Jump to content

EOSHD C-LOG


Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, mercer said:

10% is a lot plus ProRes is a great intermediate codec. If you're using a Mac with EditReady, there are so many other benefits to transcoding the footage to ProRes before you bring it into your NLE.

Also, I haven't used Andrew's C-Log yet, but we must remember the Canon's are still limited for their grading. I believe you will get some more shadow and highlight info, but you still want to get your exposure and WB pretty spot on in camera. And you definitely do not want to ETTR with them... if anything you may get better results underexposing a hair and bringing it up in post.

Tried it, and the files got 10-15% bigger then Canons ! Seem you are better of with Compressor. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 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

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, in the next days I will try all the other profiles.

For the moment: 

- C-Log is awesome, great DR no problem with shadows as I have with V-Log L recorded internally on the GH4.
It's really a GIFT for any Canon user! You have to buy if you need a log profile! 
I'm going to try close to BlackMagic Micro Camera as soon as possible just to see differences and similarities.

- Cinema 4 is a "neutral" with better colors and a slightly better DR. Great! I really like it for a 90% ready look.

- Scarlet is a Fuji Velvia-like profile, with raised blacks, hyper saturated look (red blinks to my eyes) and less DR in order to have a great contrast.

I think that just C-Log could cost at least more then V-Log L (it works wonders at 8 bit, instead with GH4 you have to record externally 10 bit to appreciate it), you have a lot of other great profiles, so don't wait that Andrew changes mind and buy it now! :) 

Thank you Andrew! And Canon has to thank you, because I'm really thinking to buy again a Canon just to use your profiles! 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On September 3, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Andrew Reid said:

eoshd-pp-ad-front.jpg

eoshd-clog-profile-lcd.jpg

c-log-histogram.jpg

Download now for just $9.99 ($29.99 usual price)

The EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles Pack is now available and works in both video and stills mode - on all Canon DSLRs.

Crafted using my Canon 1D C as a development camera, the EOSHD Film Profiles pack installs "Canon LOG" to cameras previously without it, plus a range of film simulation modes to DSLRs such as the 5D Mark IV, 5D Mark III, 1D X Mark II and T2i, etc.

Read the full article

I finally had the chance to upload the C-Log onto a camera. Unfortunately it's the eos-m10... Probably the lowest level Canon camera, but it's the only one I have access to at the moment.

I think the C-Log definitely helps with the shadows and I am really enjoying it so far. I've also been testing some of your other profiles. I love the look you have shown with Chrome, but with my footage it is SUPER saturated, whereas your samples look muted... Do you think it may be camera specific? Also Cinema 4 is very saturated as well, when I cut the saturation in half, it more closely resembles your description. But with the saturation knocked down a touch or two, it kinda resembles the Wide DR mode in Canon's C cameras. Nice job, it's really cool to breathe some life into these cheap old tech cameras. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick and dirty test of my Canon EOS-M10 and Andrew Reid's Custom LOG. Since this camera is Canon's most basic interchangeable lens camera, I cannot guarantee that others' experiences with other Canon cameras and EOSHD-LOG would be similar or different, or better or worse. So, basically, this is my quick test with my modest equipment and skills.

Your mileage may vary...

Equipment Used:
Canon EOS-M10 
Canon FL 35mm f/3.5
Magnus 2XM-2000V Video Monopod 
EOSHD-LOG Picture Profile

Impulz LOG Kodak Elite Chrome 200 FPE LUT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, wanted to share my little test as well - 

 

Shot this the first day I bought my 5dmIV. We've been shooting a documentary in Italy for the past week now with the same setup and with no chance of viewing the graded footage, really looking forward to that! 

Thank you Andrew, great work.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you guys have some tips to expose correctly with this profile? I am not very experienced in LOG but ran into the same issues I had with S-Log before that I just can't recover the picture in post. I can make it look "ok" but still inferior to when not using LOG

(Though I found it to be a lot easier to grade than S-Log)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On September 19, 2016 at 3:59 PM, Asmundma said:

Tried it, and the files got 10-15% bigger then Canons ! Seem you are better of with Compressor. 

Sorry, I missed this. What flavor of ProRes are you using to downscale it? Are you uncheckinf optimize footage when you import the footage into FCPX after downscaling it in EditReady first?

42 minutes ago, dvcrn said:

Do you guys have some tips to expose correctly with this profile? I am not very experienced in LOG but ran into the same issues I had with S-Log before that I just can't recover the picture in post. I can make it look "ok" but still inferior to when not using LOG. .

I think each log profile is different. With Canon LOG you want to protect your highlights. So do not expose to the right of the histogram. I usually underexpose by a stop. I also noticed that if you use Andrew's LUTS with his LOG profile, it raises your levels, so when I would underexpose by a stop, if I used one of his Cine LUTS, my highlights were really hot. The nice thing about his LOG profile is that your footage will look dark but there is some info hiding in the shadows.

Of course, this is just what I've been doing with my eos-m10. Other models may react differently, so just try a few different ways and see how they turn out. Post your results, most people are pretty friendly and helpful around here. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

protecting the highlights can mean over exposing. don't do it too extremely, like a blank wall that requires no dynamic range, pushed to just before clipping. and definitely under expose a tiny bit if it's a shot where a highlight is definitely going to blow out, but not to the point where the important part of the scene is completely black. there is some info in the shadows, but I do not think there is an actual dynamic range advantage here over prolost flat. the shots where you can overexpose a little and protect the highlights will be the best

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, mercer said:

Sorry, I missed this. What flavor of ProRes are you using to downscale it? Are you uncheckinf optimize footage when you import the footage into FCPX after downscaling it in EditReady first?

