All Activity

Here is my understanding about 4K NRAW in Nikon Z6 III / Zr and Z8. I don't have the camera just gathered info from Internet. Correct me if I am wrong. Z8 as others already mentioned uses two different methods to get 4.1K NRAW / RED RAW from 8K. Gerald Undone gets a lot of criticism on this forum but he mentioned those methods in his Z8 review while many other reviews don't. Typically for all 4.1K from 24fps to 60fps and 120fps Nikon Z8 uses line skipping with all artifacts that come with this method. Only for 24p,25p and 30p Nikon Z8 has a special EXTENDED OVERSAMPLING mode. This method of course gives more detailed / better image. It is not without it's own issues. Those issues becomes logical when we ask ourself how do they over sample a RAW video stream and at the end get another RAW video stream ? https://alikgriffin.com/nikon-z8-color-shifts-4k24p-nraw/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyyiKwlRXCA IMHO this small green cast in the shadows will be easy to fix. Still will require some work and time. The extended oversampling is not available for 60p and 120p. In this case APS-C crop is an option for better non line skipped image. Nikon Z6 III / Zr 4K NRAW is line skipped, but 6K full sensor width NRAW has only slightly higher bit rates when shooting with NORMAL quality. They are comparable to Sony Intraframe codecs. IMHO for RAW video 24Mpx sensors represents the best balance between resolution and speed. Too many mega pixels and large portion of them should be discarded somehow for 4K RAW video or we have to deal with huge 8K filesand do the down scaling in editing. 12Mpx sensor on the other side actually has less pixels than theory suggest are needed for perfect 4K DCI debayering. Rumors about what Sony using probably a fully stacked 24Mpx sensor in next FX3 make sense. Nikon Z6 III / Zr Achilles heel in NRAW so far is dynamic range / latitude. All tests of Nikon Z6 III so for show 1 stop less of both dynamic range and latitude compared to sensors in Nikon Z8, Sony 12Mpx one in ZV-E1, A7S III, FX3, FX6, 50 MPx one in A1, Sony Venice 2. They all have dynamic range between 12 and 13 stops and 8 stops of latitude. I really hope Red Raw better log profile, chroma noise reduction and 6K to 4K resolution down-scaling will give one more stop of DR and make this sensor on par with the rest. After all same sensor in non DR Boost mode in Panasonic S1 II when using ProRes RAW codec reached 9 stops of latitude. It is hard to believe Nikon used some trimmed down version of the same sensor. x265 10bit 4:2:0 in latest Nikon hybrid cameras is visibly of lower quality compared to RAW video but it may turn out to be perfectly fine for most tasks and most people. Nikon x265 10 bit 4:2:0 may turn out to be as good as other brands x265 10bit 4:2:2. I don't know until I try it myself or see a detailed test. Between Nikon Z6 III and Zr I would choose Z6 III. It has good EVF, shutter, Full HDMI port and is a true hybrid. Internally for video they are practically the same and by renaming NRAW video files we get access to the better RED RAW pipeline and color science in Resolve. Current Nikon Z6 III price in a local photo shop is 2050E. Nikon Zr price is 2375 Euro and camera is not yet available. Nikon Z6 III doesn't sell well, price was decreased significantly from original 2500-2800 Еuro most likely because it doesn't offer significant upgrade for photo shooters and all those talks about lower dynamic range. Second hand Z6 III bodies pop up locally from time to time in the 1700-1800 Euro range and still with warranty. IMHO Nikon Z6 III and Zr are for people who want to shoot RAW video. Theory and practice tell us 10bit 4:2:2 is equally good but sometimes we just want something 🙂, for whatever reason. 12bit NRAW with RED RAW hack is really a great choice because it offers fairly compressed industry standard RAW codec. ProRes RAW has higher bit rates. I edited in Resolve some sample NRAW video clips from Nikon Z8 and Z6 III and can say that if video is exposed properly there is no need of noise reduction. Editing, color correcting and grading them is not more difficult or time consuming than SLog3 internal footage from Sony. They take more space but still nothing crazy and for certain projects and people it could be acceptable. Bottom line: If you want to shoot RAW Nikon Zr, Z6 III and Z8 as well are great options, first two being quite affordable. I am worming up to the idea to get Nikon Z6 III. Use it some time and compared it with Sony ZV-E1 which has one of the best Sony sensors for video. Then eventually keep one of the two and sell the other.

10-bit D-Log M 4K 120fps It doesn't record straight to the MicroSD card though...

If no-one is able to assist here, might be worth asking in the relevant sub-forum on liftgammagain.com where the colourists all hang out. Of course, you might get an answer that's more technical than you'd like...

