scene settings for pmw 320?

[Alister Chapman]

ChromaDuMonde

Not cheap I'm afraid.

[Ronnie Martin]

Yep $850 US... thanks for the info.... I will see if one of the local TV stations has one that I can use.

Ronnie

[Anthony McErlean]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

The 350 and 320 are very similar cameras and have the same processing sections, so my PMW-350 scene files are a good fit with the 320, although not completely identical due to the different sensor.

The matrix settings work well on both as do the gamma settings. Detail setting are quite different however. I would leave the detail settings on the 320 at default if you are unsure.

Charts are a great way to get several cameras to match. If you use a ChrmaDuMond chart and vector scope you should be able to set up each camera to give the most faithful reproduction of the colors even if you can't get all the cameras you want to match in the same place at the same time.

Thank you Alister.

I don't have to match the camera to anything so i don't have that problem.

I would just like to see a good scene setting for the 320 but if you can work from the 350 scene settings, thats a good start.

There isn't a lot of response to the original question, wonder why.

Thank you.

[Anthony McErlean]

Detail level or Crispening, which one of these setting will give a PMW320 a bit more sharpness to the image?

[Alister Chapman]

You might want to take a look at my guide to picture profiles and scene files. Within the main page you'll find links to more in depth information which should give you an idea of exactly what the key settings do.

Picture Profile Guide. | XDCAM-USER.COM

Detail is the main control, crisping is a subset of detail, so if you have no detail enhancement, crispening will do nothing, but if you have a lot of detail enhancement, then crispening will modify the detail settings.

[Anthony McErlean]

Thank you Alister.

[Chris Clifton]

Originally Posted by Rodney Minott

Does anyone have any good scene settings for the pmw 320?

I did contact Sony Service and there is not a set of factory picture profiles in any of the settings of my EX1R and EX3 that will match my 320K. Doesn't exist. And they don't plan on designing any matching profiles. I have come close to matching by setting the 320K to Standard/factory default, and setting the EX1 & 3 to Cinegamma 4/Hi Sat. My 320K is sharp and crispy, so I knock it down -10 detail. I can't rent the three out together and definitively say they'll match---and EX3 renters expect that. So I am regrettably trading the 320 for another EX3 asap.

[Anthony McErlean]

Originally Posted by Chris Clifton

My 320K is sharp and crispy, so I knock it down -10 detail. .

So are you saying Chris, a + detail will increase sharpness to the 320.

[Alister Chapman]

A positive detail value will increase the contrast around edges which will make the picture appear sharper but at the expense of un-natural "video like" edges around things and noise becoming more visible. The actual resolution does not change. A positive Aperture value will make the 320 look sharper but without the blocky edges.

You should try setting the EX to Cinegamma 1 and the 320 to Hypergamma 4 as these are the same gamma curves. When comparing sharpness you have to remember that perceived image sharpness is primarily a function of contrast with resolution being secondary. So unless you first get the contrast range to match through matching gamma curves and gain, any changes to the detail settings or aperture are only masking the contrast difference, so you'll never get the cameras to match.

[Anthony McErlean]

Originally Posted by Alister Chapman

A positive detail value will increase the contrast around edges which will make the picture appear sharper but at the expense of un-natural "video like" edges around things and noise becoming more visible.

Thanks again Alister for your advice.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Anthony McErlean

Detail level or Crispening, which one of these setting will give a PMW320 a bit more sharpness to the image?

"Crispening" is the Sony term for what used to be known as "coring".

In my engineering days the conclusion we came to was that it was best set as low as possible. Increasing it can reduce noise - but very adversely affect the picture otherwise. Don't be tempted into just thinking of it as a noise reduction knob. On some pictures that's all it may seem to do - on others it can have a more definite (and undesirable) effect.

Quite a good explanation here: http://www.panavision.co.uk/pdf/down...oting-tips.pdf and look closely at the diagrams.

In brief, it means that detail enhancing is only given to quite distinct edges, and not to small changes (such as noise). Nice idea in principle - but it can't distinguish between noise and subtle detail.

Therefore as it gets increased, high contrast detail is unchanged, subtle detail is lost. That can look really bad, since typically such as a face can still be sharply outlined, but lack all the skin texture and become "puddingy".

If you look at the diagram next to "Technical Information" then what it actually does is vary the distance between the red lines - more crispening means moving the red lines further apart. hence the more descriptive term of "coring" - it removes the "core" of the detail signal.

[Ron Fabienke]

I have 4 great files set up by engineering department at Band Pro. The 1st is named Normal and if I am on 2, 3 or 4 when I power the camera down it defaults back to the Normal file. Is there a setting in the menu where I can stop this from happening? Thought I would ask here first before checking back with them.

Thanks

[Ron Fabienke]

Apparently it is the memory retention battery gone dead per engineering. Doesn't affect the memory for the scene files themselves though. That is a different setup. Now I have to see if it's user accessible or need to take it back in.