Jump to content

cpc

Members
  • Posts

    204
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by cpc

  1. It should be noted that the Alexa would probably be the easiest to match with Kodak since it takes a lot of cues from it. Also, most of the film look colorimetry related properties come from printing the negative on release stock, not from the negative itself. The reasons for this are quite deep, but essentially they boil down to negative film being technically more feasible to design without excessive color shifts because the orange mask allows for some clever tricks. Positive/projection films on the other hand don't have this luxury.

    Since the two sources in the video are not printed, it is much easier to achieve a decent match by feeding them both into a P3/rec709 output space. Still a great video though, and I do agree with the sentiment behind it.

  2. Photoshop (which uses Adobe Camera Raw) will only have the Embedded profile available since it doesn't recognize Blackmagic cameras. ACR debayers in ProPhotoRGB, and then does another transform (to sRGB) on display and export. This is approximately equivalent to rec709 in Resolve.

    Resolve will not debayer in BMDFilm unless you set it to do so. Photoshop will not debayer in BMDFilm, because it doesn't know what BMDFilm is.

  3. If you debayer in BMDFilm color space using BMDFilm gamma you should be able to match ProRes/Film colors. These settings are in the Camera Raw tab on the Color page.

    HHQ7FrGQSWV2laUck-_v1MUgE3OK_5dN3TN0ZMSF

    Resolve's manual is actually pretty good and informative. It is a good idea to have a look at the relevant sections.

  4. SGamut isn't friendly to manual adjustments because of the heavily offset green primary. This is the reason Sony introduced SGamut.Cine which aligns much better with P3 and sRGB/Rec709.

    Cinema, Pro and Movie (same as Stills or at least very similar, I think) gamuts have primaries aligned with Rec709/sRGB and are for this reason easily moldable with simple luma curve adjustments without introducing hue disbalance. Skin hues are subtly rotated between these (Cinema is a bit towards yellow, Movie - towards magenta, Pro in the middle; but these are subtle), and there is a small difference in hue compression (Cinema > Pro > Movie; Movie is the most compressed) but all three are fine. I've been shooting s-log2/Cinema, but wouldn't hesitate to use any of these.

    One thing I've always wondered - what is the theoretical advantage of S-Gamut in a compressed 8 bit space? I have an impression that it gives a more cinematic and subtle look than using Pro or Still, but I can't back that up with any objective evidence, it's just my impression from limited S-log use and watching other people's work.

    It is really a question of how you interpret the color values. Since SGamut is the largest it may appear less saturated (= more subtle) even after treating it. But it certainly does have the problem (without proper remapping) of pulling skin towards yellow.

  5. The VAF-5D2 brings the 5D Mark II's image in line with the 5D3's image in raw. You can barely tell them apart with the filter installed. The 5D2 is a bit noisier. That's the ONLY difference. Both a bit on the softer side though, which is why sometimes I prefer the rough and ready non-filtered image of the 5D2 in raw.

    I really like what 5d3 raw does with faces. I find it has just about the perfect amount of sharpness. And I've yet to see a better HD/2k camera for narrative in terms of image quality. Interesting that the 5d2 can be made to match this. Is 5d2 raw usable at iso 1600 with proper exposure?

  6. These images look awesome for commercial shoots, TV, and docs. But I don't prefer it for a cinematic look. I will be interested to see what raw looks like with this camera. Do we know if anyone has tried this yet?

    That's a strange thing to say. I think Canon color science takes a lot of cues from film. Now of course these promotional videos are all graded so they are more representative of the colorist's inclination than anything.

  7. The autofocus features are beautiful. Dual pixel AF was great on the prev gen C cameras, and this is another step in the right direction. I like how they are pushing this with face tracking, manual focus guides and the movable AF area. A dream for documentaries.

    I think this is the most interesting camera of the recently announced/released bunch. Curious which features will propagate down to the next c100.

  8.  

    Hello!

    I haven't slept much last night but here it is, the α7R II low light test! (i also posted my initial thoughts at the beginning but feel free to skip to the test if you get bored!) :grin:

    The results are very surprising, whereas during the day i couldn't really spot a difference in quality between the FF and S35 modes things are completely different when the lights go down: the S35 mode is vastly superior to the Full Frame, they are not even in the same league! I don't know if that is only the result of the better readout from the sensor in S35 or there is some noise reduction wizardry happening in real time but the output from the S35 mode is way cleaner.

    It is not surprising and the reason is exactly the same as the reason FF mode has less rolling shutter than s35: the camera simply uses more photosites in s35 mode, hence less noise. 

  9. Exactly. Color exists because of specific wavelengths of light being reflected off surfaces. Color doesn't exist without light, so if there is less light, there's going to be less color. If you're shooting a scene at 52,000 ISO, of course the colors will look weird because they literally aren't there!

    (physics people please correct me if I'm wrong about this)

     

    This only applies to humans. We simply don't see color well at low light levels because of the way human vision works.

