Can't make decent HDR grade from Panasonic S1 V-Log. What am I doing wrong?

[markr041]

5 hours ago, Alexis Fontana said:

I that case I have no interest in a conversation with you, I really don’t care about those kind of ridiculous technical obsessions. I know how to light and frame and do - you know - cinematography work.

 

To anyone interested in why HDR is a waste of time - go read this very informative Twitter thread.

 

 

The discussion is a confused mess, with the usual tropes about 4K resolution, compression artifacts, etc. Almost nothing on the key advantage of HDR - extended dynamic range with 10bit color. That advantage can be seen at 480 bps or FullHD or 4K. It can be seen on most high-end phones, on m1 MacBook Pros and on most new TVs even at most-common internet bitrates.

Arguing for limited dynamic range is really stupid.

[SMGJohn]

Wow, never seen such toxicity on this forum before, I think the OP is having some massive delusions trying to cram magic into a limited codec format that just wont happen and claiming everyone pointing it out are wrong LOL

HDR only looks good when your monitor/TV can achieve HDR-800+ otherwise its pointless, OLED really struggle to hit those 1000 nits requirements for perfect HDR.

 

I also suggest watching some video from this guy who is a professional TV and monitor calibrator who actually has a clue what he is on about when it comes to HDR viewer experience.

https://youtu.be/XPzM3NDGuSc

https://youtu.be/D83SXcguwBU

 

 

 

[PannySVHS]

35 minutes ago, SMGJohn said:

Wow, never seen such toxicity on this forum before, I think the OP is having some massive delusions trying to cram magic into a limited codec format that just wont happen.

 

 

 

First part I wholeheartedly agree. We should all contribute much more to a respectful interaction! Really!

Second part I don´t agree with. The artefact is one which was immanent in the GH5 as well, shooting VLog-L in 4K 10bit 422, 150Mbit LongGop. It occured on skin f.i., larger homogenous areas of pink blotches. So it might not be a problem specific to 10bit 420 h265 with 200Mbit for open gate on the S1 but of the UHD 422 flavours as well. Would be interesting to know, if the artefacts appear in 10bit 422 UHD as well on the S1 if shooting for either SDR or HDR.

[SMGJohn]

7 minutes ago, PannySVHS said:

First part I wholeheartedly agree. We should all contribute much more to a respectful interaction! Really!

Second part I don´t agree with. The artefact is one which was immanent in the GH5 as well, shooting VLog-L in 4K 10bit 422, 150Mbit LongGop. It occured on skin f.i., larger homogenous areas of pink blotches. So it might not be a problem specific to 10bit 420 h265 with 200Mbit for open gate on the S1 but of the UHD 422 flavours as well. Would be interesting to know, if the artefacts appear in 10bit 422 UHD as well on the S1 if shooting for either SDR or HDR.

Actually that would be interesting to test out, the Panny S5 is also rated by Netflix as approved camera because it meets their HDR requirements, but I have not seen much documentation regarding how you are suppose to dial in that HDR specs with the S5.

Sadly I live in eternal darkness right now until February so I cannot go out try to shoot some HDR content but it would be interesting to test out, not sure a bright spot light and dark enough shadow would do it justice.
Also it be interesting if anyone are editing these clips on broadcast monitors specced for HDR content as Vincent points out, monitors do produce artefacting displaying HDR content way above its own game. 

I know for a fact my OLED display that can do 1000 nits actually struggles severely with darker areas displaying green blobs in places for some reasons when watching HDR content.

[PPNS]

On 12/29/2022 at 5:55 PM, markr041 said:

HDR is great!

Rec709 has very limited dynamic range. HDR gives you the dynamic range that these newer sensors with log gammas can capture. What is the point of having 14 stops of dynamic range if you can only see 5-6 stops?

Most newer TVs are capable of displaying HDR video, most top-end cell phones do so as well (on OLED screens!). Anyone who does not have a device that can display HDR video is simply using old or cheap equipment.  If you are serious about video, you need to step up (and it is not expensive).

