Benjamin Hilton

Finding the first word will help you.  After that, learn the keyboard shortcut for nudging clips to the right and left.  (on my machine in Premiere Pro its Command+arrow left or right)  Then, play back the audio nudging your sync clip to the right or left one frame at a time until the sync feels right; premiere can normally do this in real time. 

I've had to do this for several TV shows, hours of pre-content, hundreds of clips to sync, and the major wind they were shooting in on some mountain tops totally messed up the scratch mics...pretty much had to do it totally by hand.  Just be grateful you only have to do two interviews. ?

I think we need to stop looking at numbers so much and start focusing on results.  The effectiveness of codecs and bit depth totally depend on the sensor and processing.  My old Sony FS100 shot 1080P at 24mb/sec 8 bit and looked fantastic!  The GH5 on the other hand, looks terrible at 24mb/sec 8 bit.  The Sony Alpha cameras can look great at 100mb/sec 8 bit with S-log 2 and such, but the GH4/GH5 V-log 8 bit does not.  The GH5 was really built to shoot V-log at 10 bit, end of story.  It also does Cinelike D and Natural profiles great in 8 bit if you want, just depends on the look you are going for.  Try the internal codecs, if you aren't getting the results you want, try a recorder. 

Rent a camera and do some tests.  Know the look you are going for, and find a camera, lens, and color profile, that can effectively capture that look. 

Here are some screenshots from a short film I just directed.  GH5s, Leica R primes, and the lowly internal 10 bit codec of course...?

I have shot extensively with the GH5 cameras over this last year and I can confirm that there is a night and day difference between the internal 8bit 100mb/sec and 10bit 150mb/sec in V-Log.  Even using Cine-Like D is a big difference.  If you are shooting natural or rec 709 though, the 8bit 100mb/sec holds up great.  It just depends on what you are shooting.  S-log 2 is made to hold up with Sony's 8bit codecs, V-log is not. 

On 8/4/2018 at 5:27 AM, BrooklynDan said:

I simply do not understand the nostalgia here. I shot my senior thesis project on an FS100 and while I got some decent images out of it thanks to the skill of my DP, it always looked very videoish to me. The highlights burned horribly, the colors were oversaturated, and even if you shot it flat, you could never quite bring it back to the way you want it in post. Also, the form factor and ergonomics were some of the worst I have ever seen, the placement of the LCD screen on top was ludicrous, and the lack of NDs (thankfully rectified in the FS700) made screw-ons or matteboxes a necessity, which is difficult on a zero-budget. It was Sony's first go at making a prosumer large-sensor camera (after the F3 which came out at the same time), and their lack of common sense and feel for camera design just wasn't there, despite their long history in making video equipment.

My C100 mk. I(same era, same price-range) eats it for lunch in every possible way. Image quality, roll-off, NDs, hand-holdable ergonomics, etc.

I guess the beauty of the FS100 sensor was really pulled out with the Glencairn G Log Profile, totally different camera almost than using stock profiles.  More cinematic out of the box than anything I have been able to pull from any camera since, and I've shot with quite a few cameras.  I've never used a C100 though, but I would imagine the ergonomics are quite a bit better.  That is why I had to give up the FS100, just too big and awkward for the kind of doc work we do, wouldn't be bad for cinema shoots though. 

14 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Ah so he never did anything for the Sony PMW-F3?

 

No specifically.  But, the F3 has the same sensor, so I assume the FS100 settings would carry over the same; that's what I was wondering...if the same settings would create a similar image on the F3. 

6 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I'd love to know more about this a6400 camera. 

 

 

Whoops, meant a6300

This is the link for the profile:

https://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2012/08/17/g-log-ultimate-1-0-picture-profile-for-the-sony-fs100/

I believe also that the FS100 had about 11.5 stops of dynamic range; about what the GH5 and similar cameras have.

I wonder if it's possible for some really talented person to take the sensor and processing power of the FS100 and mod it into a smaller body.  Even just a box with an HDMI port on it would be amazing...could build out a nice package that is still small and compact. 

