Messages

316

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Overexposure problems when using Marvels Cinestyle v 3.4

« on: February 27, 2013, 10:28:38 AM »

Thank you!!

Are you using a 5D3 with one of the beta versions of ML ?

You're welcome. Yes, I've been using the the ML 5D3 beta. Whenever I use the 5D3 for video, I've been using the ML beta. Unfortunately, I haven't had the time to shoot much video recently.

Good luck!

Ok, thanks for the info.
While I've read about ML, I've not ever tried using it...and I was waiting for Magic Lantern for the 5D3 to get a little more closer to 'gold' stage before trying to use it. I've read that it is safe and won't brick the camera, but still, I'm being a little overly cautious.

So, I'll give it a new look and read up on how to download and install it on the SD card (I think it resides and boots from there?).....and see how it goes.

Thank you,

cayenne

317

Software & Accessories / Recording LOUD Live Concert music with 5D3, and Rode mics: Advice?

« on: February 26, 2013, 05:20:33 PM »

Hi all,

I'm about to start taking some video and sound of some local bands. I currently have the Rode video mic (mono) that I've loved using. And, I'm about to pull the trigger on the deal to get the Rode Stereo Videomic Pro where you buy that and get Pluraleyes 3 free.

I was thinking when filming some bands playing locally, I'd keep the regular video mic on the camera, and the Stereo Videomic pro on a stand in back of the club, hooked to my older Zoom HD.

But I'm thinking...will a loud band blow all my sound out? Can I limit on camera from that mic, so I can still use it as a reference?

The newer stereo video mic seems to indicate that it has a "A -10dB PAD" switch to allow recording of loud sounds...so, hoping that would be ok, but I'm not sure how much sound pressure a typical rock, pop  or jazz band would put out? Would this suffice?

Link:
http://www.rodemic.com/mics/stereovideomicpro

Anyway, just curious if anyone here recording live concert stuff and if so, how do you go about getting good sound?

Thank you in advance,

cayenne

318

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Overexposure problems when using Marvels Cinestyle v 3.4

« on: February 26, 2013, 11:21:56 AM »

cayenne - I read over your other thread, too - so I'll respond to a couple of things.

First, to your question here: yes, I tend to underexpose (according to the camera's meter) when using Marvel. Actually, I rarely even refer to the in-camera meter. Rather, I use the histogram to set my exposure. As Axilrod suggests in the other thread, it is often desirable to preserve the highlights. The only way you can do this is to use the histogram. Also, the histogram I use is Magic Lantern's, which has a very helpful clipping indicator and a way to set/change white balance (and a vectorscope, if you prefer to set white balance by looking at the vectorscope).

Second, I prefer Marvel as a "flat" style compared to Techinicolo Cinestyle in many circumstances because it isn't so flat that you must do a ton of work in post to get some contrast back. However, Marvel is flat enough to preserve some shadow detail and some highlight detail in my experience. Properly exposed (as you are seeing), Marvel looks pretty good out of the camera, yet holds up nicely in grading. 

Regarding the lack of LUT for Cinestyle: I never used a LUT and was pretty happy with what I could get Cinestyle to achieve. The problem is that I HAD to apply something to every clip and I sometimes suffered problems with banding because I was stretching so much. My point is that, without a LUT, you get most of the way there by adding back a lot of contrast with either a contrast adjustment or by using curves and adding an S-like shape to the curve. Then, tweak to taste.

Thank you!!

Are you using a 5D3 with one of the beta versions of ML ?

I'm going to shoot some more test footage...maybe just another short of my 'cooking show'...and make sure to try the histogram trick to check exposure...I can get them both up at same time on camera, so will try to work with those then, I can definitely see where it would be handy to make sure highlights aren't blown out, which does seem to be one of my main problem.

I've remedied the mixing of light colors in my kitchen, everything is now 2700K, so that should take some variability I've been having to deal with...out of the picture so to speak.


Thanks for the feedback all!!

cayenne

319

Lighting / Re: 600EX RT vs AlienBees

« on: February 22, 2013, 01:40:01 PM »

So I'm trying to decide what kind of lighting gear to buy in the near future. Currently, I shoot with a 430EX on-camera and some cheap manual flashes triggered wirelessly by radio, but I want to move into wireless TTL OR monolight strobes. I realize that each of these systems has advantages and disadvantages -- I feel that I would benefit from the advantages of both, but purchasing both systems is out of the question due to the cost. I would be shooting on-location portraits and weddings with this gear.

