Brendanh Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 I’m a filmmaker turned travel vlogger using the GH4. I’ve been shooting in Cinelike D and trying various LUTs each episode. For the latest episode I slapped EOSHD Pro Color on an adjustment layer across the whole episode and took the saturation down to 70%. For this fast turnaround content I look for a LUT that works across many lighting situations. EOSHD Pro Color seems to be a great fast way to add a look. GH4 Lumix 12-35mm Cinelike D (Default Settings) Heliopan Vari ND Airport shots at the end on G7X mkII LUT: EOSHD Pro Color Edit in Adobe Premiere CC2017 Mac iamoui, John Matthews and mercer 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orangenz Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 5 hours ago, Brendanh said: I’m a filmmaker turned travel vlogger using the GH4. I’ve been shooting in Cinelike D and trying various LUTs each episode. For the latest episode I slapped EOSHD Pro Color on an adjustment layer across the whole episode and took the saturation down to 70%. For this fast turnaround content I look for a LUT that works across many lighting situations. EOSHD Pro Color seems to be a great fast way to add a look. Great content! Still looks ungraded to me - flat. jonpais and webrunner5 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 I don't like the look at all but color is subjective anyway. Maybe its the recommended in camera settings but I much rather use visioncolor impulz until this pro color lut gets an update to remove the aggressive red hue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 23 hours ago, Brendanh said: I’m a filmmaker turned travel vlogger using the GH4. I’ve been shooting in Cinelike D and trying various LUTs each episode. For the latest episode I slapped EOSHD Pro Color on an adjustment layer across the whole episode and took the saturation down to 70%. For this fast turnaround content I look for a LUT that works across many lighting situations. EOSHD Pro Color seems to be a great fast way to add a look. GH4 Lumix 12-35mm Cinelike D (Default Settings) Heliopan Vari ND Airport shots at the end on G7X mkII LUT: EOSHD Pro Color Edit in Adobe Premiere CC2017 Mac I really like the vintage 8mm look. It almost feels like moving polaroids. Well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rooney111 Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 On 1/13/2017 at 6:42 AM, Brendanh said: I’m a filmmaker turned travel vlogger using the GH4. I’ve been shooting in Cinelike D and trying various LUTs each episode. For the latest episode I slapped EOSHD Pro Color on an adjustment layer across the whole episode and took the saturation down to 70%. For this fast turnaround content I look for a LUT that works across many lighting situations. EOSHD Pro Color seems to be a great fast way to add a look. GH4 Lumix 12-35mm Cinelike D (Default Settings) Heliopan Vari ND Airport shots at the end on G7X mkII LUT: EOSHD Pro Color Edit in Adobe Premiere CC2017 Mac Very nice! The walking and talking scenes, are you holding the camera in your hands or are you using some sort of stabilization assisting device? Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brendanh Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 14 hours ago, rooney111 said: are you holding the camera in your hands or are you using some sort of stabilization assisting device? I'm currently using the Sirui 3T-35K which is quite comfortable to hold once you get used to holding the weight of the camera in front if you. It also doubles as a tripod. Thanks for the other responses RE look and content. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted January 24, 2017 Share Posted January 24, 2017 Does the g80 perform better in 16-255 over 0-255 ? Im still confused as to why you picked that range. Does it benefit the image or is that the range the lut is designed for ? @Andrew Reid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimor Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 On 24/1/2017 at 5:13 PM, kidzrevil said: Does the g80 perform better in 16-255 over 0-255 ? Im still confused as to why you picked that range. Does it benefit the image or is that the range the lut is designed for ? @Andrew Reid 1+ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 On 1/24/2017 at 11:13 PM, kidzrevil said: Does the g80 perform better in 16-255 over 0-255 ? Im still confused as to why you picked that range. Does it benefit the image or is that the range the lut is designed for ? @Andrew Reid Here's a demonstration using all three settings on the GH4 with FCP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesku Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 16-235 records 10 503 459 colors 16-255 records 13 651 919 colors 0-255 records 16 581 375 colors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orangenz Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 On 24/01/2017 at 5:13 AM, kidzrevil said: Does the g80 perform better in 16-255 over 0-255 ? Im still confused as to why you picked that range. Does it benefit the image or is that the range the lut is designed for ? It suggests there is no difference to dynamic range, sure. But reducing the distribution of that range to 16-235 means far greater likelyhood of seeing banding in plain colour areas and when lifting shadows or reducing highlights. I think better to understand Premiere settings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 15 minutes ago, Orangenz said: It suggests there is no difference to dynamic range, sure. But reducing the distribution of that range to 16-235 means far greater likelyhood of seeing banding in plain colour areas and when lifting shadows or reducing highlights. I think better to understand Premiere settings. I leave mine in 0-255 because unless the 16-255 forces the encoder not to assign bits below 16 it is a useless setting. My guess was it was suggested to use 16-255 for the same reasons technicolor cinestyle uses that range (to avoid assigning bits to the worse part of the codec). That doesn't seem to be the case here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonpais Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 13 hours ago, Vesku said: 16-235 records 10 503 459 colors 16-255 records 13 651 919 colors 0-255 records 16 581 375 colors That's really amazing! Can we see one of your videos that shows all this wonderful color? BTW, your Vimeo channel is simply incredible! You have such an eye for composition. I must have watched the Mega OIS vs Power OIS at least a dozen times. The GH4 must really be holding you back. I love reading your reposts here of topics you started at other websites four years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vesku Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 4 hours ago, jonpais said: That's really amazing!. I love reading your reposts here of topics you started at other websites four years ago. Glad to hear you want to learn so much about digital video and color science. webrunner5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsemiterrific Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Here are some clips I did with my wife's G7 Lumix. I used the settings for Standard pic profile Andrew recommended, and used the Pro Color LUT with grading. Let me know what you think. Souto 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Well, out of camera is quite workable; I'd say that. But, you could get there yourself with perhaps a little nicer results... * The Original *A quick 'n rough Cinegain fix * Your result Instead of Canon warmth, the last one has that blueish pinkish vibe of the EOSHD LUT. Skin & lips look unnatural to me. I only really liked the results at nighttime, perhaps it's due to the warmth of incandescent lights. But you know, different people different taste and all. I just like it a little more subtle. Orangenz 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsemiterrific Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 16 minutes ago, Cinegain said: Well, out of camera is quite workable; I'd say that. But, you could get there yourself with perhaps a little nicer results... * The Original *A quick 'n rough Cinegain fix * Your result Instead of Canon warmth, the last one has that blueish pinkish vibe of the EOSHD LUT. Skin & lips look unnatural to me. I only really liked the results at nighttime, perhaps it's due to the warmth of incandescent lights. But you know, different people different taste and all. I just like it a little more subtle. I think your critique is valid in this clip--and is probably due to my grading. CF enables you to do a lot with reds/yellows. The image too blue IMO. I was trying to be very conservative in grading it. But what about the couple I shot later and the landscapes? It's not that you can't get good results otherwise, it's the steps are so quick and easy using the LUT, as I tried to show in the three steps I demonstrated several times in the footage. Cinegain 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cinegain Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 True that. Yeah, the other clips worked quite a bit better. I just personally only use LUTs to toggle different looks, to quickly see what would work best and then start from scratch. Of course, that's quite a bit more time consuming, but it avoids certain recognizable 'LUT looks' if you will and gets you a tailored look to fit the scene. Concerning the clip with the couple, you did a pretty nice job yourself, with the LUT, it was a big too neon in the reds for me, e.g. her hair turned Trump orange. * original * tweaked I'm more of a let blonds be blond and greens be green kinda guy, so I preferred your own grade which was close to this tweaked one. Not sure if I messed up his shirt color or improved it, I wasn't there, my eyes only know the color of natural things, so skin, hair, grass, leafs, etc. tomsemiterrific 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsemiterrific Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 13 hours ago, Cinegain said: Well, out of camera is quite workable; I'd say that. But, you could get there yourself with perhaps a little nicer results... * The Original *A quick 'n rough Cinegain fix * Your result Instead of Canon warmth, the last one has that blueish pinkish vibe of the EOSHD LUT. Skin & lips look unnatural to me. I only really liked the results at nighttime, perhaps it's due to the warmth of incandescent lights. But you know, different people different taste and all. I just like it a little more subtle. I think your critique is valid in this clip--and is probably due to my grading. CF enables you to do a lot with reds/yellows. The image to too blue IMO. But what about the couple I shot later and the landscapes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsemiterrific Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Yes, I also agree about the "Trump orange" of the lady's hair. I think this LUT can work well in many cases for an easy basis for a grade. But your point is something that frustrates me: the red cast. Reducing the red doesn't really remove the cast it only tones it down, which seems to defeat the purpose if warmth in skin tones is what you want. Of course, that could all be graded out with masks, etc., but why? Isn't one of the purposes of a LUT to save time in grading? That said the LUT worked really well in the general landscape shots. And I like how the LUT actually does expand the dynamic range and helps you recoup some of the lost highs. I saturated much of it more than I usually might. I think the grading I did of my daughter was hasty---the shot was taken in weird light, a mix of shadow and late evening sun...using auto WB. I was trying to get a "worst case" scenario. I also wanted to try out the metabones speed booster and my Canon lenses, and it worked great. You don't even have the sense you're shooting with an adapter, and my Canon F 4.0 zooms transform into F 2.5 zooms with stabilization. I understand the G85 has internal stabilization....so that will give my zooms dual stabilization. Pretty friggin' awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.