HV20: Cinemode Softness (loss of image detail) Pic

Ian G. Thompson · August 10th, 2007, 08:00 PM

Thanks Cal

Calvin Tan · August 10th, 2007, 09:05 PM

UPDATED:

Please shoot cinemode with custom setting contrast +1 and there will not be any loss in detail but still less contrasty then TV mode.
If u shoot cinemode with custom setting and contrast 0 there is definitely a loss of detail.

Eugenia Loli-Queru · August 10th, 2007, 10:10 PM

This is my last post on the matter. As I am writing this, I am sitting in front of my HDTV and watching "Syriana" in HD. This movie in particular reminds me a lot of Cinemode's look. It has no real details, it's extremely bad on dark conditions but not too bad on highlights. Personally, I don't like that look. Not pleasing. Comparing Syriana to some new digitally-shot movies, it feels like it's 1991 all over again. I guess, one could shoot for that look on purpose though.

Joseph H. Moore · August 10th, 2007, 10:34 PM

Is there an increase of detail by increasing the contrast setting?

http://www.12south.com/video/hv20/mo...e_contrast.mov

Glenn Thomas · August 11th, 2007, 09:06 AM

Personally, I love the look of cinemode. The colours, the extra detail you get from the increased dynamic range. As Eki has proven in some of his tests here, cinemode clips can be fixed in post. Shooting in AE, TV or Auto modes, you can't fix what's not there afterwards. For example if you've got a shot where there are clouds in the sky that are blown out, there is no way you'll be able to restore that detail. Likewise if you under expose to compensate, you'll end up losing detail in the dark areas. That's why cinemode is important to me.

In regards to the extra sharpness, remember you're all comparing still images here. The HV20 is primarally a video camera, not a still camera. Played back as video is that so called extra detail or sharpness really going to be that visible? I know if I was watching a movie, I would much rather see something like this http://osnews.com/img/vegas/2.png where the reflection in the window up in the top right corner is actually visible. As opposed to this http://osnews.com/img/vegas/1.png where there is hardly any reflection in the window at all. It's mostly just white. To me that's more of a consumer video look that I would rather avoid.

The only time I'll ever use TV mode is if I shoot something where I'll need a higher shutter speed, like for a slow motion style clip where each field will become an individual frame. The rest of the time the camera just remains set to cinemode.

Ian G. Thompson · August 11th, 2007, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eugenia Loli-Queru

This is my last post on the matter. As I am writing this, I am sitting in front of my HDTV and watching "Syriana" in HD. This movie in particular reminds me a lot of Cinemode's look. It has no real details, it's extremely bad on dark conditions but not too bad on highlights. Personally, I don't like that look. Not pleasing. Comparing Syriana to some new digitally-shot movies, it feels like it's 1991 all over again. I guess, one could shoot for that look on purpose though.

Ha... that's what happens when you become more and more of a video techie...you start to have that critical eye of everything you watch. It's happened to me also...I can't just go to the movies anymore and watch a feature film without being critical on how it was filmed...I find myself saying.."look at all that grain"..."that scene is way too dark"..."what was the director thinking" "ohh...blown out highlights" etc....etc...

Thank God for my wife though...she brings me back down to earth with a big ol' "Shut Up Ian!!!" which leaves me with a pre-programmed response.."Yes Dear."...sadly...she's trained me well....

Eki Halkka · August 12th, 2007, 06:49 AM

Of all HV20's modes, cine mode is the closest to RED output.

http://www.red.com/gallery-still.shtml

If you look at the stills at full resolution, you will see that the sharpness characteristic is very close to that of HV20 cine mode. There's just four times more pixels to play with.

Salah Baker · August 12th, 2007, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph H. Moore

Salah,
Sent what to Stu? If you've got images, share!

CineForm captured at FS1 from intensity pro
F1.8 1/48 no ois

http://www.salatar.com/hv20chart/hdmi24pcf.psd
has 2 layers one Cine other tv.

Joseph H. Moore · August 12th, 2007, 05:39 PM

Salah,
Many thanks for that!

The high contrast detail seems to be there pretty nicely in CINE, and has a tad bit more ringing in Tv.

Unfortunately, a bit difficult to judge what's happening with low contrast detail, though, since that bit of chart doesn't really have any.

