Axel

Stop lamenting. Learn the scopes and then take pride in lecturing us all! First of, it has good colors for sure. That's not what we are here for, we are testing. If anybody wants a perfectly fine neutral basic grade he should better buy a PMW300 or something like that and stop worrying (and grading). You mix up color correction and grading. And secondly, there clearly are some stylistic choices in Neumanns original Beyond The Grid clip, as we can tell by a closer look at the few shots he let us to play with. So, no, André, you are wrong. It's not perfectly neutral. Where is the dislike-button? True, sadly. It certainly isn't the easiest thing ever. I advise all here to brace themselves against any harsh and arrogant critic. And not to trust any perfect stranger who tells you it's you're just using the wrong software. Maybe wolf33d is a talented colourist. Good for him. Are we here to brag about our talents or to learn something?

Isn't Seattle notorious for a grey, rainy atmosphere? I've never been there, I just liked the photography in The Killing (Netflix). Perhaps the still-washed-out V-lut image (will there be a new official lut for this 10-bit material?) is the most appropriate? hyalinejim has done a great job with it though. Okay, I'm monitoring this on a device with P3 color space, don't know if clipping looks nasty on sRGB monitors, please tell me. I just let the highlights reach 108% in this one: Yes, I don't see a "soft roll-off" of the bright yellow band above the horizon, it looks kind of cut off. By very conservatively bringing highlights down to 95% I see that this sharp boarder is a thin line of clouds which disappeared through the clipping. I don't care. Whenever there is such a dominant light source in the image, my rule is to let it clip as much as I can possibly tolerate. And this one can be pushed quite far, no wonder: it's 10-bit. This belongs under subjective opinion, individual taste ... EDIT: bad example. Too much highlight saturation. This is with 112%:

Good. I think you recovered too much above. The clouds look too faded. @Taranis We evaluate what can be done with this footage. That's all.

Imo the best one so far is that of EOSHD member cantsin, who posted it in another forum. I am sure he will forgive me for putting the link in here: My image looks like from a Christmas carol TV show (too kitschy skin). You can imagine she's just about to sing let it snow, let it snow, let it snow .... cantsins image looks as if it was from a film with Julianne Moore.

Look decent. It's just that I feel green to be unnaturally saturated then, in every shot, particularly Seattle_Dolly. Left is Panasonic V-Log applied, middle is auto balance applied to this, right is green selected and slightly desaturated.

Also tried this shot and find your's close to perfect. Here is why (arguable, as always, but please try to describe what you object to, not just say bad grading): You'd expect the sunset's light to be yellow or orange (there still is the choice which you prefer), you would for the sake of color contrast have shadows tinted in the complementary color, but just a hint of cyan is enough. Everything that's directly hit by the sun should be well saturated, the rest should fall off. You probably crushed the blacks just a bit, I expect the edge of the table (first few frames) to be indistinguishable. The brightest part in the image is the horizon between the branches, it may or may not clip. All in all, this is no subject for an HDR approach in the classical sense, you don't care if the tree trunks or her rucksack lose detail. The compositional setup of this shot is the direction of the light, which is too prominent to ignore. You'd see all you needed to see if she was a complete silhouette. The tension in the image comes from the three directions of sight, her looking at (and recording) the setting sun, the sun shining in the opposite direction and the viewer looking onto this frame, framed by the dark trees, having depth of field through a stark contrast between foreground and background, known in classic landscape painting as the natural absorption of colors (air contains particles that gradually reduce contrast and saturation the farer an object is away). I use to shoot my vacation videos with my iPhone which has no DR worth mentioning, but given that I use filmicPro (allowing me to set exposure), I dare say it wouldn't have been overchallenged with that shot. I also shot with BM 10-bit and raw and had some 13 stops to play with in post. That's when I finally realized that the best shots were those with either not too extreme contrast (which could be adjusted in post) or those I did not at all costs try to preserve shadows and highlights to show off the camera's virtues. Too many detail can come in the way of a clear and strong composition. Landscapes (because part of their beauty is related to the sky) of course sometimes need more DR. This! I am a big fan of van Hurkman who often contradicts professional dogmata. And for the arrogance of many commentators see this: To be honest, I would have been among those who dislike Faris' grades. But he is right nonetheless. Say, for God's sake, why you dislike an image. And be precise or forever hold your peace!