On 7/31/2018 at 4:05 PM, mercer said:

Umm yeah... those images are gorgeous... I particularly love the bottom 4.

Are Glencairn’s G Log settings transferable to the newer sLog2/3 capable cameras?

I love these kind of posts, so thanks for sharing. After 5 years of hobby shooting, I find myself way more interested in older cameras I couldn’t afford then than the modern 4K cams available today.

I know gear and tech marches forward but it seems like there was better looking footage from those cameras than what is floating around now. I guess the pool of shooters was smaller back then, so there is more muck to sort through. Hell, I alone have 50 or so horrible videos clogging up searches... lol. 

I tried working his profile into an a6400, but couldn't get anything to feel right.  Something really special about that sensor. 

20 hours ago, BenEricson said:

Colors kind of remind me of the frames posted above. The F3 produces a really good image. Really underrated. 

I have never used an F3 before, would love to try it though.  Anyone had any experience using Glen's profile with the F3?

Agreed.  NDs and a smaller body would be amazing!

41 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

At one point I wondered if there was going to be a "Sony FS1":

http://ironfilm.co.nz/sony-fs100-discontinued-sony-fs1-coming-soon/

I suppose the closest we got to that was the Sony FS5, did you ever try that?

I haven't tried the FS5, but have spent some time with the fs7.  They are nice cameras for sure, just don't seem that came out of the camera special touch that the FS100 did.  Maybe the 1080P helped with it to a certain extent, 4k can be a bit harder to get right without feeling like plastic. 

I was thinking back today just how much I enjoyed the images produced by my beloved old Sony FS100.  I have shot with quite a few cameras since then, but I think I can honestly say that the FS100 produced some of the best-looking images on a consistent basis for me than any other camera I have worked with since.  I shot primarily with Glen Cairn's G log ultimate which gave me beautiful dynamic range and color straight out of camera.  Many times my grade was a simple lowering of the blacks and white balance adjustment.  And, the files for 24mb/sec AVCHD, so easy in post. 

We moved on with cameras because of the size and ergonomics but I think that if Sony rehoused the FS100 sensor in a mirrorless body today, I would be the first buyer.  Here are some 720p images from some of my old films for posterity sake.  Does anyone else have fond memories with this camera?  Some stills from your work with it? 

Does anyone know of/use a good video player that can handle 10 Bit on a Mac with LUT support?  I have used VLC up until now, but it is pretty slow and buggy and doesn't support playback LUTs. 

I would love to be able to review my footage off of the card with a 3D LUT for the V-Log without having to import to an NLE.  Any thoughts?  I am using Mac systems. 

Thanks!

It's definitely a tough shot, but fun to try anyway...

14 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:

I'm unable to remove it myself but have contacted admin to remove it for me, as well as the copied one in the quote. My apologies. Just to be clear, my intent was not to offend you or criticize the actual work and can understand the nature of your request. 

I understand, thank you for your respectfulness. 

14 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:

I think this is a huge point. For most modern mirrorless cameras that shoot to a distribution codec, regardless of 8 or 10bit, the manufactures designed these systems to produce good colors right out of the box. There isn't a lot of room to push colors around in post. You really have to know your way around qualifiers. 

I think sometimes (I feel a philosphy coming on) we get too caught up associating LOG with "professional" but it isnt neccesarily always true.

If you're getting good color and good exposure in camera, what the hell do you honestly need LOG for when you're probably going to arrive at the same grade (or very close to) you would have gotten in camera anyway. In this situation you just unessecarily doubled your workflow.

Now, before you nutty professor's jump on here I just want to state I know why LOG is preferred in most situations...DR. I'm just making an observation that these cameras are optimized by the factory to deliver the best they have to offer out of the box. When we speak about these systems this needs to be acknowledged more. 

As are Tiffen softening filters, and much less expensive. Step up rings are cheap and even matte box versions of these filters are cheaper than a set of lens. 

