Custom Presets - Your Contributions

[Levan Bakhia]

Let's share information and experience we have on custom presets and other setting about XL H1. So here is my experience and knowledge, I will leave blanks on what I don't know and would love to know and will be waiting for you to fill in:

1) -3db - so from my experience, it is better to use this one all the time, except for when you really are out of light. Less grain, clearer image, in all the situations. This is definite.

2) Gamma Curv [GAM] - so this one is good if you are looking for you camera to percieve light and colors in more cinematic pattern. And for my opinion it works. My own preference is for CINE2.

3) [KNE] - well this is for softening the highlights and white blow outs. It makes much softer transition in white areas when it is set to low.

4) [BLK] - when in the image the black area is going too dark loosing the details, using this Stetch would show more details, when PRESS will make black much darker and cleaner, clearing out some unwanted details. (this is of course usefull in many cases, when you need a very smooth and clear black in the picture, and reduces noise also)

5) [PED] and [SET] - to me it looks like both do the same, but SET is more sensitive (changes picture more). I don't know princips behind it but both give some details to the picture while lowering the contrast. This one is good, because, at least you have details and if you need contrast, you could do that later in postproduction.

6) [SHP] - easy, adds sharpness to the picture. I would never go above 0, because, I can always do that in POST. But I am not sure if going below 0 would make any sense or at least when would that make sense?

7) [HDF] - need help here

8) [DHV] - need help here

9) [COR] - I assume that it also has something to do with details and noise, but don't get it. What does it do? When should I use it? I don't understand this, but seems like an usefull feature.

10) [NR1] - This really clears the image from noise, but ghosting, why would I use it? Maybe in some shots, where there is not too much moving and also even in that case set it to low. (if I have a lot noise)

11) [NR2] - This clears the image from noise really good without any ghosting, and makes me wonder again, why should we use NR1?

12) [CMX] - does have something to do with cinematic look, but I don't see why should I use it in the camera, when I can do the same in post. It just changes the colors a bit.

13) [CGN] - well, when decreased to lowest level it becomes black and white, and to the highest +9 it is very colorfull. It might be usefull but makes me wonder, if it is better to do this in the camera or in the post?

14) [CPH] - have no idea what it does. DO YOU?

15) [RGN,GGN,BGN,RGM,RBM,GRM,GBM,BRM,BGM] - These all is like doing color correction and grading in the camera. Why? when there are so many much nicer tools in POST to do the same and better. Actually, I think when shooting, it is not a good idea to touch them at all, because if you make some specific look, then you have less power to do any corrections after, in you POST. and that might not be good, maybe you change your mind, or don't like something, or two shots don't match exactly. It is better to leave them all to 0, so that you have more space and freedom afterwords. (I personally use FINAL TOUCH HD to do the color correction)

So, this is what I know, and I might know some thing not perfectly correctly, so please don't hesitate, correct me if you don't agree.

[Alister Chapman]

IF you were working with 4:4:4 10bit uncompressed I might agree that it may be better to create your "look" in post, but with HDV you are working with a highly compressed image that has had much of the colour information discarded. Start altering the colours by any significant amount in post and you will see an increase in noise and compression artifacts. Also if you create your look in camera you will be better able to judge on location how lighting and exposure are going to effect the final image.

For me the whole "Fix it in post" mindset is completely wrong. I am not saying that modern post processes can't be used to enhance the finished program, for example matching scenes or shots together or tweaking this or that, but to ignor the traditional craft of the cameraman and simply "fix it in post" implies that when your rushes arrive at your edit suite they are in some way "broken". You wouldn't shoot everything with the same exposure and then try to "fix it in post" as where the image is blown out or totally dark you'll never recover the detail, so why treat colour the same way?

[Lauri Kettunen]

Few comments:

KNE and BLK have an effect with respect to level of light. For example, if one sets KNE=LOW, then the areas near maximum brightness become less bright. But now, if one also sets the aperture such that the brightest are just below the zebra, the overall effect is that the darker areas also become less dark. So, the KNE and BLK are tools to adjust the dynamic range. Say one shoots gray clouds (which are about mid and bright tones). Setting BLK=PRESS maximizes the dynamics of gray, which is to say, a higher number of different tones of gray are stored on tape, and thus, more details from the sky are captured on the footage. The other way around, say one shoots something which has only dark and mid tones. Then, by setting KNE=HIGH one maximizes the dynamic scale giving more latitude in edit. Summing up, KNE and BLK are not only about the highlight areas and the black end, respectively.

