kidzrevil

@squig so thats what that ugly mesh looking noise is when you underexpose huh ? ?? Do you think it might be a better option to overexpose +0.5 to +1 and normalize the exposure in post ?

the voigtlander 28mm f2.8 is truly underrated. On a FF camera when shooting close to the subject, the way the depth of field rolls off is truly unique. Even at 5.6-8

God damn ???those screengrabs look amazing @squig

@cantsin yeah ! Its in the 15 beta

davinci resolve 4x super scale from 1080p. I took a couple of shots of foliage because they are usually a dead giveaway for sharpening artifacts

@kye yup and the super scale feature is magical. It works better than my neat video workflow !

@mercer the Davinci super scale algorithim is pretty sophisticated. Idk their secret sauce but it has given me a very visible jump in detail in my 1080 raw files at the expense of extra processing power

@mercer I use Neat video ! You right click your files in davinci resolve and look for the feature. Its pretty dope and a great way to upscale footage

@kye definitely +1 on the bit about the chroma noise ! Im considering just running the noise reduction pass with a very slight luma noise reduction and heavy chroma reduction ?. Another cool feature I stumbled upon that gave a SIGNIFICANT gain in IQ was davinci resolve 15 super scale feature. @mercer you may want to check that out as well

@mercer oooooh the only thing I adjust globally is sharpness -0 and I may add a touch to the color boost slider. I adjust the exposure levels on a clip by clip basis, it works better with the raw files than using the lift,gamma,gain sometimes

@mercer I use resolve to make all adjustments to the raw file before exporting in 12 bit individual files. Resolve debayers the raw files way better than acr. After you compress to prores or dnxhr you can edit freely in whatever nle you choose

Adobe Premiere is such a scam in comparison to Davinci. I see little to no reason to pay fora monthly service that is more buggy than the FREE davinci resolve ?

@kaylee thank you ! I’ve used one to get deep colors in a landscape shot but I haven’t used it on skin ??? you should try it out you may be onto something !!!

+1 I kinda wanted to express that with that grade. I wanted to show how thick you can make colors look without clipping with 14 bit color in addition to the LUT. Davinci Resolve Tetrahedral interpolation makes LUTs even more accurate which is a neccessity with ML raw 14bit color. I then finished the grade in Adobe Premiere lumetri with simple adjustments and it really handled the nuance color well leaving nothing clipped

Thank you ! And thats all I want to do is give people more options. We have millions of colors to choose from, why be locked i to the same looks you know ? @squig

@Deadcode not every client wants that. If I used whatever LUT was used in the example video on a fashion client you’ll never be able to see the true colors of the clothes. The LUT will shift and compress all the hues to fit this color pallette. Point is with film there is an infinite amount of looks and aesthetics one can choose and market. If everyone wanted a muted color palette instagram’s filters wouldn’t be so widely used and abused. Idk why you keep mentioning HDR in this conversation but you seem excited about it so I would love to see your results does this look more “filmic” to you

@Deadcode I rather you just say you don't like the look. Rec2020 or Rec709 has nothing to do with the appearance of the colors if nothing is clipping inside the color space.The only time you even see a visible benefit with Rec2020 is when the file is encoded in 10 bit color and displayed on a true rec2020 monitor. Color clipping is one thing but there is nothing clipping. On a technical level this complies to the tee with the standards of the color gamut and you can simply screenshot a still and watch it on your vectorscope. It sounds like you are saying you don't like the rendering of the color and that's fine but that's subjective. What do you define as a filmic look ?

@Bioskop.Inc I thought about the 28mm but I tend to avoid vintage glass under 35mm. 35mm & up usually are better designed. The takumars is one of my best sets of lenses

@Deadcode ??? What are you talking about ? This is a rec709 image...and there’s no shadow lifting and highlight recovery in the grade. Is your monitor rec2020 ? Im confused as to what you are saying. Download the file and check your waveform. It totally fits the entire image in the rec709 display gamut, clipping at 100 ire broadcast standards with no lifting or curve adjustment in the shadows. My monitor is calibrated for rec709, if you are viewing in a rec2020 color space your gamma and chromacity will be way off. This leads to the appearance of oversaturated color and weak contrast. Its good to know that you own an HDR monitor though !

I Started using a tiffen ultra contrast to raise the image off the noise floor. I like the results ! This is with my new LUT btw

I prefer the 55 to the 50 myself ! I have the 35mm f2.5 , 85mm f1.9,55mm f1.8 & 105mm f2.5 . They look gorgeous with the lens turbo speedbooster

LOVE this ! Wow Voigtlander 28mm f2.8 w/ tiffen ultracontrast filter. This filter is underrated. Its been helping me keep the shadow areas above the noise floor

@mercer yup ! As a rule of thumb I generally avoid lenses under 35mm especially with vintage glass because of the inherent limitations of wide angle lenses. 24mm is the widest I’ll go but it has to be a well designed lens. Point is we’ve already had a lot of tools neccessary to make these old cameras shine. even the t2i is dope when treated right in post

I think we hit the high point or the “golden era” of imaging technology a long time ago. Between the limitations in the human eye and in display technology the bottleneck has always been in the display tech available to us today. 4K is cool but you can only see its benefits from extremely close distances because of the finite resolution of the human eye. HDR and wide color gamut allows the display to render billions of colors but on average the human eye can see 10 million of the 16 million colors available in rec709 color. Point is cameras were more than capable of exceeding the capabilities of our human eye years ago so the advantages of newer camera tech is becoming less and less groundbreaking in comparison to the dslr revolution if that makes sense.

@Gregormannschaft thank you ! Its a 1/8 black pro mist but it still came out kinda heavy ! I may give up shooting with diffusion filters for a while