Yeah...DISQUALIFIED! ?

Heh, that's currently all of our problem. ? The thought of shooting (equals spending) 12 bit RAW to be distilled down to cheap 8bit compressed 20Mbit h.264 is not exactly inviting.

Rec2020 is going to help with this big time. That being said, adoption for UHD 8bit televisions is STILL not widespread let alone televisions enabled with HDR/10bit UHD. 

Streaming Prores? I doubt Apple is going to give Google a license for that. HEVC isn't too far off though. 

And lastly, this...

 

Would you mind removing that picture?  I would prefer to not have profanity associated with my work for religious and professional reasons. 

The secret to those images though is in the color grade.  There are very few cameras that will look that good with minimal grading.  I have spent months off and on in the color bay with v log tests devoloping LUTs that match my style with the camera in almost every lighting scenerio.  But now that I have the LUTs developed, it's an easy matter of applying them to my footage as a grade, then doing my corrections underneath on each project. 

I think it's possible to create amazing images with almost any camera these days.  The trick is to pick a camera and stick with it for a while.  Take a couple of weeks to test it in every situation.  Find out what exposures compliment the sensor, what ratios it likes, native ISOs, and what it likes for breakfast.  Then after you find its sweat spots, take the footage into Davinci and play with it.  Develope a color science that matches your style.  Most codecs are robust enough these days to really develop whatever color science you want with your images in post, especially if you can shoot log. 

I think the GH5 is complimented by soft lenses, as the sensor is naturally really digitally sharp.  I've tried a lot of lenses with it, including native Panasonic m43 lenses, and I still end up grabbing the 24-105 for quick shoots most of the time.  Good zoom reach, color, contrast, flare control, and constant f2.5 aperture with a speedbooster.  And, it's reasonably soft, which I think compliments the GH5 really well.  The native m43 Pansonic lenses are way too sharp when paired with the GH sensors in my opinion. 

15 hours ago, Papiskokuji said:

Very encouraging ! Maybe the nicest screen grabs I've seen from the GH5. Especially the first pic of the post and the last one of your last post ! Finally not an overdone color grading. More cinematic and yet natural looking. Really nice ! Makes me wanna buy one ! By the way @Benjamin Hilton what do you think about the 10 bit codec ? Is it strong enough ? Compared to let's say Prores ? Do you get pink macroblocking ? That's my nightmare ! And I'm curious to know your workflow for this grade !

Thx !

Thanks!  The 10 bit codec is very strong, almost as strong as proress I would say, just not as fast editing wise:-)  With 8 bit there is definitely pink macroblocking just like the Gh4, but I haven't  seen any of it with 10 bit.  

I know there is a lot of confusion as to whether you need 10 bit or not in a camera, but I would say that the GH5 is made to work in 10 bit with v log and therefore looks it's best by far in that codec.  Though, many other cameras and log profiles, including Sony's S log 2, are made to take advantage of 8 bit, and therefore look great in 8 bit.  It's not so much that 10 bit gives you huge advantage over all as a reason to buy the GH5, more that the 10 bit is a huge advantage if you shoot with the GH5 and v log, as the camera seems made for 10 bit. 

15 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Were the original screenshots shot with the Canon 24-105mm? Makes it all the more impressive, as that's by no means a fast prime. Nice rendering.

The 10bit looks as good as raw in your grade.

Yes, everything I included was shot with the Canon 24-105 f4, which with a speedbooster, is a f2.5 equivalent. 

4 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:

And that's why it looks softer in a more pleasing way. I have to say, the 10 bits is doing some nice things for those gradients. Are these jpegs in 8bit? If so, I have a 10 bit monitor, I would'nt mind seeing the originals. 

These blind tests always fool people. I think they're eye opening and show us how much psychology plays into our personal biases. 

That being said, though these images undeniably look great as stills, how do they fair in motion? I think if that was part of the guess the camera equation, more ppl would have nailed it, especially those who own a GH5. I could be wrong. 

