Jump to content
AaronChicago

GH5 vs Ursa Mini 4.6K

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, deezid said:

It's still harsh and kinda digital filtered, don't know what happened to the source. Seems 8 bit as well.

Agreed.

@AaronChicago, what about NR on your capture settings?

In any case, Ursa samples don't fully rule out either. A bit less, though.

As already posted before, everyone can check it out by their own, Pot player does the trick for preview: Ctrl+B. No need much effort... Try it guys, your eyes can only stay grateful : ) Aka 'the GH5 playback filter' when we don't apply our homework earlier. Kidding or keeping the topic here a bit lighthearted anyways, this stuff is not so straight out the box as we can only dream for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

@Emanuel @deezid I didn't change anything on NR so I'm guessing whatever is standard. I still need to mess with that. It's possible that the ProRes conversion did something funky, but I used the original GH5 file in the Vimeo clip. Here is the original file straight from the camera: https://www.dropbox.com/s/51cdjfj495nivdn/P1000088.MOV?dl=0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the information Aaron. I'm afraid the explanation can be nailed from this discussion:

Even though, this may come more apparent when we raise the sensitivity. ISO 800 is too low for popping up. I guess that's there even when not noticed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AaronChicago said:

@Emanuel @deezid I didn't change anything on NR so I'm guessing whatever is standard. I still need to mess with that. It's possible that the ProRes conversion did something funky, but I used the original GH5 file in the Vimeo clip. Here is the original file straight from the camera: https://www.dropbox.com/s/51cdjfj495nivdn/P1000088.MOV?dl=0

Quite a small difference only. Thanks for the upload. :)
Bit still looks like more sharpening than usual (even without a Black Satin filter in front of the lens).

Always thought that using a non Panasonic lens and sharpening at -5 equals actually no sharpening at all. Am saddened it's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, deezid said:

Quite a small difference only. Thanks for the upload. :)
Bit still looks like more sharpening than usual (even without a Black Satin filter in front of the lens).

Always thought that using a non Panasonic lens and sharpening at -5 equals actually no sharpening at all. Am saddened it's not.

There are other settings beyond sharpness where over processing stands. Neither ends there. A bit all over capture devices and camera manufacturers BTW. Without mention post. That is, yet no clue of any digital camera to somehow shoot film :X other than towards the subsequent workflow...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

@Emanuel @deezid I didn't change anything on NR so I'm guessing whatever is standard. I still need to mess with that. It's possible that the ProRes conversion did something funky, but I used the original GH5 file in the Vimeo clip. Here is the original file straight from the camera: https://www.dropbox.com/s/51cdjfj495nivdn/P1000088.MOV?dl=0

Brought the 10-bit file into FCPX and rendered to ProRes, then brought into PP CC and quickly graded with Lumetri. With a little post looks reasonably organic.

GH5Still.thumb.jpg.4fb7c3abafa7060fbcfc9d3b0994aeba.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried to match both cameras, actually they look the same now (like 99%)

The GH5 needed like 12 nodes (with the filtering included) while the BM46k only one (ARRI LUT in Resolve with curves and added saturation). :bawling:
But at least you can match them.

Here's the video (don't watch in Chrome browser, colorshifts)

@AaronChicago
Can I set the video to public so it may help other potential buyers?

GH5.jpg

UM46k.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See?... (almost) all is possible in the digital realm with certain steps. Still over processed to require more blur anyway. PotPlayer is your friend :-) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

See?... (almost) all is possible in the digital realm with certain steps. Still over processed to require more blur anyway. PotPlayer is your friend :-) 

The video looks absolutely the same in mpc be or classic, pot player, WIndows Media Player etc... Just Chrome does it's own strange things to color.

The artifacts are almost gone, if I add more blur, the video looks too soft compared to the BM46k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, deezid said:

The video looks absolutely the same in mpc be or classic, pot player, WIndows Media Player etc... Just Chrome does it's own strange things to color.

The artifacts are almost gone, if I add more blur, the video looks too soft compared to the BM46k

Not in Pot Player though. Artifacts are practically gone if you add blur there. Not manual settings, right. Funny because it works. Trick hinted, I do bet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Not in Pot Player though. Artifacts are practically gone if you add blur there. Not manual settings, right. Funny because it works. Trick hinted, I do bet.

Found it, sure does a really good job, more processing to hide some of the ugly processing done in camera... Strange that we cinematographers need stuff like this in the first place *hint to Panasonic, add an option for no processing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, deezid said:

Found it, sure does a really good job. Strange that we cinematographers need stuff like this in the first place *hint to Panasonic, add an option for no processing!

