Jump to content

HockeyFan12

Members
  • Content Count

    787
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About HockeyFan12

  • Rank
    Frequent member

Profile Information

  • My cameras and kit
    Arriflex 765

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I've returned to older cameras. I don't need 4k for personal projects and don't really think it looks better, either. I've always liked the image from both the C100 and GH5. I think V Log has +4 stops of highlight detail above 18% gray and Canon Log has 5.3 but then the shadows get a bit muddy and you have to watch your 100+ IRE super whites and recover them in post. With an external recorder, the C100's image I think is really great. But it does fall apart bit with macro blocking on leaves and flat surfaces, so I wouldn't use it for green screening necessarily. The Mk II might be better.
  2. HockeyFan12

    Filters?

    The chart isn't great imo, but in general "contrast" means "low contrast." So anything in that corner is reducing contrast. Nothing is adding more contrast, everything reduces it somewhat. But filters with black dots reduce it less, Ultra Contrast introduces a controlled flare and reduces it more. I do think the difference between Digital Diffusion FX and HDTV FX is stronger than the chart would indicate, but it probably depends on the strength of the filer.
  3. HockeyFan12

    Filters?

    Yeah that sounds about right. Find a cheap Ultra Contrast filter on eBay or Amazon and try it out. I directly compared a Digital Diffusion FX 1 and HDTVFX 1 a while back. They looked similarly, the difference was HDTV FX had milky shadows. I have the files somewhere but I didn't label them so I doubt I can find them quickly. Years ago I tried out a bunch of Ultra Contrast filters alone and it wasn't what I wanted. I was watching an explanation of MTF on YouTube and the idea is at different frequencies of resolution you get different amounts of contrast. You could probably mode
  4. HockeyFan12

    Filters?

    Of those, Digital Diffusion FX is what I would recommend. Some of the black diffusion filters are nice, too, they lower the contrast less than the regular variants.
  5. HockeyFan12

    Filters?

    Contrast filters lift the black levels across the frame, resolution filters have a small-radius bloom or simply reduce the sharpness of the image without reducing the contrast, halation is a wider-radius bloom that reduces contrast locally but doesn't necessarily wash out the entire frame. Reference the chart on the Scatter webpage. I imagine Ultra Contrast would look like somewhat like a light gray solid if it were on that chart.
  6. HockeyFan12

    Filters?

    Of those three, I've used Digital Diffusion FX, HDTV FX, and Smoque. Smoque looks to me like it's simulating filling a room with haze. Imo it's probably not what you're after. I think HDTV FX is a combination of Digital Diffusion FX and Ultra Contrast. Or it seems that way to me, at least. Ultra Contrast on its own is sort of like having a dirty UV filter or using a lens with light haze. It lifts the black levels like a controlled flare would when hit by light. This isn't so different from just using vintage lenses with older coatings (and internal haze and dust from age and lac
  7. http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?369550-C100-(-650) It should be cheap since AVCHD is bad and external recording is good, but what you get for the money is unparalleled. Add in some inexpensive lenses, Cowboy Studio shoulder rig, and an MKE600 and you've got a capable kit. And then maybe add in a light or two.
  8. I assume Arri ProRes is also delivered as EXRs? EXRs are high dynamic range 32 bit linear files, correct? When the colorist is grading and there's a sequence involving both vfx shots and regular footage, are they grading EXRs as linear files to match Log C or do they transform the EXRs into Log C somehow before grading? How do they get them back to Log C to match the non-vfx shots?
  9. 10 bit log from what camera? I'm confused because the Alexa Mini shoots 200fps at 2k (if I remember right), which correlates with a 5ms rolling shutter. 8ms makes sense for a 120fps sensor. How do you deal with Red raw footage in Nuke?
  10. At 800 ISO, the Alexa only has 0.1 stops more shadow detail than P6K, so underexposing the Alexa an additional stop isn't really a fair comparison. I don't own a P6K, and agree the A7SIII sensor looks much more interesting (not even sure rolling shutter is much worse than Alexa LF Mini), but it's a really impressive camera.
  11. It doesn't much matter, but at 800 ISO the Alexa and P6k have similar over/under. I think Black Magic recommends rating the camera at 400 ISO, in which case, without highlight recovery enabled, you would get 1.5-2 stops less highlight detail (as you mention), but it's clean enough at 800 ISO and with highlight detail recovery enabled actually surpasses the Alexa in real world use. Black Magic's highlight detail recovery works remarkably well. I've never seen a weird result from it, which is remarkable. But you're right not to rely on it too much, and I also find Cined's Komodo results sus
  12. I've had a similar experience. Can you send me your C-Log + BT709-WideDR LUT? Wide range to narrow. I downloaded one but am not sure it's the real deal. Canon's colors have changed over time and I still prefer the original C100 and C300 to their newer cameras. But the R6 might be ballpark.
  13. What firmware versions do you have and have you double checked white balance settings and followed up on this? The S1 and S1H I always found too magenta (by a lot) with V Log so it would be a welcome relief if the newer firmware has a greener tint, as the below image does.
×
×
  • Create New...