finding the colour saturation very weak at DVinfo.net

Jamie Huckle · August 9th, 2006, 08:49 AM

Can anyone suggest where I’m going wrong, everyone raves about the quality of the Canon XLH1 but I’m finding the colour saturation very weak, contrast low and picture generally very average. I upgraded from a XL1s and the colour on that is definitely superior. Any ideas

John Benton · August 9th, 2006, 09:00 AM

Jamie,
Right out of the box the color is flat. You have to start playing with the preset menu for any image flexability - that and the Kelvin (white balance) dial will give you great color.
But Remember it is Not 4:2:2 color space, so the color may sometimes seem thin. However, you can stream lossless 4:2:2 through the HD-SDI port and this is what allows for maximum flexibility with this camera,
J

A. J. deLange · August 9th, 2006, 11:02 AM

The XL1s produced colors appreciably more saturated than the objects being photographed. Canon toned this down in the XL2 and XL-H1 i.e.they reproduce color more realistically. If more saturation is desired it can be dialed in either in the camera or in post.

Kevin Wild · August 9th, 2006, 11:47 AM

I have both the XL2 and XL H1 and have always found the saturation to be way low if you don't play with settings. I crank them up to +4 (I think, from memory). The only thing is, you have to watch out for reds. They look like garbage if you have cranked it up too much and hit a very hot red spot.

Just my $.02. You MUST change the settings for the H1 to get the best picture out of the camera. It's very vanilla if you don't.

KW

Ash Greyson · August 9th, 2006, 05:07 PM

Also, turn down your pedestal and/or setup level. I caution against pushing the color too far in camera as you will lose resolution that cannot be gained later. The color information is all there to be tweaked with later. Also, if you want more poppy colors, use video gamma and video matrix, not cine settings.

ash =o)

Steve Rosen · August 9th, 2006, 06:02 PM

I found that the 1st generation of DV cameras all tended to be hot in terms of chroma (especially the DVX, which I dialed down to -5 or -7).. I guess the manufacturers wanted to show off that DV could capture rich color - kinda like the way detail/sharpness tends to be exagerated in HDV cameras...

My experience with the H1 is that it is just fine more than 90% of the time. There are a few situations where the chroma seems a little weak, but I'd much rather have it weak than hot - remember NTSC (if you have to deal with such a thing) is very unforgiving.. And, as mentioned above, it's very easy to boost color in post, but not so easy to remove it...

Antoine Fabi · August 9th, 2006, 06:07 PM

Steve,

Why is it better to increase a low color level in post rather than decrease a high color level ?

Stephan Ahonen · August 10th, 2006, 02:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antoine Fabi

Steve,

Why is it better to increase a low color level in post rather than decrease a high color level ?

Same reason you allow headroom when recording audio. If there's clipping you've lost the clipped data forever.

Ash Greyson · August 10th, 2006, 07:46 AM

Oversaturated images lose chroma resolution that cannot be regained later.

ash =o)

Steve Rosen · August 10th, 2006, 09:16 AM

Additionally, the really nice thing about the H1 is that you can SELECTIVELY dial color in or out - that's something that's usually only available on much more expensive cameras...

If you've got the time and the patience (which, admittedly I usually don't) you can actually set up menu accessed scene files for specific locations and/or situations... That is a terrific plus for people that are picky about color reproduction...

Recently I had the opportunity to review footage shot on an HVX (not shot by me, so I was unable to truly evealuate it) and for all the acclaim of 4.2.2, I wasn't very impressed with the image at all.. the colors seemed "mushy" and, while they may have been vibrant, they didn't look natural to my eye. As much as I like the P2 card concept, I'm very happy I settled on the H1...

John Jay · August 10th, 2006, 09:30 AM

my take is that I suspect there is a reason why manufacturer,s ship the cameras in a low saturated state.

Essentially 4:2:0 means HD luma but SD chroma. So if the balance is changed in favour of higher chroma the image will be perceived as softer because the balance is being shifted toward SD chroma. This is pretty much unavoidable unless you are lucky to have 4:4:4.

