@starios Very cool....and spooky! Looks like you're getting some CA around the bright edge of the flame? Is is just the YouTube compression? Can't tell for sure but I'm surprised and thrilled the GH3 delivers that kind of exposure with the f1.4.

the fckng midtones are the problem, I watch my stupid video and even before edit, the light of the lighter is enough for a clear image in f/1.2 iso 1600, the very low light tending to be black is also ok, the state between those two is the thriller

@maddog15 I'm not convinced all -5, in my tests I see too much information being lost in color, maybe if it recorded 422; your grades look good though ;-) AVCHD is less noisier and to me seems standard is less noisier too and natural + DR. Noise is another big field to study, je je, I almost always use extra noise and grain and being more lazy than paranoid about it I'm trying to find optimized marriage... with some weekend lovers of course.

This guy at vimeo uses

-4 -3 -3 0 I used this custom setting based on Standard then graded in Adobe Speedgrade. The original was shot Lumix GH3 in entirety with Leica 25mm f1.4, Lumix 7-14mm f4, Nikkor AIS 55mm Makro f2.8 in broad daylight, very harsh conditions. Tabitha is diffused with an 8 foot overhead silk but everything else is hot daylight.

@maxr Thanks for the reply and info. Man it is a fine line battle. If you'd be so kind, go back to page 5 on this post to the grading video I posted. look at the close up plant shot at 26 seconds. Absolutely incredible before and after shot in my opinion. Saturation is rich (greens and dark purples in the out of focus water top right), tonal range is good, no exaggerated noise or artifacting after luminance adjustment. Had I not had everything at -5 the little white flowers would have been absolutely blown out, whites crushed and dynamic range lost. Even the in camera noise reduction would have "smoothed out" precious detail and information in those whites.

As @starios has battled - it's the damn skin. So I ask myself, "So what's the big difference in the plant close up shot at 26 seconds and skin tones in "driving vid"? Shots that are primarily greens or blues do quite well in my opinion. BUT that singles out Red. (This may be old news to some but I'm just reiterating) I remember a post by Drew from DREWnet claiming, "New important findings". He stated that, at least on the GH2, the red channel was a problem in many ways. Noise especially. So... He set the white balance to the "indoor light bulb" setting for all his shots. Which means REALLY blue. I tried it in a sunny outdoor shot. It was "way too blue" of course BUT the shot was much cleaner, smoother less noise! Reduced the blue in post to balance the color.

I'm also not convinced that setting all on -5 is the end-all answer.... especially with skin tones. As I learn this cameras strengths and weaknesses, like anything else, I'll just shoot accordingly. AVCHD vs MOV is a consideration but man that's half the bit rate! Same AVCHD bit rate as the stock firmware of the GH2 on HBR mode which in my opinion was just... "ok".... but not Wow.

@starios Hands down, that take/test is definitely usable! (In my humble opinion) Good tonal range when you first strike, flesh looks like flesh. Even with YouTube compression 1080 appears to be clean, not too noisy. That's my two cents for what it's worth:)

natural setting with everything turned down to -5, -5, -5, 0. So as flat as the GH3 goes, also didnt crush the blacks or blow out the whites so keep alot of detail.

was using the SLR magic 25mm f0.95 and the Lumix 12-35mm 2.8 IS

No post stabilization used just Image stabilizer on the lens and conforming 50p to 25p for slow motion helps smooth out camera shake

@maddog15 thank you but that's from Ned Espeut-Nickless, je je. I wonder if his "0" is for NR or colour though... 'cause if colour those are exactly the ones I use too. I invited him here, FRisksuuuss

@wgtwo Can you post the clip or screen shot? I'd personally like to see what your seeing as flesh tones and the red channel have been a struggle for me lately also.

http://i.imgur.com/CVRsRmE.jpg RGB curves

http://i.imgur.com/95lbUBg.jpg Levels - better, but has a slightly bleached look, particularly below the cheekbone.

http://i.imgur.com/CNvEIMg.jpg Different shot with some compensation - has a weird orange look to it (the difference here can probably to attributed to the difference between Caucasian and Asian skin, but in both cases there is a problem).

@wgtwo as @maddog15 I find light version more natural and I prefer too 3 way cc. @maxr very nice video, as usual time lapse is national geographic level! When I shoot 50p and pan the camera, to avoid jittering when export in 25 I blend instantly in quick pannings the second frames that are going to be deleted from youtube-vimeo. It helps. About my nightmare problem, noise, my conclusion after some tests, even that I always shoot -5 -5 -2 -5, when there is extreme low light going to iso 3200 or 6400 and need for a lot of editing in post with denoiser and boosting light, I tried shooting with (contrast is noisy concernig midtones) -5+5+5+5, it has much much less noise and helps every filter in premiere act better probably because all those +5s are before cameras compression.

@starios

When I shoot 50p and pan the camera, to avoid jittering when export in 25 I blend instantly in quick pannings the second frames that are going to be deleted from youtube-vimeo

I don't understand and I'm interested :D

@maddog15

regarding low light, I've turned my ISO limit on and set it to 1600. I think I'd rather have a little darker shot but without all the noise you get beyond 1600

May I say that it's a choice, for me that choice will greatly depend on what you would call "a little darker" and "noise".
In this video - this one's mine, je eje - from 5:04 to 6:56 is all ISO 3200, light sources are the moon, the big lantern glasses guy is holding and a very tiny led torch; of course neatvideo and added noise. IQ and grading wise could be better, like you I'm still finding my way... on the way. Keep the engine running :-)

@maddog15 thanks mr.
In the video I pointed out above I had already used my fastest lens f1.7, minimum SS possible and we place santamaria plant in a spot where she will be happy (and make others happy) not near the lights and sights jejeje, which compels me to say I don't agree with some points FJ make but I don't have too :D some are even very misleading... but hey, that's main problem with generalizations, isn't it?
As I said before, in my particular case, I'm trying to find a balance between grain, IQ, DR and all the cinematic whores we adore.
Another parameter to measure settings with (and general workflows) will be "how long" takes to process/clean/CC/grade. Have to go eat, chhhhhhiiirs