herein2020

Another trick that I have read about but not tried.....if the video is 1080P then upscale the whole thing to 2K or 4K, I have read that YouTube uses better codecs for anything higher resolution than 1080P. Also, keep in mind that YouTube also uses better codecs for popular channels; that's why music videos from celebrity names look better than yours ever will on YouTube. It's part of the cost of free. If the source video before the YouTube upload looks fine, then all you can do is try Vimeo, DailyMotion, follow the Google YouTube guide and tell the client that you can't control how badly YouTube is trashing your footage. Also let him/her know that YouTube has tiers of quality depending on the channels owner and popularity when they ask you why everyone else's looks so good.

You actually want less keyframes not more, keyframes are mainly used for editing and help the video editing software do less work, that's why ALL-I compression is easier than LongGOP to edit even though ALL-I is typically 4x larger files. But you would never render a final project in ALL-I. When you say "it is exactly there where things happen" what things are you referring to? If you post a screenshot of what is going wrong myself and others may be able to help you better. Maybe it is something else that needs to be fixed somewhere else in the process. Your example of 40 players bowing is still nothing LongGOP and a lower bitrate can't handle. Where you will start seeing artifacts or macro blocking with lower bitrates are scenes where nearly every single pixel changes in every frame like when a drone is flying at high speed over the ocean, a timelapse that was shot with large intervals between images combined with a field of flowers blowing in the wind, etc. If the final destination for the video is YouTube then I would recommend you simply look up the latest YouTube video formatting recommendations. It sounds to me like you are overthinking it...simply follow Google's YouTube chart (they do run YouTube after all) and leave it at that. Another option is to post it to Vimeo instead, maybe have the version that you want on the client's website hosted on Vimeo then the one for everyone else posted on YouTube, also does the source video look fine before you upload it to YouTube? https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1722171?hl=en

The examples were without Noam Kroll's LUT. I forgot to add his LUT to the examples. The LUT that I ended up using from him in the final project is so minimal that I think it just adds a little more contrast. I don't try to get too creative with the color grade for projects like these since the client typically expects true colors. I think I would get better results with the Leeming LUT if I had a better camera like the S1, S1H, etc. I would love to replace it with the R6....but...we all know how well that's going. The Leeming LUT combined with the GH5's sensor needs so much overexposure that the highlights get clipped pretty badly in certain scenes or the GH5 has to be pushed to high ISOs to get the necessary over exposure and then things start falling apart. So in lowlight or high DR scenes I just grade the GH5 with the WFM and a Noam LUT. I emailed Leeming asking for a C200 LUT or a CLOG3 LUT and he said he will get to it if he has the time. After using the Canon CLOG3 to Rec709 LUT and seeing how easy CLOG3 is to work with I realized I don't need a Leeming LUT for it.

Nope, I'm no colorist 🙂, if I can't get it in a few clicks I move on, to me life's too short to try to learn everything. If I had a customer with this request (fortunately my customers couldn't care less as long as it looks good) I'd just use the shot match feature, convert the output to a LUT, apply it to an adjustment clip, grade the source clips to rec709 then throw the adjustment clip over the top and call it a day. If the client really wanted to get closer to the look I'd outsource to a colorist and bill the client for the custom work.

I am getting fed up with working around my Ronin S's weird quirks so I am actively seeking a better gimbal for 2020. I would love to find a gimbal that can fly both my GH5 as well as my C200 but it seems less and less realistic. So I am curious, what is everyone else using? I created the poll using the most popular gimbals that I am aware of at the moment. I personally have the Glidecam HD-2000 (which I never got very good at especially on windy days), the Zhiyun Crane V2 (awesome little gimbal but couldn't handle the weight of my GH5 without taking it out of its cage), and the Ronin S which I use for everything at the moment but DJI refuses to fix the issue where it does not return to the center after a pan or tilt and you have to recenter it with the trigger button which can ruin a take. I like Zhiyun but do not like their latest models with the handle sticking out of the back. I had the Ronin MX but sold it, it was a pain to put together and too bulky for the types of work I do not to mention needing to lug around the stand. I think the perfect gimbal would be one that can go from one handed operation for smaller rigs to being put into a dual grip ring configuration for heavier rigs. I know there's some kits that try to do this already, but they always seem like an afterthought and the gimbal isn't really optimized to operate in the ring grip configuration. I had high hopes for the Ronin S but DJI doesn't seem interested in continuing to improve it and more than likely they do not want to impact their Ronin 2 or Ronin M sales.

