Which Picture Profile to use in T2i?

[Taky Cheung]

In general, I do not like to color grade in post. I'm not good at it, and also there're so much footage to do. So I prefer to have clips straight out of the camera and ready to go.

I like the Standard Profile but it gets too orangy indoor. What would you recommend?

[Perrone Ford]

I recommend you learn to do post color better. Or purchase a camera more suited to your needs. These cameras are operating on the ragged edge to give us HD video with the sensors and processors they have. Not to mention the weak codec.

Asking them to deliver finished color from the camera is asking a bit too much in my opinion.

[Taky Cheung]

I know how to color correct in post. I am not good at it and just in general don't like to do that. There're so much footage from a full day wedding. My plan was to stick to Standard outdoor, then switch to Neutral when shooting indoor. or use Neutral all the way. Maybe I should try Faithful. =)

[Perrone Ford]

I like neutral, but I feel it needs to be graded. I've only tried faithful once. I have a custom profile, but I grade everything. Maybe faithful is th answer.

[Robert Turchick]

To answer you initial question, on my T2i, I use neutral or Mr. Bloom's flat settings which can be found somewhere on this forum. (been a while since I set it up so I cant remember them all) I use flat when I have to match up to my HMC150 and neutral when the T2i is the only camera. Make sure you change your white balance settings too. I generally stick to the defaults (sunny, shade, tungsten, etc) and that helps a great deal along with the profiles.

Now...on to seconding Perrone's advice....I don't think there's a project I've done that hasn't required some sort of grading. I don't like doing it but it's part of the game. I even have a few editors I work with who come to me for grading and it shows they care about the finished product.

One of the first projects I did served as a crash course in grading. (a documentary where about half the final piece was from 1970's and 80's 8mm film shot by the subject's father. I did the telecine as well) Pain in the arse but absolutely required as the footage ranged from stunningly good to absolute crap.

For video to really look polished, it's a necessary evil. Even when the footage may seem great. Put up your scopes and learn how to read them. You will find that small tweaks can make a difference. And that's just when setting up proper levels.

When done at the highest levels, it's a specific job title with an expert. It becomes an art form when you learn to use it to tweak the mood in a piece.

Reality is there's too many variables to keep track of in the heat of a shoot for any camera to deliver perfect images every time. Especially when there's a lot of footage involved. And since we're talking about DSLR's which are about as manual as it gets, there isn't going to be a magic bullet that works for every situation. (sorry Red Giant! ha ha!)

I just finished a 60 min documentary with 28 interviews. It was all shot on the same camera with the same lights but in 3 different settings. Took a while to go through but the end result was worth the effort.

Not saying you have to become an expert colorist but learn the techniques and the more you do it, the better your finished projects will look.

A lot of us on the forum are independent guys. It requires us to wear a lot of different hats. Not all of them are glamorous or fun but to keep upping your game and getting repeat and word of mouth clients, you have to at least be competent in all areas of production or know someone who is so you can sub out that portion.

I won't go into it here but I feel the same about audio post (which I started doing over 20 years ago) Lots of video guys neglect the nitty-gritty details involved and to me it sticks out when done carelessly, and you never notice it when done right.

[Chris Barcellos]

I use the super flat that was posted months back, and will grade from there. As far as orange color, that sounds like you need to set your white balance with the light you are shooting in... Tough in mixed light situation, but if you don't like the orange on the LCD, check out changing to one of the other lighting choices.

[Martyn Hull]

Neutral with all the other settings to my personal taste,sorry but i just dont see the point of being completely happy with the color but still feal it has to be corrected or altered.If something goes wrong with the film thats another story but i only film for fun.

[Aaron Courtney]

I use neutral as well. One thing that doesn't come up very often in these forums is that if you are using Cineform, you're going to lose about 1/3 to 1/2 a stop (to my eyes) when it gets transcoded to YUV 4:2:2. Additionally, the encoder introduces some weird "airiness" that requires grading in order to restore richness to the image.

[Dave Dodds]

I downloaded a couple of the custom picture styles that are out there. A couple I really like are the Fuji Reala and the Kodachrome.

It seems a bit ridiculous how much more people are getting comfortable with doing everything in post. I am and always have been of the mindset that you should really do your all to get your negative (or whatever) as close as humanly possible to your intended result. I guess it comes from many people not knowing what they want as the end result, but that still doesn't mean we should preach that way of working to everyone else. If you care to put some effort into it, you can get solid images in-camera.

Maybe I'm in a different position than a lot of you guys. I'm not wearing different hats. I'm brought on to shoot and light. I'll occasionally consult with the producer or director on other things but I'm the cameraman. I guess because of that, I wouldn't feel comfortable handing off something that isn't spot on and ready to go to the producer or editor.

That said, I'm shooting a doc right now where the DSLR is a second cam to an EX1 a-camera, which is naturally quite flat. I'm lighting and filtering for the A-camera, so I do set the DSLR to a more flat style to match it my starting point with the EX1.

