Jump to content

ride_on_the_rhythm

Members
  • Content Count

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ride_on_the_rhythm

  • Rank
    New member
  1.   I haven't experienced that at all, even when I leave the color settings at 0.  Sounds like something you need to look into, or there could be a defect of some sort.
  2. Great read.  This post has been a valuable resource not just for me, but likely many other RX100 users.  I wanted to offer some experience and tips that will hopefully help guide others, especially with LUTs and color grading.  I am by no means a pro.  I like to make creative use of my skills to in essence "pimp" out my home movies, using cinematic principles.  It's a hobby, nothing more.  I have done a few weddings and bridal showers etc. for friends.  I have been using Sony Vegas for many years.  When HD first came out on a consumer level, I got the Canon Vixia HF10.  When the RX100 came along, I jumped on the opportunity to have a portable device for better video abilities.  I absolutely realize that the quality of high-end DSLR and pro video equipment is more or less superior to the RX100, but that doesn't mean we can't play around with RX and do some similar stuff on a diluted level.   I've had the RX100 since February, and recently sold it for the M2 because I wanted native 24p.  No matter how much you conform or overcrank, true 24p just looks better.  I haven't been disappointed.  Even in low light indoors like at a restaurant, the noise is quite bearable, in fact it looks very much like film grain.  Other than that, I haven't noticed anything different video-wise between the 100 and 100M2.   I recently started playing around with Davinci Resolve Lite and it is a pleasure to work with.  Once you get the hang of it, color correction is a breeze.  My workflow is this, on a Windows PC, using footage shot at 60i from the RX100:   Import clips into Vegas Pro, set deinterlace to blend --> Do basic cutting and moving of clips --> Batch render the clips as Sony MXF 50Mbit files @ 29.97p along with an .xml --> import the mxf clips and .xml to conform the timeline in Resolve --> color correct as needed --> export clips as Sony MXF --> import back into Vegas, add effects, text, music, blends, etc --> render to completion (I like mp4 @ high bitrate).   It seems tedious but in reality Resolve renders much faster than Vegas even with lots of color correction so I'm happy.  The conversions from AVCHD to MXF is also very fast, not much transcoding involved and since it is being done at such a high bitrate I don't notice any degradation.   LUTs   Pro cameras that shoot in RAW are easier to color grade because video is not so compressed and has a higher bitrate.  There are many LUTs available for film emulation and other looks.  I decided to try and duplicate a flat Cinestyle-like profile for RX100 footage which might be able to have LUTs applied with decent results.     Straight out of the camera I've been using pretty much the same recommended settings that everyone else seems to like: Portrait Mode with DRO2 and sat, contrast and sharpness dialed down.  The one part I question is whether or not reducing sharpness is a good thing.   Most LUTs seem to need log video, but the RX100 by all accounts is in rec.709.  I found a LUT that can convert non-log into log.  When applied as the first node in Resolve, it flattens the image even more, approaching something very close to "Cinestyle" and other pro cameras.  Then as a secondary LUT, you can apply almost anything else and the results are very impressive, all things considered.  This gives the footage a very cinematic look.  For example, the modern "orange-teal" film look can be achieved with just a few clicks without masking skin tones and applying different layers for mids and highs.  Often some basic work with lift and gain in the original is all that is needed to get a great look.   I don't want to link the sources for these various LUTs because this is not a sales pitch, but a little googling can get you there.   Bottom line, this camera is lots of fun to use because it is so easy to take around.  I don't care that the zoom is slow, because who zooms during video clips anyway?  DOF is very nice at the wide end.  I simply compose most video @ 1.8 so it always looks pretty nice.  I use Reelsmart Motion Blur rather than carry around an ND filter in bright light.  I also tend to underexpose images because they are easy to correct in post.   That is all for now.  Hope this can be of help to others.    
×
×
  • Create New...