Personal View site logo
'Apocalypse Now' Experimental Series 1 Thread - BOOM, Intravenus - cbrandin/driftwood AN Soft/Cinema
  • 1089 Replies sorted by
  • @mobileavatar sorry for not including it, I shot with the cinema profile

    @driftwood haha you can test my blog if you like, just includes more info if people care to read. From my test I noticed a difference but it was subtle, are my results what you would expect or should we be seeing a more dramatic difference?

  • @Xenocide38 Perhaps do some extended grading tests and report it here. Its your personal view - say what you think but say it here. You'll get more respect for it. That's my personal view. Also try out the original Soft matrix settings.

  • @driftwood Thanks. Will do.

  • @driftwood For those who like to convert before Grading/Post would you recommend using ProRess 4444 instead of 422 HQ?

    Kind regards


  • @lambo what pp is that? anything done to it?

  • Amazing, HBR 25p, Cluster7 Nebula Sharp ... average video bit rate over 50mbps ... Vibrant: -2,-2,0,-2

  • I got some strange artefacts with Cluster v7 444 seti. Looks like bright horizontal lines. Look at the edges of blue construction in the right corner (file: bccap0000.jpg) . Second image (bscap0001.jpg) is few frames forward - no artefacts. Got same with VLC too.

    edited on 2012.08.31 @driftwood I stand corrected. Installed K-Lite and now after pressing pause on WMP few seconds later codec solves the artefacts.

    1914 x 1077 - 339K
    1920 x 1080 - 361K
  • @Driftwood and others, splendid work, just in time to test a lovely old Yashinon-DX lens I just got. Here's a v7 DREWnet 444 'sharp' test. Looks great to me. Download the 1080p 15mbps exported version to see the quality.

  • @janis That's a good looking shot. (I think I saw what you meant with artefacts (white lines under blue construction), but I had to really look to see it. Would have never noticed unless you mentioned. Perhaps noticeable on a big screen TV or theater screen.)

  • Thanks Nick, and everybody who has worked hard on these new settings, really looks special :) not forgetting Vitaliy thank you! :)

  • @Driftwood I'm having some trouble sorting out what does what Nick.

    I tried drewnet 444 sharp today and my first opinion is it doesn't like the 14-140 and it doesn't like harsh light and hard shadows in 720p. When the exposure was even and perfect, the image was splendid. When it was not, the highlights blew very easily. I'll spend some more time with it later today.

  • I am planning some green screen using the 14-50 leicasonic. It is not as edgy as the panasonic lenses but I would not call it soft. Any suggestion for soft vs sharp against green screen improvement would be appreciated. I guess I am asking, especially @driftwood or @cbrandin, if color space improvements are greater in the sharp or soft versions.

  • drewnet444 sharp. 14-140, Standard -2

    1280 x 720 - 1M
  • I tried the nebular 444 soft and compared to flowmotion 2.02 or cluster v.6 nebular it feels like i have a bit more noise in lowlight even at lower isos. In a well lit scenario it looks good though.

  • @Mirrorkisser Thanks! That will save me a lot of time tonight.

  • @Xenocide38 From the objectives you describe at your "blog," I don’t understand why you want a hack. Just stick with the stock. Your "test" was so limited I don't understand how you could reach any conclusions. Finally, people who shoot "trees and bushes" (which, apparently, you have some kind of problem with) do so to evaluate detail handling and motion of fine detail. Were you able to evaluate any of that from your test? Were you stressing the recordings you compared with your beard?

    I don't mean to be harsh -- but I am being honest. You drew some pretty hefty conclusions from a few seconds of a nearly static headshot that contradict serious work from serious people.

    @peternap Use the "soft" with micro-four-thirds lenses. Use the "sharp" with classic film lenses. The results of these settings are amazing and superior to anything I’ve yet seen from a GH2.

  • @adamquesada PP ?? Post Production ?? i used Color, Colorista II. Colorbalance...and Lens was Nokton 25mm

  • @onionbrain Thanks! I had it backwards. I'll reload and have at it again. The Rino's aren't the best test anyway.

  • @onionbrain My only intent was to examine the hack in a situation I deal with frequently and that is talking heads. You're right in the assessment that I don't necessarily "need" a hack for what I do and so I don't really do a lot of hack testing. However, Apocalypse Now seemed intriguing as it promises simulated 444 color and the limited color space has always been one of my biggest complaints with DSLRs.

    I'm sorry if you found my test pointless but I appreciate your feedback. Hopefully it helps some people and if not, then I apologize for wasting their time. The trees and bushes comment was made in jest and only meant as a joke. I understand the reasoning for shooting such objects but don't find them very valuable to my work and I'm sure others will do those tests anyway. I only meant to provide a test that evaluated my needs and maybe the needs of others.

    I think the hack work is amazing and far beyond anything I could hope to attempt on my own. The knowledge of @driftwood and others is invaluable and I respect their contributions greatly. I think almost every hack on this site improves the camera to some extent and I am very thankful for that.

  • Everytime I think I might just buy the BMC or a Scarlet, nick comes along and does something incredible....

    And chris. Cannot forget Chris.

  • @JDN

    LOL +1 :-)

  • So yeah I was wondering if we will have the Cinema Matrix for Sedna

  • @janis Ive seen that problem with AVCHD (and stock recordings) files played back thru VLC & Quicktime and screengrabbing. I refuse to use them sticking to only true ffmpeg/decent AVCHD codecs to play back footage. If you use Mac OSX use Movist and try it out. If youre Win7 etc... use WMP with a decent codec pack like K-Lite Codec Pack 9.2.0.

    A lot of visual artefacts happen when;-

    A/ you don't copy over the entire private folder which includes all the hi-bitrate AVCHD files and their metadata and the result is choppy/artefact footage from a slow sdcard reader


    B/ You aren't using a decent enough codec based player (like the ones I mention above). Either download/buy one (K-Lite is free) or use your NLE to check footage.

    Please check thoroughly again.



  • @peternap Yep, onionbrain is correct. Soft is aimed at Pany lenses, Sharp is aimed more at Soft lenses.

This topic is closed.
← All Discussions