Render settings do not add a delay to the footage, they just determine the quality. You did not mention what resolution (4K or 1080P), or what destination platform (YouTube, Vimeo, DVD, etc), or frame rate. But anyway, below is what I use for 1080P with a YouTube or Vimeo Destination. For your project since there is not much fast moving action, you can probably get away with a lower bitrate like 8Mb/s or maybe even 4Mb/s. The bitrate is the main thing that affects file size and quality. In the Davinci Resolve screenshot the bitrate is the 16000 Kb/s value. Not sure what NLE you are using but they all have bitrate options for rendering. I'm no expert on the whole keyframes, CBR/VBR, etc. I just experimented and watched rendering video tutorials until I got the settings that work for me. These days the only thing I change is the bitrate based on the project contents. As a reference point, DVDs have a video bitrate of only 9.8MB/s. If I really need to conserve space for example a really big project, then I would render a small part of it, the part with the most movement, and keep lowering the bitrate with each test render until you start seeing a noticeable quality difference and macro blocking, then crank it back up a bit and you now have your lowest bitrate that will not affect the visible quality. That will get you the best file size without quality compromise.

lol, no way am I setting that thing up for a few pictures, unless the client has the budget for me to bring at least two assistants and a good insurance policy when it blows over. When the sun is out I tell my clients...lets walk over there to those trees. It's always a balancing act between budget and meeting the customer's expectations.

I think the shot match feature did a pretty good job what do you think? With a scrim like you mentioned it would get you 90% of the way there in a few clicks. It seems to have crushed the shadows and midrange a bit, but those are far easier to fix than starting from 0. From there you could just convert the grade to a LUT, throw it on an Adjustment clip and you've got your grade for the whole project or at least for those scenes.

I nearly always shoot 4K60 8 bit Long GOP (GH5, C200, GoPro) and if I'm doing the editing and delivery I deliver in 1080P 29.97FPS. For my own YouTube channel I render out to 16Mb/s data rate for YouTube and Facebook and 1.4Mb/s for Instagram. If a customer demands 4K then I deliver in 4K but I think in the past 5yrs only one customer specified that the final product must be 4K. The footage was really annoying to work with too because I lost all of my crop, zoom, and recompositioning capabilities. For that client I actually changed the way I shot with them because I knew I couldn't fix small things later. If I'm just shooting the footage and the client is doing the editing then I just shoot 4K60FPS and deliver the footage straight out of camera. For footage delivery I do everything through my website and zip files. I get unlimited storage and bandwidth through my website hosting plan which is only $4/mo......so I run my own Wordpress website, DNS domain, and get unlimited everything on the website than what some people are paying just for DropBox. The one annoying thing about my delivery method is I use zip files which take forever to zip if it is raw footage and some clients have had problems unzipping them over a certain size if they are on a Mac. I have also had clients who have no idea how to unzip a file so I end up being their tech support.

Isn't there a trick you can do in Davinci Resolve where you bring in a screenshot of an image you like and there's a technique that lets you nearly exactly match the source picture. I would think though to pull an image in that many different directions you would probably need to shoot in raw and of course as you mentioned, lighting, gamma curve, camera, etc. had a lot to do with it as well. I've seen some other videos where after you use the shot match feature they go in and start using selective color and wave forms to more exactly match the source image.

@kye @Trek of Joy Attached are screen shots from a typical project for me, lifestyle promo video shoot for a new multi-family community. I picked a scene where all three cameras were used (GH5, GoPro, DJI Drone). GH5 is the side shot, GoPro underwater, obviously drone from the aerial view. Cameras Drone - Natural profile Sat/Sharp/Contrast set to -5, WB Daylight GH5 - Cinelike D profile modified as per the Leeming LUT guide, WB Daylight GoPro - Flat Profile, WB Daylight Color Grade GH5 - Leeming LUT + slight WB shift to magenta to match the drone Drone - Expanded WFM to add contrast, sharpening 47, color boost +20, WB shift to warm GoPro - Expanded WFM to add contrast, color boost +20, WB shift to warm Time Spent on Color Grading all 3 cameras - Less than 2min. I forgot to extend the adjustment clip over the sample clips to show Noam Krolls LUT, but I went with a very subtle LUT that looks like it just adds a little more contrast. Project Details - the rest of the project was shot during sunrise but as the lighting got cooler during the day I wanted to keep the warm sunrise feel (plus it was a really ugly grey day) so I moved everything towards the warmer side. I have yet to find a generic LUT that I like for the drones or the GoPro so I just do the exact same WFM grading process each time then throw a Noam LUT over everything. The Leeming LUT I use on the GH5 if it works; I've had it do some weird things due to the GH5's terrible highlight rolloff so when there are hot spots in a scene I grade the clip by hand or I will get weird green skews and orange skin tones using the Leeming LUT. So yea, that's my whole process, very simple, very quick, probably far from perfect, but for my target customer base they are happy with the results. To your point though @kye when I shoot with the C200 and can properly light the scene and shoot in CLOG3 the results are just incredible. CLOG3 and the S35 sensor of the C200 is so easy to work with compared to my usual run and gun scenario with no control over anything except the camera settings. Exposing the GH5 properly for the Leeming LUT is so difficult, I never really know if it is right until I am grading it later. I'm always trying to retain the highlights somehow without underexposing the talent or the rest of the scene.

I experienced a bit of that myself and I only said a fraction of what Andrew and others have put out. I was banned from Canon Rumors because I didn't give Canon a pass like everyone else and seemed to be the first one on that forum that said the R5 and R6 were not fit for purpose if the overheating was a real thing in the production cameras (this was when everyone was still saying it is a pre-production issue). For me it worked out perfectly though..I don't want to be a member of a forum where you are not allowed to speak the truth about a product without being banned. I was also banned from the DJI forums because there is a critical issue that affects it's operation that DJI refuses to acknowledge or fix and I seemed to be the only one continuing to ask them for an update (yrs later it still is not fixed).

I have the C200 and it will do Canon RAW but I have shot everything from music videos to commercial work and never used the RAW capabilities. I do shoot literally everything in 4K because it gives you crop and recomposition options in post but I wouldn't recommend shooting RAW if you have never used that codec and it does sound like overkill for YouTube. Two things I would not recommend doing for the first time on a paid shoot is using a gamma curve and a codec you have never used before. I don't know what other codecs the FS5 offers but I can tell you that the 4:2:0 8 bit out of my C200 has been more than enough for everything I throw at it. For my workflow though I am very careful to get the WB correct in camera and control the highlights because it will fall apart in post if I got either of those wrong. If you have never shot 4K I would definitely test that as well ahead of time mainly due to the data rates. Many SD cards can handle 1080P with no problem, but some cards can't handle the 4K data rates. Also, just a personal thing, but I have never used an external recorder, to me its just more gear that can break, batteries can die, and that can be misconfigured.

I found this by accident on my own. I got rid of Premier and learned Davinci Resolve in 1 week, but in that week it was just the basics. My very next project was a music video so within Davinci Resolve I did not know how to nudge the audio track or video clip by just one frame so a few cuts were off by a frame or two. During playback I was actually surprised how some of them looked better that way. In the end I ended up leaving some of them like that. I do think the "off center cut" as I call it does not work all the time. The contents of the clip, the type of song, and especially how close together the beats are will determine how effective this is so I use it sparingly even though I am aware of it. While experimenting I discovered that if there is a subtle underlying beat and it is close to where you want to cut with the primary beat it is better to make the cut on center with the primary beat otherwise it will look like you tried to synch with the underlying beat but missed the proper spot. I also have yet to find a time where cutting one frame late looks good.

