I'm going to the DI suite next week with new test footage for my $10K feature film, part of it's going to be testing this. I mean, it's 4:2:0 regardless, but the Broadcast Range seems to play a lot better. TO my eyes, the Broadcast range looks slightly better and when you go to add contrast back to the full range, it's almost like you can never really get the colors to separate properly. Now, in post, convert two of the exact same files with a decent contrast range in two different ways: 709 Full Range and 709 Broadcast Range, then match them whichever way you'd like. Short version: you can now see at least MOST of what the image would look like flattened out. Incidentally, not only does it show you just how far the camera's REALLY reaching into the shadows and highlights, making exposure on the LCD by eye MUCH freakin' easier, it also shows you what you would get when converting via 5DtoRGB with Full Range. What this does is show you a less contrasty image and less saturated image (duh) and the brightness about matches what's coming through the lens. Then set the LCD brightness to A*1 in the menu. Set your camera's LCD and EVF up (or just one) to the lowest saturation, lowest contrast settings in the LCD calibration. You can try this yourself, but what you want to do is this (recommended here a number of months back): I have yet to take my most recent tests to my colorist (from Modern, if that helps put his experience in perspective) but after investigating someone's suggestion, it seems counter-productive to use Full Range as a setting. On this topic, although I know I recommended full range first, I'm pretty positive that doing Full Range is actually not a good thing after all. Nominal blacks are at 16 and peak whites are at 235 (240 for each color-difference signal) occasional crossover down to 1 and over to 254 is allowed for transients for both standards.įor a 10-bit video signal, valid levels are 4 through 1019 (bits 0––1023 being reserved for timing/synch reference), and nominal peaking is confined to the range of 64 through 940 for luma (64 through 960 for chroma).Ī computer display may very well be able to handle a 0–255 signal (although most actually use 6-bit LCD panels), but that in and of itself has little to do with the BT.601 recommendations, or the difference between BT.709 and BT.601 in this regard (which doesn’t exist). This is true neither for BT.709 nor for BT.601.īoth BT.709 ( !!PDF-E.pdf) and BT.601 ( !!PDF-E.pdf) define a valid 8-bit video signal as ranging from 1 to 254 (levels 0 and 255 being reserved for timing/synchronization). Which only does 15-235 broadcast safe 709 unlike a computer display which is 0-255 601 The second shot of each take is the 5DtoRGB. What do you think? The first of each shot is the standard way. And the shadows of the hemlock tree in the sprinkler shot. Where I really see a difference is in the trees far away in the dock shot. In the normal way it blends colors together more. For instance, the water looks very blue while the wood looks warm. I think there may be more in the shadows and to me, the colors seems more separate from each other. I'll let you be the judge of the screen grabs. Whereas the normal way keeps the black RGB close together, the 5DtoRGB separates them more. It seems to separate the color channels by quite a distance on the Waveform monitor. One brought in with 5DtoRGB and one brought into Pro Res in FCPX. Here is some footage shot with the Mysteron Burst Hack. Ok, so here is another aspect of GH2 wonderland that is going to drive me deep into the testing cave again.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |