DV Info Net - Picture Profile Recipes

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)

- Sony XDCAM EX Pro Handhelds (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/)

- - Picture Profile Recipes (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-xdcam-ex-pro-handhelds/110902-picture-profile-recipes.html)

Thanks Bill for the update. I have shot with the new 0 Gamma setting and like Cine 1 the best for my bright outside shooting. I guess that must have to do with the Cine 1 compression starting at the higher 80%.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Ravens (Post 819378)

Already done that...here
pp1: Steve Thomas' PP
pp2: original TC1
pp3: TC2 Cine1
pp4: TC2 Cine3
pp5: TC2 Cine4
pp6:TC2

Bill, thanks a lot for posting your work on the PP's. I just loaded you SUF file and I'll pretty much just be using TC2 (cine 1,3,4) for all my shooting. It sure makes it a lot easier not having to correct as much in post. Thanks!

The result of all these profiles will depend on exposure levels. Surly the recipes give here are somewhat lacking if a zebra level isn't associated with them? No?

mhstevens..

read the premises upon which the TrueColor profiles are based

Bill: Will you direct me to what I should read. My search on TrueColor didn't get me anywhere that helped.

Post #64 of this thread(page 5).
In particular, step #4

Bill: I know you did this - that's not my point. What I was saying is that if Jo sets his zebras at 100% with your settings and Jill sets here zebra at 85 and they both expose until zebras are just gone a profile (not your profile that is set to 100IRE, but any profile where IRE may be something else unmeasured)will give different results. To standardize to true comparisons when a profile is posted then the zebra setting used with it should be quoted.

100 IRE is 100 IRE. It matters not how one arrives at it. Zebra set to 100% will show you when you get there. If you set zebra to 85, all bets are off. The caveat to what I posted is that one needs to be able to find 100 IRE in the scene. I will leave it up to you how to do that. If there are no "hotspots", then discretion prevails. TC2 was designed to maximize latitude and give fairly faithful color reproduction. The two are not mutually exclusive. If one seeks perfect exposure(whatever that is) then one can make appropriate compensation to the gamma curves to put middle gray wherever they wish. That's the point of applying the color matrix settings to other Cine presets.

This isn't rocket science, but, it is science. In any creative endeavor, science yields to creative intuition.

I really dislike measurebating. It is what it is.

Bill: It still seems you still think I am talking about your profile. I know you set top white to 100IRE. I'm talking about other profiles that other people post without quoting if they have set IRE or zebras any special way. Not everyone sets the hottest spot at 100IRE. If I post a profile that works well with my top white set at 90IRE I need tell you that. That's my only point.

I have been out this afternoon testing profiles. The best two I have found is Bill Ravens' revised profile and the Doug Jensen one. However, I don't understand why Phil Bloom thinks Bill's profile is close to natural/unprocessed and hence being ideal for working on in post. To me it looks good but highly saturated with crushed blacks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Ravens (Post 814739)

Here's my results:
Matrix---------------------on
Select---------------------hisat
Level...............................0
Phase..............................+6
R-G................................+75
R-B................................0
G-R................................-18
G-B................................-23
B-R................................-33
B-G................................+11

Color Correction..............off
White.............................off
Detail.............................on
Detail Level.....................0
Detail Freq......................0
Skintone.........................off

Knee..............................on
Auto knee......................on
Point.............................90
Slope............................0
Knee SAT level...............50

Gamma Level.................0
Select...........................STD3
Black............................-15
Black gamma.................-9
Low key sat..................0

It would be great to have someone validate my results. I'll redo more fine tuning as I go on. For the time being, my latitude is increased above the factory settings, my saturation is more lifelike. The histogram now displays a range from near 0 to 100%. Peaks are well distributed over the range without favoring lows or hi's.

I'd be glad to post some frame grabs if a server was available.

Time to go test in the real world.
I hope this helps out.

Well Bill, I created a PP with your above settings and did some test shootings, but am very disappointed with the result. Yes, the histogram now tends to evenly cover tha whole spectrum, but there is an ugly halo over the thin tree branches against the sky (which was just at the edge of 100% zebra appearing) - see attached grab. Also, there's too much blue in it (I was using some 5200K and auto-iris).

Now, could it be that with STD3, one should really alter the knee point, and/or saturation - slope? Or is something else at fault here that over-saturates of the near-clipping lights? The grab on the right shows more or less the same scene, but manually made a stop darker - the sky becomes more natural.

Can somebody recreate this, or is it just my camera? I'd appreciate somebody re-assuring me it's not my camera at falut, the STD3 being the widest but also the most standard setting!

PS: What's even worse is that at shooting time, nothing wrong was visible in the LCD... Just light blue sky, with small patches of zebra here and there.

Yoyr problem is the STD3. i don't know how you got that quaote but Bill profiles were using Cine. I used Cine4 with Bill's settings and it was very good. Try that.

True...
I believe this is the latest from Bill.
Note. You may want to make 3 seperate profiles
using the three different CINE curves. (CINE1, CINE3, & CINE4).
This way you can choose the most appropricate one based on lighting conditions.

Matrix ...............on
Select................hisat
Level..................0
Phase.................-5
R-G...................75
R-B...................0
G-R...................-18
G-B...................-32
B-R...................-27
B-G...................13

Gamma Level.............. 0 (changed from -40)
Gamma Select.............(CINE1, CINE3, or CINE4)
Black..........................-12
Black Gamma..............0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael H. Stevens (Post 819937)

Yoyr problem is the STD3. i don't know how you got that quaote but Bill profiles were using Cine. I used Cine4 with Bill's settings and it was very good. Try that.

Guys, I know it's the STD3 gamma that is causing it - I just wanted to check Bill's TrueColor settings using the default gamma curve, so I've used it on purpose. This is basically the default factory setting, with slightly modified Highsat matrix.

And this is why it worries me so much - instead of even better flat colour reproduction, I arrived at those ugly highlights...

Again, does the same happen to your cameras with the settings above AND the STD3 gamma curve?

YES. All the STD gammas are bright and contrasty and generic looking. No need to ever use them.