I'll see if I can put something together, my projects take up so much space I archive them as soon as they are done but I'll try to put together some samples, I definitely do not have anything at the level of the professional YouTubers where you have all the cameras side by side; also in that scenario the different cameras would probably be more obvious, but I'll try to find a couple of clips from the same project and show before and afters. The most challenging for me is shooting a scene with the C200 locked down then trying to match the footage out of the GH5 to the C200 since it is the same scene. My method is quick and easy as long as two different cameras do not shoot the exact same scene.

I decided long ago that I will never be very good at color grading....there are only so many hours in a day to do anything and I'm working on average 80hrs a week as it is now. I provide an even mix of photography (models, fashion, events, real estate, landscape, etc) and video (weddings, music videos, events, promo videos, etc) all as a one man band. So I've worked myself into a place where I am more of a generalist vs. a specialist, everything I do must be economical and above all efficient if I'm going to keep up with the endless inbound stream of projects. So I approach color grading the same way I do everything else; what is the quickest way to reach a point where the client is happy with the final product? For me that involves a few simple things....properly WB when shooting on set, try to properly expose for the scene (sometimes a little under and sometimes highlights are clipped due to factors beyond my control), shoot a flat profile (CLOG3 out of the C200 ,a modified Cinelike-D profile in the GH5, a neutral profile in the drones, flat profile in the GoPro), and in post I use the Canon CLOG3 to Rec709 LUT for the C200 and the WFM for all of the other cameras. Within the WFM I expand the image to the edges of the Rec709 limits for each clip to give them all a neutral grade starting point. At this point every clip is pretty much looking pretty good but only conformed to Rec709...so my secret sauce is a LUT pack that I bought from a professional Hollywood colorist Noam Kroll. His LUTs are amazing and much more subtle than most of the ones you find on the Internet. I've found his LUTs to be better than the camera makers themselves. So after I have my whole timeline conformed to Rec709 I add an Adjustment Clip over the top of the entire timeline in Davinci Resolve and apply one of Noam's LUTs; his Master Pack III is probably the most expensive LUT pack out there but so worth it. I haven't used any other creative LUT since I bought his. In my opinion this process gets me to a very professional look very quickly without having to spend a lifetime learning the job of a colorist. Noam Kroll https://cinecolor.io/

I'm going to put on a Canon fanboy hat and say maybe it is just a bug in the software and they will fix it soon. But wait, no that hat just doesn't fit me.....this is complete BS and nothing short of a failure of epic proportions. Every new finding just makes me wish I didn't own so much Canon glass and Canon gear.

Wow, did anyone else notice this camera will have dual native ISO? As per the spec sheet, now that's pretty impressive. I think ISO 100 and ISO 1600 would have been more useful but still, I did not expect to see dual native ISO in an "entry level" mirrorless. Panasonic just never ceases to surprise me; except in the AF department. Dual Native ISO [Normal] Native ISO: 100, 640

I for one am really starting to feel like I have been supporting the wrong company for all of these years. This overheating issue has really opened my eyes to just how far Canon will go to maintain their product segmentation. I was always frustrated by the little things Canon did, like put MJPEG only for 4K in my 5DIV, no dual slot recording for video, 1 card slot in the EOS R, no XLR module for any mirrorless or DSLR camera, not a single DSLR or mirrorless with unlimited recording time, clunky way to set a manual white balance, 1/200s flash sync speed, etc. But then I would see that color science and menu system and ergonomics and I would be reassured that I was still using the best system available. But the more I look at how Panasonic stuffs every feature I keep waiting on Canon to provide into every body they build (even the "entry level" S5) and even Sony of all companies with their A7SIII (never thought I'd ever have anything good to say about a Sony camera), it is making me really rethink the ecosystem I have bought into. I don't make major changes to my gear lightly, and everything I have now just works within well known limitations; but if Canon keeps doing what its doing now I may make a decision to go all in on a new system and it would probably be Panasonic if they ever get their AF act together.

