Recent content by Barry Goyette

Hi Alex, I’m interested in the cinessd, if you want to work something with cyeung for the station.

yes. to compress 4k down to 100mb/s you pretty much have one option...Noise reduction. (followed by horrid-halo-inducing-aliased sharpening). You also lose a fair amount of color detail. It might be the way to go at night.

In stretching the DR on the x7, DJI introduced some pretty nasty issues in the deepest shadows (banded noise and cmos smear). Best to stay away from them. You can get good results at 1600...but you better not "underexpose" at 1600. Keep your exposures well to the right and it's not a...

Hi Paul, Thanks for the effort on your test. Just a minor correction to your last post. 6k Raw only requires the 240gb CineSSD. Somewhere along the line, DJI dropped that limit, (which I think, is still in the marketing), but I can confirm that you can record 6k CDNG to the 240. Barry Goyette

yeah...that's what RAW therapee is design to work with...RAW :-)

for now...you can solve it by processing the image in RAW therapee (free raw converter). Whatever profile DJI is including for this lens is unfixable in ACR, but RAW therapy doesn't even see it, so no problem. :-)

I think you just need to experiment with the various gammas that DJI supplies for h264/265 and see which you like. Unfortunately they seem to change the names of them with each go4 update, but different folks have different likes. I find the D-cinelike gives me a typical "WideDR" look and is the...

If you're using D-Log with ProRes, we've been getting pretty good results with the stock Arri LogC Rec709 LUT. (I work in FCPX, but Scott Randall has also confirmed it works well in Lumetri). For a little flatter result, The Canon C300mark II Clog to WideDR-Rec709 looks good as well. I'll be if...

--I keep seeing Barry Goyette posting about ProRes being "incorrectly" implemented and the absolute need for in camera lens correction. Well in the real world that's not correct. You want as little baked in as possible, you want to be able to make those changes in post. There is no need to waste...

...so it sound's like we're in agreement....Most of the people I know shooting RAW Video on the ground, I would consider advanced amateurs, folks who thought a BlackMagic camera was a good deal, or young folks whose parents offered them or a Red or a BMW, and they decided to keep the Honda. :-)...

I think your definition of amateur and mine are very different. As somebody who has been working professionally every day for 30 years, doing higher end work in mostly in smaller markets, I can tell you that a RAW workflow isn't part of most production budgets that I see. I think this is true...

---The ProRes footage does have a slightly better color preservation and less aliasing, but you won't notice this too much unless you're really zoomed in on the footage. Scott's comparison of H264 to ProRes in DLog showed significant differences in color resolution and false detail/aliasing...

I'm curios if it's the polar pro filter. I've had problems with sharpness with them in the past, and they are known for IR problems which could lead to the blahs. Lack of sharpness can increase the perceived presence of noise. (and again..this footage on youtube doesn't look sharp to me.

I use LUT utility in FCPX, not sure where the alexa LUT came from..there is one that loads with FCPX, but this one I might have downloaded from ARRI. The C300 LUTs are available from canon's Cinema eos support site. There's about a hundred of them :-)