I neither know what HDF and DHV are precisely. But, I tested these CPs with a rez chart; By adjusting their values I was able to change the number of horizontal and vertical lines the camcorder is able to distinct.

Like Alister I would also say it's not a good idea to leave everything in post. Instead The RGM, RBM, ...,BGM can be effectively employed to finetune the camera to capture neutral colors. For example, at least my XL H1 was well out of balance. When I shot landscapes on grayish winter days, different tones of gray were tilted towards different colors --needless to say, creating an akward impression. It took me four days to adjust the XL H1, but eventually, the result is very pleasing. Fixing such problems --different tones are tilted in different ways-- in post is a time consuming process. I rather prefer having a neutral starting point for edit. (Still, have only a guess of the true meaning of the RGM, RBM, ...,BGM.)

BTW, Alister, are your examples on the other thread slightly biased towards blueish magenta? (Look at the ground behind the rooster)

[Jim Giberti]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

IF you were working with 4:4:4 10bit uncompressed I might agree that it may be better to create your "look" in post, but with HDV you are working with a highly compressed image that has had much of the colour information discarded. Start altering the colours by any significant amount in post and you will see an increase in noise and compression artifacts. Also if you create your look in camera you will be better able to judge on location how lighting and exposure are going to effect the final image.

For me the whole "Fix it in post" mindset is completely wrong. I am not saying that modern post processes can't be used to enhance the finished program, for example matching scenes or shots together or tweaking this or that, but to ignor the traditional craft of the cameraman and simply "fix it in post" implies that when your rushes arrive at your edit suite they are in some way "broken". You wouldn't shoot everything with the same exposure and then try to "fix it in post" as where the image is blown out or totally dark you'll never recover the detail, so why treat colour the same way?

Funny Alister, I had a similar point in a post yesterday. It's probably not a bad idea to repeat these things because the things that may seem second nature to you may be revelatory to others.

Growing up in the music world, when it came to producing the term was "fix it in the mix". It was a bit more complex in the sense that the sound you wanted to get in live performance was usually very effected. The first time I recorded in the studio (with a great engineer) was the first time I realized that you could get great sound with basic things like choice of microphones and mic placement..record it flat and then use the British EQ on the million dollar Neve console to do any subtle shaping, but always try and get the performance as close to what you wanted the album to sound like.

That analogy works when we're talking about uncompressed or marginally compressed footage with full color space. With HDV or the HVX too, it's more like recording the performance on stage knowing that you're going to take that back to the studio and do a final mix...that's where the problems of fix it in the mix would come in because you'd have your vocals EQed and reverbs and delays and pianos and guitars all processed for the performance....it might sound great to the audience and great to you on stage given the venue, but when you went back to the studio and tried to work with all of those various tracks, anything you did was degrading the master, adding noise (the real noise) and changing curves that had already been modified.

It's interesting how similar the issue is to producing creative work in this medium, and it was just second nature to me after years of performing and producing music.

[Greg Boston]

Originally Posted by Lauri Kettunen

The RGM, RBM, ...,BGM can be effectively employed to finetune the camera to capture neutral colors. For example, at least my XL H1 was well out of balance. When I shot landscapes on grayish winter days, different tones of gray were tilted towards different colors --needless to say, creating an akward impression. It took me four days to adjust the XL H1, but eventually, the result is very pleasing. Fixing such problems --different tones are tilted in different ways-- in post is a time consuming process. I rather prefer having a neutral starting point for edit. (Still, have only a guess of the true meaning of the RGM, RBM, ...,BGM.)

I like to think of the color matrix adjustments as replacements for hanging filters on the front of the lens to achieve certain looks.

-gb-

[Steve Rosen]

Another point that's worth noting relative to "fix it in post". Cinematographers, as a rule, take pride in delivering an image that represents their visual style, and it's interpretation as applied to that particular film. They don't just load a magazine, take an exposure reading and hope the rushes come back okay.

They employ combinations of filters and styles of lighting, followed sometimes by carefully tested manipulation of the original negative during processing (ie, bleach bypass) to create a "finished" image before the editor even sees it.

They do this precisely for the reason that they don't want the image fooled with by a newbie producer who's never even taken a photography or art class, but because he's got a computer in his office, he suddenly thinks he's one of the Great Masters.

This acquistion medium (HDV) is going to test the abilities of many people who have been able to "point and shoot" with MiniDV. I'm not putting anyone down here, either - I've seen terrific footage shot by high school students without an ounce of experience. But HDV recquires, demands, some very serious attention in order to get something that's more than just "sharp".. I'm speaking from experience, because even though I've been a professional cinematographer for over 30 years I've managed to screw up some footgae that would have been a cake-walk in DV..

