Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Dont beleive in cinestyle?
Posts: 4789
-
Karma: 1,813
Am I the only one who doesnt believe in cinestyle?
I had ran a few tests a while ago and was happy with the lowlight gain I got from it but rarely ever used it because it looks like pure shit until you color correct it to look exactly like you would have had it with loss in the shadows.
Everyone is raving about it so I just figured Im being lazy and not correcting it properly or something.
fast forward, now I read up on it more, decide to start playing with the LUT. basicaly it does the same thing as before, same loss of new information but now it happens automatically.
I ran tests shooting cinestyle in
their prefered settings,
prefered/+1 saturation (keep color info)
Standard
From having played with the footage with corretion, LUT and analysing all of my scopes I was realy unimpressed and my image was actualy worse. At the same sharpness settings, my image using cinestyle becomes noticably softer than at standard/same sharpness. Even after sharpening!
on the theory side of things, what makes me hesitate about the picture style is that even if you gain more dynamic range, at 8bits color space on a 7D, there is not much you can do to correct your footage without banding your footage.
So why dont I get it? why is everyone going through more editing time to shoot superflat when they realy dont increase dynamic range, or get anything out of it since, once edited to look acceptable, it gives me the same tonal detail as if I shot it standard.
Is there something Im missing here? im trying to understand what everything loves about this.
thanks erbody.
Posts: 4789
-
Karma: 1,813
color depth, dont flame on me camera geeks!
Posts: 20239
-
Karma: 1,273
Generally speaking, at the foundation of this "DSLR revolution" are people without an understanding of basic post processes blindly following blog sites commissioned by Canon and regurgitating its info.
Shooting in 8-bit for heavy post work doesn't make sense, and unfortunately people seem to forget that skepticism is healthy.
Posts: 2930
-
Karma: 701
I like using it. It gives you just that much more room to work. I actually love color grading. It's that final step that makes your film finally come together. I've grown to love a flatter image, as long as it's sharp (unless there's a reason for it not to be).
I haven't done any tests with it vs other picturestyles. I have however noticed the serious banding issues when you push it too far.
I'd like to hear what people with any expertise on the topic have to say about it.
Posts: 2439
-
Karma: 1,578
Doesn't do shit except produce shit.
Posts: 61603
-
Karma: 123,089
with 8bit 4:2:0 codecs, the goal of your picture styles should be to minimize color grading . i like doing a little but i try to do less basic grading. experimenting and other extreme grading is a different story. in the end, you should have a picture profile/style that minimizes grading.
Posts: 9297
-
Karma: 7,706
bumping this to hear more thoughts. Just put it on my cam and plan on trying it out soon/seeing how hard it is to grade in post
Posts: 9037
-
Karma: 6,943
Posts: 5584
-
Karma: 3,097
I used it once when shooting an interview in a "warm" room and found it to give me the results I want. But a friend of mine who's filming based out of LA told me he's talked to a few DP's and they all told him to stay away from it since it's pointless in that it doesn't do what it's supposed to do (increase DR). I've been using Neutral for non-skiing and landscape for skiing, get's me the colors I want and sets me up for a simple/quick time in post.
Posts: 8770
-
Karma: 10,467
Iv heard cinestyle and magic lantern dont play nicely together so iv been using marvels advanced recently. it gives me a pretty darn good image that i barely have to color correct.
All times are Eastern (-5)
