XT1 NEUTRAL FLAT look wanted. (for a movie type look)

[rwker]

FUJI lacks a CONTRAST option but after a quick research i found a way to make it look quite flat but i feel it still lacks a bit compared to the big boys at Panasonic and Canon.

I am interested in a more movie kind of look for my shots and since many might say the video feature still lacks a lot, i've seen some really good videos from a FUJI Xt1 and Xpro1.

Here is my findings (settings found on the web)

 

Color grading to be done post processing. 

 

Dynamic Range-100

Film Simulation- Pro Neg Std 

White Balance- Custom

Color- -1

Sharpness- 0

Highlight Tone- -2

Shadow Tone- +2

Noise Reduction- -2

Has anyone achieved a neutral look with a much different settings ? 

 

[Aswald]

FUJI lacks a CONTRAST option but after a quick research i found a way to make it look quite flat but i feel it still lacks a bit compared to the big boys at Panasonic and Canon.

I am interested in a more movie kind of look for my shots and since many might say the video feature still lacks a lot, i've seen some really good videos from a FUJI Xt1 and Xpro1.

Here is my findings (settings found on the web)

 

Color grading to be done post processing. 

 

Dynamic Range-100

Film Simulation- Pro Neg Std 

White Balance- Custom

Color- -1

Sharpness- 0

Highlight Tone- -2

Shadow Tone- +2

Noise Reduction- -2

Has anyone achieved a neutral look with a much different settings ? 

It may help if you post a pic of two on what you mean by "neutral" look vis a vis a not so neutral look.

[rwker]

I am sorry I wasn't sure what it was called and I wrote it as NEUTRAL. Infact it's the CINESTYLE look that i am after. (After reading various sites, it sort of looks neutral but retains far more detail when contrast is low)

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 14, 2016 by rwker

[Aswald]

Ok. I get the picture now. Attended a video briefing years ago and yes, like what you said, they lower the contrast. Some of them drastically so. I guess for the lack of the contrast setting, you may bump up shadows and pull the highlight down a notch or two. Whatever you do, don't sharpen until after every thing is done. Some suggest a preset layer mask to give that cinematic cross process which may help.

 

I'm not sure how they do it exactly but I think there's some info on the net,

[rwker]

yeah i have sharpness to 0. And i still feel there is something lacking in the shots.

 

(WIshed there was a good coder here in FUJI community who could make a custom rom for FUJI cameras with cool features.)

[Adam Woodhouse]

I found when I recorded video on the XT1 it ignored any customization's I did to the profiles.  If you can get a custom colour profile to work in video, please tell how you did it.

Thanks.

[jenwe]

I suppose you rather mean shadows -2 because that means softer shadows = less contrast in the shadows. Pro neg std is already the "softest" setting and with shadows and highlights set to -2 it's very neutral.

 

But depending on the situation I wouldn't stick to DR100. In more contrasty (is that a word? ) situations DR200 or 400 would be much more useful to flatten the image even more.

[aceflibble]

All DR200 and 400 do is push the shadows further after capture, no better than you can do yourself in editing/grading software. DR100 represents a half stop push to the exposure of shadow tones. (This is why Fuji's base ISO is 200; it's actually ISO 140, to underexpose highlights, and it automatically pushes the shadows up to where they would be for a real ISO 200, basically faking more dynamic range than the sensor actually has.*) DR200 represents a full stop push to shadows, after capture. DR400 is a two stop push, in theory, but the ISO isn't quite linear and it's actually more like a one-and-two-thirds stop push.

 

End results: Capturing with DR100 and choosing to push the shadows up 0.5-1.6 stops in post is the same as capturing at DR200 or 400, except it's your choice to do so or not afterwards, while with the DR options it's permanently part of the file. There is no actual additional range to be had. Pro Neg S, shadows and highlights -2, and saturation -1 or -2, is still the flattest profile you can get out of a Fuji. In terms of grading video, the DR options are utterly pointless, and in fact detrimental.

I wish there was a proper cinestyle colour profile for Fuji, but there's simply not. 

*For balance: This isn't just a complaint about Fuji. Every camera manufacturer does this, both for video and for stills. It makes their sensors look better in common noise tests and dynamic range tests. ISO 100 on most cameras these days is actually anywhere from ISO 50 to 80; I'm not aware of a single digital video or stills camera made in the last ten years which actually does measure ISO 100 at ISO 100.

[hambern]

All DR200 and 400 do is push the shadows further after capture, no better than you can do yourself in editing/grading software.

 

Well... I don't know about you but i can't even come near the look of DR400 by editing a DR100-image. DR100 blows way to much highlights in my opinion. I almost always use DR Auto or DR400 in really bright light. By the way. The best settings i've found by far so far is:

 

Dynamic Range- Auto

Film Simulation- Pro Neg Std 

White Balance- Custom

Color- +1

Sharpness- 0

Highlight Tone- -1

Shadow Tone- -1

Noise Reduction- 0

 

It gives a lot of possibilities for editing. But iw you want it really flat. Try:

 

Dynamic Range- DR400

Film Simulation- Pro Neg Std 

White Balance- Custom

Color- 0

Sharpness- 0

Highlight Tone- -2

Shadow Tone- -2

Noise Reduction- 0

Edited June 30, 2016 by hambern

[aceflibble]

You misunderstand. DR400 isn't doing anything magical to the higlight range, it's just under-exposing your picture more, and pushing the shadows more. If you're try to use DR100 and push the shadows without having underexposed, then yeah, you're going to end up with blown highlights, still.

 

In other words, DR100 at ISO 200, 1/200th and f/4 gives you the same highlight detail as DR400 at ISO 800, 1/800, f/4. That DR100 file would then need to have the dark tones pushed by +2 stops (in theory; more like +1 2/3rd stops in practice) to match the DR400 file.

The X-Trans and X-Trans II sensors are what we call 'ISOless'. Basically, an ISO 200 (actually 140, remember) photo given a flat exposure push of +1 stop looks the same as a photo which was taken with ISO set to 400. This holds true up to ISO 1600. So basically, if you think you need to take a photo at any ISO between 200 and 1600, you may as well always just take the photo at ISO 200, and then push as needed later. You can test this out for yourself with the cameras' own raw processing options. ISO higher than 1600 does actually work out better to do natively, but that's more to do with the poor quality of Fuji raw convertors, rather than an actual limitation of the sensor. ISO 100 is totally pointless as it's entirely digital and only means you lose highlight dynamic range, which is why it's only an option for in-camera jpg and not raw. Again, this all stems from the 'ISOless' sensor and Fuji fudging the ISO numbers.

 

All that is to say, again, that if the OP is looking for the flattest image to grade later, it's best to stick to DR100 and then push shadow detail as much as you see fit later, when grading. To match what the other DR options give you, you simply underexpose, which has no drawbacks because you're not losing any detail unless you underexpose by more than 3 stops. You get the choice, after filming is done, on how much you want to push the file back up. If you do use DR200 or 400, you're locking your video into a certain level of shadow pushing which you can't undo.

 

tl;dr: Yes, DR400 will look flatter and retain more highlight detail if you don't know how it works and you're comparing it to a DR100 file which hasn't been underexposed properly. But for video grading, you never want those kind of baked-in decisions.