DETAIL level? at DVinfo.net

Barry Green · March 15th, 2006, 10:20 PM

Just curious what HD100 shooters have their DETAIL level set at for most shots...

Tim Dashwood · March 15th, 2006, 10:36 PM

I've settled on -6 for most of my dramatic work destined for HDTV or downconversion to DVD. I have gone as high as +4 for "crisp" high contrast action/night shooting.

I'm still undecided on filmout detail setting because I haven't had the opportunity to do my own filmout tests.
(+4 was used on the SWAT Team stuff I shot that was included in Stephen Noe's film out test shown at the Chicago event in February.)

Stephen L. Noe · March 15th, 2006, 10:53 PM

I like to keep it at -7 for HDTV. For DVD production I like it anywhere from -7 to +4 depending on what is being shot but favor -5. For Film transfer I think -9 is best.

Paolo Ciccone · March 16th, 2006, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Just curious what HD100 shooters have their DETAIL level set at for most shots...

I keep it at MIN, 24fps, for a soft look that is not blurry. It's still very nice and sharp without, IMHO, being enhanced.

--
Paolo

Greg Corke · March 16th, 2006, 11:05 AM

-7 also. I was down at JVC yesterday and the tech kindly showed me some test charts because he was concerned that I had my detail settings to low. Granted off imo seems too soft almost countering the resolution but for me somewhere between -5 and min seems to be best. personally I find little difference between -7 and min except perhaps min is just a little too soft still in some situations. It was intersting listening to the rep who was trying to convince me that I should not go below -4 . the problem for me is that althogh this gives the best reading on a wave form monitor you cannot get away from the fact that this image at this setting looks much more video like. I thinks most of us indies are prepared to sacrifice a little sharpness in the quest for a more filmic image.

Greg

P.S. I also saw the hd 100 played back through a hi-def crt and compared to a hi-def lcd it is worlds apart. I know it has bee n said before on the forum but I think it's interesting when you see it first hand the difference really does strike you perhaps more than you would imagine.

Javier Velez · March 16th, 2006, 11:41 AM

I usually go between -9 to -2 on HDV 720 depending on available light. However, last weekend I tested slow-mo at HDV-SD 480/60p and I noticed the footage lost considerable sharpness. I adjusted the detail from -6 to +2 (shutter 1/100 for extra crispiness) and it gave me a better look. I still haven't tested HDV-SD 576/50p, but I'm suspecting increased sharpness from 480/60p.

JV

Earl Thurston · March 16th, 2006, 12:22 PM

I leave it at "MINIMUM". That has the least amount of aliasing without going too soft (as per "OFF"). One can always add more sharpening in post if needed. However, I'm considering trying "OFF" for facial closeups. Might be an effective look.

Jim Giberti · March 16th, 2006, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Earl Thurston

I leave it at "MINIMUM". That has the least amount of aliasing without going too soft (as per "OFF"). One can always add more sharpening in post if needed. However, I'm considering trying "OFF" for facial closeups. Might be an effective look.

Minimum. I just don't like the digital look of anything more. It's too apparent to my eyes, and minimum gets you very sharp without the various highlight and edge crap that you get by dialing it up.
IMO of course.

Earl Thurston · March 16th, 2006, 02:49 PM

BTW, here are some sample images shot at "MINIMUM" detail:

HD100 Sample Images

Jacob Nielsen · March 16th, 2006, 03:57 PM

oooh don't ever look at the tele-shot no. 5!!!

Jacob.

Mike Marriage · March 16th, 2006, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacob Nielsen

oooh don't ever look at the tele-shot no. 5!!!

Jacob.

Yeah, the last few % of the zoom is best avoided on mine too. I don't think it is that bad though.

Nima Taheri · March 17th, 2006, 08:06 AM

this might be a stupid question, but here I go:

what does the Detail Level actually do? Did I understand it right if the level determines how sharp to show details of high contrast? Or does it have anything do to with colors aswell?

Ted Ramasola · March 17th, 2006, 09:08 AM

its like edge enhancement. Nothin to do with color.

Stephen L. Noe · March 17th, 2006, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry Green

Just curious what HD100 shooters have their DETAIL level set at for most shots...

What was the reason for this question? Have you got back on the HD-100 horse?

Barry Green · March 17th, 2006, 01:25 PM

I've been experimenting with the HD100, and with all the HD cameras. I was comparing HVX, FX1 and HD100 and looking at the edge enhancement. Seemed like the HVX and FX1 really liked the detail set high, and didn't show much in the way of visible edge enhancement at all, even at maximum, but the JVC's higher settings (from NORMAL to MAX) were very noticeably enhanced; at MAX there's huge white outlines. So I was asking to find what users are finding the usable ranges were; in my comparisons I found that the other cameras at MAX (FX1 at +15, or an HVX at +7) were about equivalent to the JVC at -6. That didn't sound quite right to me, but I figured I'd go to the source and ask you guys.

At the six-way shootout we had determined that the JVC's "off" was truly off, and MIN was showing some visible edge enhancement, so I was trying to find ways to equate them for baseline purposes.

But that got me to thinking: if maximum on the FX1 and HVX equates to -6 on the JVC, then -- what level are JVC shooters using? And what do they like? What looks good to them? Do people use the higher levels and accept it?

Interesting to see that almost everyone here is using between MIN and -6, which equates to the usable ranges on the other cameras too. MIN looks like about -5 on the HVX and +5 on the Sony; you can't go lower than +5 on the Sony without the picture becoming irretrievably blurry (I'd say quite a bit blurrier than the HVX at -7 or the JVC at OFF!) Something weird happens to the Sony below 5, the picture looks actively blurred.