600EX RT advantages:
1) Built-in wireless transceiver
2) Portability
3) High-speed sync
4) ETTL

The main reason I would choose the Canon RT system over 3rd-party speedlites is point #1: no longer do I have to worry about charging dozens of batteries just to use two speedlites, or trying to figure out whether the problem is with my flash or the radio triggers when troubleshooting during a shoot -- everything is in one self-contained unit.

As for point #2: I can fit 2 or 3 of these speedlites in my bag with my camera... I don't have to worry about packing strobes in a separate bag.

Point #3: I'd like to do more shooting in bright sunlight. I'm using a 6D right now which has a terrible sync speed of 1/180 (I've shot at 1/200 with no problem without HSS but I would still prefer a higher sync) so HSS could prove to be a real advantage for me.

Point #4: I'd be able to hotshoe mount the speedlites and use them for bounce flash, which is something I already do pretty frequently with my 430EX. In addition, I might find that I like having wireless ETTL ratio control and use that instead of manual.


AlienBee advantages:
1) Power
2) Recycle time
3) Price
4) Modifiers

Point #1: You can never have enough flash power.

Point #2: Although I haven't had too much of an issue with speedlite recycle times, instant flash recycle times definitely won't hurt.

Point #3: For the price of just two 600EX RTs I could buy four ABs and a Vagabond. WTF is with that price, Canon?

Point #4: Really liking the Paul Buff modifiers. They're inexpensive and seem to work great with the ABs.


So what do you guys think? It looks like I spent a lot of time trying to justify going with the Canon system whereas the ABs are a no-brainer at the price point. Honestly, if I do go with the Canon system I am going to wait for them to release some RT slaves first so I would only have to buy one 600EX... 480EX RT anyone?

What all of AB stuff are you thinking about here? Model numbers? What's the cost you're looking at?
I've heard of AB stuff, but don't know much about it...sounds interesting, but I'd not know what a noob to them would be buying...can you fill in a bit more detail please?


Thanx!

cayenne

320

EOS Bodies / Re: Cancelled order from adorama because of price mistake, help!

« on: February 20, 2013, 08:45:21 PM »

If you listed your $2000 camera on Craigslist and tyoed in $20 in error. would you honor it?

Agree.....even if it was typed (or typoed) in instead of tyoed in .  Reputable companies like Adorama cancel the order before it processes, some (as mentioned by a previous poster) charge your card then credit you back....often at their leisure.     Chalk it up to "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't"

I installed a new keyboard this morning, my old one seemed to be contributing to typo's.  It was actually worse, I just returned it to Costco.
I found that I did not like any of the keyboards I saw.  I wish I had my old IBM keyboard from the 1980's they were expensive and made by Keytronics right here in Spokane.  I used to have several of them, but being the old connector style I got rid of them.

There is a company that bought the rights, and makes the old bucking spring IBM type keyboards, but now in USB...

I have one and LOVE it...heavy, loud when typing...using it right now.

Here's the company:

http://pckeyboard.com/page/category/UKBD

This is the keyboard I got:

http://pckeyboard.com/page/UKBD/UB40P4A  They're about $79....built like a tank like the days of old.

I'd highly recommend them...if you're a fan of the old IBM keyboards.

HTH,
cayenne

321

Lenses / Re: New Canon USA Lens & Speedlite Rebates

« on: February 20, 2013, 11:12:19 AM »

The link to BH is dead, so what's the deal on the 600 speedlight if any?  Will this deal migrate to Canon Canada?

It is $50...which, I believe is $10 less than last time for rebates.

322

Video & Movie / Re: Camera Test: Need Advice, Marvels Cine, Lighting, Resolve Color Grading, etc...

« on: February 19, 2013, 02:37:32 PM »

You might also try using an incident light meter to see what kind of readings you get. The reflected meter in your camera is taking a guess at what it thinks you want. An incident meter will give you the actual amount of light falling in a specific place in the scene. It's also helpful in setting up your lighting so you can get your ratios to your liking.

Would you have a recommendation for a good bang for the buck  incident light meter?

Thanks!

c

323

Video & Movie / Re: Camera Test: Need Advice, Marvels Cine, Lighting, Resolve Color Grading, etc...

« on: February 19, 2013, 01:39:39 PM »

I agree with the other poster, mix lighting is a huge pain in the butt and flourescents are very unflattering.  Usually when I'm using daylight balanced LED's I'll set the WB to 5200-5500 (depends on the situation) and then use a 3200K litepanel for the hair light/kicker/backlight since it has a nice warm glow when the WB is at 5500k. 