Any chance of doing the same thing with an image that has subtle texture? Cloth, wood, etc.? Or maybe with the whole chart I used? I'd love to see the 4:2:2 HDMI rendition of the pure RED and GREEN circles.

Robert Ducon · August 13th, 2007, 02:32 AM

Salah, yes thank you. That chart helps.. it doesn't show any drawbacks of CINE to me. Gives me more faith in CINE actually - the PSD histogram proves there is more latitude, which will help with post (as we've always believed).

I agree with Joseph, we need something with *very* subtle detail. A piece of cloth, or custom/recycled paper.

I'd do it myself, but my rented HV20 had to be returned early - Canon is taking their sweet time repairing mine. A month without...

Glenn Thomas · August 13th, 2007, 05:16 AM

Robert, what was wrong with your HV20?

And yes, the chart resolution looks promising.

Robert Ducon · August 13th, 2007, 01:49 PM

The camera's sensor (or electronics) went south. I really think it was the sensor. It's a consumer camera, so not that surprised. Disappointed how long it's taking.. 5 weeks now? *shakes head*

http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=98298

Anyhow, an HDMI w/CINE example of subtle detail would be great!

Salah Baker · August 13th, 2007, 05:54 PM

this may wet your whisle...for now
Ill let Stu do his thing with the images...look to Prolost for the full (size) info

http://www.salatar.com/hv20chart/charttest2.jpg

Joseph H. Moore · August 13th, 2007, 07:25 PM

Salah, you tease! Yes, those should do nicely!

Sam DeWitt · September 13th, 2007, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eugenia Loli-Queru

>

IMO, the "film look" is not about 24fps, or shutter speed, or contrast, or latitude or grain. It is about DOF and shallow focus and how well lit your subject is. That's all there is to it, everything else is a myth and an old perception. And this camera can't do good DOF without a 35mm adapter. Everything else is fixable in post, so as a filmmaker, all I am interested is a 35mm adapter and I am good to go. I just don't see cinemode as a good shooting mode.

Just to fan the embers, or probably more like the ash at this point, I think the above quote has it exactly backwards. Depth of field is a subjective choice in shooting. It is the other things, especially the 24 fps with whole frames (24p) that help distinguish film as film. All theatrical films run at 24 fps, period. Their is no deviation from this excpet with some specialty venue films (some IMAX and others).

Douglas Trumbull, no slouch when it comes to knowing a thing or two about film engineering, pushed for years to make a 60 fps camera and projector system that, to his eye, was inherently better than the 24fps standard. This did not exactly take the industry by storm. When folks think "film" one of the biggest aspects they are thinking of is 24fps.

Edging back from the cliff of what ALWAYS constitutes a film look is the 1/48th shutter speed. Most film is shot at this shutter speed and this creates a temporal feel that says film to our eyes.

To try and make a long post end - the notion that a shallow depth of field is a signature look of FILM is just wrong (sorry Stu)!

It is certainly a powerful creative shoice, but I would imagine that not too many folks would argue with the statement "Citizen Kane is a very cinematic film". It did win an Oscar for cinematogrpahy, and is pretty much at the top, or very near, of every list of "greatest films ever made" etc.
Well, Greg Toland and Orson Welles put a LOT of work into getting very sharp focus for both near and far objects in their film. It was something truly unique for it's time. That look has been emulated and improved upon ever since. Shallow DOF is a creative choice, but by no means a defining one for what makes film "filmic".

I just had to get that off my chest. sorry.

Oh - and I agree that cinemode is so the way to go with the HV20, nothing about legacy looks or anything like that. Simply about having the most picture latitude to play with after shooting. As stated before, the RED camera's frames, straight from the camera with no tweaking, also look flat and soft. This is what you want if you care about controlling the look of your footage. If not, then auto everything is the way to go. Sharp video edges are certainly not "the look of the future", they are the look of the bad home video past.

R.I.P.