Your question is so vague it is hard to know where to start. I think any modern mirrorless will meet your needs, the ISO requirement though eliminates most of the entry level and even midrange cameras. I would have to guess you are in the $3K USD range to get that kind of ISO performance. Are you sure you even need that kind of ISO performance? I've never shot a single image or frame of video at anything over 6400 ISO and I've been shooting video and photography for going on 10yrs. At some point you need light or you need to accept that there will be a ton of noise. You are better off getting a cheaper body and spending the money on faster lenses vs. thinking you can shoot in the dark by just cranking the ISO.

I'm just curious, if you already own the S1 is the S5 really so much better that you would buy it? If the GH6 had such minor upgrades over the GH5 I would not buy it. I think the only thing that would get me into a GH6 would be 4K120. Dual gain ISO, and ProRes would be pretty nice too though.

I think my problem is I have yet to work with a camera that has reliable AF when shooting video. I hear about all of these great new AF systems but I'm still shooting on the GH5 using 100% manual lenses so no AF even if the GH5 had any, the C200 which is typically locked down on a tripod or hand held so I prefer using MF there too, and my 5DIV which puts a big box in the middle of the screen and you better hope that box is on your subject. Speaking of the C200 it supposedly has good AF, but the few times I've tried it, it always seems to be a scenario where it doesn't work; like if the talent is wearing a hat or wears glasses then the face AF doesn't work, if you've added haze to the scene the AF doesn't work, if the ND filters are too strong, the AF doesn't work. If I ever end up with a camera that actually has reliable AF I'd be the first one to jump on the AF bandwagon.

You are correct, I went back and read the full specs, this camera seems really cool, kind of like what the R6 should have been but without Canon's 1DXIII sensor, color science, or AF. Am I wrong to read about cameras like this and still sit here hoping Canon gets their act together for the R5 and R6? If I did not already have the GH5 and needed a gimbal camera this would probably be what I would get.

You beat me to it. I am far more interested in gimbals, lighting, audio, tripods, learning how to better color grade, learning how to edit faster, etc, etc. than I am in the camera bodies or lenses. I have only bought one camera body in the last 4yrs but I am always adding to my collection of lav mics, video lighting, light stands, wireless gear etc. All of that equipment will outlive any camera or lens. I take that back, I have bought two camera bodies in the last 4yrs but for very specific purposes and only once I felt like my existing equipment had reached its useful limits. I bought a C200 for long form and commercial work and I bought a GoPro 8 for underwater and FPV work.

I have a GH5 and have always manually focused but there is one simple scenario where I would definitely use AF...on a gimbal. I don't trust AF in 95% of the situations I encounter yet I will not replace my GH5 with a camera that does not have a better AF system. I am typically a one man band run and gun shooter shooting everything from music videos to interviews, the main time I would like AF is in certain situations when doing gimbal work. My GH5 is good enough for most of the situations that I encounter that I don't see a reason to replace it if I cannot use the replacement for both photography as well as video and if the AF is no better than what is in the GH5. If I had a focus puller or had any way to manually pull focus while the camera is on a gimbal it would not be that important to me. It is pretty funny though, just the other day I was shooting a music video and I had just filled the room with smoke and set the lighting and was shooting on the C200; I decided for one of the takes to use AF.....well guess what, the C200 could not focus at all on any of the talent due to the smoke, so back to MF I went. But back to the topic of the S5...it is DOA for me, if this camera is why there is no GH6 then I will be sorely disappointed. I have all the MFT glass I want and my GH5 already has no recording time limits, never overheats, does dual card slot recording, etc. I have a feeling the S5 will have a recording time limit like the S1, may not work with the XLR audio module, and will require me to invest in L mount lenses. It also does not do 4K120FPS, and I still would prefer my Canon 5DIV for photography.