is a high Iso does it move towards 6400 or the other side? And i f it's high Iso should I move the NR towards 0? Because I'm so new to my camera I have all on automatic and filming in A modus - so the only thing I do manually is altering the depth of field and the sharpness.
In what way should I change the noise reduction when light is changing? Can I come by without altering the noise reduction tomorrow at the shoot?

2. If I use the AVCHD setting which p and Mbps should I use? The 24 p 24 Mbps or ...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I just took some test shots with new settings in Mov following your answers in this threat .
They look ok! So the following two days I will shoot my next video on:

- MOV
- 24 p - 50 Mbps

- Contrast -5
- Sharpness -5
- Color -3
- Noise reduction -4


1. There is one thing which I don't understand completely - the noise reduction in relation to Iso. What kind of figure is a high Iso does it move towards 6400 or the other side? And i f it's high Iso should I move the NR towards 0? Because I'm so new to my camera I have all on automatic and filming in A modus - so the only thing I do manually is altering the depth of field and the sharpness.
In what way should I change the noise reduction when light is changing? Can I come by without altering the noise reduction tomorrow at the shoot?

2. If I use the AVCHD setting which p and Mbps should I use? The 24 p 24 Mbps or ...?

 

ISO is the sensitivity of the sensor.  Higher ISOs mean more noise in the image.  I would rate ISO 1600 and higher as High ISO.  Noise Reduction will reduce the noise in-camera.  However, the camera will lose detail or "smear" the image if Noise Reduction is too high.  At -4 you will get very good detail, but increased noise.  If you intend to shoot at High ISO, I would suggest getting Noise Reduction software plug-in like Neat Video which reduces the noise in the image.

 

I know you're shooting A (Aperture priority) and probably ISO at A (auto).  It should be fine, just be prepared for each clip looking different because your ISO, white balance (WB) and shutter speed will be all over the place.  In an ideal world you will want to have everything on manual and be consistent with all these settings.  But I know you do traveling, and it's so hard to get the right settings.  The GH3 is pretty good on Auto, and your previous video was really good considering.

 

AVCHD will be fine at 24P 24Mbps.  Depends on your delivery, but if you like that image you should be fine.  I think you should try and shoot at a higher frame rate like 60P because you can always do slow motion effects later in post.  It also gives you smoother looking footage, and you can always convert 60P to 24P in post.  Either AVCHD or 50Mbits MOV, both 24P or 60P take about the same amount of space on your SD card.

 

I hope this helps.  Can't wait to see your next short film!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Hi Nahua - you're simply brilliant! Thanxs a lot!
Remind that I'm in Europe so electrical lights are 50 Hrz frequency.
In this treath  I also posted the flickering or banding issues I experienced while working with these settings. In this example it was with artificial lightning. But I also took some really good shots under the same circumstances with the same lights. I used the one point (correct name) setting, for measuring the light. 

https://vimeo.com/61454321

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

OK sorry go with shutter priority (S) mode and set it to 1/50 for EU/PAL lights.  Indoors the camera will automatically go to shallowest depth of field and change ISO to suit.  Shutter speed can be multiples of 1/50 - 1/100, 1/200 work too (for slow motion, but can look jittery like "Gladiator" movie if used at 24P).  Good luck!

Wit likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Thanxs!!! Still don't know why you have a A function if it's not helpful and you should shoot in the suggested S or M mode .... I guess I will figure this out later. For now I'll start working on my footage and film ;-) 

 

What do you men with the Gladiator look is this also on 1/50?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

"Gladiator" look is a reference to the Ridley Scott film Gladiator.  The actions scenes have a staccato movement associated with really high shutter speeds over 1/1000 sec.  Since most films are shot 24P at 1/50 sec, you get a more pleasing motion blur.  But if you want to do slow motion, then you need to shoot at 1/100 or faster shutter speed.  It's all in the look that you want to achieve.  Slower shutter speed means more motion blur, faster shutter speed means less blur and more stuttering movement.  Again play around with different settings to get the look you want.

 

As for the A function, well it really is a stills camera first.  So the legacy functions of A, S, M, and P are all there.  You can also change the movie mode to shoot in S function.  Go to movie mode on the dial, enter the menus, go to the camcorder icon menu, exposure mode and set to S.  Now all you see is the shutter speed, the aperture value is gone.  If you have ISO and WB both on Auto, then those icons disappear as well.  So now all you do is set your shutter speed and everything else is on auto.  In dark scenes it will automatically go for the widest aperture, then set the ISO for you.

Wit likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Thanxs for helping me learn it all in a short period  Nahua ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

One thing I don't get really. Why should I unscharp it in camera and rescharp it in post? Or shouldn't I do this with all the footage - just see what needs it and what doesn't ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0