Jump to content

see ya

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by see ya

  1. Haven't had a look at the clips yet but one thing with the Sony cams is that they capture full luma upto 255 so if you aren't already make sure you pull your highlights down to 235 before making any judgements on blown highlights and aliasing, viewing full luma in any media player or NLE preview will show as solid white and could lead to wrong conclusions. Not saying its the reason just an added consideration. Another example of this is the FS100 or 700 with the Speed Booster slow motion video EOSHD posted recently, the levels weren't pulled down to 235 and consequently everything in the highlights looks bad in Vimeo or anywhere else. A small simple thing that will only exagerate the situation.
  2. Can you post a short clip? Native camera source that shows the problem.
  3. Yep the levels are full range in the encode as well, so everything looks even more blown and crushed in any media player, although it's well over exposed and hard contrast anyway. All encodes for delivery should be 16 - 235 btw.
  4. Interlacing is done at encode time so yes. Depends on the deinterlacing method as to the quality, haven't tried as yet.
  5.   Thanks for posting the low light files, but really need native source files rather than encodes out of the NLE.   Bruno, do you have a low light MTS you could make available?
  6.   Argh! My apologies, the clip wrap mov is 50p as you say.   Looking at the 50i MTS files yes they're really interlaced not progressive, it's only the motion that manifests the lines by nature of the interlacing process.   @hmcindie, my apologies, crossed wire's, not reading the thread properly.
  7.   The AVCHD in MTS is 16 - 235 and the h264 in MOV is full range but flagged so most NLE's will scale the luma into 16 - 235 at import. Some media players will respect the flag as well.   These test files will help test media player and NLE.   http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74780302/fullrangetest.zip
  8. I still have my HV30 and I'm aware of the shooting modes, thanks. The RX100 clip wrapped source from earlier up this thread, that I opened in Avisynth, which does nothing unless told to was NOT interlaced as far as I can see.   What do you see here, decompressed with ffmpegsource2, histogram(mode="classic"), ConvertToRGB(matrix="PC.709)?   http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74780302/rx100_pc709.png   Sure the RX100 may have an interlaced mode, but the source I'm talking about was not it would appear. Two 25P progressive streams as discussed earlier.
  9. Thanks for adding the MTS files. The clip wrapped sample you originally posted isn't interlaced. Again I think its a work around to avoid paying bigger license fees by delivering it as flagged interlaced where in reality it's two identical 25P streams, picking either one doesn't matter, so just need to tell the NLE to interpret as 25P then NLE picks alternate streams, one frame from one then next frame from other and so on so you still end up with 25p If you're seeing interlacing lines in the clip wrap source recording profile I think your NLE or QT is trying to hard. Haven't had chance to look at the MTS files yet. re luma levels, its clear the source is full range in the top end, but looks like some sort of highlight roll off before hard clip, unless you were able to use zebras or highlight warning to judge exposure. What creative style was used for the clip wrap file? Could you provide a low light sample and in a more contrasty profile to see what happens with luma at low end?
  10. Hi, have you compared same set up between h264AVC MOV and AVCHD MTS? The encoded levels range is different between the two codecs.
  11.   Yes, numerous consumer range cameras from various manufacturers seem to do this, use an interlaced flagged container but store progressive frames, Canon did it with the HV series HDV mpeg2 camcorders causing confusion. I think it was another one of those artificially seperating the codec between consumer and professional ranges or some avoidance of the cost for licensing maybe.
  12. Thanks for the link to the rewrapped file but do you have a source file to ensure all metadata is there?   "but for the sake of these tests it wouldn't change which Creative Style is the flattest or the cleanest to shoot with."   You write a lot about 5DToRGB for a test on Creative Styles. :-) But it's clear to see in your AVCHD vs 5DToRGB Prores image that somethings not right with levels or color matrix in the conversion's you've done, the base of the toy is more orange in the ProRes and the prores has less contrast, so wrong color matrix and levels handling.   So apart from the comparison of Creative Styles like for like there's little to glean from this test, it's a given that if less saturation and contrast is dialled in then the image will be flatter.   Thing is by not handling the full luma levels correctly and converting with the wrong color matrix going from YCbCr to RGB then RGB channels get clipped, highlights blown, more contrast added artificially, all making artifacts more promentent that were probably already there in the source, the difference between what QT gives and 5DToRGB is subjective.   I see no point in using 5DToRGB for transcoding unless there's problems with editing speed. For quality a simple gentle denoise of the original source in a 32bit NLE workflow will do the job better.
  13. Have you established whether the camera source is full luma at the high end like say a FS100 16-255. Does your clip wrap / 5dtorgb route ensure levels go 16-235 before you extract your image frames for evaluation? Otherwise all your sample frames will be skewed, more blown highlights and clipped color channels.
  14. Thorough test but do you have a native source file from the camera to offer as well, so many tests online fail to offer it and therefore they're even more subjective for the reader based on the testers setup, workflow and tools. No one can coroborate or compare results. Not familar with it but does it shoot other than AVCHD. How did you extract your images for your test frames?
  15. @JHines, these Sony's capture 16 - 255 from the samples I've seen so generally you need a 32bit workflow and ensure that levels for encoding are pulled into 16 - 235, its the media player that makes it look clipped on the whole if luma is captured above 235 not the camera prone to clipping all cameras are prone to clipping. 8 & 16bit workflow generally just clip the 'superwhites', 32bit workflow allows RGB values below 0 and above 1 so no clipping, output must still be encoded into 0 to 1 for delivery. For video RGB 0 to 1 encodes into 16 - 235. RGB 0 to 1 at 8bit is 0 - 255. Its staightforward to see how anyones NLE or grading tools handle levels using a simple test file to see whether 8bit, 16bit or 32bit workflows clip. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/74780302/Original.mp4 The file contains levels outside of 16 - 235, dropping it into an NLE will show black and white only, apply a levels filter to squeeze into 16 - 235, if the gradients then appear and whether at 8, 16 or 32bit workflow. If they don't then that bit depth workflow clips.
  16. I wouldn't bother with the lens filter although the Raynox gets good reviews. I'd buy a set of 3 manual extension tubes by Kenko or similar and a reversing ring which isn't on your list. If you're then not happy with the 'quality' from the cheap options then you know the lens is really your only option. Extension tubes will reduce light and can make it harder to focus, reversing ring does just that, so you can mount a suitable lens like 135mm wrong way round. A close focus rail is also a useful addition as focusing should be done manually, stacked even for photos and a sturdy tripod, wireless remote etc.
  17. And the 6D is? a 5D MK II sensor + some other fluff off the T2i, T3i, T4i range?
  18. Did you download the raw DNG frames? There are vertical lines cutting through the backs of the girls legs and body, horrid green noise in the shadows, if thats what the sensor is reading out then no amount of gigabytes of 1 channel 12bit raw is going to fix it. Garbage in garbage out raw or not. Like yourselves have no idea what the guy 'grading' some one elses raw files was trying to achieve.
  19. [quote name='Francisco Ríos' timestamp='1353602925' post='22126'] Yellow, thanks for the info. And what do you think about grading? What will better to work on grading? prores or nativ avchd with your workflow?[/quote] Grading in Premiere CS6 or AE, you're not working with native avchd or prores it's imaterial, the frame is decompressed into memory and converted to RGB for display including interpolating the sub sampled chroma in some way and with color processing / grading most of the tools work in RGB and if a choice done at 32bit precision preferably. [quote]I though that the imac will handle better prores to work with grading, twixtor, etc.[/quote] As we're all more than aware if our machine is not upto editing the source then there's two options. We buy a faster machine or transcode to something we can work with to get the job done. But that is to solve performance issues, there's no increase in 'quality' transcoding.
  20. No 5DToRGB is not the 'only' way, transcoding GH2 AVCHD to ProRes is pointless for CS6. Mac or PC? ffmpeg for free also available for mac to do quick remux into MOV container. [url="http://ffmpeg.org/download.html"]http://ffmpeg.org/download.html[/url] Simple commandline or batch script: [color=#000000]ffmpeg[/color] -i video.[color=#000000]MTS[/color] -vcodec copy -acodec copy video.MOV Clipwrap to remux not transcode, if you're on a mac and don't like the CLI: [url="http://www.divergentmedia.com/clipwrap"]http://www.divergentmedia.com/clipwrap[/url] Here's another free one, that should just remux too based on the broadcast version of ffmpeg, ffmbc: [url="http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=2732.0"]http://www.magiclant...hp?topic=2732.0[/url] Or maybe remux to matroska with mkvmergeGUI, although don't know if that helps with CS6: [url="http://www.bunkus.org/videotools/mkvtoolnix/macos/"]http://www.bunkus.org/videotools/mkvtoolnix/macos/[/url] [url="http://www.bunkus.org/videotools/mkvtoolnix/downloads.html"]http://www.bunkus.org/videotools/mkvtoolnix/downloads.html[/url]
  21. I'd just remux rather than reencode, there's a tool called Clipwrap which will do the remux, made reference to in the links mentioned above.
  22. Could be the fxguide.com RC podcast from this week, its mentioned in passing, they query framerates, thats about it other than brief discussion on raw DNG, confusion over that and Cineform.
  23. First thoughts from looking at the native files subjectively the GH3 h264 MOV appears to have slightly more detail, the GH2 MTS AVCHD has plastic looking skin and 'smudged' areas through out. The GH3 h264 MOV appears to have no 16x16, 8x8, 4x4 partitioned macroblocks only 8x8 and they are prominent in a still image, but this maybe something odd with my set up although I've not seen this with any other source, only GH3 h264. The GH3 h264 MOV as others have mentioned has a lot of moire, the GH2 AVCHD non discernable, would have been interesting to compare GH3 AVCHD MTS too. GH3 h264 MOV makes use of full 8bit range, the GH2 MTS the limited 8bit range. So should be finer gradation in the GH3 h264 MOV, certainly the highlights are spread over more levels, the GH2 MTS highlights are compressed excessively but then it's brighter exposure not a like for like comparison.
  24. @MaxAperture, steady on, Karim has already said he'll post the native camera files, I too have no interest discussing 'tests', so many variables in every respect can skew, but he's prepared to spend time shooting and providing, lets not bite the hand that feeds. Do we need images repeatedly requoted from a post or two above, really.
  • Create New...