n8rv
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.6 #10 · Canon video thread for hybrid shooters... | |
Carlo_M wrote:
n8rv thank you for doing all that work!
Since YT compresses everything down to a lowest common denominator (even at 4K rez) I'll trust to your observations based on your master files on your computer. I do agree that, especially via YouTube, to my eyes (viewing on a 4K monitor at full screen) there was no discernible difference in any of the lossless files. And while I do agree the 4K/8K SRAW/RAW looked a tad sharper, again because of YT compression the difference wasn't as stark on the browser end. I'm sure if I were looking at the master files, I'd see more of a difference.
With regards to 4K SRAW being line skipped, that may manifest itself less in sharpness loss, and more in the presence of possible moiré (I didn't see any FWIW, but you didn't shoot like a houndstooth jacket either haha).
I agree that while CLog2 is much more forgiving in color grading and shadow/detail recovery than just using non-Log compressed options, the flexibility of doing those tasks in RAW is greater (as it should be given the enormous file size comparison between even the smallest SRAW (light) and the 135Mbps of HEVC). That's why I'm super happy that the R5ii now has a histogram because when using the lossy codecs (which I almost always do) it's very important to get exposure right (or as close as possible) so that I stay within CLog2's ability to bring up shadow detail or bring down blown out highlights.
The high level takeaway from your excellent video for me is: if you are shooting compressed codec and your workflow and intended audience handle HEVC, use it.
Also I do see some flicker in all the scenes regardless of codec and it's likely due to either the LED light in the room or the Christmas tree lights being close to the same frequency as the frame rate you're using. In those cases, I found the anti-flicker function of the R5ii does wonders in identifying what the flicker frequency is, and then putting you at the next closest shutter speed to mitigate it. I had annoying flickering in my Lumen (exhibit at the Getty late in 2024) when I shot it when I first got my R5ii and didn't know how to use the setting. Sadly that exhibit is now gone so I can't reshoot it. Ah well, live and learn....Show more →
---------------------------------------------
artsupreme wrote:
Like Carlo said, thanks for spending the time to perform that test. I agree it's hard to see the difference on YouTube. I watched full screen on a 4k monitor tonight and I couldn't see much of a difference, but obviously you can see it better with the native files in your workflow I'm sticking to HEVC for most everything and I'll shoot RAW in very rare instances, like maybe a magical sighting on a safari or similar. Let us know if you eventually decide to switch to HEVC and if there's any difference in post compared to similar videos you made with XF AVC....Show more →
Thank you both.
Yes, I forgot to add the Youtube compression disclaimer but of course, that should be taken into account. I think it still helps in terms of showing differences in tonality, some noise, and overall detail, but yes - my notes are mainly based on what I observed by comparing the files locally.
The flickering is definitely caused by the Xmas tree lights. I wanted to keep settings at a baseline level for "cinematic" / "filmic" video in this test, so everything was left at 24fps, 1/50, ISO 800. I haven't used the R5II's anti-flicker function yet, but I'm sure it would come in handy there. Will have to try it in the future. I've used Resolve's anti-flicker tool in the past and it's also worked well. Opted to bypass it this time for the sake of speed.
@Carlo_M when you say "histogram" do you mean the actual histogram or the new waveform visualizer? I think the waveform is good, but kind of hate that you can't resize or move it. Really eats up a lot of display real estate.
In most cases I've been relying on the false color option for exposure and it's been great. I have one of the camera back buttons mapped to toggling it on/off. Also bypassed that in this test just to keep things baseline. Might be good to do another test at higher ISO values, especially the "second" (unofficial) base ISO 4000.
As for chosen codec, I am now of the mind that HEVC is probably the way to go when shooting compressed. I do love the malleability and perceived sharpness of RAW, but file sizes are still on my mind. Also the potential problems line skipping on 4K RAW might bring, depending on what's being shot. Maybe I'll switch between RAW and HEVC depending on task (e.g., HEVC on bright, evenly lit scenes and RAW on others that might be more challenging), but also would just love to pick a codec and run with it.
I've seen that you can disable or lower noise reduction on compressed video via the color profile settings page, so I wonder if that could help in bringing back some of the sharpness and detail that is lost by default, while still maintaining the manageable file sizes of HEVC. Has anyone tried that?
Also that brings the question of is sharper always better? Do we risk making things look too "digital" by placing too much emphasis on sharpness?
Edit: this video talks about noise reduction for the R5C. I think it also translates to the R5II and possibly other Canon bodies:
|
! That's why the NatGeo team get paid the big bucks and why we've all marveled at their work our entire lives. Simply awesome! 
