Jump to content

EOSHD C-LOG


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 284
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Looks like you've found the reference image Sony's engineers used for skintones. Maybe Magic Lantern can hack the pizza and reverse engineer the cheese to make it look more appetising? Then

I just bought it and what I can say... I tried for some minutes it on my father's Canon 6D and it is just AWESOME! I went far to ISO 3200 without problems! I tried only C-Log, Cinema 4 and Scarlet,

I purchased the profile and the LUTS. I haven't had a chance to load them onto a camera yet, but I did test the LUTS on Canon LOG 1080p footage from my XC10. They work pretty well. Cine 3 is definitel

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, Dave Del Real said:

Nice, what were your exposure settings?

Thanks. The light was pretty varied. All these shots were hand held using the old war horse 24-105 f4 L lens. I shot off the histogram and mainly tried to keep my highs below 70-80 IRE. On the exposure gauge that usually meant I was shooting -3, or below 0.
But I've also shot standard exposure, putting my F-stop where I want it and using auto ISO---and the footage came out fine. I only changed to manual ISO when my highs were pushing over 80 IRE--and that has worked very well. The key as far as I can tell are the LUTS. Reid's three LUTS vary in how they adjust exposure, and one of the three is mostly likely to work well. I used a Canon LUT that they produced for the C300 Mk II---lots of punchy and beautiful color there.

Reid's C-Log works a treat, as they say on the other side of our pond.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
On 28/11/2016 at 6:53 AM, Tarantinofan said:

Why $30 for a Canon C picture profile? Why $10? Even if the Canon C works well with Canon C lut packs, I still wonder if it can practically work on Adobe software. $30 marked down to $10 sounds fishy, it should be free or even up to $5. Even if you got bills, it still would be worth more if the price got cut.

Jesus christ, some people are so cheap.

When Sony first introduced S-LOG they charged something like $5000 for it.

And you think $10 is too much.

Go spend it on a pizza instead fat boy!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Looks like you've found the reference image Sony's engineers used for skintones.

Maybe Magic Lantern can hack the pizza and reverse engineer the cheese to make it look more appetising?

Then Sony can take delivery from the pizza boy and start all over again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Andrew Reid sorry if it was already answered but did´t have the time to read the whole topic, since this was made to bring C-log to DLSR, is there any benefit using in a C100?, can it be loaded in the C line cameras?, if not, is the package including any LUT´s that could be used with Canon original  C-log in post to get some specific results with skintones?, thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
On 12/2/2016 at 2:02 PM, hijodeibn said:

can it be loaded in the C line cameras?

Cinema EOS cameras don't need C-LOG as they already have Canon LOG.

The LUTs in the C-LOG pack do work with Canon LOG on the Cinema EOS cameras as well. I tested them fully with official Canon LOG on my 1D C.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
18 minutes ago, julienajarry said:

I do really enjoy it but interested how Andrew's compares - I would use the better. You can see a few examples here: 

 

Those look nice. I like Andrew's a lot, and his additional profiles and LUTs are great too. Could be fun to see how they compare, but I wouldn't want to nitpick too much between them if they're both good for skintones and dynamic range and using LUTs

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Liam said:

Those look nice. I like Andrew's a lot, and his additional profiles and LUTs are great too. Could be fun to see how they compare, but I wouldn't want to nitpick too much between them if they're both good for skintones and dynamic range and using LUTs

So this is by no means a great comparison, it's a very quick one on a 5D3. Same WB, settings, etc. James Miller's is cooler and flatter IMO. Andrew's is warmer as a touch less flat in this situation. I need to dial these in and get more in depth on the 1DX mark ii but my quick thought it I like James Millers. Andrew's in first and James's second.

AndewEOSHD.png

JAMESMILLER.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...