So -- just curiousity, and looking for some confirmation too. Wanted to see what those in the field have found as their workable range. Thanks everyone!

March 15th, 2006, 10:20 PM	#1
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	DETAIL level? Just curious what HD100 shooters have their DETAIL level set at for most shots...

March 15th, 2006, 10:36 PM	#2
Tim Dashwood Wrangler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Posts: 3,637	I've settled on -6 for most of my dramatic work destined for HDTV or downconversion to DVD. I have gone as high as +4 for "crisp" high contrast action/night shooting. I'm still undecided on filmout detail setting because I haven't had the opportunity to do my own filmout tests. (+4 was used on the SWAT Team stuff I shot that was included in Stephen Noe's film out test shown at the Chicago event in February.) __________________ Tim Dashwood

March 16th, 2006, 11:05 AM	#5
Greg Corke Major Player Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London, UK Posts: 245	-7 -7 also. I was down at JVC yesterday and the tech kindly showed me some test charts because he was concerned that I had my detail settings to low. Granted off imo seems too soft almost countering the resolution but for me somewhere between -5 and min seems to be best. personally I find little difference between -7 and min except perhaps min is just a little too soft still in some situations. It was intersting listening to the rep who was trying to convince me that I should not go below -4 . the problem for me is that althogh this gives the best reading on a wave form monitor you cannot get away from the fact that this image at this setting looks much more video like. I thinks most of us indies are prepared to sacrifice a little sharpness in the quest for a more filmic image. Greg P.S. I also saw the hd 100 played back through a hi-def crt and compared to a hi-def lcd it is worlds apart. I know it has bee n said before on the forum but I think it's interesting when you see it first hand the difference really does strike you perhaps more than you would imagine.

March 16th, 2006, 12:22 PM	#7
Earl Thurston Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Burnaby & Maple Ridge BC Posts: 289	I leave it at "MINIMUM". That has the least amount of aliasing without going too soft (as per "OFF"). One can always add more sharpening in post if needed. However, I'm considering trying "OFF" for facial closeups. Might be an effective look. __________________ Earl R. Thurston, Stargate Connections Inc. Made with GY-HD100: The Container Adventures: The Rescue

March 16th, 2006, 02:49 PM	#9
Earl Thurston Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Burnaby & Maple Ridge BC Posts: 289	BTW, here are some sample images shot at "MINIMUM" detail: HD100 Sample Images __________________ Earl R. Thurston, Stargate Connections Inc. Made with GY-HD100: The Container Adventures: The Rescue

March 15th, 2006, 10:53 PM	#3
Stephen L. Noe Trustee Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Chicago Posts: 1,214	I like to keep it at -7 for HDTV. For DVD production I like it anywhere from -7 to +4 depending on what is being shot but favor -5. For Film transfer I think -9 is best.

March 16th, 2006, 11:41 AM	#6
Javier Velez New Boot Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 6	I usually go between -9 to -2 on HDV 720 depending on available light. However, last weekend I tested slow-mo at HDV-SD 480/60p and I noticed the footage lost considerable sharpness. I adjusted the detail from -6 to +2 (shutter 1/100 for extra crispiness) and it gave me a better look. I still haven't tested HDV-SD 576/50p, but I'm suspecting increased sharpness from 480/60p. JV

March 16th, 2006, 03:57 PM	#10
Jacob Nielsen Tourist Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Århus/Denmark Posts: 4	oooh don't ever look at the tele-shot no. 5!!! Jacob.

March 17th, 2006, 08:06 AM	#12
Nima Taheri Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Norway Posts: 136	this might be a stupid question, but here I go: what does the Detail Level actually do? Did I understand it right if the level determines how sharp to show details of high contrast? Or does it have anything do to with colors aswell?

March 17th, 2006, 09:08 AM	#13
Ted Ramasola Trustee Join Date: May 2005 Location: Allen, Texas U.S.A Posts: 1,117	its like edge enhancement. Nothin to do with color.

March 17th, 2006, 01:25 PM	#15
Barry Green Barry Wan Kenobi Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: North Carolina Posts: 3,863	I've been experimenting with the HD100, and with all the HD cameras. I was comparing HVX, FX1 and HD100 and looking at the edge enhancement. Seemed like the HVX and FX1 really liked the detail set high, and didn't show much in the way of visible edge enhancement at all, even at maximum, but the JVC's higher settings (from NORMAL to MAX) were very noticeably enhanced; at MAX there's huge white outlines. So I was asking to find what users are finding the usable ranges were; in my comparisons I found that the other cameras at MAX (FX1 at +15, or an HVX at +7) were about equivalent to the JVC at -6. That didn't sound quite right to me, but I figured I'd go to the source and ask you guys. At the six-way shootout we had determined that the JVC's "off" was truly off, and MIN was showing some visible edge enhancement, so I was trying to find ways to equate them for baseline purposes. But that got me to thinking: if maximum on the FX1 and HVX equates to -6 on the JVC, then -- what level are JVC shooters using? And what do they like? What looks good to them? Do people use the higher levels and accept it? Interesting to see that almost everyone here is using between MIN and -6, which equates to the usable ranges on the other cameras too. MIN looks like about -5 on the HVX and +5 on the Sony; you can't go lower than +5 on the Sony without the picture becoming irretrievably blurry (I'd say quite a bit blurrier than the HVX at -7 or the JVC at OFF!) Something weird happens to the Sony below 5, the picture looks actively blurred. So -- just curiousity, and looking for some confirmation too. Wanted to see what those in the field have found as their workable range. Thanks everyone!