Jump to content

Your ideal NX1 Settings


Geoff CB
 Share

Recommended Posts

Okay, here is a shot I took yesterday testing the -10 contrast with a custom profile. Otherwise, I had Saturation at -4 and Sharpness at -10. I just tweaked the curves and threw on an M31.

 

 

Vivid -0 Contrast OOF Camera.jpg

Vivid -0 Contrast M31.jpg

Ok, and here is one I took today. This one is in vivid. The first shot is 0 contrast and the second is -10 contrast. I basically, adjusted the curves until I was able to get the waveforms to almost completely match, then I added an m31 LUT to them both. The one with -10 contrast has the LUT at 100%, the 0 contrast has the LUT at 50%.

Vivid 0 Contrast.jpg

Vivid -10 Contrast.jpg

I think the 0 contrast looks better and requires less fussing. I think it also has a warmer feel to it, but I'm sure a better colorist could pull that out more. But it does seem like you gain a half stop with the -10 contrast.

looks good ! Guess the jury is out 0 contrast is the way to go. Now we should focus on saturation and the color sliders. Right now all my sliders are at 1.00, 1.00, 1.00. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

looks good ! Guess the jury is out 0 contrast is the way to go. Now we should focus on saturation and the color sliders. Right now all my sliders are at 1.00, 1.00, 1.00. 

Yeah, I think 0 contrast is the way to go. I have been using -4 saturation, with good results... As is, it looks fairly good out of camera, but I also have a little leeway to adjust. I have not messed with the hue or colors at all. I remember reading some comments on a post a few months ago where a guy was shooting calm and then bumping up his colors. I never tried it, but maybe. Btw, retro and landscape look interesting too, but without a doubt, vivid is best out of box profile. Good find!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a great thread. Looks like everyone's using the vivid profile. Will have to try it and some of the other settings mentioned here.

I like these settings I posted previously in another thread for a nearly SOOC natural look. Has some room to manoeuvre in the darks but very natural colours IMO. 

Standard (Normal Gamma)  ... Green = 95%, Saturation = -2, Sharpness = -10, Contrast = 0, MBL +10.

001.thumb.jpg.edcfeef29888d548c8e09fe557

002.thumb.jpg.e309d4425e498523e14331068c

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a great thread. Looks like everyone's using the vivid profile. Will have to try it and some of the other settings mentioned here.

I like these settings I posted previously in another thread for a nearly SOOC natural look. Has some room to manoeuvre in the darks but very natural colours IMO. 

Standard (Normal Gamma)  ... Green = 95%, Saturation = -2, Sharpness = -10, Contrast = 0, MBL +10.

001.thumb.jpg.edcfeef29888d548c8e09fe557

002.thumb.jpg.e309d4425e498523e14331068c

 

Very clean, natural image. Good stuff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very clean, natural image. Good stuff. 

Thanks. I have no idea what I'm doing but I find this camera a lot of fun :)

There seems to be a lot of ways to get a natural look out of the NX1. I like these settings too ... 16-50S .. Gamma DR, Contrast -5, Master Black Level +10. Sharpness was either at 0 or +5 ... can't remember but was too high either way. My wife's hair looks pretty bad as a result. Great fun experimenting anyway. 

Exactly same settings here but used FilmConvert over the top for a very non-natural look ... 16-50PZ ... Arri ... Alexa ... DCIP3 ... KD5207 (Andrews suggestion somewhere along the line)

I'd also like to start shooting more street stuff with the 16-50PZ ... while the 16-50S seems perfect in every way, the PZ seems to have a nice less clinical look and it makes the NX1 a totally different cam to use because it's so light and nimble with nice stabilisation especially when teamed up with DIS and the cams AF abilities. I like the PZ lens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks. I have no idea what I'm doing but I find this camera a lot of fun :)

Neither do I, and I know even less of what I'm talking about. 

My wife's hair looks pretty bad as a result.

I bet you didn't tell her that.

Exactly same settings here but used FilmConvert over the top for a very non-natural look ... 16-50PZ ... Arri ... Alexa ... DCIP3 ... KD5207 (Andrews suggestion somewhere along the line)

I'd also like to start shooting more street stuff with the 16-50PZ ... while the 16-50S seems perfect in every way, the PZ seems to have a nice less clinical look and it makes the NX1 a totally different cam to use because it's so light and nimble with nice stabilisation especially when teamed up with DIS and the cams AF abilities. I like the PZ lens

Yeah, the PZ lens looks nice. I don't have any of the native Samsung lenses but you guys seem to be getting some good results with them.

That's what's really cool about these Samsungs... You can get a nice clean look out of the box, perfect for family events, or you can tweak the clinical image to get a filmic look, or even a crazy look. Although highly compressed, the codec can handle a lot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it so popular (in EOSHD) to emulate "dirty" look of 70's and 80's movies? Wouldn't be more beneficial to emulate something like The Martian? Clean image with beautiful colors.

Is it becouse it's so much harder to make image look actually good, and it's easy to make images look crap and then say it's artistic?

I don't know, I think the majority of this community likes the clean look you are referring to. If you like YOUR videos to look like The Martian, by all means go rent an Arri, and have at it.

I, personally, like the look of vintage film and/or video with character, but I, unlike you, can respect people's individual tastes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it so popular (in EOSHD) to emulate "dirty" look of 70's and 80's movies? Wouldn't be more beneficial to emulate something like The Martian? Clean image with beautiful colors.

Is it because it's so much harder to make image look actually good, and it's easy to make images look crap and then say it's artistic?

Is not beauty in the eye of the beholder? In any case, I don't recall watching The Martian and thinking, "oh boy, I would really like to have that look in my productions". IMO, The Martian had a look reminiscent of Aliens ( I'm going by memory). It wasn't bad, but nothing I would feel compelled to achieve. And btw, lets not confuse in camera color from a $1k camera with the finished work from a $108 million dollar budget Hollywood blockbuster, with experts in cinematography, colorist, special effects, lighting, makeup, props and talent etc... In any case, I think many here would be curious to see what looks you have created with the NX1... and please share the settings. Who knows, you might have a winner?

 

FYI: Here is a little peak inside "The Martian"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is not beauty in the eye of the beholder? In any case, I don't recall watching The Martian and thinking, "oh boy, I would really like to have that look in my productions". IMO, The Martian had a look reminiscent of Aliens ( I'm going by memory). It wasn't bad, but nothing I would feel compelled to achieve. And btw, lets not confuse in camera color from a $1k camera with the finished work from a $108 million dollar budget Hollywood blockbuster, with experts in cinematography, colorist, special effects, lighting, makeup, props and talent etc... In any case, I think many here would be curious to see what looks you have created with the NX1... and please share the settings. Who knows, you might have a winner?

 

FYI: Here is a little peak inside "The Martian"

 

I wish I could "Like this" comment twice. Well said!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it so popular (in EOSHD) to emulate "dirty" look of 70's and 80's movies? Wouldn't be more beneficial to emulate something like The Martian? Clean image with beautiful colors.

Is it becouse it's so much harder to make image look actually good, and it's easy to make images look crap and then say it's artistic?

art is subjective. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it so popular (in EOSHD) to emulate "dirty" look of 70's and 80's movies? Wouldn't be more beneficial to emulate something like The Martian? Clean image with beautiful colors.

Is it becouse it's so much harder to make image look actually good, and it's easy to make images look crap and then say it's artistic?

I'm sure there are folks who resort to various tricks/gimmicks like fancy emulations to make up for not knowing how to tell a story. But those who do know use looks to serve their creative intent. E.g., I'd think a science fiction like The Martian or war and desert films will want to get the gritty look with ultra sharp (and possibly low shutter angle) imagery that might not work for say a feel-good romance. So, it's not all bogus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I tweak the saturation settings of the nx1 is the more gems I discover ! Started adjusting the hue slider as well as heavily desaturating the picture wizard profiles. Went down as low as -5 on vivid and adjusted the hue and wow the image really came alive. Contrast should be left alone its the negative saturation adjustments that really make you aware of the little nuances of the profiles and what makes them their own film stock ! 

The more I tweak the saturation settings of the nx1 is the more gems I discover ! Started adjusting the hue slider as well as heavily desaturating the picture wizard profiles. Went down as low as -5 on vivid and adjusted the hue and wow the image really came alive. Contrast should be left alone its the negative saturation adjustments that really make you aware of the little nuances of the profiles and what makes them their own film stock ! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I tweak the saturation settings of the nx1 is the more gems I discover ! Started adjusting the hue slider as well as heavily desaturating the picture wizard profiles. Went down as low as -5 on vivid and adjusted the hue and wow the image really came alive. Contrast should be left alone its the negative saturation adjustments that really make you aware of the little nuances of the profiles and what makes them their own film stock ! 

Interesting, I had tested lowering the saturation in the past and I had found that anything below -5 fell apart, but that was before I realized contrast should be set to default. So maybe, will definitely mess with this. I haven't tweaked the hue yet either, definitely trying this. Do you have any grabs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO these kinds of look adjustments are best done in post. For the shoot, I think it's best to focus on getting the right information (i.e., technically good footage amenable to grading) depending on the scene and lighting. An in-camera look that works beautifully for one scene may be a fail for others.

Link to comment
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.

 Share

  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
×
×
  • Create New...