Serious banding in blue skies with D-Log profile

[Mindflights]

After the previous firmware update in March, that supposed to be an upgrade to Log color profile for the P4P, I used that profile for the first time - Log profile with 500 locked ISO - with the appropriate ND filters for proper exposure and I noticed big amount of banding at the Blue Skies that made the footage almost unusable without heavy editing and deband techniques. I never noticed such a banding when I was filming in Cinelike profile at the past. I used the polar pro shutter line nd filters. Do anyone of you notice the same problem?

 

[ryantrax]

Did you notice a change when going back to Cinelike? Or did you not notice it until you opened the files on the computer?

 

[davemex]

I'm curious about this too. Just took the P4P out for the first time yesterday, shot in d-log h.265 4K@30FPs, Polar Pro 16 stop ND filter, -1 sharpness and everything else zero, converted to DNxHR to color grade in Resolve. The final product had serious banding in both the blue sky and on other solid color surfaces, like the river. Very disappointed with that. To me, that was one of the biggest reasons to upgrade!

Would love to hear what other people are doing to get around this.

 

[SkyGarage]

I'm curious about this too. Just took the P4P out for the first time yesterday, shot in d-log h.265 4K@30FPs, Polar Pro 16 stop ND filter, -1 sharpness and everything else zero, converted to DNxHR to color grade in Resolve. The final product had serious banding in both the blue sky and on other solid color surfaces, like the river. Very disappointed with that. To me, that was one of the biggest reasons to upgrade!

Would love to hear what other people are doing to get around this.

Use D-Cinelike, 8bit is not enough for LOG without banding...

 

[Mindflights]

Did you notice a change when going back to Cinelike? Or did you not notice it until you opened the files on the computer?

I did not have the chance to film in Cinelike after the incident, I was filming in h265 D-Log and transformed it in apple Prores 422hq, but in many shorts that I filmed at the past using Cinelike I did not have problems like that. Those two, I made them using Cinelike profile with no noticeable banding in blues.
NorthStar
Δ (Delta)

 

[Mindflights]

I'm curious about this too. Just took the P4P out for the first time yesterday, shot in d-log h.265 4K@30FPs, Polar Pro 16 stop ND filter, -1 sharpness and everything else zero, converted to DNxHR to color grade in Resolve. The final product had serious banding in both the blue sky and on other solid color surfaces, like the river. Very disappointed with that. To me, that was one of the biggest reasons to upgrade!

Would love to hear what other people are doing to get around this.

Exactly the same configuration and problems

 

[nickj]

As others have said, stay away from D-Log, and while shooting in D-Cinelike try -1/-3/-2 for your settings - think of it as a less-aggressive "log" profile. Has worked well for me in many instances.

 

[davemex]

Use D-Cinelike, 8bit is not enough for LOG without banding...

So... even after the update the consensus is that Cinelike with reduced contrast and saturation is still the best way to go for the best results with post-production? The original thread I went through was preaching d-log and -1/0/0 or "none" for the best post-prod results.

 

[nickj]

So... even after the update the consensus is that Cinelike with reduced contrast and saturation is still the best way to go for the best results with post-production? The original thread I went through was preaching d-log and -1/0/0 or "none" for the best post-prod results.

For video and jpegs, yes D-Cinelike (-1/-3/-2) is just about the best setting for post-production. BUT, for raw stills you'll want to shoot None 0/0/0 because that's going to represent your starting image when you bring it into photoshop, lightroom or whatever you use.

 

[Liveddica]

For video and jpegs, yes D-Cinelike (-1/-3/-2) is just about the best setting for post-production. BUT, for raw stills you'll want to shoot None 0/0/0 because that's going to represent your starting image when you bring it into photoshop, lightroom or whatever you use.

I was under the impression that when you shoot RAW stills, the different styles that you choose do not affect the RAW file, only if you shoot in JPEG....and the RAW file is always "flat" looking out of camera, no matter which Style you choose.....I know that's exactly how DSLRs work, but like I said that's what I've heard about the P4 and P4P cameras as well.......Please let me know if I'm wrong.

 

[nickj]

I was under the impression that when you shoot RAW stills, the different styles that you choose do not affect the RAW file, only if you shoot in JPEG....and the RAW file is always "flat" looking out of camera, no matter which Style you choose.....I know that's exactly how DSLRs work, but like I said that's what I've heard about the P4 and P4P cameras as well.......Please let me know if I'm wrong.

The reason it's recommended to view in "None 0/0/0" to shoot RAW with the P4P is because it is essentially turning off any "look" or picture style, so you're previewing the unprocessed image that will be shown in your photo-processing software of choice. Unfortunately the embedded profile in RAW stills from the P4P do not display with a "flat" look, they start out very contrasty and need to be flattened by the user (i.e. reduce contrast etc.). There have been other discussions on the forum about this, it's disappointing but not a deal-breaker ultimately - just protect those highlights!

 

[Liveddica]

The reason it's recommended to view in "None 0/0/0" to shoot RAW with the P4P is because it is essentially turning off any "look" or picture style, so you're previewing the unprocessed image that will be shown in your photo-processing software of choice. Unfortunately the embedded profile in RAW stills from the P4P do not display with a "flat" look, they start out very contrasty and need to be flattened by the user (i.e. reduce contrast etc.). There have been other discussions on the forum about this, it's disappointing but not a deal-breaker ultimately - just protect those highlights!