And many of not all of original serials or movies produced by Prime Video, Netflix or AppleTV+ are HDR.

Anyone who claims they do not know anyone professionally shooting film or video who delivers in HDR is just telling us he or she is in the second, third, or fourth tier of professionals. Which is an odd place for snobs to inhabit.

Producing HDR video is hard, but it is worth it.

Would you call yourself a first tier professional? Because i’m being honest and i wouldn’t call myself that (and neither do i think of myself as a snob). The place i work for mainly does online ads, with occasionally some stuff that gets on tv. Completely disposable stuff, that either gets crushed by social media compression or broadcasted in 1080i to people who dont turn their motion smoothing off lol.

outside of that i try to do narrative short films, but those just get seen by film profs or get a hidden link on vimeo. Again, conditions in which hdr would not help very much at all, and where a well calibrated 709 environment would be perfect. as far as i know, my macbook pro only does fake hdr too, so whats the point there as well?

 

since you claim that producing hdr video is worth it, and i would like to at least be convinced, could we see some of your professional hdr video work please?

[markr041]

2 minutes ago, PPNS said:

Would you call yourself a first tier professional? Because i’m being honest and i wouldn’t call myself that (and neither do i think of myself as a snob). The place i work for mainly does online ads, with occasionally some stuff that gets on tv. Completely disposable stuff, that either gets crushed by social media compression or broadcasted in 1080i to people who dont turn their motion smoothing off lol.

outside of that i try to do narrative short films, but those just get seen by film profs or get a hidden link on vimeo. Again, conditions in which hdr would not help very much at all, and where a well calibrated 709 environment would be perfect. as far as i know, my macbook pro only does fake hdr too, so whats the point there as well?

 

since you claim that producing hdr video is worth it, and i would like to at least be convinced, could we see some of your professional hdr video work please?

You don't get it. This is NOT about what I produce or your career it is about the value of HDR. Just watch any HDR offering from Apple TV+, or Netflix or Prime Video. Properly.

It does not matter what you produce either, it is your claim that professionals don't produce for HDR that is ludicrous. And reveals more about you.

 

 

[Alexis Fontana]

21 hours ago, markr041 said:

The discussion is a confused mess, with the usual tropes about 4K resolution, compression artifacts, etc. Almost nothing on the key advantage of HDR - extended dynamic range with 10bit color. That advantage can be seen at 480 bps or FullHD or 4K. It can be seen on most high-end phones, on m1 MacBook Pros and on most new TVs even at most-common internet bitrates.

Arguing for limited dynamic range is really stupid.

Yeah - no, then you didn’t read it or didn’t understand it. 

 

3 hours ago, SMGJohn said:

Wow, never seen such toxicity on this forum before, I think the OP is having some massive delusions trying to cram magic into a limited codec format that just wont happen and claiming everyone pointing it out are wrong LOL

HDR only looks good when your monitor/TV can achieve HDR-800+ otherwise its pointless, OLED really struggle to hit those 1000 nits requirements for perfect HDR.

 

I also suggest watching some video from this guy who is a professional TV and monitor calibrator who actually has a clue what he is on about when it comes to HDR viewer experience.

https://youtu.be/XPzM3NDGuSc

https://youtu.be/D83SXcguwBU

 

 

 

He literally sells televisions for a living.

 

1 hour ago, markr041 said:

You don't get it. This is NOT about what I produce or your career it is about the value of HDR. Just watch any HDR offering from Apple TV+, or Netflix or Prime Video. Properly.

It does not matter what you produce either, it is your claim that professionals don't produce for HDR that is ludicrous. And reveals more about you.

 

 

You’re a moron talking out of your ass.

 

Moderator - delete my account if you will, this place is a waste of time. 

