Jump to content

MatthewP

Members
  • Posts

    76
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by MatthewP

  1.  

    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:

    1D-C-greens.thumb.jpg.89e4d5d75f28f1a4a4

    Image1.thumb.png.91bc612fd5bcdab9e74ea52

     

    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)

    Wow, nice job Matthew. What did you do exactly to make that correction?

    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. Hollywood wanted a 4K DSLR so Canon saw an opportunity and enabled 1.3x 4K crop video mode on their 1D X. The 1D C was born and the £12,000 price tag made sure nobody bought it.

    With the Samsung NX1, the consumer didn't want 4K H.265 but is getting it anyway, because Samsung wants them to buy that lovely 4K TV to view the footage with. This is called technological progress, where more powerful machines are thrust upon an unexpected public and everyone gets excited.

    Now the two world collide in this shoutout. Expect fireworks!

    The Samsung NX1 is currently on special offer for $1299 at B&H

    Read the full article

     

    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:

    1D-C-greens.thumb.jpg.89e4d5d75f28f1a4a4

    Image1.thumb.png.91bc612fd5bcdab9e74ea52

     

    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. I have a question, what the hell are you guys all shooting that's so significant that you'll sit here and split hairs over DR, gamma, this, that, and the other thing? Are you producing a multi-million dollar blockbuster, or, rather is it something like some shots of a trash can, may be the sky and a few trees posted on Vimeo? You take one persons findings and opinion of a camera and suddenly you're all high ranking DP's of the world, trash talking this and that because it isn't 10 bit, it doesn't have enough DR, it doesn't compare to this camera or that camera. Who cares? Show me something you've done that's so significant that I should care. I'll be waiting!

    ​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.  

    I wonder how the hacked GH1 footage will stand up against the NX1's LOG Gamma - probably can't tell them apart. I hope that's not the case or I want the last 5 years of my life back waiting for the perfect camera.  Sorry Panasonic, Sony, Canon, Nikon, and Black Magic: there's a new sheriff in indy town his name is Samsung NX1.

    ​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.

    post-14094-0-19082900-1417608662_thumb.j

  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. No it's a linear roll at constant speed.

     

    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. I wonder how many repeat bookings that man gets for jobs?  It's like he's a caricature of himself after a whole box of pro plus.  I wanted to reach into the computer screen and shove a big ball of cotton wool in his mouth

     

    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?

  13. yes, its like the GH3 at 1080p. when you switch to 4K however the crop is even higher. i dont have the exact numbers, 2.25 crop i believe?

     

    are thre aready comparions between GH3 and GH4 @ 1080p? maybe even stills in comparison to GH3 or EM1?

     

    i think that the GH4 is a great camera, with the official price tag it sounds even better, but the handheld shooting style is still very popular and i need my next camera to have IBIS. switching from my 25mm 1.4 to the 14-140mm just for OIS, just isnt acceptable anymore.

     

    i would have rather seen a GH4 with sharper 1080p compared to GH3, IBIS and no 4K option, than what the GH4 offers right now. sure 4k is nice to have and Andrew always says that you can always downsample it to 1080p obviously, but that happens at the price of a smaller sensor. sure its only a very small difference to m43, but we have to draw the line somewhere. going from fullframe to apsc to M43 multiaspect to M43 to cropped M43 doesnt cut it anymore for me.

     

    when i buy a new generation of a camera i need it to be better or at least the same in ALL aspects. cropping m43 even more is definately a step back that im not willing to take.

     

    however i can understand anybody who ll buy this camera in a heartbeat :)

     

    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.

  14. 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.

  15. Nah!

    He probably got a bad score & was trying to find an excuse for his genetic make-up - nothing wrong with being a little colour blind, its nature/natural!

     

    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:

  16. 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...