Panasonic GH1 - Film Mode Settings

flibnarb

***I'm unsure as to whether or not it's proper etiquette to start a new thread for this question, so Vitaliy by all means feel free to move or delete this thread with instructions on how to get this question answered.***

Anyway, I was hoping to get some information on the "best" "Film Mode" settings (Panasonic terminology) also known as "Picture Style" (Canon terminology) for un-hacked AND hacked GH1 to later achieve the most accurate "Filmic" look. In my research on Google I've not found a very straight forward answer for the GH1. There is much talk on the Canon side of things to achieve this, particularly by using Marvels picture style or something of the like. So I was hoping to get some input on some experts in the forum related to the GH1 Film Mode to achieve this.

As I understand it, one wants to use settings that will achieve the most flat picture as possible along with settings to achieve proper exposure and such based on environment so that there is more dynamic range for the color grading process, is this correct? Now I know that to achieve an overall filmic look recording needs to take place at 24p and 1/48th of a sec or close to it (1/50th for GH1), I'm just looking for comment on the Film Mode/Picture Style.

As most, I'm hoping to have as much control in post of colors and latitude as possible to achieve the film look, and I realize this process begins in camera. Thanks in advance for any input.

humpman

@yskunto in the beginning i tried to solve it with only Film Modes and WB correction, but results was pretty poor, i wasn't pleased by results.

yskunto

@humpman your findings on the film mode and Sony Vegas processing are very interesting! Is there any chance to closely replicate RAW colors using combinations of film mode and build in WB correction for GH1?

Aria

@humpman, I still use my GH1 every week and have been for years shooting local TV shows and events. Nothing amazing but it does the job. I just can't use it to shoot landscapes of thick foliage in day light. It locks up the camera every time. If there's a bush swaying in the background it can put the fear of God in me. So I have other cameras like my G5's that I use for that stuff. The G5 is a pretty good camera if you use manual lenses. The GH1 has more dynamic range but the G5 can shoot with no issues in wide angle landscapes.

humpman

@Aria thanks for response, i don't know how much people still seriously use GH1, but i believe they exist. Also there is new patched firmware for it http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/8601/panasonic-gh1-firmware-research-testing#Item_15

Aria

@humpman, nice work. I really have given up on such a thing but you did a great job of getting there. Just goes to show that with hard work you can still dig out even more image quality from this camera.

humpman

Spend a little time to solve problems with colors on GH1. In most I don't like the Red color on it because it's almost orange. Only in RAW photos true Red colors. Simple example: Video

RAW

In the beginning i tried to fix it with Film Modes. On vectorscope they look almost same, but Vibrant -2 0 0 0 mode is little more close to RAW than others. So i took Vibrant as start point. Then i did use Channel Blend plugin in Sony Vegas to change color tones and shift them in RAW colors. Here is settings i get: First variation

Second variation, with brighter greens, and more close to RAW i think

Also you need to correct levels, after all this let's see the result: Video, did shot this with saturation +2

Video, this one i desaturated in post

RAW

weimar

as far as the 5d goes, it does better in darker situations (just about anyone would agree) than most dslr's, the gh1 I love for its lens versatility (try using a PL lens ((usually equated with cinema lenses) on a 5d)) and also for its clarity... filmic smoothness can always be achieved with astute color correction and processing. The most film like dslr I've seen is the Nikon D90--looks like 16 or 8mm film to the T... The D90 only shoots in 720p at actual TRUE 24 frames per second, not 23.976.... which makes it perhaps the most unusual dslr video camera of the last few decades to my mind... In natural low light it has a grain that is totally unlike any other digital camera out there.... but for good old fashioned dslr video at full 1080 HD I like the gh1 (I don't like the smaller/more fragile build of the gh2 and I wasn't that into its image for some odd reason though I've seen some good things from it, to be sure).

weimar

'I am awaiting the day most people owning the HDSLRs start shooting something worth looking at.' -VK

True. Very True. Content.. I just got a gh1, so i'm seeing what it can do. As far as film modes go, it is paramount that you use different ones for different situations. I have found that the approach that emphasizes taking the sharpness down to -2 no matter the situation is not a very good one. dynamic range is an analogous concern: in darker situations it becomes important if it isn't lit very well (although stopping down with decent lighting makes it somewhat less important)... I have found that dynamic mode bleeds the color a bit while adding contrast. nostalgic is seemingly the most flat and brightest of them all and has a fairly bland color response (it's a step past smooth in all these ways), standard is fairly self explanatory, nature seems to have better contrast than smooth and nostalgic and also has a balanced color response.