I think each log profile is different. With Canon LOG you want to protect your highlights. So do not expose to the right of the histogram. I usually underexpose by a stop. I also noticed that if you use Andrew's LUTS with his LOG profile, it raises your levels, so when I would underexpose by a stop, if I used one of his Cine LUTS, my highlights were really hot. The nice thing about his LOG profile is that your footage will look dark but there is some info hiding in the shadows.

Of course, this is just what I've been doing with my eos-m10. Other models may react differently, so just try a few different ways and see how they turn out. Post your results, most people are pretty friendly and helpful around here. 

I took the camera files - mpeg files (they are 4:2:2) through editready and generated 4:2:2 prores. Did the same with Apples Compressror 4:2:2 . Can you adjust the internal bit rate somehow in editready??

 

 

3 hours ago, Liam said:

protecting the highlights can mean over exposing. don't do it too extremely, like a blank wall that requires no dynamic range, pushed to just before clipping. and definitely under expose a tiny bit if it's a shot where a highlight is definitely going to blow out, but not to the point where the important part of the scene is completely black. there is some info in the shadows, but I do not think there is an actual dynamic range advantage here over prolost flat. the shots where you can overexpose a little and protect the highlights will be the best

So this is different from Sony slog, where one want to protect the shadows....?

I have still to see someone proving any extended dynamic range with this C-log.......

when I use Canon log to rec - its way off - so it not a log actually.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Asmundma said:

I took the camera files - mpeg files (they are 4:2:2) through editready and generated 4:2:2 prores. Did the same with Apples Compressror 4:2:2 . Can you adjust the internal bit rate somehow in editready??

 

 

So this is different from Sony slog, where one want to protect the shadows....?

I have still to see someone proving any extended dynamic range with this C-log.......

when I use Canon log to rec - its way off - so it not a log actually.

Yeah, dynamic range isn't really the point of this "log". It's nice to grade, and from what I've seen it's nice for applying luts, but maybe you need to adjust a little bit as well. I don't have much experience with luts. There was some talk here about how a custom picture profile from eos utility can't really increase dynamic range. Not sure how it works. Guess it doesn't go straight from the raw data to the picture profile. Yeah, definitely over expose with slog, but with it's higher DR, that's easier. With eoshd clog, it just makes sense to sometimes allow for some noise instead of making clipping worse than imaginable

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JazzBox said:

Here a little test I made yesterday with my father's cameras and my GH4.
Andrew's C-Log wins clearly on GH4's V-Log: in my opinion GH4 is perfect in "Natural" profile - better then Canon  for resolution, frame rate etc... - but with its LOG profile it fall apart.

Mr Reid breathes new life in Canon's cameras :)
 

 

 

Interesting test, Jazz. It looks like the MKiii works nicely with Reid-Log am curious of a comparison between his and James Miller's LOG-Like profiles. I'm also interested in hearing more from Andrew on the topic. He seems to be pretty busy lately and MIA from some of the questions asked. The good thing about the MKiii is you would be getting two beasts from the camera... Reid-Log and ML Raw. Could be a great tool in the arsenal. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the final edited video of that screenshot posted before. I must say that I've tweaked the selected Reid's LUT quite a bit to get the look I wanted. Some of the shots as you will see are a bit overexposed but the theme was black dresses and I wanted the dresses to translate onto the screen better so I overexposed on purpose. Also tried making the highlight roll-off as smooth as possible. Grade was done in Resolve. Comments are welcome!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to take a moment to congratulate Andrew on a remarkable picture profile.

I have both James Miller's log profile and EOSHD C-Log. The latter, Eos C-log, is remarkable and I can confirm works beautifully on 5DM4 in 4K & HD. 

I noticed quite a bit of digital noise on the Miller Clog, while the EOSHD log seems to crush the noise on the dark end. I noticed banding on only a few under-exposed areas, but actually it faired much better than the NX1 (which owned for 1 year and could not abide by the over sharpening and banding). 

I know there's a healthy amount of 5DM4 bashing in the world right now, but as someone who uses the C100, Digital Bolex, and 1DC regularly, I love the form factor of the 5D and love the image. But that's just me. 

I am also vigorously testing some throwbacks on the 5DM4: VisionColor, Prolost, and Cinestyle. 

And for anyone who is interested, here's a Magic Lantern discussion on profiles, where some very interesting reverse engineering appears to be in the works: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=16299.msg172869;topicseen#msg172869

 

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

Another video test / comparison which I made with C-Log's EOS HD. In this video I tested two things:

 

The first was to see what is the best exposure method using the 70D with the C-Log, in which case it was proved that it would be using ETTR only, which will give you a good quality with very little noise, since the video was recorded with little light and stood still with little noise, so in a good light condition you will have images without noise. Another option is you can use the ETTR and then rise 1 or 2 stops, making an overexposure of the image. You will have less noise but still has the disadvantage of losing a bit of information in highlights. In this case, depending on the situation is not much problem.

 

The second test was regarding the best way to make the correction after recording. If you want to fix quickly, you can use a free LUT which I put in the video description to download. It is a kit with various LUT's. In addition to these I have tested dozens of other LUT's, but this was the best I found for a reasonable and quick fix. But the final conclusion is that the best way to get the best result is you make the correction using the S-Curve. It is clear that we are talking about initial correction of the image, u have it in LOG and need to fix the shadows, mids and highlights before you start working with it.

 

So, it's better watch the video. Hope you all like it :D

 

https://vimeo.com/187938666

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...