Is there analogous 'cinestyle' flat settings for stills photography?

[cayenne]

Hello all,
I'm exploring currently for my 5D3 of using the cine or flat styles for shooting, in order to retain as much sensor information as possible for color correction/grading in post.

It occured to me that I'd not see any real discussions for stills, and I'm wondering if there are similar settings to use, or not? If not...why not for stills, but so much attention to it for video?

It seems to me, more and more, while you do indeed try to get as much as possible correct in the original exposure (exposure, composition, etc)....that pretty much everything else like color and all, is done 99% in post production.

It seems to me the same is the case for both video and stills, and I was wondering with that being the case, why there were not recommended 'flat' settings for stills...?

Thanks in advance for any explanations on this!!


cayenne

 

[cinema-dslr]

That is why "most" shoot raw. so they can adjust everything in post.
Same is true for video if raw is a option then there is no need for cinestyles.

for video geting the picture right is even more inportant than shooting JPG because of the video codec compression.
compare a jpg at 7MB/picture with video 5MB/sec

 

[preppyak]

It seems to me the same is the case for both video and stills, and I was wondering with that being the case, why there were not recommended 'flat' settings for stills...?

There are actually, just a different process. "Flat" for stills involves shooting raw, and making sure all of the extra settings (auto-light optimizer, noise reduction, etc) are turned off. There is also ETTR, or exposing to the right, which is a similar technique to maximize dynamic range in stills.

So, while it isn't a single picture style, there are some tricks that are similar for stills

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Hello all,
I'm exploring currently for my 5D3 of using the cine or flat styles for shooting, in order to retain as much sensor information as possible for color correction/grading in post.

It occured to me that I'd not see any real discussions for stills, and I'm wondering if there are similar settings to use, or not? If not...why not for stills, but so much attention to it for video?

It seems to me, more and more, while you do indeed try to get as much as possible correct in the original exposure (exposure, composition, etc)....that pretty much everything else like color and all, is done 99% in post production.

It seems to me the same is the case for both video and stills, and I was wondering with that being the case, why there were not recommended 'flat' settings for stills...?

Thanks in advance for any explanations on this!!


cayenne

Yes. It is called RAW . And it's one million times better than Cinestyle jpgs or .movs.
Also some people feel Cinestyle takes TOO far and due to 8bits it can be hard to bring back to life without hitting some issues.

 

[dirtcastle]

Lightroom shadow/highlight/tone controls will do the trick.

 

[nightbreath]

"Flat" for stills involves shooting raw, and making sure all of the extra settings (auto-light optimizer, noise reduction, etc) are turned off.

Aren't those settings affecting only JPEG preview of the image? Could someone confirm what settings affect RAW files (I assume, HTP)? And do those settings (Picture Style, Noise Reduction, Auto-Lighting Optimizer) affect the initial image you get when you open the RAW file in LightRoom?

 

[nightbreath]

Anyone?

 

[Policar]

"Flat" for stills involves shooting raw, and making sure all of the extra settings (auto-light optimizer, noise reduction, etc) are turned off.

Aren't those settings affecting only JPEG preview of the image? Could someone confirm what settings affect RAW files (I assume, HTP)? And do those settings (Picture Style, Noise Reduction, Auto-Lighting Optimizer) affect the initial image you get when you open the RAW file in LightRoom?

I think only HTP and black frame subtraction do anything to the RAW file maybe other than tagging it with some settings.

I have no idea why anyone would want cinestyle for stills when they have raw or even neutral jpeg. Cinestyle for video was designed to fit into a log-based workflow, NOT because it has more dynamic range. And it looks really bad out of camera and tonality is generally worse once graded than material shot with the neutral mode. The proper answer is just control your light better. If you need that much dynamic range to capture the scene, you're probably going to get a flat image, which is a major problem because screens and paper are low contrast, or you'll have to use HDR or something tacky. Just light correctly or, if shooting landscapes, wait for good light. It's hilarious to me that DXO mark's "landscape" metric is measured by dynamic range...most good color landscapes are still shot on Velvia (four stops of dynamic range); even zone system, the first real HDR technique, is only ten stops!

 

[dshipley]

That is why "most" shoot raw. so they can adjust everything in post.
Same is true for video if raw is a option then there is no need for cinestyles.

This is not true. Red and the Blackmagic cinema cameras shoot in RAW and they also shoot very flat. I am interested in a knowledgable answer to this question too, as I want to expand the dynamic range of my DSLRs.

Short Answer: The appearance or look of RAW files are always the result of some kind of software or hardware processing. It is completely up to the processing of said hardware or software that determines how the image/video looks.

All RAW file types are different (some more than others and some less than others), but in both still and video RAW files contain the uncompressed or compressed Bayer Sensor Data along with some other items (metadata related to camera settings, type, etc). In order to see a preview from either requires demosaicing of the Bayer Sensor Data. So depending on demosaicing process (along with any other processes that are carried out along with it... white balancing, noise reduction, etc) you end up with an actual image (or preview).

RAW files from still cameras tend to have a processed JPEG within the RAW file wrapper for fast previewing purposes. So your camera that has essentially provided the demosaicing and other processing for previewing on the back of the camera. This is why changing your Picture Style while shooting RAW will still change what the preview image looks like on the back of the camera. Also, once you open your RAW image in software the software is providing the demosaicing and other processing to render the preview you see on screen.

RAW files from video cameras typically don't have transcoded previews within the RAW file wrapper for fast previewing and therefore require some sort of transcoding to preview. When previewing the footage on camera the camera is again doing the work while software does this if previewing on a computer.

 

[preppyak]

I think only HTP and black frame subtraction do anything to the RAW file maybe other than tagging it with some settings.

HTP, that's what it was. There is some discussion as to whether or not the other settings have any effect, but, if you are shooting RAW, there is zero reason to have any of them on anyway.

 

[cayenne]

I think only HTP and black frame subtraction do anything to the RAW file maybe other than tagging it with some settings.

HTP, that's what it was. There is some discussion as to whether or not the other settings have any effect, but, if you are shooting RAW, there is zero reason to have any of them on anyway.

Sorry noob question.
Can someone tell me what "HTP" and the "black frame subtraction" mean?

Thank you in advance,

cayenne

 

[nightbreath]

Sorry noob question.
Can someone tell me what "HTP" and the "black frame subtraction" mean?

Thank you in advance,
cayenne

The answers are:

[quote author=jrista]
Highlight tone priority is a camera mode that internally fiddles with exposure to preserve as much detail as possible in the "highlight range" of tones...the brightest tones in a photograph. It does this, however, at the cost of tones in the shadow range, as the ultimate effect is a shift of the histogram down towards the shadows. The cost of shadow tones is a bit less than the gain in highlight tones, however it is something to be aware of.
[/quote]

[quote author=Wikipedia]
In digital photography, dark-frame subtraction is a way to minimize image noise for pictures taken with long exposure times. It takes advantage of the fact that a component of image noise, known as fixed-pattern noise, is the same from shot to shot: noise from the sensor, dead or hot pixels. It works by taking a picture with the shutter closed.
[/quote]