I went out and shot some footage of the public market today with the new C100. I used the wide Dr profile and just added a slight curve to the picture with a tad of saturation. I'm really not happy with the results, they don't seem half as clear or crisp as many I've seen here. Any ideas what I'm doing wrong? Shot at iso 850 and mostly f9 ish. It seems like there is almost a haze or something to me, hard to explain. Does that profile need a ton of color work to make it stand out? Wondering if I should have used the 709log (i think it's called that )
I have a shoot in the morning, quick advice is very appreciated. All shot handheld with the kit lens. Market - Unstabilized on Vimeo

Sorry but I think that footage looks pretty good. At least on Vimeo. What exactly is the issue you are having? It doesn't look hazy or under saturated to me. Sorry I don't have any great advice.

Fixed the color up a little and stabilized, I'm a bit happier now.
Now, just trying to decide to shoot on 709Log or the WideDR

Public Market - Rochester NY on Vimeo

I'm really not happy with the results, they don't seem half as clear or crisp as many I've seen here. Any ideas what I'm doing wrong?

Judging by the skin levels in some shots, you could probably lower the exposure a little. This would the 'haze' issue, and 'fixing it in post' loses some of your highlight detail. This is just part of 'getting to know a new camera' where you'll soon be able to judge exposure by what you know about the screen rather than what you actually see on the screen. If you see what I mean. :)


Wondering if I should have used the 709log (i think it's called that )
I have a shoot in the morning, quick advice is very appreciated.

Broadly speaking, the 'Wide Dynamic Range' and C-Log Custom Pictures are for difficult lighting conditions containing a broad rage of light levels from very bright to very dark. Using them on an overcast day, or under bland office lighting, creates a very dull picture that needs a lot of work - and because it's 8 bit, heavy grading can lead to a degraded picture quality. So we tend to use a CP with LESS dynamic range under soft lighting. Rec709 and the EOS CP are a bit extreme though - only 5 stops.

OTOH, I have been well served by the Wide DR CP in a range of situations, only switching to C-Log in really difficult lighting. Wide DR seems to be a great 'catch-all' CP if you are prepared to spend a little time tweaking in post.

One thought having checked the first movie - have you turned the Detail way down? Turning down detail is a 'good thing' as cameras don't tend to do it very well - it's far better to do this in post where the sharpening algorithms can take their own sweet time and do it properly... but you have to render it all out.

There is NO SHAME in adding a little Sharpening in post on rushes that have had the detail removed. The pictures need it, especially for corporate work where sharp, colourful pictures are valued.

I've left the standard Wide DR alone, havnen't turned down anything yet. I was thinking I wanted more detail, to provide a sharper image?
And thanks for the tips.

Yup - sharpen in post, not in camera - unless you're on fast turnaround.

By way of an example (from last year):

http://www.mdma.tv/c100vsfs100/Milan-WDR.jpg

A high contrast scene using the default WDR setting, note the level of detail in the dark areas, amount of 'sharpness' or 'detail'.

http://www.mdma.tv/c100vsfs100/Milan-C-log.jpg

The C-Log version is a little alarming in its lack of detail or 'bite' - but so much more detail in the highlights and shadows

http://www.mdma.tv/c100vsfs100/Milan-C-log-graded.jpg

With grading and the ALL IMPORTANT step of adding sharpening, it may appear to be the same tonality as the WDR image, but has a lot more info going on (sky, shadows) and the detail is better. Note that this was for a 720p presentation, not these 1080p images - the key for the sky is a little, erm, hurried! LOL.

Ok, so we should be sharpening the WDR profiles, that's good to know! Thanks

Deffo sharpening on C-Log, check your WDR settings - look under detail. By default, I think it's set to '0' which means there's 'some' sharpening. None at -10. I'd better dive into the camera and check later, as I am currently on 'Dad Duties' ;)

Ok, so after our first studio shot last night using the C100, I would have to say that I'm very pleased with the results. The camera is very easy to setup and use. I had tossed around the ideas of 24p and 30f for the shoot, I ended up with 30f, and I think the results are very nice. I used the 709Log as I didn't really want to have to color in post.
That being said, coloring in post was definitely needed, as raw ouf of the camera was just so blah looking, as you can see from the attached video.
I will probably stay with the 709Log profile, and just color around that in the future, and the next film I shoot will probably be in 24p, just so I can get a comparison. I don't feel like 30f made it look too "video-ish" at all.
For those who would like to see the comparison, the video shows both ungraded and graded footage with the settings used, and a side by side.
Coloring was done in Vegas ( Magic Bullet Looks )
Canon C100 - Coloring Test - 709Log Picture Profile on Vimeo