Absolutely. This is really funny. But, it is what it is. The right amount of blur can solve it anyway. Without becoming too soft. With the right caveats this camera can be 'the camera'. Mike Hannon's comparison test has proved it. I also bet we need NR dialed down whatever ISO is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, your camera is your camera. GH5 shouldn't be Ursa Mini 4.6K shouldn't be an Alexa shouldn't be Film.  The camera is what it is, trying to get it to look like another camera is defeatist, embrace the tool that you own or of course purchase the one that you really like. 

The LUT is designed to dig out what's hiding beneath odd color choices by Panasonic, and is meant to be a stable base upon which you build.  The skin looks like that because that's exactly what Panasonic gave you, and doing anything more to it looks over modulated.  Or, when you push flesh values too hard from source images that inherently can't handle it, you get terrible looking skin.  Try playing it back on a massive source (I used a 70" 4K LED for all of my color work) and see how unpleasant things look.  

The ideal situation is being able to hand footage off to a client (in this case, recorded to an external monitor with a LUT activated so that the external is recording the LUT's color work), and step away without worry that the client will a. ruin it or b. ruin you for the footage not being very pretty.

Adjacent to that, as a shooter, one should likely want a very clean base to begin with that you can add to.  A proper LUT would allow you to shoot in every condition and achieve neutral results with minimal / stock settings in camera.  All of my Ursa Mini LUTs work at an extremely basic level, they're basically fool proof, that's what this GH5 LUT is doing (also fixing highlights, popping skin out, making sure it's presentation ready for large screens.) 

I think someone said it's a "Gradeable grade", that's probably a good way to describe it.  It's a cleaner base than what Panasonic gives you with any of the other color profiles OR the V-Log to ReC709 LUT which is a major challenge.

I'll likely release the LUT this week, barring some Gh5 V-Log owners testing it out for me. It won't be for everyone, which is okay with me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07.05.2017 at 6:41 AM, deezid said:

Tried to match both cameras, actually they look the same now (like 99%)

The GH5 needed like 12 nodes (with the filtering included) while the BM46k only one (ARRI LUT in Resolve with curves and added saturation). :bawling:
But at least you can match them.

Here's the video (don't watch in Chrome browser, colorshifts)

@AaronChicago
Can I set the video to public so it may help other potential buyers?

GH5.jpg

UM46k.jpg

Looks good.

is it possible to make a GH5 vlog to blackmagic mini 4.6k filmlog? So than you can apply second final lut (like arri lut) to achieve this final look? Thanks

 

P.S: will you share this LUT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GH5 Done with several grading layers in Assimilate Scratch, not complicated task. Snapshot in jpg. Could be easy tweak (darken) with gamma settings or little bit of s-curve. Deezid result is nice, for me just with small yellowish tendency.

Construct 1_GH5_10bit[2]_0003.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, a couple month ago i did my own LUT, and have a post about that in the other thread:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stiils from Daniel Peters https://vimeo.com/danielpetersdop.  LUT i did is: gh5 v-log to bmd ursa mini bm_film

gh5_to_bm.jpg

Maybe someone will be interested: https://yadi.sk/d/IPxyk13d3GXd4o (rar with LUT)

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

You can find this lut for gh5 lut assist in attached files : BMURSA.vlt (cant say it looks similar to the original LUT for NLE but it's ok for in camera exposition judgement)

I want to find some "official" or more accurate and 100% match LUT for VLOG gh5.

Actualy i think that my lut is not 100% match, bu really good as a start point... It have more natural color and less contrast compared to original filmlog from BM...

Anyway... You can try it, its free;) And tell me what do you think

P.S: you can see a little banding in gh5 footage on the image above, just because i take a compressed gh5 mp4...With original 8 or 10 bit footage you would`t see any

 

BMURSA.vlt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, tihon84 said:

Well, a couple month ago i did my own LUT, and have a post about that in the other thread:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stiils from Daniel Peters https://vimeo.com/danielpetersdop.  LUT i did is: gh5 v-log to bmd ursa mini bm_film

gh5_to_bm.jpg

Maybe someone will be interested: https://yadi.sk/d/IPxyk13d3GXd4o (rar with LUT)

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

You can find this lut for gh5 lut assist in attached files : BMURSA.vlt (cant say it looks similar to the original LUT for NLE but it's ok for in camera exposition judgement)

I want to find some "official" or more accurate and 100% match LUT for VLOG gh5.

Actualy i think that my lut is not 100% match, bu really good as a start point... It have more natural color and less contrast compared to original filmlog from BM...

Anyway... You can try it, its free;) And tell me what do you think

P.S: you can see a little banding in gh5 footage on the image above, just because i take a compressed gh5 mp4...With original 8 or 10 bit footage you would`t see any

 

BMURSA.vlt

Nice! Thanks for that. Just testing on a couple of V Log and Ursa clips, I notice that the VLog shots end up darker compared to the UM clips, when using the same conversions from BMDFilm to Rec709. Colors looks really accurate though.

Share this post


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...