Neoscene - Results from 5D files are darker.

[Frank Manno]

I'm using the latest version of Neoscene to convert 5D files to AV files.

When I compare the result, the AVI files that Neoscene converted look darker than the original with seemingly slightly less sharpness / resulution.

Is this normal or are my settings somehow incorrect? I have quality set to high.

-Frankie

[David Newman]

Alway use a tool like VirtualDub to confirm such observations (it wil not misslead,) as 99% of the time it is a graphics card setting. For 5D converts Neo will fix the luma levels and correct the black and white levels, this is a good thing, however the sharpness is not affected.

[Frank Manno]

Hi David thank you for your response.

The way I'm confirming my observation is by putting the original 5D .MOV clip on a track on my timeline, and then the converted CineForm clip directly above it and synced. As it's playing back Im simply switching from track 1 and track 2 and watching the difference in real time.

Here is where I'm noticing that the Neoscene result isn't as 'bright' or 'vibrant' as the original 5D clip. I feel I have to perform a slight levels adjustement to the Cineform clip to try to get it look closer to the original 5D MOV file.

In my testing, would you say I'm confirming the result properly?


-Frankie

Originally Posted by David Newman

Alway use a tool like VirtualDub to confirm such observations (it wil not misslead,) as 99% of the time it is a graphics card setting. For 5D converts Neo will fix the luma levels and correct the black and white levels, this is a good thing, however the sharpness is not affected.

[David Newman]

You maybe mixing your terms, "'bright' or 'vibrant'" - also means contrast, which is bad as you add contrast, but it is harder to take away without revealing clipping in the image. Canon MOVs have a minor luma design flaw that Neo fixes, which add too much contrast for default decode. You didn't mention sharpness this time, with is perceived with increased contrast -- if there was a real sharpness change, that would be a concern, everything else is a feature on Neo -- we know what we are doing. Old blog on the subject CineForm Insider: Correction: Canon 5D is fine, tools are wrong.

[Frank Manno]

David,

Thank you for pointing me to the blog on the subject, will have a good read and try to absorb it.

In the meantime I've created a small screenshot to demonstrate what I'm noticing. If all looks fine to you thenI'm happy, I'm just worried in case there is somethign wrong with the way I'm using Neoscene, hence me posting.

I have a screen grab and a split screen of two shots. One with Neoscene and the other is the original 5D image. It's just the minor difference in the brightness that I'm talking about.

Have a look here: Untitled-1

-Frank

[David Newman]

That is the contrast difference, and it is a good thing. This is not a brightness change -- middle grey is left untouched. The blacks are crushed on the Left (original) and restored on the right (look at the black suitcase.) Hightligts are also preserved better on the right (Neo) image.

[Laurence Kingston]

In case you still don't understand, let me put it another way. Computer monitors and HD TVs both have three primary colors: red, green and blue. The ranges of these colors are different however. A computer monitor goes from a black of red = 0, green = 0, blue = 0 to a white of red = 235, green = 235, black = 235. A TV (either HD or SD) has a narrower range however. It goes from a black of red = 16, green = 16, blue = 16 to a white of red = 235, green = 235, blue = 235.

Because of this, if your colors are set between 0 and 255 they will look good and vibrant on a computer monitor but too contrasty with highs blown out and detail lost in the shadows on a TV. If the colors are set between 16 and 235 they will look good and vibrant on a TV but they will lack contrast and look washed out on a computer monitor.

Video from a high quality camcorder will have colors in the 16 to 235 range, but both stills and video from a DSLR have colors in the 0 to 255 range.

What Cineform does is correct this by rescaling the 0 to 255 colors to match the range that is standard to all video cameras. It also slows the unstandard 30fps to the standard 29.97.

Both these adjustments are necessary and welcomed by most video professionals. However, if you are not using a monitor setup calibrated to video levels, and if you are not rendering to DVD or Blu-ray and playing back on a TV, you may not appreciate this.

Now let's look at two different scenarios:

1/ Let's say you are somewhat new to video editing, the DSLR is your only camera, you are previewing the video in a window on your screen, and you are rendering an HD mp4 that you are going to upload to Youtube or Vimeo. What you'll see is footage that looked better before you converted it to Cineform. When you are watching it on Youtube, it still won't look as good as it would have if you never recoded it into Cineform. You come to the conclusion that Cineform degrades your video's color.

