Color mode & Dynamic Range

[2nd2non]

Thanks for the tip man. I'll check it out.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

Before you go to PP, check out davinci resolve. It's free and a very good editor with best in class color grading tools. You'll be able to migrate from vegas fairly easily after watching a few YouTube tutorials as I did and won't look back unless you think you want to use some of the specialty tools After effects offers. But then again, you can always buy that separately and use it with resolve.
I use it for my I1-Raw and it ingests the cinema DNG files with ease using optimized media for editing on a moderate windows PC with GPU.
PM me if you want suggestions on some recommended resolve YouTube tutorials.

 

[Tomas Wangen]

Before you go to PP, check out davinci resolve. It's free and a very good editor with best in class color grading tools. You'll be able to migrate from vegas fairly easily after watching a few YouTube tutorials as I did and won't look back unless you think you want to use some of the specialty tools After effects offers. But then again, you can always buy that separately and use it with resolve.
I use it for my I1-Raw and it ingests the cinema DNG files with ease using optimized media for editing on a moderate windows PC with GPU.
PM me if you want suggestions on some recommended resolve YouTube tutorials.

+1 for Davinci Resolve. You get a rather incredible (given the price) editing suite for free, and the color correction/toning part is probably the best out there.

Worth noting is that the free version excludes import of h265 (at least for Windows) so transcoding to prores is a mandatory part of the workflow. h264 is supported, but generating proxies (optimized media in prores lingo) is advised for normal setups (as 1080 / latest i7 @ 4ghz is not enough for native 100mbit 4k h264).

Also, export resolution is limited to maximum 4k (which is really not a problem for most of us).

 

[F3honda4me]

Yea if not for the lack of h265 I would have considered davinci. Also I think at the time the free version would not render 4k.

 

[Tomas Wangen]

Yea if not for the lack of h265 I would have considered davinci. Also I think at the time the free version would not render 4k.

I have script-automated my transcoding, so that does not add much hassle (for me). Besides, with prores sources you no longer need the proxies, so time required is close. (disk required is ofcourse higher)

 

[Wrice4]

Well everytime I use Premiere Pro CC 2017 trial, my pc freezes when trying to edit the video, even when trying to create proxies... I have a decent, custom built, gaming pc, and never ran into this problem using sony Vegas pro 13. Might have to go back to that, even though I am enjoying PP so far. Maybe it's the 4k 60fps that is just beating up my pc. The free trial of Premiere Pro will not open a H.265 file. Neither will Sony Vegas Pro 13 either.... Looks like I am out of luck with half the videos I shot today.

However, I did focus on infinity like I was told and it seems to work great, shooting in none with 0,0,0.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

 

[F3honda4me]

Correct free trial of PP will not handle h265. Paid does. I went through that myself.

 

[Wrice4]

Correct free trial of PP will not handle h265. Paid does. I went through that myself.

Thanks. I don't want to derail this thread so I'll pm you if that's okay.

 

[Wrice4]

Using Premiere Pro 2017 now. With recording on None at 0,0,0 if you add any sharpening, at all in post, then it's over sharpened. Are you guys not using any post sharpening or are you adjusting the sharpening on the p4p?

 

[Raptorman0909]

Using Premiere Pro 2017 now. With recording on None at 0,0,0 if you add any sharpening, at all in post, then it's over sharpened. Are you guys not using any post sharpening or are you adjusting the sharpening on the p4p?

I reduce sharpening in camera with either -1 or a -2 and then I use about 30 in PP 2017. Seems to work about the way I want it to.


Brian

 

[Dronefriend]

I shot with -2/0/0 the other day and I was actually quite content with it straight from the camera. The "action camera look" was definitely not there.

 

[F3honda4me]

Using Premiere Pro 2017 now. With recording on None at 0,0,0 if you add any sharpening, at all in post, then it's over sharpened. Are you guys not using any post sharpening or are you adjusting the sharpening on the p4p?

I use -1,0,0 none.

 

[Wrice4]

Thanks for the tip. I assume that post sharpness is always better than in camera sharpness?

 

[Raptorman0909]

Thanks for the tip. I assume that post sharpness is always better than in camera sharpness?

Sharpening in camera gets you nothing you can't do in post but it does provide the compression system more "detail" to work with so it has to compress more. Why waste data stream bandwidth on compressing synthetic detail that you can add later without wasting compression bandwidth.


Brian

 

[lalvar40]

Sharpening in camera gets you nothing you can't do in post but it does provide the compression system more "detail" to work with so it has to compress more. Why waste data stream bandwidth on compressing synthetic detail that you can add later without wasting compression bandwidth.Brian

So you mean to use -1 0 0 or -2 0 0? and then add sharpness if need it at desktop? what about mode? none?

 

[Wrice4]

So you mean to use -1 0 0 or -2 0 0? and then add sharpness if need it at desktop? what about mode? none?

From what I have gathered, from this thread, people are choosing between none and D-Cinelike.

 

[Tomas Wangen]

From what I have gathered, from this thread, people are choosing between none and D-Cinelike.

Both are valid choices. Dcinelike might have a slight edge for shadows.

 

[Roamer105]

Sharpening in camera gets you nothing you can't do in post but it does provide the compression system more "detail" to work with so it has to compress more. Why waste data stream bandwidth on compressing synthetic detail that you can add later without wasting compression bandwidth.


Brian

Careful with softening the recorded footage too much. The encoder just gets lazy and one can not recover detail in post production that simply is not there. However it is very easy to filter and soften in post production. In my experience the latter produces much better results. I take my footage at 0 or -1.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots

 

[Tomas Wangen]

Careful with softening the recorded footage too much. The encoder just gets lazy and one can not recover detail in post production that simply is not there. However it is very easy to filter and soften in post production. In my experience the latter produces much better results. I take my footage at 0 or -1.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots

I find -1 is a good compromise as I have seen compression problems with 0.

 

[Raptorman0909]

Careful with softening the recorded footage too much. The encoder just gets lazy and one can not recover detail in post production that simply is not there. However it is very easy to filter and soften in post production. In my experience the latter produces much better results. I take my footage at 0 or -1.


Sent from my iPad using PhantomPilots

This video was shot using D-Cinelike and -1/0/-1 and then in PP I used 30 for sharpening and about 115 for saturation.

I think the results are about as good as I could expect.

Also, sharpening in camera can't be fully undone in post and that's one of the main reasons you don't push the sharpening in camera. Sharpening basically increases local contrast at the edges and doing that in camera adds synthetic detail the compressor has to handle leaving less bitrate for actual detail. The one thing I feel fairly certain of is that DJI doesn't handle DR compression well so that's why I use a mild profile like D-Cinelike and I don't further tweak things with a minus 1 or 2 for contrast. So, running with a minus 1 or 2 for sharpening and saturation appears to be good and you don't need to add a lot of sharpening or saturation in post and that indicates to me that the values of minus 1 or 2 are about right.


Brian

 

[Roamer105]

Using PP, aside from pushing back the saturation and a little sharpness, did you have to push highlights/whites and blacks a lot using D-Cinelike?