My favorite guess the camera EVER. 

 

Probably not. My guess is at the end of the day, no. But some bigger clients care very much what you choose to shoot on and it better be big and impressive, and cost $1-2k per day to rent. Again, psychology.

I imagine as these smaller cams bridge the gap between $3000 and $60,000 it will start mattering less and less to big budget clients. But I can see the speech bubbles now, they see you on your GH5 and one pops up and reads "I can do that too, why did I need him?"

There is nothing in your examples that would suggest "amateur". 

Personally, I'm holding out for this bad boy...

 

Panasonic really nailed the HD on the GH5.  With the GH4, 1080P was really bad looking compared to shooting 4k and downsampling in post, really soft, and a lot of moire and noise.  But with the GH5, in-camera 1080P doesn't look any different than shooting 4k and downsampling in post.  All my tests have shown they look exactly the same - which is really nice when you need to turn around a quick project for Youtube. 

4 hours ago, Matthew Hartman said:

That being said, though these images undeniably look great as stills, how do they fair in motion? I think if that was part of the guess the camera equation, more ppl would have nailed it, especially those who own a GH5. I could be wrong. 

 

I think the akward looking motion is mainly due to compression, which is why the 400mb/sec all-i codec is exciting.  The problem with all that though, is that most of my work ends up on Youtube with terrible compression anyway, so I've kind of given up on good motion for now - until we reach the days of amazing internet speeds and prores Youtube:-) 

Sorry, I was flying and just caught up with this.

It's a GH5 with V-Log with a Canon 24-105 1st generation lens.  I am falling in love with this camera more and more every shoot; I don't quite see what so many people have against it.  With a speedbooster you get super 35 4K 10 bit log with a robust, yet not bloated, codec.  Plus, a really tough body and battery that will get through some of the hardest shoots without overheating or dying:-)   And the image is just beautiful!  12 stops of dynamic range are definitely enough for most normal shooting, I rarely end up blowing anything out, even when exposing on the bright side.  The V log is a bit noisy, but the noise looks a lot like film grain, I think it adds a nice texture. 

Also, all the screenshots are taken from footage shot in 1080P 10 bit, not 4K. 

Does all this pixel peeping over camera nuances really matter on set if you know your camera sensor as a DP?  Check out some screenshots from my latest commercial and see if you can guess the camera it was shot on.  How good is your camera knowledge? :-)  (All these images are just with a 10 second grade, so don't be too hard on them) 

Why not make your adjustments after Filmconvert with the Lumetri panel?

16 hours ago, filmspa said:

Do you guys think that Panasonic will release Full VLog for the GH5S in the future? I heard that it allows 14 stops of dynamic range

According to my understanding, Panasonic created VLog L to better work with the GH4/GH5's native 12 stops of dynamic range possible from the sensors.  Full VLog is created for the 14 stops of dynamic range possible from their Varicam line.  So, adding full VLog to the Lumix cameras would not give a better dynamic range as the sensors cannot capture more than 12 stops.  

The difference is even more noticeable with a high-quality grade.  (Exact same settings on both)  Not just in the noise, but also the dynamic range.

No Problem.  I attached a LUT I exported of that grade if you want to try it out as a base for the sequence.  It includes all the adjustments minus the power windows to bring up his face.  

I think power windows are your friend on a project like this where you really couldn't light.  They give you the ability to draw the attention to the right places by bringing the exposure up or down in certain areas. 

Grading is a very fine art that takes a lot of practice, don't give up!  It's worth taking the time to learn and practice and become a master.  (I still feel like I have a long way to go here)

Jungle Grade V_1_32.Screen Shot 2018-02-01 at 8.46.59 AM.cube

What do you think of something like this?

I took what you posted last, and kind of massaged it into more of a 16mm film color space.  (I think I could do better with an ungraded raw still, the multi-generation screenshot is probably a little rough at this point:-)  Her skin exposure still needs to come down in my opinion, but I can't do it with the still as there isn't really any info left there to bring down.