Also, with DSLR's I generally end up going underexposed (relative to the in-camera meter) by usually almost a full stop.  You want to try to expose for highlights with these, and it's always better to underexpose than overexpose, since blown-out detail is incredibly difficult to recover with 8-bit compressed video.  But I can have a severely underexposed clip and make it look pretty damn good, but with even slightly overexposed stuff I can only hope to get it to acceptable at best.

Hey, thanks for all the input!!

I bought all new lights to try to use this weekend...alll color temp 2700K (this was pretty much my only choice on the track light halogen U10 lights....that I could match with CFLs for my clamp lights)....so, hopefully, the mixed lighting will be out of the equation.

One other question I have..once you get WB right...contract set.
What do you do to get colors to really pop? 

So far, when I get color correction set right for the basic stuff as above, I'm still not able to figure how to get the colors to pop as much and image to look as sharp as it seems to come out with the Canon preset 'normal' or default style.....

I'm wanting to shoot flat..and have my finished video to look better than the presets...but so far, is an uphill battle for me...

C

324

Video & Movie / Re: Camera Test: Need Advice, Marvels Cine, Lighting, Resolve Color Grading, etc...

« on: February 19, 2013, 01:36:01 PM »

Hey Cayenne!  I'm about to go read the rest of your responses in this thread, but first off I think you should drop resolve from the equation.  I don't think there is anything you can do with it that you wouldn't be able to do with FCPX's built-in color correction and/or Magic Bullet Looks.  If DSLR video was 10-bit or 12-bit then maybe it would be worth having Resolve in the mix, but with 8-bit it's just overkill and only adds complexity to your workflow.

I kind alike Resolve....when the workflow works, but mostly in that the controls on Resolve are much more intuitive to me for color correction, with the color dials, and the nodal workflow, I find it it easier to keep up with my different corrections.

I just can't seem to get the same control or at least "I" haven't figure it out with the slider controls on FCPX.  I also find the scopes to be a bit easier to see and work with on Resolve vs FCPX. For instance, after seeing a colorist describe how he was able to fix color balance by finding a black object on the parade scope, and correcting it, and doing the same with a white object on the scope and doing the same..that white balance would be set...I was able to do this much easier with the controls on Resolve vs FCPX.

I agree it is likely overkill for canon footage, but I find that I am more comfortable with the controls of Resolve than with FCPX.  But hey, I'm good to try to learn as many different paradigms as I can...so, when the xml from FCPX to Resolve and back breaks, I concentrate on doing it within FCPX. 

325

EOS Bodies - For Video / Overexposure problems when using Marvels Cinestyle v 3.4

« on: February 19, 2013, 11:56:24 AM »

Hello all,

I'm trying to work and learn more with flat settings for video. I've shot some sample tests:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=13012.0

And I found that using Marvels, and even the manual flat settings as recommended by many on the site here...that when setting exposure in the viewer, that when it showed proper exposure in the in camera meter, that the output was quite overexposed.

On the test footage, on the two clips where I underexposed by about 2 stops, I had much better footage and room for color correction/grading...nothing was blown out like with the ones I'd set by the in camera meter.

Those test shots are also of me trying out setting white balance with and Expodisc which seemed to work pretty well...but this exposure things seems to be a problem I'm having....anyone else have this problem?

Thanks in advance,

cayenne

326

Video & Movie / Re: Camera Test: Need Advice, Marvels Cine, Lighting, Resolve Color Grading, etc...

« on: February 19, 2013, 11:51:04 AM »

I'm not going to go into a heap of detail here but from what i can see i can tell you from looking at your basic image that the biggest issue you are having is mixed colour temps of your lights.

Buy some Gels and then change your colour temp of all of your lights to be the same. (or replace the bulbs, but Gels are easier and probably cheaper)

Heres a basic tutorial http://www.videomaker.com/videonews/2011/08/11041-lighting-for-video-color-correction-gels

Once you do that you will see that your colours will be even and make it a hell of a lot easier to grade.

Secondly your uncorrected footage seems very in-camera graded and not flat.

You may want to try something such as Cinestyle and see how that compares for grading.
https://www.technicolorcinestyle.com

Lastly if you have an iPhone or similar download a light meter app https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pocket-light-meter/id381698089?mt=8
It will help you get a more accurate light reading that trying to do it through the camera.

Thanks for the reply...and the links.
Yes, the mixed lighting is a HUGE problem.  This weekend, I bought new halogens for the kitchen flood lights...all 2700K. I bought new CFL bulbs for my clamp lights...also all 2700K. So, that should all match.

Interesting you mention the 'in camera' correction. I was shooting with the Marvels Cinestyle v 3.4. I too thought that would be flatter than it looked. I downloaded the Technicolor Cinestyle...but found that they now want you to pay for the LUT that is needed for it....and I've not been able to find the old free LUT anywhere on the internet yet (I still need to search on USENET).