A point about raising chroma in post tends to lead to excessive exposure of the macroblocking 8x8 pixels, the DCT in the codec is optimised for the presented balance and altering that later in post makes it more visible. (Why on earth the codec gurus do not implement a phase shift in the chrom- luma macroblocks instead of having them co-sited, as present, really baffles me - it would lead to better images)

Because of the above , my preference is to shoot one click higher than I need on the colour gain and reduce chroma in post (and in so-doing reduce macroblock visibility)

Steve Rosen · August 10th, 2006, 09:53 AM

John: I believe that any amount of manipulation in post should be avoided in HDV - when possible.. The reality is that in fast shooting (I shoot documentaries) it is often impossible, or at least impractical, to customize for every setup... Given the fact that occasionally some color correction is going to happen, I prefer to boost color (slightly) rather than have to tone it down. To my eye, and I've tried it both ways, it looks better - you're point is well made, though, and means that everyone needs to experiment some in order to satisfy their own eye...

John Jay · August 10th, 2006, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Rosen

John: I believe that any amount of manipulation in post should be avoided in HDV - when possible.. The reality is that in fast shooting (I shoot documentaries) it is often impossible, or at least impractical, to customize for every setup... Given the fact that occasionally some color correction is going to happen, I prefer to boost color (slightly) rather than have to tone it down. To my eye, and I've tried it both ways, it looks better - you're point is well made, though, and means that everyone needs to experiment some in order to satisfy their own eye...

No worries Steve; mileages vary as they say.

One point I would add is you never know what monitor your audience will be viewing on and if it happens to be a cruddy low contrast ratio (<1000) device then the macroblocks will show up.

John Benton · August 10th, 2006, 11:18 AM

Another minor point:
Some 35mm adapters often change the image and need to be fed a bit more Color Gain

Antoine Fabi · August 10th, 2006, 12:26 PM

"Same reason you allow headroom when recording audio. If there's clipping you've lost the clipped data forever." dixit Stephan Ahonen

"Oversaturated images lose chroma resolution that cannot be regained later."
dixit AshG

...hmmm....makes sense...

I'll test it !

thanks !

August 9th, 2006, 08:49 AM	#1
Jamie Huckle New Boot Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Cambridge. UK Posts: 6	finding the colour saturation very weak Can anyone suggest where I’m going wrong, everyone raves about the quality of the Canon XLH1 but I’m finding the colour saturation very weak, contrast low and picture generally very average. I upgraded from a XL1s and the colour on that is definitely superior. Any ideas

August 10th, 2006, 09:30 AM	#11
John Jay Major Player Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: US & THEM Posts: 827	my take is that I suspect there is a reason why manufacturer,s ship the cameras in a low saturated state. Essentially 4:2:0 means HD luma but SD chroma. So if the balance is changed in favour of higher chroma the image will be perceived as softer because the balance is being shifted toward SD chroma. This is pretty much unavoidable unless you are lucky to have 4:4:4. A point about raising chroma in post tends to lead to excessive exposure of the macroblocking 8x8 pixels, the DCT in the codec is optimised for the presented balance and altering that later in post makes it more visible. (Why on earth the codec gurus do not implement a phase shift in the chrom- luma macroblocks instead of having them co-sited, as present, really baffles me - it would lead to better images) Because of the above , my preference is to shoot one click higher than I need on the colour gain and reduce chroma in post (and in so-doing reduce macroblock visibility) __________________ John Jay Beware *PLUGGER-BYTES*

August 9th, 2006, 09:00 AM	#2
John Benton Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 658	Jamie, Right out of the box the color is flat. You have to start playing with the preset menu for any image flexability - that and the Kelvin (white balance) dial will give you great color. But Remember it is Not 4:2:2 color space, so the color may sometimes seem thin. However, you can stream lossless 4:2:2 through the HD-SDI port and this is what allows for maximum flexibility with this camera, J

August 9th, 2006, 11:02 AM	#3
A. J. deLange Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: McLean, VA United States Posts: 749	The XL1s produced colors appreciably more saturated than the objects being photographed. Canon toned this down in the XL2 and XL-H1 i.e.they reproduce color more realistically. If more saturation is desired it can be dialed in either in the camera or in post.