[PannySVHS]

Let us all not waste any time with getting into unfriendly arguments. Why feed a negative vibe with another person, feeding it to eachother! There is plenty opportunity to not to get involved in using unkind words. There are plenty of kind and interesting people communicating on this forum. Please, everyone, let´s all keep our act together.

Citing Steve Yedlin, is a good start imho.

Hey, don´t make me test myself to film a blank wall with my S1. 🙂 So I am very grateful for findings and fantastic insights along the way.

 

[SMGJohn]

While there is hundreds of sample video from YouTube and Vimeo people using S1, S1H and S5 with HDR exports. 

It appears all of them are either 10bit 422 or 12/14bit 444 RAW video, and I watched a handful to see if the OP's colour issues were present in them despite the compression rate I could not see any such artefacting which I assume happens in lower light areas. 

I would suggest the OP actually tests the 10bit 422 mode to see if he experiences the same issues, I am not sure he is all that justified in complaining when he only tests the HDR grade he is trying to accomplish in a 10bit 420 mode, I saw the images and he is clearly colour banding, essentially just hitting a limitation of his codec not having the colour information. 

No amount of magic can solve this.

Also the OP did not mention which HDR specifications he is trying to grade towards, it would be helpful which HDR spec he is gunning, if its Dolby or some of the other dozens of HDR specs out there, it also be interesting to know what nits those colour banding happens at in those particular areas, to me it seems apparent issue in the shadow areas so a higher ISO could be destroying colour information. 

[PannySVHS]

I will check some footage of mine next week, which might contain some blotchyness from the GH5 and S1 in their VLog flavours. At least with the GH5 I remember that artefact for people with caucasian skin in super harsh sunlight, filmed in UHD, VLog, 10bit 422, 150Mbit h264 Long Gop. So, we all stay calm and kewl and cheerful until then. The very least! 🙂

[markr041]

6 hours ago, Alexis Fontana said:

Yeah - no, then you didn’t read it or didn’t understand it. 

 

He literally sells televisions for a living.

 

You’re a moron talking out of your ass.

 

Moderator - delete my account if you will, this place is a waste of time. 

Typical response of someone who has been struck by the truth and cannot handle it. Maybe a fine videographer, just not very smart.

[Owlgreen]

It's not about 422 vs 420. The 6k modes all have 420 color sampling. If you want 422, you get at most DCI 4k resolution. This means the 6k modes recording 420 chroma record more color samples than the 422 modes. 

It's, at least partly, a matter of overly aggressive noise reduction, which is on even when using NR:0. Thanks to Michael S for pointing this out.

The pink blotches can and do appear in 422 footage, and in rec.709 grades, albeit in slightly different parts of the picture than with PQ grades. 

One way to partially prevent it, is to use ISOs higher than 640, such as 4000, to overwhelm the always-on NR.

[PannySVHS]

Gh5, big pink blotches under certain circumstances like reddish skin ,that in Vlog 10bit 422 4k 25p 150mbit. S1 seems okay but prone to oversaturated reds and blues in Vlog after conversion to 709. Both channels can be desaturated before conversion though.

 

[hyalinejim]

11 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

Gh5, big pink blotches

Can you upload a file? I wouldn't mind having a look at it.

[PannySVHS]

4 hours ago, hyalinejim said:

Can you upload a file? I wouldn't mind having a look at it.

With great pleasure. Finally i can share that gruesome artefact with a friend from the forum.:) Will do that tomorrow via PM. cheers

[hyalinejim]

2 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

Finally i can share that gruesome artefact with a friend from the forum.:)

Ha ha! Looking forward to some gruesomeness!

[PannySVHS]

Well, still didn't get around it, sorry. Gruesome, I know.:) Actually the artefact as a fact itself is pretty gruesome. When it appears it's ugly, relevant and hard to believe. The craziest artefactg has been for the c300 mkii in 2k 444, where in one frame the head of a person completely disappeared. Any way will send you the GH5 sample these days. @hyalinejim cheers:)