But anyway, Taky, the Reala is a damn-fine picture style to shoot with. Google it.

~~Dave

[Perrone Ford]

Dave, while I appreciate what you're saying here, it ignores a fundamental issue with the DSLR cameras wonderful as they may be.

And that problem is that they have poor color structure, and poor dynamic range. On set, this often manifests itself in poor skin tones, bleeding bokeh, and other issues. Leaving some of this to post allows a measure of control simply not possible in the camera. These problems are exacerbated by the fact that the monitoring from these cameras is exceptionally poor. And few have calibrated playback monitors on set.

So to me, it makes a LOT of sense to leave set with an image that holds up technically, even if it may be off the mark artistically, and the fine tuning left to post.

The digital paradigm (especially the RAW workflow) is vastly different than shooting tape. These cameras cannot capture 14 stops onto their cards, but we can stretch what they DO capture in post very nicely if we leave the set with a solid technical image.

I've got the Reala and Kodachrome styles loaded onto my camera, but have yet to want them for anything. I might play with them this weekend for some stills I am shooting, but I'll also be shooting RAW. Shooting video with those styles leaves you NOWHERE to go in post. If the director or producer suddenly change their mind in post, you're up a tree. In film, you could move things around quite a bit because you've got 14bit scans of the negative. With the DSLR, you've got 8 stops max, and 8bit color.

To each their own, but having done it both ways, I'll continue to shoot somewhat flat in the camera. I shoot my EX1 the same way, and I shot the DVX100 the same way before that.

Originally Posted by Dave Dodds

I downloaded a couple of the custom picture styles that are out there. A couple I really like are the Fuji Reala and the Kodachrome.

It seems a bit ridiculous how much more people are getting comfortable with doing everything in post. I am and always have been of the mindset that you should really do your all to get your negative (or whatever) as close as humanly possible to your intended result. I guess it comes from many people not knowing what they want as the end result, but that still doesn't mean we should preach that way of working to everyone else. If you care to put some effort into it, you can get solid images in-camera.

Maybe I'm in a different position than a lot of you guys. I'm not wearing different hats. I'm brought on to shoot and light. I'll occasionally consult with the producer or director on other things but I'm the cameraman. I guess because of that, I wouldn't feel comfortable handing off something that isn't spot on and ready to go to the producer or editor.

That said, I'm shooting a doc right now where the DSLR is a second cam to an EX1 a-camera, which is naturally quite flat. I'm lighting and filtering for the A-camera, so I do set the DSLR to a more flat style to match it my starting point with the EX1.

But anyway, Taky, the Reala is a damn-fine picture style to shoot with. Google it.

~~Dave

[Michael Carter]

I'd be concerned if I had to grade every last shot to be happy with it - especially with daylight scenes with good on-set light levels (or outdoors), white balance seems to be my biggest concern.

I did a TV spot for a lakeside community out in the country; the only grading I did was to blue up any green water in shots where it wasn't reflecting the blue sky (so technically, this was more of an "effect" in a sense, changing the reality of the scene). I darkened a sky or two (at the time I only had a soft grad ND, which on a small-sensor camera does very little).

On my last Tungsten shoot, which was pretty moody and dark, I was really pleased with what I was getting on the LCD, and in post I may have just opened up a highlight or two.

I just use a custom setting where everything is dialed down - Sharpness 0, Contrast 1, Saturation 3, and I leave color tone alone.

Are the "film" profiles just based on these four sliders, or has someone hacked into things a little deeper? I'll have to look into that.

[Taky Cheung]

I'm with Dave and Michael, I prefer to have video done right to begin with. If I'm making a short then I can color grade the footage.. but with a 14 hrs wedding, that's just too much to do. Yesterday I finished a wedding using Neutral all day. The output looks great! Also don't noticed the reddish tone in dark ballroom in reception.

[Perrone Ford]

Originally Posted by Taky Cheung

I'm with Dave and Michael, I prefer to have video done right to begin with. If I'm making a short then I can color grade the footage.. but with a 14 hrs wedding, that's just too much to do. Yesterday I finished a wedding using Neutral all day. The output looks great! Also don't noticed the reddish tone in dark ballroom in reception.

Have you looked at the picture styles Dave was recommending?? My settings are very near to neutral anyway and that's just fine. The picture styles he's talking about are so far from neutral, it's not even funny. They leave you NOWHERE to go in post.

If I was doing fast turnaround weddings, I wouldn't want to grade them either. So find something that works for you and stay with it. I have a few different ones loaded on both the EX1 and the T2i. If I am in control of the light, I can select one with a bit more dynamic range and color. If I am at the mercy of the sun, or other light sources I can't control, then I dial it back and make sure I get all the light in the camera I can get.

In the end, we all have to choose what works best for us.