Cluster X: Series 1 - moon - ЅріzZ - nebula - drewnet - Slipstream

botha

looks good!

luxis

@lagunak47 Cool looks! Hey but what about a little credit to ze smiths in the background ; ) ?

rajamalik

Thank u @peternap @luxis.but, a friend of mine felt its so muddy and colorish @GravitateMediaGroup so, i reuploaded it. Just removed oversaturation. Watch it in 1080p see what magic driftwood did in Moon series, love moon for grading trial 5 does more.this was shot in trial 3.

JeffGibbsTC

@rajamalik, the reupload looks the same to me, looks pretty darn good but would love to see the ungraded version.

rajamalik

@JeffGibbsTC yes i will upload it tmrw,.but if u just wanna see few frames from it,u can see my previous post in this thread.

emynach

Thanks @inqb8tr for the reply.

GravitateMediaGroup

why did the video change?

atibob

First, the sun was shining :) X trial5 Cluster. Canon FD & Helios 44M. Youtube ruined the movement of the water, but the picture became more analog than digital. (I do not say "film"). Sorry for my bad english because.

kellar42 · Screen Shot 2013-02-28 at 7.51.18 PM.png

Serious day today, down the river from the continental divide to a Caribbean village only accessible by boat or horseback. Stuck with Moon(T5) despite storage concerns. (I only have 4 32GB cards, 27 minutes a pop). I ended up bringing my nearly new retina macbook, garbage-bag-wrapped up the YING YANG to do a full offload down at the village, shot 3.5 hours total footage. Still something magical about trial 3 but I'm sticking with the perceived evolution and using 5. Couldn't deal with the LA7200 on the water (lots of zooming) so this grab and anything else I get up in the short term will be 14-140 with a Tiffen .9 ND only.

Just seems to be really sharp, keep detail in the shadows and grades well. Can't thank @driftwood enough.

matt_gh2

@kellar42 Ballsy move with the laptop. I like the detail in that shot in the water.

johnnymossville

Playing around with the Drewnet settings and old SMC Takumar lenses.

peternap

Question for anyone using moon 5 and has a GH3. How well will Moon cut in with the GH3?

rapsoe

@Driftwood I'm unfortunately stuck with Oly & Pany glass for the time being and I love the 444 matrix used in some of you old settings to tame their excessive sharpness. Something that is not yet completely clear to me is if your new Cluster X series is developed for m4/3 glass or for older & softer lenses, or if it is a halfway solution.

Thank you so much for all your hard work!

driftwood

Theyre tested on both Pany & manual and look very good but are balanced. There will be soft variations of all the Cluster X Series where needed soon - I fully understand that Pany glass is excessive. :-)

driftwood

*** NEWS *** NEBULA Trial 6 with crazy 1080p24 adjustments and reliable iA control of 1080i/720pSH

A very tasty looking Cluster X Series 'Nebula' Trial 6 is about to be released with hi bitrate top quality QP12 on 1080p24 H modes with 80% mode support plus QP12 on 720p & 1080i/HBR. Its pushing 6 GOP to extremes and delivering tremendous quality - with the surprising ommission of ptools Low/Hi Top/Bottom settings :-) Checkitout on page 1.

I'm really excited by this setting but I got no daylight to try it out here! Give me feedback :-)

pop24

just our funny harlem shake.

Mirrorkisser

@driftwood: soft variations sound superb, as i am still totally in love with moon trial 3!

JeffGibbsTC

While I appreciate everyone's quest for a "look" that suites them, I for one am looking for the MOST resolution and sharpness. (I feel adding grain or softness to a 1080p shot which is already far less resolution than 35mm film moves it away from looking cinematic. But that's just me.) So as the amazing GH2 and the incredible work that Driftwood and others have done to bring these hacks to the world winds down, I really would like to understand which patch has the most resolution/sharpness especially for wide and medium shots. I am wondering if any of the Moon trials exceed Sedna in this regard in anyone's opinion. So far in my tests and the clips viewed here its hard to tell.

matthewcarr

@JeffGibbsTC At this point it is, like you said, hard to tell. I just use whatever is the latest greatest Intra (Moon v5) and don't worry about the rest. As for your request of sharpness, people complained that Moon v4 was too sharp. There are other factors that will define a cinematic look (lighting and lens to start) far more than the subtle differences of each setting.

peternap

@JeffGibbsTC I agree with what @matthewcarr said, there is a lot involved in Cinematic. I like Moon 5 and really didn't see much difference in 4 and 5. They are sharp but offer a tremendous amount of room for post. I still use Sanity when I want no nonsense, sharp, trouble free video such as in Lectures, seminars or speeches.

JDN

@JeffGibbsTC I respectfully disagree. There's a reason that most film and tv of any quality has a hollywood black magic or some other similar filter stuck in front of the lens. Resolution is important because it helps avoid blocky pixely macroblocky nonsense that screams videos, but sharpness usually screams video. Far too often people get the two confused.

In more moon-specific news, Finishing up a 5 minute promo I shot for Ducks Unlimited on a big restoration project here in Canada. Various versions of moon, all holding up well in post and looking great. Should be up in a week or two.

thomisus

@bkmcwd @driftwood don't know if has been noted before, but "Spizz" patch doesn't have 30 minutes time removal.. btw i love this patch.. because i mainly use PAL HBR i stick with this over the others because of spanning.. I'm trying to compare Spizz with golgop3-13 by bkmcwd and understand which give me more balance between stability and quality..

JeffGibbsTC

@JDN The high level TV and movie productions begin with 35mm or a very high resolution digital camera; at the level of the indie or doc producer I think throwing away resolution by trying to soften or give grain to the image degrades the audience's experience. My two cents. My purpose here was to just see if those who want maximum resolution feel any version of Moon is better than Sedna in this regard. I have tested trail 4 and it didn't seem so, will try another test or two soon.

bug009

Just curious...what technically makes Moon 5 sharper than 3? Is the setting just adding more contrast? I am probably like a lot of people and have a mix of lenses with different characteristics. A couple of Panasonic lenses and several old manual Nikkors each with its own distinct character. Have been using Moon 5 in 24p and 60p with a 64gig Sandisk card. No problems and am very pleased with the results. This is an ideal setting for someone like me who has a single cam, doesn't want to be constantly swapping out firmware, and likes a lot of latitude in post. I just ask about the contrast because I wonder if the same thing can be achieved by using the different in camera curves (for me mostly Smooth, Standard, and Cinema). Or is it something more? Thanks.

UPDATE: Never mind. My lazy ass just found the the answer in Nick's initial post at the top of the AN Boom/IV thread. Will try to do a couple of controlled tests of 3 vs. 5 to satisfy my own curiosity. I'll post the results here if I think they can be beneficial to anyone else.

emynach

Does the Cluster X Drewnet trial 6/7 spans on 24h or 24l?

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters