Need help setting in camera color settings? Come here

[J_Gasper]

[J_Gasper]

Active member
Got some snow today and decided to do some comparisons.

I have always shot a Neutral picture profile. Lately, I have been trying to get away from it. Im not really satisfied with it anymore. A question that gets asked a ton by beginners is " What do I set my in camera colors to?" or "What picture profile and White balance should I shoot?" No one has really put a good comparison up between picture profiles. I have decided to let you guys decide what you like best.

1st Shot: Standard Picture Profile 6600K (Normal White Balance)

2nd Shot: Neutral Picture Profile 6600K (Normal White Balance)

3rd Shot: Standard Picture Profile 6000K (Cold White Balance)

4th Shot: Neutral Picture Profile 6000K (Cold White Balance)

5th Shot: Standard Picture Profile 7100K (Warm White Balance)

6th Shot: Neutral Picture Profile 7100K (Warm White Balance)

All of these shots have absolutely no color correction/ grading to them.

Also, sorry for the incredible amount of moire on the bricks of houses.

 
Forgot to mention...

Sharpness was not all the way turned down on the Standard picture profile shots. Sorry. Forgot about that..
 
Shooting with the neutral color setting give your more dynamic range for you to use in post to get the exact feeling you want with less limitations.

If you don't know how to grade properly in post, I recommend you stay away from shooting with the neutral color setting.
 
this. i always shoot my video on the cinestyle and superflat then grade in post to my liking. works wonders. all the other default settings are too "point and shoot" for me and loose too much detail to try and grade something the way you want it
 
With DSLRs, you should be trying to do as much color/contrast/whatever-look-you-want in camera because the codec is delicate and not the best to color grade. I do this with my fs100 and my avchd codec, it works great. Shooting flat isn't just the right answer to great footage.
 
true but i always import my footage by log and transfer and take it from the shitty codec to something like prores422 (LT) just so i don't loose what info i do have while jumping back and forth from fcp to color.
 
Just because you transcode it to prores doesn't automatically make it a good codec. You're still using a very weak file, even though it's a different file type, the amount of information is still very low. grading a file from a dslr is very prone to break down, artifacts, noise, etc but with a true 422 codec like dvcprohd (p2) or canons new 50mbps 422 codec, you have alot more flexibility in post. With fragile codecs like h264 and avchd, its best to do the least amount of color correction and color grading as possible.
 
yeah i definitely agree. shooting on the hvx with the dvcprohd is lightyears better to mess with in post and holds up very well back and forth in color. for me, it just seems like i get better results if i transcode right off the bat so that little bit of info that is there doesn't degrade as fast i guess. haven't had any problems that way yet but if i kept it in the h264 and send once to color and back it goes to utter garbage
 
You seemed to missed what I said. Changing your codec doesn't do anything. Putting a geo metro engine inside of a lambo may look really good, but it runs just as shitty as the geo does. I hope you're transcoding to prores LT, anything higher and you're actually degrading your image because you're adding so much extra information that doesn't exists, your taking 24mbps codec and expanding it into 100+mbps.
 
just curious,

have not had the time to shoot, but notice on the shots with the standard picture profile how they have that really digital look with the tree branches in the distance? I know it makes it worse because I was not on a tripod, but if I turn my sharpness all the way down, will that fix the problem?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top