Jump to content

hyalinejim

Members
  • Content Count

    466
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Volumetrik in Magic Lantern Raw Video   
    ACR gives nicer colours and cleaner image than Resolve. To avoid flicker don't use shadows, highlights, whites, blacks or contrast - use exposure slider or curves instead. Or better still, forget about grading in ACR, buy Cinelog and grade later.
    For fast jobs I use Resolve. For maximum IQ I bite the bullet and transcode overnight to 444 Cinelog masters using ACR for AE. Search for a Smart Import 2 script.
  2. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to cameraeye in Magic Lantern Raw Video   
    @hyalinejim
    - Can't thank you enough for your Cinelog recommendation and the script.
  3. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from kidzrevil in No Joke - RAW 4K on the 5D Mark III   
    Absolutely! I also turn sharpness up to the max so that it helps with focusing. With digic peaking it makes focusing so much easier.
  4. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from kidzrevil in 12 or 10-bit RAW Magic Lantern!!!!   
    Yes, but any gains in resolution are only offered by the crop mode with the stuttery greyscale preview - it's off center and quite difficult to follow live action. The normal mode and 3x crop fast preview mode are limited to 1920x1080 AFAIK.
  5. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to Sage in GH5 to Alexa Conversion   
    The behavior is correct - Alexa does it too ; ) With wide gamut to 709 primaries, most saturated blues become very saturated

  6. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from webrunner5 in GH5 to Alexa Conversion   
    I just tried it now. The results are not so good. Adding the Arri colour space transform to GHa Main pushes a lot of the reds into negative clipping. This is especially noticeable in dark and deeply saturated reds, blues and purples. Lowering the saturation of GHa Main by a lot prevents this clipping. However, the issue is still evident (although not to the same extent) in GHa LogC. This means you might see some unnatural colours when using GHa LogC with LUTs that expect an Arri input. I would not use Soft or Main with Arri Luts at all.
    VLog - chart exposed for middle grey

     
    Add GHa Daylight Main

     
    Add Arri LogC to X 2 gamut only

     
    If you look at the bottom of the waveform you can clearly see the red channel going AWOL in this step from GHa LogC to the Arri X 2 gamut (this chart shot was ETTR, and has no clipping)
    GHa LogC:

     
    Now add transform to Arri gamut:

     
  7. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from seku in GH5 to Alexa Conversion   
    But Main and Soft don't perform the transformation from Alexa Wide Gamut to Rec709 primaries. So the hues are "wrong" - the are the colours of an acquisition colour space.
    GHa LogC to Alexa X 2 gamut gives colour as Arri intended, I'm thinking. But Main and Soft are simply slightly more contrasty and more saturated versions of Log C (with saturation roll-off?).
    Now, this might be of interest as a look in itself, especially if people are grading Arri LogC directly and leaving the colour space untouched. But I would suggest to you that if Main and Soft are your interpretation of a film-like Rec709 look with saturation roll off and other good things, then you should transform the primaries. The ColorChecker shots above demonstrate just how far out Main is. The hue, saturation and value of colours are significantly skewed as they haven't been transformed to Rec709 primaries.
    So am I right in saying that if I want to match Alexa colour, GHa LogC plus a LogC to Alexa X 2 gamut lut is the way to go?
  8. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Adept in GH5 to Alexa Conversion   
    @Sage Am I right in understanding that your lut converts GH5 VGamut to Alexa Wide gamut? If so, the "correct" way to use your luts would be to use GHa LogC with an Alexa Wide Gamut to Alexa X-2 conversion. When I do this, colours look more correct - not too saturated and skintones are not too magenta.
    Here's a comparison with actual X-Rite colorchecker values from BabelColor in the centre as a reference. I've added a curve to each to match to the chart's gamma.
    (VLog to GHa LogC) + (LogC Gamma & Alexa Wide Gamut to Alexa-X-2 Gamma & Alexa-X-2 Gamut) BEST MATCH

     
    (VLog to GHa Main) - too saturated

     
    (VLog to Varicam V709) - better, but not as good as the first one

     
    So as far as I can see, the colours that GHa gives should (technically) be transformed by using them with a LUT that expects Alexa Wide Gamut. So I'm curious as to what you see is the role of GHa Main and Soft? I understand your reasoning for the curves you chose for each, but what about the colour?
     