In using smooth with -2 sharpness for a while, as many testers have recommended as a must, I have found it negates the purpose of getting the sharpest lenses around because of the inherent limits of the format-mainly in comparison to medium and large format cameras, which are much less worried with sharpness due to the effective area of exposure (size of the picture). Also it may well be making the processor work harder with digital filtering and the like, by altering sharpness in film modes... So leaving the sharpness alone instantly cured a concern with clarity that i had using smooth or nostalgic modes.

I think it's a worthy topic to test at length the characteristics of the film modes because just in an hour or so I found that it significantly alters the characteristics of the image to the point of even a 1/2 to full F-stop compared from nostalgic to dynamic. Of course I haven't looked at the manual regarding modes either, but I doubt it says much.

rains

Well I'm new here, GH1 shooter. Design school grad film major 8 yrs in the industry. 30 yrs of age from New Zealand. I shoot on full M, smooth flat as possible, FD, Panasonic, zeiss glass, fast and wide. I love my HGH1 Thanks Vitaliy and other contributors. I'm happy with results outdoors, lots of light, I have my own aesthetic tastes thats all i care about it really depends on what your doing. personally I've had way too many nights, weeks, months years, in post. Very minimal post with GH1 due to limits is great means I'm shooting more, concentrating on getting what I need to tell my story. Properly exposed shots enough light right time of day great scenes, equals easy post. Again it really depends on what your doing. Know your gear, post and sound. I dont mean adding a track off your iPod. If your in Sydney and like what you've read, let's have coffee.

MrAnthony

A flat style is not the same as actual dynamic range. Duh.

producer

As it can be seen, I already stopped any discussion of this topic, especially when there is just not any development about this primary matter, and even some people pull it retrogressively back...

fatpig

I think it's very amusing that MrAnthony repeatedly and completely ignores the videos and explanations posted here, which indicate what the producer whants to say, which is, that the flat picture style is the only way to fit more dynamic range into the picture, which can then be taken into color correction. if you dont want to colorcorrect- dont use flat picture style, mranthony. :) But he, and many others want to- and so the flat option would be a blessing to improve GH2s small dynamic range, compared to film.

that is the "film look"-part. the dynamic range. period.

Mark_the_Harp

Ingenious! By the way, you can also stamp / cut shapes out of a bit of cinefoil to get shaped bokeh highlights. A lot of fun to be had there!

LPowell

@Mark_the_Harp
"...I dug my Optex anamorphic out yesterday and had a go with it - it does seem to flare in uncontrolled lighting."

Thanks for the tip on Cinefoil, I've ordered some to try it out. The Optex 1.33X anamorphic lens uses the same glass as the Century Optics adapter, but the Optex's mechanical design lacks any provision for attaching a lens hood. I modified mine by removing the dysfunctional outer front ring. This allowed me to press-fit the plastic mounting ring of a 72mm collapsible rubber lens hood around the exposed front anamorphic lens mount. It fit perfectly. To give the lens orientation lock screw a good grip on the front element, I cut a narrow circular strip from a rubber lens focus ring I scavenged off an old broken lens. I stretched this around the base of the front lens like a wide rubber band. As you can see from the bottom photo, the 3-position rubber lens hood pops securely into place around its plastic lens mount, and can be adjusted to provide as much shading as needed.

The other trick with the Optex and Century Optic anamorphic adapters is to remove the rear lens element and reassemble it facing backwards. This produces a sharper anamorphic image for closeup shots, but puts distant objects out of focus.

MrAnthony

>As for producer, he forces this topic to exists. So, do not paint this in black.
flibnarb started the thread, not producer.

many people will read it and start learning proper things.
> I hope so.