So basically what you're saying is that you change the Style setting when shooting RAW stills, JUST so you can SEE what you're getting?....makes sense that you would need an actual representation of the RAW....But what I'm saying is that a RAW file should NOT be affected by the Style settings in the app no matter which one you choose (D-log, DCinelike, Art, None .... ect). So you can choose None or Art or whatever while shooting RAW, when you pull that RAW into Capture One Pro or Lightroom/Photoshop, its going to look like a RAW file, not a "Styled" file...We might not be on the same wavelength here lol...I'll take a series of RAW files with different Styles and see if they all look different when i pull them in. If I'm thinking correctly all the RAWs should look the same, flat or as close to flat as DJI specs are.

 

[nickj]

So basically what you're saying is that you change the Style setting when shooting RAW stills, JUST so you can SEE what you're getting?....makes sense that you would need an actual representation of the RAW....But what I'm saying is that a RAW file should NOT be affected by the Style settings in the app no matter which one you choose (D-log, DCinelike, Art, None .... ect). So you can choose None or Art or whatever while shooting RAW, when you pull that RAW into Capture One Pro or Lightroom/Photoshop, its going to look like a RAW file, not a "Styled" file...We might not be on the same wavelength here lol...I'll take a series of RAW files with different Styles and see if they all look different when i pull them in. If I'm thinking correctly all the RAWs should look the same, flat or as close to flat as DJI specs are.

Yes, that is what I'm saying, but to make it more clear think of "None" as literally no style applied to the preview image so you can see a direct-from-the-sensor representation (again 0/0/0).

Even though None is in the "Style" menu, it is essentially the "turn off styles" option rather than a style all its own, hence the name "None". You will find that your unadjusted RAW image in post will look like the None 0/0/0 preview image you saw on your monitor while photographing.

 

[Liveddica]

Yes, that is what I'm saying, but to make it more clear think of "None" as literally no style applied to the preview image so you can see a direct-from-the-sensor representation (again 0/0/0).

Even though None is in the "Style" menu, it is essentially the "turn off styles" option rather than a style all its own, hence the name "None".

Awesome!...I guess the reason I started this discussion is due to the fact that I shoot in RAW and don't pay particular attention to the color or style of the preview from the back of my camera because I know that will all change when I manipulate it later. Instead I look at the histogram and the general exposure, and of course color temp on the preview window...I leave the color or lack of decision making once I have the RAW in Photoshop for example. But I will try the None style out then......Thanks Nick

 

[tml4191]

Great info in this thread^ Thanks for sharing all the insights^
Besides the alternate view with the new dlog profile, I'm not a fan of the upgrade. Can anyone actually recommend a scenario for the new iso 500 locked dlog profile? The Cinelike profile is more favorable in my opinion...

 

[Mindflights]

I made some comparison tests today, in 4K, H.264 vs H.265 with D-Cinelike and H.264 vs H.265 with D-Log. I just found that h.265 with D-Log produce serious banding. h.264 with D-Log has less banding problems than h.265!
I will upload and share the tests.

 

[Raptorman0909]

After the previous firmware update in March, that supposed to be an upgrade to Log color profile for the P4P, I used that profile for the first time - Log profile with 500 locked ISO - with the appropriate ND filters for proper exposure and I noticed big amount of banding at the Blue Skies that made the footage almost unusable without heavy editing and deband techniques. I never noticed such a banding when I was filming in Cinelike profile at the past. I used the polar pro shutter line nd filters. Do anyone of you notice the same problem?

Yes, sadly D-log seems to make banding issues, always a problem with an 8-bit camera, worse. See this video I shot in January using D-log.

My opinion is that using a heavily compressed log profile with an 8-bit camera is asking for trouble given that you have too few levels to record and if most of them are allocated to mid tones then you will tend to lose at the highlights and shadow. In addition, DJI is all over the place with D-log and since the P4P was released they (DJI) have mucked up the D-log profile, making significant changes, about 4 or 5 times. If they had a handle on it they would not be changing things so dramatically so often.


Brian

 

[Mindflights]

Yes, sadly D-log seems to make banding issues, always a problem with an 8-bit camera, worse. See this video I shot in January using D-log.

My opinion is that using a heavily compressed log profile with an 8-bit camera is asking for trouble given that you have too few levels to record and if most of them are allocated to mid tones then you will tend to lose at the highlights and shadow. In addition, DJI is all over the place with D-log and since the P4P was released they (DJI) have mucked up the D-log profile, making significant changes, about 4 or 5 times. If they had a handle on it they would not be changing things so dramatically so often.


Brian

Was the video that testing D-Log made with h. 265 or h. 264?

 

[Raptorman0909]

Was the video that testing D-Log made with h. 265 or h. 264?

I included details in the video comments section as follows:

Shoot details: SS 1/1280, f/5, ISO100, H.265, D-Log and a custom setting of -1/0/-1 as well as D-Cinelike.


Brian

 

[Mindflights]

I included details in the video comments section as follows:

Shoot details: SS 1/1280, f/5, ISO100, H.265, D-Log and a custom setting of -1/0/-1 as well as D-Cinelike.


Brian

I think the problem is H.265 with D-Log. Watch my newest video about it, h.264 vs h.265 with D-Log
latest firmware April 2017, ISO 500 (locked) ND 8 Polar pro, SS 1/60, 4K/30FPS, Style -1,-1,-2