Been getting back into video editing lately, and have been digging deep into optimizing my color grading, workflow, and output with the modern Premiere Pro. What I've found is a myriad of settings that alter the way footage is initially displayed, and how it responds to editing. I've found one group of settings that I like (Wide Gamut [Tone Mapped]), in terms of footage flexibility and starting point. Thing is I (here we go) want to put out a set of LUTs for a specific purpose, but I'm not sure how they'll work across other people's preferred color settings. Sure, I can include starting point settings with the LUTs, but if the settings aren't common, they can negatively disrupt workflows, which is the opposite of what LUTs are used for. I know no LUTs I've purchased before have anything to say about NLE settings, only camera settings. So my question is, is there a proper, agreed upon, industry standard set of settings for Sequence Settings > Color Management in Premiere Pro? I'm working with 709 output from Log input (8-bit 4:2"0 to 10-bit 4:2:2), and I want to make LUTs that will work universally, but everything reacts very differently depending on the Color Management settings. The default Direct Rec. 709 (SDR) settings are pretty disastrous in terms of being waaaaay too contrasty and oversaturated with 709 LUTs, and difficult to correct into something pleasing. Gives old school DV vibes (which might not be out of fashion today...). OTOH, Wide Gamut (Tone Mapped) is extremely easy to work with, gives very smooth color and tone, and makes color work a breeze. What settings should I be aiming for in terms of LUT creation?

Tried it myself after checking Sidney's video about NEV to R3D conversion, and out of curiosity copy pasted my NRaw project clips to project created with Red settings. The NEV to R3D clips look a bit like Nraw with RED LUTs and Nraw clips look the same than in usual project created for NRaw. Hopefully the ZR R3D colors look as nice as in many YT videos. With R3D you get chroma NR though and Red's ISO settings in Raw panel. Just wanted to get familiarised what editing R3D would mean to draw conclusion whether to try ZR as a 2nd cam or not. Here are the RED project settings. The magic being Output DRT set as RED IPP2 which unlocks Output tone map and Highlight roll off. Input colour space does not matter, and Timeline cooler space can be changed to DWG or something else.

If it is true, for me, the pefect workflow for RAW use, will be the 4k Nraw converted to RED raw. As it should be around 350 Mbs, which is very good for RAW. The only thing I don't know is how do they get this from a 6k sensor. In Gerald Undone, it did look a bit mushy, but I don't zoom 400% in my shots. The 4.1 k from my Z9 is perfectly usable. But in this case it is just half of the pixel.

Not hard to tell who leads, no matter the race of the full specifications on paper, I guess: Any hopes on a different approach about low light from there?

It seems if you set Resolve color management like Sidney Baker-Green describes earlier on this page, duplicate your NRaw clips, rename the other as R3D, and take both to timeline, you get Red’s tone mapping and highlight rolloff controls to NRaw clips as well. They just work from Project settings to all clips at the timeline. As a bonus you have your regular NRaw raw controls as well.

Nikon gave this camera to so many different people I wonder how they did even find them. Some just have 500 followers, but are locally known in their country. Maybe Jarred Land is behind this.

Perhaps this is the reason, but for h265 it is 5.4 k and not 4k until 50-60 fps. Could those .6k make that much of a difference!!! I would have liked the impression of a z6iii shooter on the h265 format. I had a pre order for a z6iii with my reseller in my country. And I changed it to the ZR. I hope the h265 is good LOL. I was also very wary about the overheating as I live in a tropical island, but just saw another video, from a Vietnamese shooter, who said no overheating. I think he was one of those who filmed one of the launched video.

Are they? The Z8 is 3999€ in Finland (discounted from 4799€) and the ZR is 2449€. Likely the ZR will be similarly discounted in a few years, maybe sooner. h.265 4K 25 fps 10-bit data rate is 190 Mbps on the ZR and 190 Mbps on the Z8, so the image quality should be similar. The ZR has an optical low-pass filter though and the Z8 does not, so details in the ZR footage might be ever so slightly softer. What the ZR does not have is "extended oversampling" so the 4K footage at 50 and 60 fps is likely of lower quality than the Z8 (when extended oversampling is turned on in the latter), and this indeed could be left out of the ZR to prevent overheating in the much smaller body. At 4K 24, 25, and 30 fps the h.265 image quality should be quite similar between the two cameras (apart from the OLPF difference). However, if you record 6K in h.265 this should not be an issue as there is no need to do oversampling and you can convert the footage to 4K using your method of choice in post. Summary: I can see that there would be a quality loss at 50-60 fps at 4K but the image quality should be fairly similar in h.265 between the ZR and Z8 when recording 4K 24-30 fps. This can hopefully be verified when the camera is out on the market. The Z8 is much larger and heavier which makes it less gimbal-friendly (or at least you need a much heavier gimbal than the ZR, potentially leading to body strain and discomfort, and eventually one is not able to continue). The ZR supports digital audio via the hot shoe (future products will support it, including tascam's) and 32-bit float, which are useful features for recording on-location audio. The ZR has a larger back display. I imagine only those who always record video on a tripod would be happy using the Z8 or Z9 while those who hand-hold or use a gimbal often, and those who simply need a lower-cost solution for video would prefer the ZR. The Z8 and Z9 of course are capable of high-resolution stills, with high frame rates, and have much less rolling shutter in stills shooting than the ZR (which has lower rolling shutter in video mode). So, many stills shooters will prefer the Z8/Z9 if they can afford it and justify the cost and weight.

