Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
'Apocalypse Now' Experimental Series 1 Thread - BOOM, Intravenus - cbrandin/driftwood AN Soft/Cinema
  • 1089 Replies sorted by
  • @driftwood... hello!

    wondering,,, if there p and b frame scaling for BOOM?

    or is this matrix only 4 intra?

  • @Stray. I am a fan of AN 6GOP Nebula. I was wondering if you have tried any of the Valkyrie settings and what you thought about it?

  • I have just uploaded a small settings 444 Clash/comparison.

    Thanks to Personal View, Driftwood and bkmcwd. Hope you guys enjoy it. Made with a "soft" lens, NOT a lumix "sharp" lens. Please check the differences. This is a WIDE SHOT, so its a good comparison for WIDE SHOTS, for close ups or Skin Tones please don't mind this test.

    I will try to run some tests on Lumix lens later. ADVICE: Run your own tests, it's definitely the best way for you to know what works for your project.

  • Will be trying out Intravenus v1 tomorrow. @Driftwood, thanks for the time and effort for these great patches

  • I shot an interview today using Nick Driftwood's AN 444 Soft matrix, with the Olympus f1.8 75mm prime MFT glass. Password is "LadyPart" (case sensitive).

    I really like this patch for skin tone and interviews. Thanks Mr @Driftwood, and also to VK for making this possible.

  • Took a risk this morning and now glad I did, shooting a high-paid gig with a major Napa winery on an experimental setting - Boom!

    Wish I could share some of the footage, but these frame grabs should give an idea. Raw ungraded footage, Smooth -2-2-2-2, Voigtlander 25mm f/.95 and Pentax 55mm f/2.

    1920 x 1080 - 3M
    1920 x 1080 - 3M
    1920 x 1080 - 3M
    1920 x 1080 - 2M
  • @Zaven13 Valkyrie is good too but I'm not seeing any advantages to using it over AN Nebula with what I'm shooting at the moment. In a few situations I've seen AN Nebula maintain a higher I-Frame than Valkyrie for what its worth, but subjectively the image is the same, and in post work there is no real difference. I have also been shooting an awful lot of lowlight footage (more out of necessity than choice) and AN Nebula gives the best performance I've seen from a longer GOP setting. However, thats more likely down to the look you get using it in that situation, and how I feel about that look more than any real measurable technical reason. I'd still say you can't beat a GOP1 running CBR-like in lowlight. When it comes to GOP3 settings, I'm still going to reach for GOLGOP3-13 at the moment, which is great in both lowlight and for general shooting.

  • @Sangye Perhaps you recorded this footage in low light but using my Avisynth script shows that none of the subject matter falls into the dangerously low luminance zone. I think you shot this subject matter in the best possible way.

    I would be interested to know what ISO you used?

    BLtV_Sangye _3.png
    1920 x 1080 - 3M
    BLtV_Sangye _4.png
    1920 x 1080 - 2M
  • @jesh @peternap: regarding the iso bug: to my knowledge you dont have to stick to the 2nd row. You have to chose an option of the 2nd row first, before you swap to the first row. Then the numbers of the first row should be noise free and un-bugged. If you choose an option of the first row right away, you get the noise.

  • @moviearmada: thanks a lot for your comparison. Very nice set up and way to compare, with one exception maybe: i think youtube due to its harsh compression is not the best platform to compare your very good work effectively.

  • @Mirrorkisser check the Vimeo version, try to download the file and watch it on your computer. Either way vimeo is compressed at 5mb/s also. Maybe i'll try to export a higher res file and upload it somewhere.

  • @MovieArmada Make the same comparison, only 720p, you can see how thin the line jump, increasing 300%, except cluster7 sharp2, there will not jump the line.

  • @vicx I was also very pleasantly surprised when I got home and reviewed the footage. It was one of those shoots where everything just went perfectly right.

    In the pre-sunrise shots, I mostly used ISO 640, and occasionally 1,250. After that I stayed at ISO 320. I couldn't say for certain what ISO those two frame grabs you analyzed were, but I'd guess the tractor was 1,250 and the grapes were 640. The tractor was on the 25mm, set to f/1.2 I believe. The grapes were on the 55mm at f/2. Both were at shutter speed 1/40. It wasn't quite as dark as you may think. The tractor shot was within minutes of sunrise and there was already quite a bit of atmospheric light, and the full moon was also still illuminating everything.

  • @MirrorKisser yes I have known about the fix, but every time the camera is turned off it has to be done again, and In case I space out, and dont switch to the second row first, I think a lot of people are just using those 2nd row ISO's because no matter how forgetful you are, they will always have consistent results. I am thinking I will just use the 2nd row for now and perhaps the gh3 will be around in a few months and bug free so I can use the native ones :D

  • @jesh, as far as i recall there was a reason why the native ones, aka the ones of the first row should be used. Maybe someone with more pedigree can help out?

  • @Mirrorkisser I suspect it's the second row that are the "native" ISO levels, the standard 200, 400, 800... sequence. One telling clue is that the sensor's DR hits its max at ISO 200, and isn't any better at ISO 160. That suggests that ISO 160 is a digitally scaled down derivative of ISO 200. Here's a link to the GH2's sensor test results:

  • @lpowell: cheers for the info. Too bad 320 is not in the list, because many shoot with it. Someone here in the forum who works as DP once explained the benefit of the iso values 160, 320 etc. Those can be found on any camera. If the booze has not totally gotten my memory, i think he was even referring to an iso rule, similar to the 180degree shutter role. I will look if i find it again. Although what lpowell says makes perfectly sense, too. So you rarely shoot above 200 iso? Thats your natural setting? Cheers

  • @Mirrorkisser Not sure which one you were referring to, but guys like Martin Zahuta advocated it because it seemed the negative gain (ISO 200 brought down to 160) meant less noise showed up on cameras like the 60D. The idea was to use a third stop below whatever the native ISOs were (so if the native ISO had been 1250 then you would have used ISO 1,000, etc.)

    So it wasn't so much the numbers themselves, just the third stop relationship below the native ISOs.

    However, I consider myself very ignorant on the topic so you are much better reading up on your own. :)

  • Any news about the cinema preset? thanks

  • @thepalalias: cheers for the info, will look into it!

    It appears that for noise reduction the simulated isos (160,320 etc) are best. Lpowell is right, the 2nd row are the native isos. So according to the two links, your best of shooting at iso 160, you have the biggest dynamic range and still as little noise as possible (provided you outplay the iso bug)

    Cant tell why though, 320 sometimes appeals more to my eye...

  • @Mirrorkisser Perhaps prefer a small hint of noise in the picture? :) Thanks for all the help with filling in the data from the 60P testing!

  • this is a short video i did yesterday. mind you, i am a complete noob when it comes to settings and such. had the gh2 for only a week and loaded the an drewnet soft firmware in it. the results came out great even with my lack of skills.

    youtube does take a ton of quality out of the video though :/

  • @driftwood - Boom! held up great in DaVinci

    Screen Shot 2012-10-01 at 3.36.26 PM.png
    2560 x 1440 - 4M
  • @artiswar Nice shot. Looks like you have some dramatic intensity here with this character. Curious to see film when it's done. Please share and post if, and when, you're able.

  • @matt_gh2 - Thanks! That's what we're aiming for! Currently cut an 8 minute version for a local short festival but the 12 minuter is going to be the one everybody sees. I'll be sure to post it up here. An homage to Karusmaki and Malick in a way.

This topic is closed.
← All Discussions