August 9th, 2006, 11:47 AM	#4
Kevin Wild Major Player Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 540	I have both the XL2 and XL H1 and have always found the saturation to be way low if you don't play with settings. I crank them up to +4 (I think, from memory). The only thing is, you have to watch out for reds. They look like garbage if you have cranked it up too much and hit a very hot red spot. Just my $.02. You MUST change the settings for the H1 to get the best picture out of the camera. It's very vanilla if you don't. KW

August 9th, 2006, 05:07 PM	#5
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	Also, turn down your pedestal and/or setup level. I caution against pushing the color too far in camera as you will lose resolution that cannot be gained later. The color information is all there to be tweaked with later. Also, if you want more poppy colors, use video gamma and video matrix, not cine settings. ash =o)

August 9th, 2006, 06:02 PM	#6
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	I found that the 1st generation of DV cameras all tended to be hot in terms of chroma (especially the DVX, which I dialed down to -5 or -7).. I guess the manufacturers wanted to show off that DV could capture rich color - kinda like the way detail/sharpness tends to be exagerated in HDV cameras... My experience with the H1 is that it is just fine more than 90% of the time. There are a few situations where the chroma seems a little weak, but I'd much rather have it weak than hot - remember NTSC (if you have to deal with such a thing) is very unforgiving.. And, as mentioned above, it's very easy to boost color in post, but not so easy to remove it...

August 9th, 2006, 06:07 PM	#7
Antoine Fabi Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: sherbrooke (Quebec) Canada Posts: 108	Steve, Why is it better to increase a low color level in post rather than decrease a high color level ?

August 10th, 2006, 07:46 AM	#9
Ash Greyson Trustee Join Date: May 2003 Location: Tulsa, OK Posts: 1,689	Oversaturated images lose chroma resolution that cannot be regained later. ash =o)

August 10th, 2006, 09:16 AM	#10
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	Additionally, the really nice thing about the H1 is that you can SELECTIVELY dial color in or out - that's something that's usually only available on much more expensive cameras... If you've got the time and the patience (which, admittedly I usually don't) you can actually set up menu accessed scene files for specific locations and/or situations... That is a terrific plus for people that are picky about color reproduction... Recently I had the opportunity to review footage shot on an HVX (not shot by me, so I was unable to truly evealuate it) and for all the acclaim of 4.2.2, I wasn't very impressed with the image at all.. the colors seemed "mushy" and, while they may have been vibrant, they didn't look natural to my eye. As much as I like the P2 card concept, I'm very happy I settled on the H1...

August 10th, 2006, 09:53 AM	#12
Steve Rosen Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Monterey, California Posts: 895	John: I believe that any amount of manipulation in post should be avoided in HDV - when possible.. The reality is that in fast shooting (I shoot documentaries) it is often impossible, or at least impractical, to customize for every setup... Given the fact that occasionally some color correction is going to happen, I prefer to boost color (slightly) rather than have to tone it down. To my eye, and I've tried it both ways, it looks better - you're point is well made, though, and means that everyone needs to experiment some in order to satisfy their own eye...

August 10th, 2006, 11:18 AM	#14
John Benton Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: NYC Posts: 658	Another minor point: Some 35mm adapters often change the image and need to be fed a bit more Color Gain

August 10th, 2006, 12:26 PM	#15
Antoine Fabi Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: sherbrooke (Quebec) Canada Posts: 108	"Same reason you allow headroom when recording audio. If there's clipping you've lost the clipped data forever." dixit Stephan Ahonen "Oversaturated images lose chroma resolution that cannot be regained later." dixit AshG ...hmmm....makes sense... I'll test it ! thanks !