I must admit I completely dislike at least 95% of other peoples graded shots. Not because I think I can do better, it's probably mainly (but not exclusively, see below!) a matter of taste. My own attempt, with explanation: On top of Panasonic V-lut (usually not recommended) I desaturated the shadows and also (like mercer) added some blue to them, but not so much. Is her jacket really a very dark blue? I substracted some magenta globally, thereby unwillingly adding more green to the trees, but fortunately the muted shadow saturation counteracted this (don't like the green in any of the shots). I boosted the saturation of the midtones, I like vivid colors, but not to the degree that the image looks artificially colorized. I admit I am not good as far as serious grading is concerned. I think I know a lot about it in theory, probably more than most here. If you say my version is terrible, you are probably right. Do better, show, explain. The point of this rant is, people - including me - can't grade. So why are they considering log the Holy Grail? I'd rather have a picture style that spared me all those steps and just left some color correction (which isn't a matter of taste and an artist's "eye" but merely cooking by the book with scopes). I would really love if the skin looked better. It's not wrong, it has the right tones, but it has too few nuances to look really alive. It's a pity that the above face is not in 10-bit, I'm curious to see if that made a difference.

Too bad. Does anybody know about such a comparison so far? Like this:

On the playback issue: FCP X 10.3.1 on newest, maxed-out iMac plays back all files at full quality. Noticed some stuttering, conformed the framerates using automatic speed, they seemingly ran smoothly, still so with V-Lut and one instance of CC. Checked stop playback when frame skipping occurs (or so, german FCP X), and playback did stop a second or so into the file. XML'd to Resolve: files are missing! Transcoded everything to ProRes then. As expected, no issues then. But note that some stuttering will be normal for files that are thrown into a *desktop project" with differing framerates. On the colors: I am not very enthusiastic about the DR (knowing A7Rii, FS7 and BM footage). Skin looks decent, but the green of the trees doesn't look right. What I would like to see in further shots by Neumann: not V-log, but just a quick comparison of all standard picture profiles (or however Pana calls them). Please make sure sharpness and saturation are dialed down somewhat, disable iDyn and iRes and all that stuff. Sorry, I don't know the right names, it's been a long time since my GH2 experiences. With Sony I'd rather go with "Cine4" (a little flat, looking like C100's C-log) to avoid a lot of problems with weird colors, noise or banding (the latter of course not to be expected in a 10-bit clip). Thanks for the clips!

On Vimeo you wrote: Excuse me for emphasising some points you already made. This camera needs only a very basic and minimalistic "rig" (there are terrific solutions in other threads, two of them my own) to get rid of the shakiness. But one has to admit: it can't be operated without. By far the best lens combo for it is the BMPCC speedbooster with Sigma 18-35. Less moire in ProRes = better resolution (moire is a symptom for poor resolution), pristine, sharp image. Easiest lens to focus perfectly due to the buttery smooth manual focus ring. Imo it doesn't need the VAT filter, but definitely an IR-cut. Some of the weird colors and noise in your clip apparently come from IR pollution (worse with an ND), which cannot be fixed in post. I repeated the same test shots with an A7Rii and compared them to my two years old Pocket shots. Comparing apples to oranges? Yes, but I could just cry and really rue having sold the whole stuff because of UHD. Next week I'll borrow the UM 4,6k. Know the manual like the back of my hand and think I can operate it from the start. Now that the latest firmware fixed the FPN issue, I think that's the ultimate answer to my prayers, camerawise. *Don't* *sell* *your* *Pocket*. I should've kept it and shoot all my test shots and video sketches with it.

Evidently. And pro users hate Apple. That statement works with a very specific definition of who and how a pro is. Apple loves artists. Artists love Apple. Not a truism, a prejudice. But evident. Most would agree. It's interesting to see how people define themselves through the brand (or the rejection of a brand) as this or that. Before FCP X came out, thousands of FCP 7 users waited impatiently for an FCP 8. The wishlist: 64bit support, native editing of highly compressed video, not much change to the beloved old GUI. Perfective maintenance like Adobe exercised it for decades. Apple must have despised these conservative pros. I imagine them sitting in Cupertino and watching the wave of shame and disgust over "iMovie Pro" with deep satisfaction. Randy? Yeah, Steve? High five, we shat them all right in the face!

I could follow you. Without knowing the background, that is how contrast and exposure are being computed and relate to colors, I came to the same conclusion. Thanks.

My buddy does have some good clients. One success story was when he invested a lot of unpaid private time in second-guessing the 'corporate identity' of the firm who made the announcement. He met the woman responsible for public relation with concepts ready to present. But he was wise enough to make her feel it were her ideas. They accepted his offer (reasonable, but not cheap) without batting an eye. The communication worked from the start (what's the right idiom? They were on the same wavelength?). He had thought out everything in advance, he could control the situation. The client came back several times despite cheaper competitors. If the client feels you are just some guy with a camera you will not be treated with respect. A successful professional must be a prostitute sometimes. The good ones make their sugar daddies think they love them.

SIMPLIFY YOUR GEAR! Seductive idea. Just now I am looking for a new camera. I'd really like it to be a camcorder, but unfortunately some of my must-have features are only onboard the heavier and more expensive models. Price and size are both the reasons why I still keep thinking about hybrids and trying to 'reduce them to the maximum'.

Mutual interests? Labour of love? I hope this won't go sour. Without a contract, anything could happen as soon as creative conflicts arise. Which is not exactly unheard-of. Not long ago, being a professional meant you weren't cheap. Now all the DSLR rebels have ruined the nimbus. To reinstate it for yourself you have to turn down every client who - directly but in most cases indirectly - treats you like dog's poo. Difficult move if you are starting up. But a defining move.

@Arikhan Well said. What does anybody care about anyway? The majority doesn't care about McD's food being junk, and you don't have to be an haute cuisine chef to know that it is. You say, my audience doesn't care, why should I? That's a valid point. Secondary matters don't need to be addressed. Colors are way overrated. Taste is what the Big Tasty means (not sure if this McD product exists everywhere, it's a burger with smoke flavor sprayed upon). Very poignantly put, thank you. Then of course we need to discuss no longer, because the NX1 is the answer ("blatant precision, crispness, detail"). EDIT: did I say that I like the NX1's features? It has good resolution, it has ok colors. But when I hear people say they like it because of the sharpness, I can't help thinking they'll like the Big Tasty for it's taste.

Not exactly. I also don't like blurry images. I'm not a pixelpeeper either. The NX1 has a too poor color differentiation to make it's too sharp images look natural. Terrible, I'm posting the same Ursa wedding film example now for the third or fourth time: It was recorded in 1080 only ... ... but, if scaled up to 2160, none of the ordinary people around you would complain the image wasn't crisp. They wouldn't use "crisp" to describe it. Some would perhaps say it had beautiful colors. Good resolution imo signals that there is a surplus of resolution. That the details are there, but that there would be even more details if you moved closer, like in real life. The NX1's edge sharpening signals, here it is, there you are, that's the end of the road, these outlines are what the world is made of. If you took a step further, the whole thing would crumble apart. Sharpness mustn't betray the limits of resolution.

The freedom to pick your clients of course comes with your reputation. Your reputation grows by picking the right clients. It's like a level in a PC game. To get there, some spare lives come in handy. A side job to make it through the dry spell?