     
     
     
  9. Thanks
    hyalinejim reacted to Sage in GH5 to Alexa Conversion   
    That's right, the result of using GHa LogC is a stand in for Alexa LogC. Going from there, it may be treated as LogC from an Alexa (it can accept Arri's Rec 709 or other transforms intended for LogC). GHa Main and Soft are alternatives to Arri's Rec709; they all handle saturation in a way that is reminiscent of film (and is not in Alexa LogC natively), but place overall saturation and contrast differently as a grade base:
    Main - Most Saturation, Middle Contrast (Mostly linear)
    Soft - Middle Saturation, Lowest Contrast (Mostly linear)
    Arri's Rec709 - Least Saturation, Most Contrast (S-emphasized)
     
  10. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to EthanAlexander in Canon 5D mark iii RAW video 2018   
    Had a go with the 3.5K:

    You basically have to shoot blind, and hitting focus is up to the camera gods...
    The only thing about using Resolve over ACR is there's no "remove chromatic aberration" button and you can see it would have been useful for this.
  11. Haha
    hyalinejim reacted to User in The "Annihilation" of Paramount Pictures   
    It's no secret that we are certainly seeing a fragmentation of distribution. But if it helps me find films that I actually want to see, then I'd be happy to forgo the Hollywood schlock. Of course seeing great films in theatres still warms my heart, but not when some troglodyte is kicking the back of my chair. I've been collecting images of people who do this and may start a website to compile them. Starting with this guy at CPH:DOX World Premiere of The Look of Silence.

  12. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to User in The "Annihilation" of Paramount Pictures   
    This.

    The studios used to take chances, in the 70's.
  13. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to Axel in The "Annihilation" of Paramount Pictures   
    If it's *just* about money, if the only votes that count are those of the shareholders, this industry is doomed. Applicable to everything. If we are measured by by the degree we can be exploited, our kidneys will be sold and the rest becomes soap. 
    Watch The Cooler. The old casino mafia ruled this frivole business with cruelty - and passion. Then the bankers appeared and took over. And the world turned to shit.
  14. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to Andrew Reid in The "Annihilation" of Paramount Pictures   
    Paramount don't think Ex-Machina director's next film, starring Natalie Portman will make any money so they scrapped the cinema release and dumped it for cheap on Netflix's porch like an abandoned baby.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/01/annihilation-paramount-netflix/551810/?utm_source=atlfb
    These execs are going to be the death of cinema.
    Good thing is we have great TVs now and HDR
    Alex Garland is one of the most talented directors and writers working today, loved Ex Machina and it was a huge hit. Intelligent sci-fi is in. Black Mirror on Netflix is popular. Arrival was a hit. Why not this? Apparently Annihilation is a direct to video B-movie in the eyes of these Paramount idiots whose summer schedule consists of a Transformers spin-off called Bumblebee and another Mission Impossible... and practically nothing else.
  15. Haha
    hyalinejim reacted to EthanAlexander in What was the first professional camera to shoot LOG gamma?   
    I like you I just think you're wrong.
    JK ; ) - Seriously though I just disagree about benefits outweighing the costs. I believe you that there are certainly drawbacks to trying to cram so much info into a small container; as I mentioned I don't shoot SLog nearly as much now, after reading some of your posts. But I know, having compared the HDR and SDR masters of a huge-budget feature, that ultimately HDR is more pleasing to me.
    I do appreciate all your posts though! They're educational and make me think. And your posts back in June are actually the reason I even signed up for a forum account... I signed up to argue with you about S Log 
  16. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to Axel in What was the first professional camera to shoot LOG gamma?   
    I'm afraid I'm about to make another TLDR posting ;-)
    What's meant by Dynamic Range?
    Someone above said common rec_709 displays could show 7 stops of light at best. This is the standard. Let's therefore agree to call it SDR.
    Many modern cameras can record 10-13 stops. A linear recording (picture profile-related) would only be able (hypothetically, see below) to store an excerpted range of nine stops. Due to broadcast-rules, the values below 16 and above 235 were considered 'illegal', because they couldn't be truthfully reproduced. That's the background to 7 stops of light at best. 
    But none of the non-LOG profiles bakes in a truly linear curve, because that would look terrible. They reserve most of the values for the midtones and rob some of the wasted 20 superwhite values. The image of a standard picture profile - often called Standard - tends to look punchy as well as natural. Most of the time this is actually what one wants to achieve.
    There are also profiles that favor skintones ('Portrait' - for Sony mirrorless the creative style Autumn Leaves has become popular because it additionally has a color shift complimentary for skin), lanscapes and so on. I don't know the exact numbers, but let's assume that there will be 50-60 values reserved for the skin range then.
    A LOG quantization curve tries to distribute more or less (there is a knee for superwhite usually) the same amount of values for every stop of light into that 256 scheme. For the Sony A7sii, which claims to record 14 stops @Slog3, this would mean 18 values for each stop (it may be somewhat more complicated, but for the sake of simplicity, let's agree upon that simplification).
    One term that currently came up in conjunction with the new GH5S' dual ISO is *useable dynamic range*. Tom Antos' tests to verify the actual dynamic range of cameras showed that all LOG recordings capture the noise floor too, so one has to substract one stop for the shadows. But there are limiting factors for the highlights too. If a daylight sky's gradient does show banding in Slog-3 in a graded rec_709 version, where in-between-values are being interpolated with floating point accuracy in post, one can imagine how this will affect HDR. 
    Admittedly I am not a broadcast engineer. But taking all of he above into account, I'd say that 10-bit or more is needed to really extend the DR. Please comment and correct my arguments.
    Now for a subjective point of view:
    We still live in an SDR world. Seven stops. Light is just white, a dull color mix of RGB. 13 stops of light crammed into rec_709, lifting shadows, preserving highlights, results in the kind of artificial-looking images we often see when people record in LOG. If light is the subject, if it's prominent in the image, I consider this counterproductive and pathetic. It's better to let the highlights clip, to let the 100 IRE white eat away the detail. I found an image to demonstrate what I mean:

