Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
ColorGHear [PART 2]
  • 568 Replies sorted by
  • I also agree with Vitaliy and Mike_C and, please, talk SLOWLY. Also, make the words round and easy to be understood by non-americans (we´re a international community). I know it could be boring for you but we need your expertise understandable (sound wise). I know what it´s mean: I am a teatcher myself ( and experience helped me to find some "tricks" to do it). First of all: listen to your "inner voice"/thinking and , then (after miliseconds,) say it lound, and within a pace. I so happy with what I have learned so far from you. Keep goin´.

  • Another camera testing with different lenses.... nonsense. How can one differ is it a lens or camera performance? Nikkor 35mm... (Non-? Ai? -S? AF? f/2.8? f/2.5 f/2.0? f/1.4?) there have been 51 different types of Nikon 35mm produced so far, with many significant changes: number of elements and groups, number of blades, coating, etc. Different types perform very different considering contrasts, color rendition, sharpness and differ in flare-prone, bokeh etc.

    Thank you for this test nevertheless. Don't take this personal, it is just a fact and I regret the time losing with different lenses, especially when it was possible to mount the same lens on all 4 cameras. It costs so much time to do such test shooting, no?

    Only 2nd part of the test with the same lens is usable (rotating in the chair), my first impression on this poor PC screen where I could watch it (quite oldie one) right now is:

    1: the cinematic one, less contrasts but retained excellent shadow details without peaking
    2: good detail in the well-lit areas, shadows tends to get too dark
    3: the sharpest contrasty one, the digital looking one, highlights peaking
    4: the balanced one, good shadow details without peaking well-lit areas

    I don't know any other camera but the GH2, my impression and pure guessing is in order of camera numbers is: BMCC, 5Dmk3, GH2, GH3. All cameras are excellent, though also very different. For cinema-like film making: No.4 than No.1

  • Since you guys had the Canon 24-70mm I don't get why you didn't use it as baseline optics and use its range for identical framing. I'm sure you do have an EF-m43 adapter. I'm curious to see the ungraded material.

  • i hate canon glass, I really do. And the other thing was time - we had to blow through the tests pretty quickly, and identical framing was not high on our priority list, especially since we expected the 5D to eliminate itself pretty quickly. Which it initially did, but the made a strong comeback.

    We did the one test to satisfy the "it's not the same lens" people, but once we got into the simul-shot test we didn't have enough canon glass to go around, so we put the Nikkor glass on the GH's for that, and the head-to-head GH2 vs. GH3 shoot and then just left them on. I said it's not very scientific, but despite the different lenses, all the footage cuts together rather well.

  • Here's how I ranked them for each test, favorite to least favorite:

    3 2 4 1

    3 4 1 2

    2 1 3 4

    1 3 4 -

    3 I like the most, for some reason. 2 is probably next, closely followed by 1. Didn't like 4 very much at all. But, a lot of this comes down to the grading, and trying to "match" footage from such different cameras can require interesting compromises. @shian you might want to upgrade the video to 1080p. Also, I interned in the rental industry out in LA, and there are only so many 24-70s available on short notice. I have a good story about this, and if you'd like to hear it, send me a PM ;)

  • Yep, I agree with Vitaliy except that he's a dumb Mother.

    I depend way too much on presets because I simply don't know any other way. It's been a busy winter and I haven't kept up with what you're doing so I have some catching up to do.

  • To my untrained eye, I didn't see one I liked more than any of the others in the first test. In the second test, I thought camera 4 gave the best balance between highlights (the shine on the female model's forehead) and detail in the shadows (the male model's ear). What ever was going in the third test, I definitely did not like camera 4 - everything looked washed out and lacking in contrast. In the fourth test there was nothing I really liked or disliked.

  • @shian

    Please, keep discussion about your good tests in proper topics - GH3 and BMC ones.

  • You could try reverse-engineering.

    Apply any preset. You can see all details on the effects panel. It's really a basic set of curve, level, hues, saturation, opacity, etc. @shian covered a topic about how to tweak the presets and creating your own.

  • Resolution wise I think that #2 really looks like poop.

  • @shian Ha, I guessed it!!

    I admit there was bit of luck, the only indication I saw clearly different was different DOF according to different sensor sizes- (smallest DOF cam1, biggest DOF cam2, same DOF 3&4), also greenish GH2 colors and its too high contrasts made me suspect it to be cam3, for those reasons I still prefer the GH1 for some things.

    Stunning performance of the unhacked GH3 though, and very interesting how BMCC footage looks after the grading, it gets the best. Did you shoot with the BBMC in RAW?

    Why are the colors so different after the grading, was it graded different way?

  • the details are in the 2nd vid. We shot both Prores and Raw but at different times.

  • @shian - Really surprised how much I don't want either the BMCC or the GH3. Kooks need to get on dat writing/concept game because the GH2 stands it's ground great, or at least good enough to surpass fan boys and impress investors/clients/distribution.

  • @artiswar: are you serious? What about the extended DR if nothing else? Just look at the talent's forehead...blown out on GH2/GH3. Yes it can be lit up within range if you have time and resources, but you just have it easier with the BMCC.

    @shian: what is it that you don't like about operating the BMCC? Just curious, I haven't touched the thing and I intend to get it when it comes out in m43.

  • @radikalfilm the "reviews" segment where we talk about the cameras and our likes and dislikes is up now.

  • @radikalfilms - I didn't say I didn't see a difference but for me, at this point, it's a matter f diminishing returns. I'd rather spend the $3k for a BMCC body only on financing my next short film. A good craftsman doesn't blame his tools. The GH2s picture is incredibly pleasing to me and actually the GH3 and GH2 were my two favorite pictures in terms of character.

  • The Dam Short Film Festival has not only selected a film I DP'ed, co-edited, and graded using the then experimental ColorGHear Toolkit - shot on the original RED ONE with the same Nikon lenses I now use on my GH2....BUT they're also using a still from the film as their Cover Photo for the festival.

    image

    SOP sscrnsht.png
    1005 x 430 - 537K
  • Very cool - congrats. Please post links to watch once it's made available online - will definitely check it out.

  • Looks great, yes - post the trailer link please!

  • @shian will there every be a PC version? I think you are missing out on a pretty big market by not. Also, how do you think colorghear and the technicolor cinestyle software compare, or what makes colorghear better ya think? Or are they both have their own different benefits?

  • ColorGHear is totally PC compatible its completely platform independent. I haven't given cine style a look, you'd have to ask a CGT user who has it. I know there's a few.

  • @GravitateMediaGroup: After Effects works natively on Windows. I use it all the time. In fact I suspect it's a lot easier (and cheaper) to build and beef up your beast of a multicore CPU/GPU workstation on WIntel than it is under Apple.

  • Grain overlays coming in the new ColorGHear. They are really nice, BTW.

  • Looking forward to seeing the January version. I assume that's the reason why when I click on the link to buy, it says 'Discontinued'? Also, as a Premiere Pro user, any reason to use AE for correction and grading instead of just doing it in PP?

  • @duartix - Or build a Hackintosh and get the best of both :-)

    @SuperSet - more 32bit depth effects.

Start New Topic

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google Sign In with OpenID

Sign In Register as New User

Tags in Topic

Top Posters