    Cameras don't have this problem. What you perceive as lack of color in low light captured images is for a couple of reasons:

    1) In naturally occuring low light situations the spectrum of the light is often overly monochromatic. For example, dusk light has lots of blue and tungsten has a strong red component. This offsets the image toward monochromatic.

    2) Overly noisy image.

     

    Anyhow, the A7s s-log2 lacks tonal precision even when shot at its minimal ISO (which is 3200) and overexposed for healthier signal.

  10. Wow, that's really cool! 
    ...but wasn't this topic about 8-bit 4:20 and 4:2:2 camera footage shot on physical cameras? I think we all understand that 8-bit can work very well for digital creations and is still the default delivery method, but the issue is whether it's an adequate acquisition bit depth for high dynamic range LOG-encoded footage. 

    Thanks.

    Actually, my whole point with this paragraph was that even uncompressed 8-bit 4:4:4 log has its limits and they aren't particularly high.  : )

  11. re: Cineon

    I don't know what do you mean by R', G,' B' (gamma corrected values?), but Cineon encodes film densities which do represent scene light intensities logarithmically, the same way digital log curves do. It is indeed meant to be printed on print film. But the comparison is fair I think. If anything, one actually needs more precision for digital because print film grain, as fine as it is, still acts as dither.

     

    Incidentally, a few months ago I was involved with tone mapping and grading this real-time rendered short:

    It uses high resolution 8-bit textures, so the source image is effectively 8-bit RGB (4:4:4) and the engine works in high bitdepth precision and/or floating point (so negligible quality loss with lighting and processing). There is a (perfectly flat) log conversion operation from the engine linear space at the end of the pipeline for film out simulation purposes (simulated Kodak print). It is parameterized for around 12 stops. The grade is done over this perfectly flat curve. I found that somewhere around 12 stops is where you start to see issues if you are picky (and I am), even considering the pulled down whites in this grade and the overlayed grain.

  12. With LOG comes great power and it is down to the user how good ends up looking. There's a lot of terrible looking LOG footage out there due to the individual grade rather than any codec weakness and I don't think 10bit ProRes LOG from the Blackmagic Cameras looks significantly different or better to 8bit LOG. 10bit is overrated for everything aside from keying. I have graded 10bit from the GH4 to Shogun and didn't see an advantage in the grade even when pushing it to extremes to see what was lurking in the murky depths!! In my view, it doesn't suddenly benefit skin tones. That is more down to the sensor and image processor than 8bit vs 10bit.

    Take for example 14bit raw as one extreme in terms of colour / bit depth... only way you can go more extreme on the specs than that is 16bit on the Sony F65! To make use of 10bit let alone 14bit and 16bit the sensor has to deliver an extremely wide dynamic range AS WELL AS a massive colour gamut. Now, we already have experience of 14bit with Magic Lantern raw. Is it significantly better than 10bit raw from a Blackmagic in terms of codec or grading flexibility? No. The sensor makes more difference. The sensor in the 5D Mark III is very good, very clean, wide colour gamut. The one in the BMPC is noisy and has a harsh run off into the highlights. Great codec, yes, but 10bit vs 14bit with that same sensor performance would have made very little difference.

    Now we have a shining example of how good 8bit LOG can look for colour... he is called Mr Canon 1D C. You saw how it compared to the NX1 which I previously sung the praises of for being actually very very nice indeed at capturing vivid, rich, satisfying rec.709 colour.

    What LOG does for a camera, regardless of 8bit vs 10bit, is quite frankly magic and should be highly regarded.

    There's 'light LOG' like on the 1D C by the way, which doesn't go as flat as S-LOG and doesn't dramatically change colour, leaving it very saturated. I think S-LOG does go to extremes in terms of dynamic range... but it is not 8bit which causes the weirder colour vs the 1D C is it? Because they are both 8bit codecs! A7S owners, indeed RX10 II, RX100 IV owners can do an experiment. Shoot 4K 8bit LOG video. Shoot a raw still. Grade to match. Compare. Difference will be smaller than you think!

    As an a7s owner, with all due respect, I can say that you are wrong. There is huge difference between s-log2 and raw. Both color and image density are significantly worse with s-log2 compared to the raw stills. Also, a7s externally recorded 4k downscaled to 1080p is easily more gradable than the in-camera 1080p.

    good examples here: http://blog.inventome.com/Blog/2015/2/a7s4Ktests/Sony-a7s-Exposure-and-Noise-Workflow-with-UHD-and-Odyssey-7Q-Plus

     

    Sensor, noise, processing, etc surely matter a lot but downplaying the importance of the available tonal precision is pointless. Yes, you can have badly quantized and processed data encoded in 10 bits, and it will still be crap. And you can have well sampled, quantized and processed data encoded in 8 bits. And it will STILL be bad if the curve is too flat for the available space. Ideally, one needs well processed data in at least 9-10 bits for log encodings with extensive DR.

    It is no coincidence that the father of all log curves Cineon log is 10-bit. Back then nothing was taken for granted, nor there was any prejudice about 8 bits, so this was extensively researched by Kodak. They concluded that 9 bits are likely enough but went for 10, since 10 fits better with computers; plus, a little bit of redundancy doesn't hurt.

    And lets not forget chroma subsampling. After all 4:2:2 is twice the chroma info contained in 4:2:0, and 4:4:4 is four times the chroma info contained in 4:2:0. So not all 8-bit is created equal.

    In general, wider color gamuts do help grading by having better color separation, but there is no point having a wide camera gamut if there isn't the color precision to encode it properly as is the case with S-Gamut and s-log2 in the a7s. Note that many digital cameras have native color gamuts wider than film leading to color precision smaller than scanned film when encoded with the same bitdepth.

  13. sunyata's analogy is quite good. A small correction only: Prints don't have a linear representation of the scene light, not at all. Prints are heavily gamma corrected for projection in dark environments much more so than material meant to be shown on emitting displays. Print-through film curves (that is, scene-to-projection) typically have a gamma in the range 2.5-2.8.

    Now first it is important where the "log" comes from. It is because humans perceive exponential light changes as linear changes. This is a logarithmic relationship. Hence, log. Log curves mimic this. Exponential scene light changes are recorded as linear changes. In other words, each increase of exposure with a stop (or doubling the light) takes the same number of coding values to encode, and not double the values of the previous stop (as do linear encodings).

    There are a couple of technical benefits:

    1) Much more effective and economical utilization of available coding space. This is the reason log curves encode wide dynamic ranges effectively in a smaller bitdepth. Cineon was developed to capture the huge DR of negative film in only 10 bits.

    2) (And related to 1) Increased tonal precision in the dark parts of the picture, compared to a physically correct linear encoding (when using the same coding space).

    Since sensors work linearly, purely logarithmic curves would waste some coding space in the blacks, because there is not enough density there. That's why practically all log curves are pseudo-log, with some compression in the black end. Arri's Log-C is probably the closest to pure log. Canon's C-log is the furthest away from pure log. The other reason is, as mentioned, mimicking Cineon. This is also, I believe, one of the main reasons all log curves have a raised pure black level. This mimicks the base density (D min) of film, as encoded in the Cineon curve to accommodate scanning film densities.

  14. ​Thanks for the great feedback! I actually did an Autumn Leaves test a few weeks back and found the colours amazing but it was very, very contrasty so I didn't do anything with it. I got the impression that dropping contrast to -3 wouldn't really help but might give it another look. I do love the flatter look you get with SLOG2.
    Will also take your tip with the skies and make them a little punchier, it's also very teal-y at points but that might be the LUT at work.

    ​You can increase the DRO setting if you are going to use Autumn Leaves for grading. DRO +3 flattens the low-mid range of all the styles.

  15. It doesn't have more highlights, whait it does is pull mid grey lower and clip signal at IRE 100. The lower midgrey point may create the illusion of more highlights latitude, but it is the actually opposite. The other three Cine curves go to IRE 109. Cine2 is supposed to be used "as is" and be broadcast safe (hence clipped at IRE 100).

    I don't think any peaking setting will work well with slog. Peaking relies on contrast and contrast is very low with s-log. One way to sort of work around this is to pre-focus with a contrasty PP and switch to s-log for recording.

  16. Log does work very very well with 8bit. 8bit is not the issue, weak codecs are. 

    Example, Canon C300, 8bit 50mpbs, Canon Log works a treat, even with the 8bit 24mbps C100, works beautifully. Sony A7s, works great (no banding or codec break up when while de-logging - some poeple don't like the a7s colour science but that's irrelevant).

    Log is simply a logarithmic gamma curve to get a flat tonal range easier to grade and protect both ends of the spectrum it will work with any codec that has the ability to be strongly contrast-adjusted without introducing artefacts. 

    GH4 4K 100mbps codec is one of the strongest 8bit codecs, as is the 200mbps 1080p, not to mention the ability to record 10bit 600mbps 1080p ProRes HQ through HDMI (You can get that for 300$ Ninja Star or 500$ Ninja2 that gives you an extra 5" field monitor)

     A strong Log curve coupled with tweaked colour science (which is what V-log is, it's also a little colour magic) is a perfect companion for the GH4. 

    ​Well, I have the A7s and s-log2 is unusable in 8-bit if you care one bit about image quality. Plastic skin everywhere once you restore contrast; simply not enough tonal precision in 8 bits for the flatness of this curve. Besides, the s-log2 setting doesn't use a huge chunk of the coding space, this way further screwing the tonal precision.

    Canon c-log is a different story. Its curve is not log really, just log-like in the upper end. And it has less DR than s-log. Much more 8-bit friendly.

     

    Codec is important but not as important as the bitdepth. Try working with 16 stops log in uncompressed 8-bit and see what happens even if there is no codec at play.

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...