    Always?
    No, but the unwritten law to never let the highlights clip is stupid, imo. Light is not just an informal part of the environment, it's an epiphany. I like a punchy image more than an expressionless one. Oh, Larry, well done! I really see detail in the clouds, terrific!
     
     
     
  17. Thanks
    hyalinejim got a reaction from PannySVHS in Improving GH5 colour - comparison with 5D3 RAW   
    Yes, the GH5 is second.
     
    For sure, the 5D files have much more malleability than 10bit VLog. You can really go to town on Magic Lantern RAW - it's a much thicker file. It's almost pristine (except for ugly shadow noise).
     
    But I think that it is actually a testament to the GH5 that I can do that. And what I've presented here is only the realisation of my preferences. The point that I want to make is that the 10bit 422 files are robust enough to undergo a fair bit of colour correction / grading. To me, the VLog coming from the camera is a "raw" material with massive potential, as the (properly) RAW footage from the 5D3 is a beginning, and not an end in itself. In the main GH5 thread you mentioned that there was a range of quality in the posted videos for the GH5, from video-ish to something more satisfactory. Believe me, if Magic Lantern RAW was accessible to the same kinds of users - and in the same numbers - as the GH5, you'd see a hell of a lot of bad 5D3 ML videos.
     
    Exactly. You need 12 nodes or 20 minutes work to match this with that. But when the groundwork is done, you're in business. Today I made a nice lut that combines the Canon-like colour with a Lightroom film emulation preset. I loaded this into the camera as a monitoring lut and exposed until it looked good in the viewfinder. Came back and slapped the lut on and each shot was perfect. It took as long as it does to Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V.... with maybe a small WB and curves adjustment beforehand This is the look that I'm into at the moment. In a year's time I might be into something different.










     

    Big time!
     
  18. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from kidzrevil in Magic Lantern Raw Video   
    My short documentary The Cloud of Unknowing, shot on 5D3 Magic Lantern, has been nominated for "Best British / Irish Short Film" by the London Film Critics' Circle. The awards ceremony is on January 28th... so fingers crossed for that!

    Here is a short extract from the film with some info about it:


    And here are some more details on the award nomination.

    http://www.iftn.ie/news/?act1=record&only=1&aid=73&rid=4291381&tpl=archnews&force=1

    Thanks Magic Lantern! 
  19. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from kidzrevil in 5d Mark iii ML Raw or Gh5?   
    I think you should get both. Spend a month playing with them. Then sell one.
    I think 5D is slightly better for short films and GH5 is significantly better for bread and butter jobs.
  20. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from kidzrevil in 5d Mark iii ML Raw or Gh5?   
    Shadows on GH5 have grain-like luma noise. 5D has lots of chroma noise and blotchy low frequency ugliness in underexposed areas.
  21. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from kidzrevil in 5d Mark iii ML Raw or Gh5?   
    The answer is... it depends!
    5D3 ultimately has better image quality (stands up to fierce grading) so for a short film I would choose that. However preview in high res modes is hard to use, so if focus pulling is important you might be better off sticking to 1080.
    For promos, GH5 all the way. It kicks the 5Ds ass here. I have used ML for corporate work with great success, but I prefer the GH5 for its usability.
  22. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Mark Tincho in In praise of AUTO.... for RAW stills   
    Today I grabbed my DSLR and went for a short walk around the neighbourhood to take some pics. I wanted to get some shots to test a film look DCP profile I've been working on. As part of my research for this I discovered that most contemporary DSLRs deliberately underexpose when using in-camera metering. This is because for most sensors there aren't actually that many stops between middle grey and totally blown out. For example, my 5D3 will clip at around 3.3 stops above middle grey. I know this because if I shoot a white sheet of paper at 1/3 stop increments and examine the linear RAW values, the exposure that gives me 18% of the maximum RAW value is around 3.3 stops below the one that clips... and that, by definition, is middle grey.
    However, this leaves very little room in the highlights. The DR of the 5D3 is around 11.5 stops. So there's three and a bit above middle grey, and around eight below. If you were to meter correctly, you would be very much in danger of blowing out highlights. To help combat this, it appears that most camera manufacturers use 12% grey as the basis for metering. The effect of this is to provide an extra stop or so of highlight headroom. And in fact, this is borne out by checking values in ACR, where actual 18% grey sits at around 185 and 12% grey sits at around 119 (the given RGB number for middle grey in a 2.2 gamma).
    Anyway, that's all very interesting or very dull, depending on your point of view. But for some reason it inspired me to shoot on auto exposure on my walk. Even though I normally think of manual exposure control as being the absolute best, I was now considering that Canon have probably tested this a lot and perhaps auto isn't so bad. So I put the camera on aperture priority with auto ISO and started snapping. At first I was kind of worried as I could immediately see two things happening that I would have rectified straight away if I had been shooting manual:
    Low contrast shots were looking a bit underexposed (I would normally ETTR in these situations to minimise noise) In high contrast scenes some sky was getting blown out (I would normally protect highlights as much as I can) However, I just went with it. When I got back to my computer I also did something that I never usually do and that was to click the "Auto" button on the ACR exposure tab. I was really surprised with how well everything turned out. ACR's best guess did a great job at expanding or contracting shadows and highlights automatically. All I had to do was tweak overall exposure, and sometimes highlights or blacks as well. Here are some of the results:

    Are there clipped highlights and crushed blacks? Absolutely. But the pics still look good.
    Now, I don't know if I would shoot this way for a client. However, I've got to say that it was such a blessed relief to not be constantly chimping the histogram and re-taking shots to get the ideal exposure. And it was also a very good feeling to get the processing done in two or three clicks. It made both shooting and processing a lot more fun.
    Who knows, maybe I'm ready for auto white balance next!
     
  23. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to BjornT in Panasonic GH5 - all is revealed!   
    Shot this on the Leica 12-60 in HLG profile (ALL-I, 1080, 50FPS) with a Gorilla Pod.
     
     
    Gotta love that weather sealing! 
  24. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from kaylee in Magic Lantern Raw Video   
    IIRC you can do scope (eg: 1920 x 804) RAW at 60fps, but it's not continuous. Shooting compressed and a lower bit depth will help here with recording times.
  25. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from kaylee in In praise of AUTO.... for RAW stills   
    Today I grabbed my DSLR and went for a short walk around the neighbourhood to take some pics. I wanted to get some shots to test a film look DCP profile I've been working on. As part of my research for this I discovered that most contemporary DSLRs deliberately underexpose when using in-camera metering. This is because for most sensors there aren't actually that many stops between middle grey and totally blown out. For example, my 5D3 will clip at around 3.3 stops above middle grey. I know this because if I shoot a white sheet of paper at 1/3 stop increments and examine the linear RAW values, the exposure that gives me 18% of the maximum RAW value is around 3.3 stops below the one that clips... and that, by definition, is middle grey.
    However, this leaves very little room in the highlights. The DR of the 5D3 is around 11.5 stops. So there's three and a bit above middle grey, and around eight below. If you were to meter correctly, you would be very much in danger of blowing out highlights. To help combat this, it appears that most camera manufacturers use 12% grey as the basis for metering. The effect of this is to provide an extra stop or so of highlight headroom. And in fact, this is borne out by checking values in ACR, where actual 18% grey sits at around 185 and 12% grey sits at around 119 (the given RGB number for middle grey in a 2.2 gamma).
    Anyway, that's all very interesting or very dull, depending on your point of view. But for some reason it inspired me to shoot on auto exposure on my walk. Even though I normally think of manual exposure control as being the absolute best, I was now considering that Canon have probably tested this a lot and perhaps auto isn't so bad. So I put the camera on aperture priority with auto ISO and started snapping. At first I was kind of worried as I could immediately see two things happening that I would have rectified straight away if I had been shooting manual:
    Low contrast shots were looking a bit underexposed (I would normally ETTR in these situations to minimise noise) In high contrast scenes some sky was getting blown out (I would normally protect highlights as much as I can) However, I just went with it. When I got back to my computer I also did something that I never usually do and that was to click the "Auto" button on the ACR exposure tab. I was really surprised with how well everything turned out. ACR's best guess did a great job at expanding or contracting shadows and highlights automatically. All I had to do was tweak overall exposure, and sometimes highlights or blacks as well. Here are some of the results:

    Are there clipped highlights and crushed blacks? Absolutely. But the pics still look good.
    Now, I don't know if I would shoot this way for a client. However, I've got to say that it was such a blessed relief to not be constantly chimping the histogram and re-taking shots to get the ideal exposure. And it was also a very good feeling to get the processing done in two or three clicks. It made both shooting and processing a lot more fun.
    Who knows, maybe I'm ready for auto white balance next!
     
×
×
  • Create New...