2/ This time you are using Cineform along with a pro video camera. You put the native DSLR footage on a 30p timeline along with your camcorder footage. You monitor it through your calibrated video monitor. The timeline is actually 29.97 so every so often there are jumps and double images in the Canon footage as your editor tries to conform the unstandard frame rate. The color between the cameras is not matched. On the DSLR footage the highs are blown out and details are lost in the shadows. You encode this footage into Cineform and both these problems go away. You come to the conclusion that Cineform is necessary and you couldn't use the DSLR footage without it.

Here is my own personal workflow:

I convert the Canon footage to Cineform. now it matches the frame-rate and color space of my main Sony HDV camcorder. I don't have a calibrated monitor so I insert an sRGB to cRGB color correction filter inline on my preview window (actually I set the correction to go between a black of 0 and a white of 235 because whites of 255 blow out on most computer monitors as well). Then I edit away using additional color correction on individual video events when needed. Then when I go to render, I leave the preview color correction on when I render a version that is going to be uploaded to Vimeo or Youtube, but I bypass the preview color correction when I render to DVD or Blu-ray. This way both my computer and television renders look the way they should.

[David Newman]

It is a little more complex then that, the Canon default contrast error is due to a YUV to RGB colorspace conversion. YUV sources are typically 16-235 (luma) with some headroom for overshoot and RGB targets are 0-255 (16-235 in Vegas.) Canon used 0-255 in YUV, which is not expected by most NLE/video tools which convert to RGB requiring an output range of -41 to 296, so information is lost when using Canon DSLRs source natively (giving a higher contrast image.) QuickTime has released a patch to try and fix this, yet there are other issue with that. CineForm makes sure the full source camera range is preserved then presented in the output range of the NLE (0-255 Premiere, 16-235 for Vegas.)

[Bill Binder]

So David, nothing else is needed in the Vegas timeline then? Specifically, no need to add any computer to studio to computer rgb fx inside Vegas? Just transcode with neoscene, drop into vegas timeline, and be on our merry way?

[David Newman]

Bill, that is correct. We comply with the Vegas defaults of studioRGB when called by Vegas.

[Frank Manno]

Originally Posted by Laurence Kingston

However, if you are not using a monitor setup calibrated to video levels, and if you are not rendering to DVD or Blu-ray and playing back on a TV, you may not appreciate this.

I'm learning a lot here from you guys.

In regards to calibrating a monitor for video use for editing in Vegas with Neoscene footage from a 5D: How do I calibrate the monitor for this?

Do I use a colorometer like I do for photography work? Is the calibration method used for photography work, the same as for video work on the same screen?

Final output needs to be sometimes Vimeo, other times a LCD / Plasma screen.


-Frankie

[Laurence Kingston]

Originally Posted by David Newman

Bill, that is correct. We comply with the Vegas defaults of studioRGB when called by Vegas.

That is the case, yes, but I add an extra color correction filter on the master video bus which takes the levels from 16-235 to 0-235 when I render a version that is going to be uploaded to online video sites like Vimeo or Facebook. To my eyes, the whites of 235 look fine, but the blacks of 16 aren't dark enough. Stretching them down to zero looks perfect. For DVD and Bluray renders I bypass this filter.

If you're mixing a Canon with regular video cameras, running the Canon footage through the Cineform conversion matches it quite nicely to regular video cameras. This is great if you are just using the Canon's for shallow DOF shots.

One other thing: The area between 235 and 255 on a regular video camera is for extra headroom so that you can rescue blown out highlights. With the Canon going all the way to 255 you don't have this. It's probably a good idea to set your zebra more conservatively and maybe intentionally underexpose a hair so that you don't get overblown highlights you can't rescue later.

[Vanja Marin]

Originally Posted by Frank Manno

I'm using the latest version of Neoscene to convert 5D files to AV files.

When I compare the result, the AVI files that Neoscene converted look darker than the original with seemingly slightly less sharpness / resulution.

Is this normal or are my settings somehow incorrect? I have quality set to high.

-Frankie

Hey Frankie!

Very interesting, but my observation of this same process is exactly opposite from yours!

Just yesterday I was comparing Original MOV footage from 5D and Cineform-AVI and I got the feeling that converted (AVIs) have lost some of contrast (deepness of dark details)...

I called for second opinion - second, well trained pair of Eyes, without giving any hunch, and second pair of Eyes noticed the same result!!

Nothing that little Effects Palette - Levels-Contrast-RGB white-RGB black in PPRO wouldn't fix...

But it is interesting how we got diametrically opposite experience...

I truly wonder how much is it up to our Equipment??? (VGAs, Monitors, External monitors...) - I have quite a good set up, with 2x24" LCD monitors and two External Monitors (one CRT and one LCD) - but it is all semi-pro gamma!

I think my weakest link is my Graphic Card - ATI 3850 HD ---- somehow I remained with a habit that you don't need some 'Beast-VGA' for editing video, since it is mostly 2D stuff...

But, now with HD I got a feeling it's getting more important to have PRO VGA (like nVIDIA QUADRO or some MATROX)

Especially with new i7 CPUs and newest Intel chipsets which, if I understood it right, don't have SOUTH-BRIDGE anymore, but have memory controller built in CPU and, supposedly even share number of instructions with GPU (Graphic card's processor) - therefore high VGA DDR5 memory seems to be more important in today editing!!!

Well, I seem to be gone wiiiiide:)

I just wanted to say that when I took both files to check them out at my Parents place on 600Hz Panasonic Plasma - they both looked P.E.R.F.E.C.T!!!!

And that TV doesn't really forgive lame solutions to your material!


Sorry for being so long!

[Vanja Marin]

Originally Posted by Frank Manno

I'm learning a lot here from you guys.

In regards to calibrating a monitor for video use for editing in Vegas with Neoscene footage from a 5D: How do I calibrate the monitor for this?

Do I use a colorometer like I do for photography work? Is the calibration method used for photography work, the same as for video work on the same screen?

Final output needs to be sometimes Vimeo, other times a LCD / Plasma screen.


-Frankie

Another thing, regarding Calibrating Monitors...

I've been using at least 10 different software calibrators - and it was never really IT!!!

Just recently, not a month ago - I invested in real thing HARDWARE CALIBRATOR - (SPYDER 3 PRO)... check out on internet how it looks...

I'll be short in this one and tell you that for the first time in my life I have perfectly calibrated monitors --- first of all 2 of them 24" one-next to the other look amazingly same...
And what brought me even more delight - my color now matches color on external CRT, on external LCD, on PLASMA...

One of things that I really thing are worth investing in (especially if you do also lot of Photography which will be printed on paper later on) - but for broadcasting purposes and simply all purposes:)!

Not to forget - my Comp monitors are mid-quality!!! Nothing extra expensive and professional...

Actually these 24" couple are SAMSUNG SM T240 - not very fabulously reviewed, and they are more of consumer thing (not even pro-sumer, and not to mention professional monitors)...

I have better ones, but they are 19" - and since now I am in "offline" part of Project, I really enjoy this extra desktop space!!!

Anyhow - SPYDER 3 PRO ---- not too expensive, and results were stunning (for me and for another few ppl I let Calibrate their monitors with it!

(Of course, you have different presets, calibration for daylight ambient, nighttime bulb lighted ambient, dark ambient, or it measures it automatically --- GOOD!)

Cheers!

[Frank Manno]

Originally Posted by Vanja Marin

Hey Frankie!

Very interesting, but my observation of this same process is exactly opposite from yours!

Just yesterday I was comparing Original MOV footage from 5D and Cineform-AVI and I got the feeling that converted (AVIs) have lost some of contrast (deepness of dark details)...

Oops I made a mistake - Our observations are the same. In my original post I said that mine lok 'darker'. After re reading, I can't for the life of me understand why I said that. I think I meant to say the converted AVI's didn't look as 'bright' so I said 'darker'.

But,

Yes. My converted AVI's are LESS contrasty that the originals. My originals have more contrast and the whites seem whiter. Which is the exact same observation as you.

So that makes two of us :)


-Frankie