Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sandro

  1. On 8/14/2016 at 7:33 PM, لطفي بوعكاز said:

    I spent the entire day testing 0-255 vs 16-235 vs 16-255 and thanks to the tip for "brightness -3 and contrast -15" that I can for sure use 0-255 in premiere cc 2015 and wont have any clipping, while maintaining the full color for exporting in DNXHD and also maintain the Legal color for Youtube and Vimeo. 

    when I used 16-235 I did a test while reducing exposure and it looked very nasty in premiere with banding everywhere, looked very clean in 0-255.

    with 0-255 you can recover superwhites, like clouds for example, the detail in shadows is much more and the blocking, artifacts is not there "when using bitrate hack"

    when using 16-255, this was better than 16-235 but still not as good as 0-255. 

    I did notice that VLC plays the 0-255 while all other players didn't read the superwhites in 0-255 so that could be an issue. 

    so my advice is use 0-255 with -3 brightness and -15 contrast but export 2 versions, one Legal for web players and TV and keep the original for the future. 

    Could you post some comparison? -15 contrast sounds really extreme. Anyway can't you just go back to 0-255 in premiere even if shot at 16-235? 

  2. 1 hour ago, kidzrevil said:

    @sandro it was gamma c at 16-235. I forgot which settings I used for Gamma C but I am working on some new ones anyway. Really wish I didn't have to use 16-235 but I dont have a choice til I find something to use other than premiere

    You just color corrected manually?

  3. On 2/6/2016 at 3:15 AM, kidzrevil said:

    I've been shooting gamma c at default contrast -10 sharpness and -1 / -2 saturation and wow. Blown away. These were shot with 16-235 but Today i am experimenting with 16-255 as I've read technicolor cinestyle used that range to optimize the image for the encoder. 16-235 remapped to 0-255 automatically in premiere and I assume the same would apply to the 16-255 footage ! for this look I did NOT use LUT's aS I noticed LUT's were exaggerating compression artifacts in the image even when denoising before applying the lut. I went old school and just installed my own toe and shoulder using curves and kept the curve in the midtone region linear. Using the zeiss milvus lenses it looks my theory is true. You can beat the in camera sharpening if you use a high contrast lens that can resolve up to 6k. I assume the noise reduction and sharpening algorithim sees the areas of the image are true detail and leaves those areas filled with fine detail alone. This camera deserves the moniker "baby red" because the image quality is stunning WHEN TREATED CORRECTLY.










    Sorry to quote this old post but I just love this look, it's my favorite. It's incredible this has no MBL! Do you have any particular color correction setting "saved" for this look?

  4. 1 minute ago, SMGJohn said:


    Yeah you need to follow your target with a manual lens and use a high shutter speed of course just cramp that ISO up max that is what they used to do in the film era, they used really high ISO film and used a high shutter, some would shoot 800ISO film at broad daylight just to get that fast shutter speed.

    There are restrictions that you must account for, with a digital camera you can just aim, shot and look at shot if you like it or not but with a manual lens/film camera you must aim for the perfect shot and kind of predict peoples movements, it is very hard to do but that is what I was told from old journalists who grew up in the film era and autofocus was not something they use back then even if they had the camera that could do it, the AF was awful back then.

    One of the journalists I spoke to documented wars like Yugoslavian civil war, Chechen war and Georgia and he said similar things but he had even harder time because there was a variable environment, you often would move indoors, outdoors all the time as you follow the troops around. 

    So best to just use high ISO, set up camera for the lightning conditions and use a very narrow aperture with high shutter, thankfully you have live view on NX1 so it is FAR easier for you to get the shot right than these veteran journalists had to deal with.

    What if you can't predict where your subject will be and it also passes by at high speed? I would love to use manual lenses whatever the system but seriously why create problems if you there's something already there and working? AF won't make a bad photographer :)

  5. 1 minute ago, kidzrevil said:

    @sandro think its a skill level thing bro. A different technique to getting your shots or improving your current one can help....I remember saying you had a problem with getting shots of people skiing....when I was in the navy I was getting shots of fighter jets...in motion with a manual focus lens. If your not getting the shots you need in manual focus and auto focus then yeah I don't think there is any camera or lens combo that can help till you improve your technique

    I already explained and discussed with you and others in details here and in other threads what the problem was and you compared the shots you took in manual compared to skiers when you a tight plane of focus which is a complete different thing. I shoot manual focus since 12y and I know what I'm talking about.
    The NX lens lineup is limited and will never be expanded and the lens available are not as assicurate as DSRL and probably impossible to buy. What is there more to say? I said I personally wouldn't use this system for stills only if planning to use on a variety of situations.

    Le'ts just drop this topic, I'm just tired.

  6. 28 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

    @sandro I wouldn't rule it out as impossible...wasn't impossible for the 1,000's of sports photographers that came before the invention of digital bodies and AF lenses...

    You probably didn't work for the of sport of worked for. Yes it is POSSIBLE but would you use whatever lens adapted on the NX1 and get 90% of shots out of focus just because the NX1 sensor is awesome? Come on... i

  7. 41 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

    @sandro yeah I read what you said and no offense I think your issue is user error. No AF is perfect and if people are still getting great shots with cameras that have worse AF tech than the nx1 you may want to consider the issues you are having user error and possibly you may want to try using manual focus in certain situations. Thats just my take

    I'm sorry but in sports manual focus is impossible. 

  8. 7 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

    I dont think they bothered to look into it. The flange distance wont be compatible with certain lenses but not all....they need to take another look at the specs

    Disagree. That Samsung sensor is incredible and works well with adapted lenses

    Not because of the sensor but because of the native/AF lenses...I explained it before.

  9. This is my first attempt with ricardo's settings. However I didn't use delut cause I wasn't able to make it work, instead I used Premiere's SL GOLD RUSH LDR with personal tweaks (no input LUT). I'm satisfied with the result expect for sky banding present on the original footage. Maybe a higher bitrate would been useful. I used the stock 80Mbit 120p.


    Anyway I'm impressed by the amount of details this sensor deliver at 1080p from 28MP at 120fps. Samsung really made a beast. I could only imagine what a NX2 could have been like!

  10. 1 hour ago, tugela said:

    No, the aperture is wide open in stills mode in live view. To see what it will look like with the aperture closed, there is a button on the lower front right side that you need to press to preview the actual image. That is what that button is for, it activates the aperture to the set value. Normally it is wide open unless you are actually recording.

    I just tried and you're right. Thanks I didn't know about this behavior. 

  11. On 8/9/2016 at 8:03 PM, tugela said:

    The reason you don't see it in live view in stills mode is because the aperture is wide open all the time. In video it is stopped down to the set value, and that is when the adjustments are made. With an electronic lens this is done independently. A true cine lens will have mechanical gearing to do it, but that is a more expensive option. Consequently modern electronic lenses designed primarily for stills just use the independent control. If it is really an issue for you then try using an old mechanical lens, although you will of course lose autofocus.

    There was a thread about two months ago discussing this very issue, that you participated in, so you should know all of this already.

    Anyway something is not right here. There should be zero difference between live view in still and video mode. Still mode previews the picture "as is" (shooting mode or whatever it's called is off) so the aperture is what you see, it's locked. UNLESS the aperture is set to maximum and exposure preview is done via software which i doubt. 
    I'll have to recheck this because I'm not convinced.

  • Create New...