Of course with complete honesty I didn't mean saying everything that crosses my mind. That was idiotic. Nor a complete confession of all my failures and delusions. Or if I find the other sympathetic at first sight or not. Just in the well-considered personal evaluation of the things behind the current conflict. After I have been honest to myself whether some of it is possibly my fault alone. I'd admit this too. And I won't accuse the other directly, just report my own view, without holding back. If it was too biased, good chance to clarify this. Not at this stage. My point is that many many false notes accumulated over time and that this caused all this bitterness. In management training courses the outcome is called lose-lose (as opposed to win-win). I recommend Tarkovskys Andrej Rublev. Spoiler: in the last scene the famous bell founder just died. His 12 year old apprentice says the old man has taught him everything to make the giant bell for the newly built cathedral himself. But it's a lie. Because the bell is so big, he has to command the work of the villagers. He has to punish disobedience, he can't tolerate others questioning his authority. Accidents occur due to his inexperience. He hopes (but you can clearly see he doesn't believe) the bell will ring in the right key - and not break apart with the first hit of the clapper. Tradition demands that all workers will be beheaded then. Time is running out, and in the end the boy is full of regret and self-hatred. In literally the last minute, the prince with his entourage and everybody already surrounding them, the heavy bell is lifted and the clapper swings back and forth, slowly building up momentum. The boy runs away in horror. And from a great distance he hears the bell, clear and majestic. Most likely intended as a parable for creative challenge. All capable people in this field are also impostors. They don't know better, but they may. They have to stay consequent or the outcome will be mediocre at best. If they sense hesitation in others, they take over responsibility. And they are held responsible in the end.

An understanding how different characters can collaborate successfully in a bloody office was even more helpful to manage conflicts between people who consider themselves creatives. In the modern concept, broken down somewhat for simplicity, conflicts aren't avoided (they are unavoidable anyway), they are exploited for their productive impulses. Psychobabble? Modern platitudes? Why can't you be fully honest? Assumed that you really want to achieve the best, complete honesty gives you all advantages. Because imo all the deadlocks between him and his clients my friend laments about come from an inappropriate reaction to the conflicts. Yes. It's not so much about being in the right, it's about self-esteem, honesty and soft skills.

Good advice. Sounds easy. I recommended this to my best buddy, who meets many video-wise incompetent clients. They are, it seems, the majority. Maybe a contract, describing a concept also, needs some ambiguity. To let you stay flexible and to not frighten off the client from the start. This is asking too much, really. It's a group dynamics, team role, psychological kind of thing. Shaping audiovisual content is not at all like connecting dots. That you have come to choose this profession means your understanding of the processes is immeasurably greater than your client's. The contract must reflect this. The client's only duty has to be to clearly describe his goals. Early on of course. And you have to clear any open questions with him/her. You are in charge, and you must be demanding. Now my buddy says, lame-brained advice, you can't imagine just how inconsequent those people are. You bet i can! But I also witness how inconsequently you react. The american saying the customer is always right is only right if he is right. First you try to assign the roles, establish your responsibilities and his/hers in the preliminary meetings and the contract. But soon afterwards, see how many compromises you accept, how many failures on the client's side you excuse. Rather sooner than later you have reached the point where the only options are open conflict or self-denying servility. I don't say I'd do better. But this is what I observe.

Yes. Didn't meet the deadlines of former competitions, but the challenge was refreshing nonetheless. You could start a new thread. Suggestions for a fictional/narrative theme: recently ... Or for a doc: The unknown ...

Ed, Tim, thank you for the links!

Yeah. What I again notice in every perfectly focussed shot is the terrible sharpening. Perhaps a strong ProMist filter could help against the sharpening?

I think not. AAE is an ancient software that could be rewritten from scratch, because there are more elegant ways of representing layers on a timeline. But few complain, because they know the program, and it works just fine as it is, it's reliable. Merging PP and AAE (and make the jackalope an expensive Hitfilm) would scare off the faithful clients. Don't you think? The problem is that PP has too many old and redundant features and over the decades became bloatware. But PP imo should be rewritten to seamlessly include the functionality of Prelude. Organizing media within PP is so marginal. Wiki: As I see it, these are all core tasks of an NLE. None of them should be awkward clunky processes.