Don Kotlos Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 I would be very interested to see a test between a 0-255 -> then converted to 16-235 in the NLE vs a 16-235 recording.Correct me if I'm wrong but when you export your editing (youtube, mp4, H264), you end up in a 16-235 color space right ? Yes but in between there is a grading step. Its where the extra information might be useful for some people. So the test would be 0-255 --> grading (0-255 rgb space) --> 16-235 delivery vs a 16-235 recording --> grading (0-255 rgb space) --> 16-235 delivery Marco Tecno 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Tecno Posted August 25, 2015 Author Share Posted August 25, 2015 Don, that's exactly what I mean (but you expressed this much better than I did). I'd be interested in seeing a comparison with the same luts applied to both 16-235 and 0-255 (eg the one by Andrew first to flatten the image and then another one to make the final image) to see if there is any difference in the final products. Don Kotlos 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neosushi Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 http://blog.josephmoore.name/2014/10/29/the-three-most-misunderstood-gh4-settings/I found this link very interesting / Sorry if it has already been posted... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Tecno Posted August 25, 2015 Author Share Posted August 25, 2015 Neo, very interesting! But look at the last comment there: "yeah I did some tests to try and figure out once and for all if there was a difference between 0-255 and 16-235 settings in the GH4. I shot a light against a white wall so it blew out in the center and was about 50% grey on the edges. And there was noticeably more banding in the 16-235 setting. Have been shooting 0-255 ever since." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neosushi Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Thats interesting. Hummmm I'm thinking of running some tests myself with the NX1. Marco Tecno 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Tecno Posted August 25, 2015 Author Share Posted August 25, 2015 Please keep us posted!!! Thx! P.s. and if you own andrew's lut please try it as well with both modes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neosushi Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Please keep us posted!!! Thx! P.s. and if you own andrew's lut please try it as well with both modes.Sorry I don't :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zak Forsman Posted August 25, 2015 Share Posted August 25, 2015 Anyone have any insight into how this might affect using an external 4K recorder to capture the 10 bit 422 signal over HDMI? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSet Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Hey fellas - Any updates on this question since Premiere started supporting H265 natively? Is it still better to shoot 16-235 vs 0-255? Marco Tecno 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff CB Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 I've been shooting 16-235. Don't feel like changing the values on every clip when I bring it in to Premiere. Annoying as hell. I've seen very little benefit to doing so, in fact I've seen more banding in 0-255 footage. iamoui 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReinisK Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Since Premiere clips 0-255 mode in shadows and highlights, I also use the 16-235 to be able to edit without adjusting every clip. But there is another reason - it somehow looks like 16-235 mode is getting about half a stop more before highlights blow out. Although I've never tested it on PC, it's clearly visible in camera when you switch from 235 to 255 mode in a just-about-to-clip-highlights scene, in 255 mode the highlights are gone. But one thing I'd like to know - when you don't have a high contrast scene, maybe it would be better to shoot in 0-255 mode for less banding? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Noticed the highlight clipping in 0-255 vs 16-235 as well @ReinisK there is def more DR there...strange. shot with 0-255 recently and regretted it especially when I see the results of 16-235 which were much better @Geoff CB Gonna try 16-255 next because premiere clips 0-255 blacks and when I grade with impulz luts it brings the highlights back into range but the results arent as good as the shadows. 16-255 could be a good balance, will test Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PannySVHS Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 I think this topic has been up on Eoshd right after GH4 hit the market, since it allows to either shoot in 0-255 or 16-235. Can´t go wrong with 0-255 as this video shows. I think Floris pretty much did this video just for the people of Eoshd back then. Pavel MaÅ¡ek 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 5 minutes ago, PannySVHS said: I think this topic has been up on Eoshd right after GH4 hit the market, since it allows to either shoot in 0-255 or 16-235. Can´t go wrong with 0-255 as this video shows. I think Floris pretty much did this video just for the people of Eoshd back then. I Think the luma range system works entire differently for the nx1 than the gh4 although it shouldn't. The luma ranges on the nx1 affects how it camera will compress the image. I just about always encounter weird artifacts and macro-blocking in some of my clips after a day of shooting with 0-255. 16-235 doesn't have these artifacts or they are "hidden" in the deep shadows where as 0-255 seems to be amplifying. My guess is that the picture profiles change how their curve is mapped based on the luma range selected Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Daze Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 I have captured many 0-255 scenes in H.264 and never had clipping in Premiere. It has only happened since using HEVC so I honestly believe that Adobe has made a mistake with this codec and that it does not recognise the correct luminance range. A simple test: take a frame capture in camera, bring the resulting capture in to the Premiere timeline and there is the correct tonal range, bring in the clip and adjustments will need to be made, can't be right. I use the Brightness & Contrast filter on an adjustment layer: Brightness -3, contrast -15, this seems to bring the scene back close to the original point if comparing to a single frame capture, some use Fast Color Corrector and adjust input/output levels but I find that colours still appear to be over saturated. Geoff CB 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 12 hours ago, kidzrevil said: I Think the luma range system works entire differently for the nx1 than the gh4 although it shouldn't. The luma ranges on the nx1 affects how it camera will compress the image. I just about always encounter weird artifacts and macro-blocking in some of my clips after a day of shooting with 0-255. 16-235 doesn't have these artifacts or they are "hidden" in the deep shadows iwhere as 0-255 seems to be amplifying. My guess is that the picture profiles change how their curve is mapped based on the luma range selected I'm not too familiar with the technical details, but I've always gotten much more pleasing images out of 0-255. Perhaps the increased bitrate hack would solve this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavel Mašek Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 Below is comparsion of 16-235 and 0-255 (converted in Premiere to 16-235 according video above) + same images with lifted shadows in Lumetri. Both same exposure, WB, Standard profile, 180Mbit bitrate, ISO 320 I think that converted 0-255 looks better, it has at least more accurate colours (wall is more orange in reality) in shadows, otherwise it looks same in to me (even in video) Don Kotlos 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Tecno Posted April 11, 2016 Author Share Posted April 11, 2016 I'll never understand if it's better 0-255 or 16-235. In the profile that Andrew made for nx1, 16-235 needs to be used. kidzrevil 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamoui Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 I use 16-235 with FCPX and don't have any issues. If I were to shoot 0-255, how would I convert it to 16-235 in FCPX, anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 @Pavel Mašek @Marco Tecno This luma range thing is a big headache man but we gotta get to the bottom of it. Damn thing is critical to the output of the image ?, I was going to try 16-255 and see how that works but I think i'll go for 0-255 with a +15 master pedestal 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.