I've noticed this in a couple reviews. Kinda surprised because the h265 on Z8/Z9 is quite good, even when compared to NRAW. So I do wonder if the h265 on ZR is somewhat "bad" maybe perhaps as noted above to circumvent overheating. I like having options on a camera but if the h265 is horrible than yeah that means this is an ultra high bitrate cam only. ..which kinda leads me to ask who would prefer the ZR to a Z8? both are around the same price here in EU.

Prores RAW has an even higher data rate than R3D or N-RAW on the ZR. Nikon lists ZR data rates for Prores 422 HQ 4K 25 fps at 820 Mb/s (102.5 MB/s) and 6K at 25 fps at 1600 Mbps (200 MB/s). Thus the Prores options for 6K are even bigger than the R3D or N-RAW, but the 4K version of Prores 422 HQ is a bit more manageable than 6K. Prores 422 HQ may be easier to edit than RAW in some ways (at least distortion and vignetting profiles are applied in-camera so there is less post work to be done). I use Prores 422 HQ 4K on the Z8 as my go-to format. I love the colors and image quality.

Someone above was asking about the data rates I recall. For Red Raw ‘Lite’ they are as follows: 6048 x 3402 : 59.94p (3780 Mbps), 50p (3160 Mbps), 29.97p (1900 Mbps), 25p (1590 Mbps), 23.97p (1520 Mbps) Compared with S1II 6K open gate at 200Mbps it really hits hard. As much as I love this camera (the Zr) now I have had more time to think about it, I’d want to use that Red codec and both the 25p and 50p options but that’s 8-16x the data rates…and that would be nuts for my kind of work. Nikon is still the best lens platform however at this time.

How about ProRes? The ZR has ProRes HQ and ProRes RAW. That should be easy to edit on a Mac, right?

So this is a very good test of the ZR. I don't know if the english AI translation is 100% correct, but anyone can try it. He was ecstatic from the start about the DR of the camera and did a latitude test, using middle grey and overexposing and underexposing to see the level before clipping the highlight and the noise barrier. This test is very good for the ZR as DR/Latitude test have been a bit all over the place. If you watched the CVP test, it was like 6 at best 7 stops of latitude!!! The ZR was clipping even before the Z6III !!! My guess is most of the test were done before Davinci last update to incorporate REDraw NE etc. And the guys were using REDsoftware to convert the files in Tiff etc. and it might be that file did lose some information. He is getting 5 stop over and 3 to 4 stop below. So, a 8 to 9 stops of latitude, at nine it is huge. If you watch CineD lab test, you are in the RED raptorX, Panasonic S1ii territory. The Z9 approaches that, but most of the other Sony cameras (but mostly in compress format) like the Sony A1, Sony Venice (RAW) etc are at 8 stops. In their test, their is only the Sony Burano, Alexa LF at 10 stops and the Alexa 35 at 12 stops!!! His complain is like everyone about micro HDMI, and huge file size. I sincerely hope Nikon does give us a lower bitrate REdraw. He also says the h265 is bad, my guess it is that when you get use to that RAW, you see everything around bad. Matti Haapoja had the same reaction when comparing the ZR side by side with the Fx3. He then changed after using the h265 a bit more and said it was at least equal to the fx3 or better. Nikon Zr is its on worst enemy, when people compare its h265 to the raw, because the raw is so good, they feel the h265 is bad. But in the end very very positive about the camera.

1st night flight in a brazilian town (Pouso Alegre, Minas Gerais) to prove this 1-inch sensor drone makes it a DJI Mini of a different kind indeed — in Portuguese language:

Hey All, I made some brand new fantasy brick textures to share with you. They live on my TXR-Brick - Seamless page. Here's the link: https://soundimage.org/txr-brick-seamless/ If you find my assets helpful, please consider making small contribution to support my efforts. I honestly hate asking, but I do pay for everything myself including my music gear which is very expensive, so contributions from the community really help me a lot. Here are some ways you can help: Donate (any amount is helpful and much appreciated) https://soundimage.org/donate/ Get my Ogg Game Music Mega Pack (over 1400 tracks and growing) https://soundimage.gumroad.com/l/ylyre Get an Ogg Genre Music Pack https://soundimage.org/ogg-music-packs-2/ As always, enjoy, please stay safe and keep being creative!

The way I've used it in the past is there's a DCTL that will convert to/from OKLab. The pain is that it assumes you're in LogC3, so I have to do a CST before/after to get from/to DWG/DI which I use as my timeline colour space. My next steps were to look at the licensing for the OKLab DCTL, and work out how to just go directly from DWG/DI to OKLab in my DCTL. I'd assume I'd just need to combine the matrices for DWG->LogC3 and the LogC3->OKLab together into one step, but not sure if that's right. The way I'd do it is to implement a function that can be applied to the LAB variables that is stronger in the target areas than the others, or only apply in the target areas. A simple way is to say something like: if(A<0) { A=0; } if(B<0) { B=0; } X = (A * B); Then use that as a mask where the transformation is multiplied by X, so if X=1 the full effect is applied and if X=0 no effect is applied. What that will do is not effect the three quarters of the colour circle where either A or B are negative, and for the quarter they're both positive it will start at zero on the edges and then ramp up. This will ensure nothing in the image breaks because every adjacent colour before the operation remains adjacent afterwards. That will create sudden transitions in the mask though, so you could (for example) square the mask before using it, so values of X that are very low will be vanishingly low and the surface created will be a smooth curve. A bit more sophistication can make the transitions at the top (near 1) smooth too. This above is a transform that targets the A=B vector, but if you calculate Hue and Sat from the A and B values, then you can start to combine all sorts of values together, like having the value target a hue with a certain range, a saturation with a certain range, and then square that to target a location on the A-B plane. You can localise the intensity further by cubing X, or better yet, apply a variable factor which shifts X closer to 1 before it gets squared or cubed, so you can adjust it to the strength you want. While you're developing these things I'd map the variables to sliders in the plugin and then you can tune them and when you find good values just hard-code them. People have been calling for many years to be able to change the colour space of lots of controls, the way you can with tools like the Colour Warper in the spiderweb view. This would make grading so much easier if you could just set the colour space of the Saturation knob to be OKLab and be done with it, etc.

Would the Prores standard support this? If they did, how could I tell?

It depends whether you like having presets to quickly set tonemapping and highlight rolloff in R3D or manually changing exposure, shadows and highlights in NRaw. R3D’s presets seem a bit limited compared to what you can do with Nraw’s -100% - 100% sliders. For example R3D with tonemapping low is too flat in the shadows and with hard has too much contrast. With medium and highlight rolloff set to very soft it can look ok, but if you overexpose just before clipping point while shooting highlights are too bright still with R3D. It can provide pleasing looking results too. ZR’s R3D 6k50p High is 3160 Mbps 23,7GB/min and Z8’s NRaw 8k50p Norm is only 2890Mbps 21,67GB/min. Kind of tempted to try ZR, buth with these data rates, double the NRaw Norm it is a no go, and even Z8 8k data rates would be more tolerable. At least you have more options to choose from now.

https://www.slashcam.de/artikel/Test/Canon-Cinema-EOS-C50--Sensor-Bildqualitaet---Debayering--Rolling-Shutter-und-Dynamik--Dynamic-Range-.html#DynamicRange Despite what the specs and the Imatest says, this review does not agree that there is an overall improvement in crop mode.

What are the datarates with h265 vs nraw?

I saw this posted somewhere else and it definitely wouldn't. R3D NE is the same as N-raw, which has different compressions rates. H.265 with Red's Log3G10 would also require the same processing power as doing it with N-log. It's simply switching out the logarithmic function and the colour profile that's applied. You would lose the chroma noise reduction and highlight recovery that's done in post though (unless they did it in camera - but that actually would require additional processing - although they already do some noise reduction in camera so it depends on the techniques). I'd like to see their next gen cameras doing that in camera along with a 14bit readout like the Fuji xh2s.

I don't think Resolve supports oklab yet. According to google's ai you'd need to use an openfx plugin to provide support. CIELAB is still a good colourspace though. It's a huge improvement for saturation compared to Resolve's default in HSL. Do you have an example of "target certain ranges but are applied globally". Definitely agree that LAB or even HSV are better spaces than the default. And I do think it's surprising the defaults aren't improved to provide better results- especially when the software is mainly known for colour grading.