Jump to content

MatthewP

Members
  • Content Count

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by MatthewP

  1. Started with some colour curves to balance the NX1 shot more towards blue, getting rid of the green cast. Then I just shifted the cool end of the blue spectrum further toward blue with a hue shift, and the warmer end of the green spectrum I shifted towards red with the same method. There were a few other tweaks to the saturation of different hues, but that was pretty much it. Could probably get it closer if I had access to the original files, but it's not bad. I guess it would be possible to make a '1D C' colour profile preset that could be applied to NX1 (or any other camera) if you wanted that particular look. Will post a sony vegas preset if there's demand.
  2. While I do agree that the 1D C is the King of Colours right now, you can get the NX1 remarkably close with some simple CC: Probably better to do some CC for those of us on a budget. Just used the stock tools in Sony Vegas. To me, it shows that the NX1 is actually capturing the colour data, but just representing it in a different way (otherwise you wouldn't be able to bring it back). (NX1 on the bottom btw)
  3. Who cares about Canon? We've got much better options now. That said, they'll probably put something special in with the 5D IV. They can do 4k (they were there first with the 1D ages ago), and focussing (7d II). They could be the king again in an instant, and that's why they aren't pushing all the time. They're secure with their heritage and brand name, so when they need to release something new they will. Not before. It's just common business sense.
  4. By the way, anyone else feeling that this website is starting to wander off its core audience? Who, besides professionals, can shoot with 1Dcs and C300s? Where's that old GH1/2 budget minded shooting gone? There are some seriously awesome cameras out there now, so much so that our (well, mine at least) shooting is defined more by features than absolute image quality. Can't there be more focus on the creative side of things, rather than tech specs? There's a lack of that kind of website at the moment, and EOSHD has the heritage and potential to fill it. Cameras are just gadgets without creativity.
  5. ​Funny thing is that even pro DPs don't care about half this stuff. That's why the C300 was (and is) so popular - it just works. DPs care about shooting, rather than the specs.
  6. Anyone know where I can buy an NTSC GX7? Need one for the 60p functionality, but I can't find any to order anywhere! Doesn't matter to me whether it's used or not. Yes, tried ebay... they force to you to pay a ridiculous import fee to them directly at checkout (something like $200!) when ordering items from the US.
  7. ​If you're comparing them at 4k the difference will be ridiculously obvious, even on a 1080p monitor. Colour wise too, there will be a significant difference. I had a GH1 years ago and, while sharpness and detail were excellent, the colours were absolutely terrible. Washed out, no vibrancy, weird skin tones... these are factors that are, in my opinion, more important than sharpness for actual content delivery which is still rarely HD even now.
  8. Good on Samsung for listening to potential buyers! They're obviously taking the market seriously, and aren't afraid to give new features for no extra cost. They're releasing an SDK too! If that's the way Samsung's going their cameras are going to be VERY attractive to various niches.
  9. I'd say A is video and B is raw. B seems to have much more colour variation in the squares. Tonality seems better (though, so is white balance, so not sure what's going on there). Edit. Yes, pretty certain it's that way around. Take a look at this shadow shot... A on the left, B on the right. Still, pretty impressive that you have to go to these lengths to tell between the two. The tonality of the colours is a bit disappointing though really, compared to RAW. It looks muddy.
  10. Remember the 7D II is a stills camera. If you look around the comments sections of photography sites it generally appears to be a very exciting release. Us video shooters have plenty of other options, so there's not much point in an article boo hooing about how it's lacking in the video department - 80% of the camera's target audience couldn't care less. All they need is 1080p - and even then there's plenty to be going on with what with all the different framerates and codec modes available on it.
  11. I think he means that if each line is being used, but in bursts of 4, then the differences in time will also be represented in chunks of 4 lines, assuming 1:1 pixel representation. This would create stair-stepping on pans etc. That's if I'm understanding the method correctly. Unless of course those 4 lines get merged into 1 line, if for example the sensor has a very high megapixel count.
  12. "Along with such disappointing video quality on both of Nikon’s flagship models the D4S and D810..." So you've seen some native files from the D810 to make this claim, I take it? Or are you referring to the specs? :) Still, a "Nikon sux" post is a refreshing change from the usual jabbing at Canon... ;) (both deserved though)
  13. Serious question: As a YouTube content creator myself, I'd be interested in hearing what you didn't like about his presentation style. I personally found it informative and his tone varied (not monotone). What was wrong with it for you?
  14. Hi Andrew, a little off topic but if you ever get the opportunity it might be worth trying a rolling shutter test with the Sony A6000. Looks like it could be quite tight compared to other cams out there.
  15. And also incredibly true, unfortunately.
  16. http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Sony_Alpha_A6000/ look at these samples... the detail is decent, but still no where near even the GH2. There's even moire on those beach front shop shutters...
  17. I feel the same way. I know sensor size isn't everything, but it's hard enough to get wide angles on M43 as it is, and cropping even more isn't exactly helping matters. Personally, mostly because it's not yet limiting what I create, I'm going to stick with my GH2, despite its dodgey colour reproduction. 4K is great and everything, but I can't imagine the mainstream (who my videos are targated at) having 4k capable monitors for at least 2 years yet, by which time there might be a GH camera with a global shutter available.
  18. Dudes, let's keep this on topic. It's not a Windows versus Mac thread.
  19. Neat video really cleans up the noise exceptionally well, whilst retaining all the detail. Very impressive.
  20. This is great for distribution, I've got to say, but it's less exciting for aquisition. Why? Well, seeing as most cameras still don't compress to h.264 very well, it's unlikely that h.265 will be any better for at least a few years. A properly encoded 1080p h.264 file can look indistinguishable from a raw video at modest 6-8mbps (seriously). Seeing that cameras shoot at 24mbps yet look worse in most cases, there is still much room for improvement with h.264 even though its been out for years now.
  21.   Don't assume ;) I got a score of 0. My point was that, realistically, there are so few shades in this test that it would hit the limit of computer monitors before it hits the limit of the human eye... but then I looked up how many colours the human eye is estimated to see, and it's apparently around 10 million... which is less than the 16.7 million that monitors are supposed to dispaly, so I guess my point was wrong anyway! :lol:
  22. Unless your monitor is high end, the only thing this test will do is show you the limitations of your monitor, not your colour vision. :)   Being able to grade well relies little on a person's ability to see colour (unless you're colour blind, of course), but more on being able to recognise and compare the subtle differences you do see, and choosing a nice pallet. So essentially, it can be a learnt skill.   Women typically have better colour recognition than men, which is interesting.
×
×
  • Create New...