But I was using a flat style....it is flatter than the manual settings I'd been using before, per suggestions from the list here. It is the Marvels Cinestyle 3.4, and is set just as it came from their site with all default settings. Is there some tuning people do off this to get it even flatter?

I'll do some more quick tests maybe this coming weekend once I have a chance to replace all the lights and get them to all match same color temp.

From looking at this footage, I"m still thinking I may need to underexpose by about 1-2 stops from the meter reading in the camera with the flat style in order to keep it from being overexposed.

Any other thoughts?

cayenne

327

Video & Movie / Re: Camera Test: Need Advice, Marvels Cine, Lighting, Resolve Color Grading, etc...

« on: February 17, 2013, 06:25:00 PM »

Hi All,

Ok, I found out vimeo can't be embedded here. ON the original post, I put the link to the vimeo verson with the 2.35:1 aspect ratio I created.  The youtube one embeds, but when uploading to them, they put the black bars back in on top and bottom.

Anyway, if anyone will give this a look after the technical problems I"ve had....I'd still appreciate comments on what I need to do about lighting, WB, color grading, and exposure (it seems under exposing per the meter on the camera seems to work best when using the flatter picture styles?

Thanks!

cayenne

328

Video & Movie / Has anyone put up vimeo links to this forum successfully?

« on: February 16, 2013, 08:17:42 PM »

Hello all,

I've tried posting a simple link to my video on vimeo, and also the 'share' code they want you to use (current there now) with the HTML iframe and other tags that don't seem to work (they asked me to cut and paste that code there to try it)....

Just wondering if vimeo works on this forum, or only youtube?

Thanks,

cayenne

329

Video & Movie / Re: Camera Test: Need Advice, Marvels Cine, Lighting, Resolve Color Grading, etc...

« on: February 16, 2013, 10:38:53 AM »

Well, just great.
My first attempt using vimeo..and video doesn't seem to load.

Anyone use vimeo before with a solution?  I can play it just fine directly from the site...I wanted to try them out so I could do the proper aspect ratio....

C

330

Video & Movie / Camera Test: Need Advice, Marvels Cine, Lighting, Resolve Color Grading, etc...

« on: February 16, 2013, 10:37:43 AM »

Hello all,

This is likely a boring clip for anyone to watch, I was just doing this for myself to see if I could figure out better ways of lighting, and trying to use the flatter Marvels Cine 3.4, and along with that, roundtrip from FCPX to Davinci Resolve Lite.

The roundtripping isn't working great right now, xml problems, but I did just grade the raw footage and worked it that way.

I do know that I now need to get my CFL clamp lights, changed out to a color temp that more closely balances out the 'static' lights in the kitchen which are on track lights, and are halogens at about 2700K (clamp lights were 5000K).
I'm going to remedy that now, and that will help with the white balance.

But in looking through these clips, it appears that I had the BEST luck..when all things were equal, I set the exposure on the cameras light meter to about 2 stops under exposed?!?!  Everything else, using any of the flatter picture styles, seems to be over exposed even though the camera meter reading looks dead on center.

Any thoughts on that?

I was also testing out the ExpoDisc thing, that you put on the end of the camera, which essentially covers the lens with 18% grey, and you shot an shot through it (recommended that you do it from the targets POV back to where the camera will be, and this DOES seem to work best).  In the latter tests, you can definitely see when dong the Expodisc from the camera POV, the scene was VERY green.

Anyway, this was with my 5D3. The ExpoDisc for setting custom white balance, I color graded with Davinci Resolve Lite, and used FCPX as my NLE.

Lighting was as described above.

Again, this isn't artsy, not interesting..just me rambling about the settings on a camera test, but I'd appreciate input on the exposure, the color grading (I have each clip doing a split screen with out of camera on left and corrected on the right)....

I really want to be able to get the very high quality cinema look the 5D3 is  capable of, but so far, I don't think I seem to be able to put things together right, to get the picture as good (or hopefully better) than using the "normal" or "Neutral" settings on the camera.

So..please look and give me suggestions!!!

Again, thank you all so far for helping me to understand the camera and how to try to use it!!

cayenne

Test Footage: Marvels Cinestyle 3.4/Lighting	Small | Large

Ps. Sorry for the confusion. Apparently, you can't embed VIMEO here...I wanted to show this in the 2.35:1 aspect ratio I edited it to, and YT added the black bars back in.

The vimeo URL for the 2.35:1 is  at this link:  https://vimeo.com/59782968