Jump to content

Lamplighter55

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lamplighter55

  • Rank
    New member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think this is what we call 'challenging lighting conditions' - winter in the UK - grey day lighting. Nice grade - has a interesting rich textural quality to the colours.
  2. The transform from 4K to HD (in camera) basically is a 2x2 sample of the 4K frame pixels going into one HD pixel - so effectively 1/4 the spread of noise. Essentially averaging to the mean each set of 4 pixels in the 4K to create one pixel in HD. The 'neat' thing about this is that you can (canon can) also use this to sharpen (increase luminance contrast) as part of the process as the chrominance noise is variable for each colour channel. So we end up with less noisy but slightly sharper images in HD. I still think Canon should be able to improve on the 'ghosting' or 'temporal' quantisati
  3. Humm could it be that the luminance gradient from the zebra cross-over values are much brighter than in previous shoots? Light being logarithmic the values could easily rise to a 'burn-out' level if you are shooting on a bright sunny day - for example any direct specular sunlight reflections will be orders of magnitude above 'correct exposure'.
  4. ... the artefacts are quite characteristic of 'Temporal aliasing' but obviously some processing has been done as it does not seem to be global to each frame and seems to to be more pronounced when there is a pronounced difference in contrast from the preceding frame onto an area with less contrast. There should be a firmware adjustment that can solve the problem. (There's an interesting page on 'Red's site that helps explain temporal aliasing and their solution (hardware) in using an lcd layer between lens and capture chip that controls the light levels at a pixel level across the exposure of
  5. I bought my XC10 back in January (2016) and have been very happy with the quality of the images/footage. This 'Ghosting' or temporal noise reduction (possibly) has also shown up on my footage (see bellow) - and I've been following this thread on the issue. Having had a close look at the artefact I can pretty much say with certainty its an error in the calculation of how Canon integrate values from one frame to the next when calculating for motion blur. Basically the maths is off and creating a 'rounding error' so the pixel bins either hold an 'over shoot' or 'under shoot' value - so you get th
  6. I recently bought an XC10 having researched the pros and cons and also taking advantage of the 'January sales'.. So far am pretty happy getting used to its capabilities. I have a question ... I have been trying to find out if any of the 3rd party 1D 'cube' LUTs available for the C100*/300* are compatible with the Clog setting of the XC10? Anyone edited with these in FCPX for example? They seem to work but I'd prefer to be certain, as when it comes to 'pushing' the limits when capturing I'd like to know I can get a safe recovery of the footage with out bias, once I've transcoded it for editing
×
×
  • Create New...