Sam DeWitt

August 11th, 2007, 09:06 AM	#155
Glenn Thomas Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 320	Personally, I love the look of cinemode. The colours, the extra detail you get from the increased dynamic range. As Eki has proven in some of his tests here, cinemode clips can be fixed in post. Shooting in AE, TV or Auto modes, you can't fix what's not there afterwards. For example if you've got a shot where there are clouds in the sky that are blown out, there is no way you'll be able to restore that detail. Likewise if you under expose to compensate, you'll end up losing detail in the dark areas. That's why cinemode is important to me. In regards to the extra sharpness, remember you're all comparing still images here. The HV20 is primarally a video camera, not a still camera. Played back as video is that so called extra detail or sharpness really going to be that visible? I know if I was watching a movie, I would much rather see something like this http://osnews.com/img/vegas/2.png where the reflection in the window up in the top right corner is actually visible. As opposed to this http://osnews.com/img/vegas/1.png where there is hardly any reflection in the window at all. It's mostly just white. To me that's more of a consumer video look that I would rather avoid. The only time I'll ever use TV mode is if I shoot something where I'll need a higher shutter speed, like for a slow motion style clip where each field will become an individual frame. The rest of the time the camera just remains set to cinemode. __________________ Personal Website: http://www.avene.org

August 13th, 2007, 02:32 AM	#160
Robert Ducon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Victoria BC Posts: 400	Salah, yes thank you. That chart helps.. it doesn't show any drawbacks of CINE to me. Gives me more faith in CINE actually - the PSD histogram proves there is more latitude, which will help with post (as we've always believed). I agree with Joseph, we need something with very subtle detail. A piece of cloth, or custom/recycled paper. I'd do it myself, but my rented HV20 had to be returned early - Canon is taking their sweet time repairing mine. A month without... __________________ Mac + Canon HV20

August 13th, 2007, 05:16 AM	#161
Glenn Thomas Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 320	Robert, what was wrong with your HV20? And yes, the chart resolution looks promising. __________________ Personal Website: http://www.avene.org

August 13th, 2007, 01:49 PM	#162
Robert Ducon Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Victoria BC Posts: 400	The camera's sensor (or electronics) went south. I really think it was the sensor. It's a consumer camera, so not that surprised. Disappointed how long it's taking.. 5 weeks now? shakes head http://dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?t=98298 Anyhow, an HDMI w/CINE example of subtle detail would be great! __________________ Mac + Canon HV20

August 10th, 2007, 08:00 PM	#151
Ian G. Thompson Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Rockledge, Florida Posts: 351	Thanks Cal

August 10th, 2007, 09:05 PM	#152
Calvin Tan Tourist Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: singapore Posts: 3	UPDATED: Please shoot cinemode with custom setting contrast +1 and there will not be any loss in detail but still less contrasty then TV mode. If u shoot cinemode with custom setting and contrast 0 there is definitely a loss of detail.

August 10th, 2007, 10:10 PM	#153
Eugenia Loli-Queru Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Bay Area, CA, USA Posts: 348	This is my last post on the matter. As I am writing this, I am sitting in front of my HDTV and watching "Syriana" in HD. This movie in particular reminds me a lot of Cinemode's look. It has no real details, it's extremely bad on dark conditions but not too bad on highlights. Personally, I don't like that look. Not pleasing. Comparing Syriana to some new digitally-shot movies, it feels like it's 1991 all over again. I guess, one could shoot for that look on purpose though.

August 10th, 2007, 10:34 PM	#154
Joseph H. Moore Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 362	Is there an increase of detail by increasing the contrast setting? http://www.12south.com/video/hv20/mo...e_contrast.mov

August 12th, 2007, 06:49 AM	#157
Eki Halkka Regular Crew Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 32	Of all HV20's modes, cine mode is the closest to RED output. http://www.red.com/gallery-still.shtml If you look at the stills at full resolution, you will see that the sharpness characteristic is very close to that of HV20 cine mode. There's just four times more pixels to play with.

August 12th, 2007, 05:39 PM	#159
Joseph H. Moore Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 362	Salah, Many thanks for that! The high contrast detail seems to be there pretty nicely in CINE, and has a tad bit more ringing in Tv. Unfortunately, a bit difficult to judge what's happening with low contrast detail, though, since that bit of chart doesn't really have any. Any chance of doing the same thing with an image that has subtle texture? Cloth, wood, etc.? Or maybe with the whole chart I used? I'd love to see the 4:2:2 HDMI rendition of the pure RED and GREEN circles.

August 13th, 2007, 05:54 PM	#163
Salah Baker Major Player Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Patterson La. Posts: 207	this may wet your whisle...for now Ill let Stu do his thing with the images...look to Prolost for the full (size) info http://www.salatar.com/hv20chart/charttest2.jpg

August 13th, 2007, 07:25 PM	#164
Joseph H. Moore Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 362	Salah, you tease! Yes, those should do nicely!