HDV is less forgiving than probably any other format - know that going in... Steve Rosen

[Lauri Kettunen]

Originally Posted by Greg Boston

I like to think of the color matrix adjustments as replacements for hanging filters on the front of the lens to achieve certain looks.

Hmm, if the filters in front of the lens affect all color channels, then the color matrix adjustments do not correspond with filters. For an idea of their use, think of white objects appearing white, and the pure green, blue and reds are just fine, but the magenta tones are towards blue or green. The color matrix adjustments enable one to fine tune the camera to avoid such problems. Once I got the colors of my XL H1 fine tuned, the same setting of Color matrix adjustments seems to fit to various kinds of conditions. (I seek for an neutral image, that represents accurately the colors of outdoor views as observed by the eyes.)

My -so far rather short- experience with the XL H1 seconds all what Steve Rosen says about HDV.

[Alister Chapman]

If any H1 users out there want to try out some of my presets I have posted some H1 preset files here:

http://www.ingenioustv.co.uk/forum/f...57&posts=1#M76

The include a couple of film stock emulations. They are not perfect but do show how tweaking the matix can create quite different looks.

[Shannon Rawls]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

If any H1 users out there want to try out some of my presets I have posted some H1 preset files here:

http://www.ingenioustv.co.uk/forum/f...57&posts=1#M76

Great Alister! You should send tose to Chris Hurd. He'll create a sticky for this forum and make them available to everybody & he'll give you credit for them. People can really use these.
I tried to make some myself until I confirmed that I need to stop pretending I know what I'm doing. *smile*

- ShannonRawls.com

[Jason Murphy]

I am pretty new here...but this is the type of thing that I love.

I will try to share some of my H1 settings soon. There is actually a way to store the settings with a still photo...that would probably be the best way to show the different looks.

Anyway...keep them coming. :)

[Oliver Brown]

Anyone else having problem opening "dot" CPF files?
Which application? TIA -- oliver

[Shannon Rawls]

Originally Posted by Jason Murphy

There is actually a way to store the settings with a still photo...that would probably be the best way to show the different looks.

Jason! Isn't that just the coolest little feature!?!?!
For me....I frequently do Tech-Scouts with the Director, DP, PD, Sound, Gaffer & a PA weeks before we shoot (sometimes months). I require/force/beg my directors to have a shot-list laid out for us way before hand. (No Oliver Stone style "I'll tell you when we get there" type of directing for me!). So during our tech-scouts I give him a directors finder and/or the camera. Normally the camera comes only when the DP is present. With this nifty "take a snapshot & record the cameras 26 image settings along with that picture" feature on the XL-H1 the DP can somewhat setup the shot in the camera, take a 1920x1080 HD snapshot, save the settings on the little SD card. With this feature, we can review/prepare ourselves in our pre-production meetings waaaayyyyy beforehand utilizing this valuable information! Just SWEET!

Originally Posted by Oliver Brown

Anyone else having problem opening "dot" CPF files?
Which application? TIA -- oliver

You can't. They are Binary files readable by the camera only.

- ShannonRawls.com

[Oliver Brown]

Many thanks Shannon for the info re: camera readable files. Thanks also for your many informative posts in this and other threads. I'm new to the board, having acquired an H1 for Xmas. I've been shooting industrials using my antique Sony DRS 200 and VX 1000. I'm anxious to work the H1 into an upcomming shoot.
Hey! guess what, I lived for 10 years on Garthwaite; ran a 24track sound studio on 54th and 10th Ave. Small world!!

oliver brown
oliver@pasadena56.tv

[Jonas Nystrom]

Does Anyone has a good preset to emulate High-con print B/W 35mm film (or like film-out to Kodak 2302 film stock)? Or should I do the filming in factory default colour and do the B/W emulation in post?

[Johan Forssblad]

Hi Alister,
I tried some different CP settings and compared them with all settings posted by Chris. When I evaluated them I found your setting "AC PREF1" to have very similar look to my preferred setting despite some CP´s are not equal.
But one thing. I think the camera has the sharpness of fine details already amplified so I prefer to decrease the sharpness. I evaluated the photos (using AC PREF1") on an Eizo CE240W 1200x1920 monitor and observed that fine details like stones in asphalt, branches in bushes and so on are unnaturally sharp and accenturated. I think you will get an even better and more pleasant picture with less sharpening or what do you think? I will definítely do some more experiments here. I think you have found a nice setting.
Best regards / Johan