>And trolls are quite rare anyway. :-)
Yes, they are. So, I'll take back saying he's trolling, but he needs to understand that just because he doesn't like the answer, it doesn't make the answer wrong. And demanding the flat style repeatedly, doesn't automatically make it a "film style." :-)

Vitaliy_Kiselev

>What are you doing here then? Maybe you should be in another forum altogether, one that can appreciate your cool logo and your backlit/underexposure style. We all know that every camera has issues and none of them are perfect, so there's no need to troll here.

I think that this are plain bad words that must be taken back.
Each guys here is different.
As for producer, he forces this topic to exists. So, do not paint this in black.
many people will read it and start learning proper things.
Some who understand that they need will be searching for flat style.And this is also not bad.
And trolls are quite rare anyway. :-)

MrAnthony

@ Producer: by your own words, you've never taken a class in photography, you don't know how to adjust the exposure settings in your camera, and you constantly ignore everyone's advice about learning about lighting, exposure and color correction while constantly whining for a "film look" or a flat image (which isn't a "film look"), which tells me you have no idea what you're asking for. Try taking everyone's advice and work on your exposure/ lighting skills and stop looking for some magic setting or magic camera to solve all your exposure/lighting problems. Since this forum/thread is about the GH1 hack, I find your comments to be trolling when you come in here and insultingly tell us to enjoy the Panasonic with its "news reportage look." What are you doing here then? Maybe you should be in another forum altogether, one that can appreciate your cool logo and your backlit/underexposure style. We all know that every camera has issues and none of them are perfect, so there's no need to troll here.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

@producer

Behave yourself :-) You moved completely offtopic and towards personal.
Want to talk about personal - use personal message.

producer

Your words "I've seen a hell of a lot more motion pictures... bla-bla..." speaks very clearly. Everyone's seen, not only you. But what have YOU created by yourself as a result to allow yourself to compare and spit other's excellent efforts?!?
Hehe, then enjoy your Panasonics with 1000.000.000MBps and adore your news reportage look...

stefanos

@producer
this conversation is spiraling into s#*t... For the love of God, try to listen... Trust me, that is not great color grading in that video and if u think it is, then I'm sorry but you are completely clueless, which is fine, as not everyone needs to be an expert in color correction but at least don't pretend to be. I've seen a hell of a lot more motion pictures than I care for, I've been watching 3 films a day in the cinema for the last month at a festival and I can tell you for sure that is not a motion picture look. these screengrabs http://eugenia.queru.com/2011/06/05/terminus-by-solomon-chase bear ABSOLUTELY no resemblance to the color management of that video u linked. They are a world apart, how is it possible to think they look similar??

Mark_the_Harp

OK. Just do it, don't keep talking about it.

producer

Yes, you're right, I don't give a s..t.
What makes me really confused is what kind of movie those persons watch to create such a weird and obviously not clear criteria even to themselves.
Meanwhile, talking about the look of the 5D Mark II video above, I simply don't understand how such a look can be criticized. That means that those persons just spit on every motion picture look. At the same time, with all my respect to LPowell, his video above (with GH1 and G2) has very amateurish look no matter of the position, lights and everything else applied. This is definitely a look out of any conception of mine. If that's what GH can produce, then I have to replace to Canon.

fatpig

hey producer, yes, its not a movie, its some tests- again- and yes i understand that people are bored of tests. nevertheless, it is a nice look that he achieved, its not the best i have seen, but its nice. :) certainly not very different from many hollywood looks. :) have a great day and dont let the guys who dont "get" you - get to your head ;)

producer

Actually, I didn't mean a story, I meant especially the beautiful shots and the great color grading that you don't like again somehow. I think I will stop discussing anymore because it seems like you've never watched motion pictures look. I can attach a lot of snapshots from many Hollywood movie productions with very similar look, but you deny it. Harry Potter movies have very similar look to what I shared earlier in this link http://eugenia.queru.com/2011/06/05/terminus-by-solomon-chase , but again you denied it. I really don't get what your conception is actually... Anyway......

MrAnthony

Wow, the first thing that struck me was the poor color balance in the opening shots--everything was green-tinted! @Mark: This isn't good from a stills photographer viewpoint either.

I hope he got model releases.

@Producer: do not confuse shallow depth of field with excellent work. There's more to any kind of photography than just shallow depth of field. As stefanos noted, go see Baraka. Amazing.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters