Видео

Hey, Davinci Resolve finally supports Flog2 natively for color space transforms. However, you may find a subtle interesting look with this method anyway.

I thought we were already friends

@@cleverghostchili no will u ?

@@cleverghostchili Hey aoa Ali from Pakistan Would u like to friendship with me ?

Sign me up! So hot here…

Fun should be foremost affordable

@@cleverghostchili Absolutely. 👍

Yeah I mention it improved with braw and cover this in depth in the long term review

2-3 weeks! Well once it arrives I can't imagine anyone not having fun with the images especially when it costs less than a thunderbolt cable, enjoy!

Hi, Zeiss Milvus 35mm f1.4 EF. I’ve sorta reviewed it here ruclips.net/video/NTwS9QPfBQU/видео.html

Sigma glass is a tier below but very good, I think the new sigma 28-45mm f1.8 would be a lot closer but you could still get close to Zeiss with the 18-50 if you use some post blur since your lens is f2.8 and the Zeiss is f1.4. Blur would also balance out some of the sigma sharpness, this recent video of mine should be very useful: ruclips.net/video/hpEU6CbRAfk/видео.html

@@cleverghostchili Thanks for instant answer. Yeah i just finished that video and i tried this technique before with more or less good results. I just sold my fuji xt-3 and I'm in the process of switching to something more modern with better autofocus, since I often shoot in gawx style alone. 28-45mm f1.8 is not in my budget for now, but i'll defienetly will try it later. I also just bought Viltrox 23mm 1.4 for shallow DOP on APS-C so basically I'll use sigma for close ups and macro. But still Zeiss struck me with its clarity and softness at the same time. But as I understand it, most of the result here is experience and color grading. And fancy glass is just those extra 5% on top of it.

@@cleverghostchili In general, I was very worried that the sharpness of modern glass such as sigma will be too noticeable. But as I understood with tuning with mid detail slider and others in Davinci I can get very close to Zeiss on Full frame.

@@antonzavarzin7208 optics definitely make it easier to grade if the fidelity/clarity is strong. I would say glass largely determines the overall look where the camera determines the texture workflow and performance. I recommend investing more in glass than cameras as lenses last longer and cameras cycle regularly. Good glass is definitely worth it, it’s a difference you feel more than identify, the specific Zeiss 3d pop is not something you can achieve in post, everything else can

@@cleverghostchili Hey again. So I ended up buying Fullframe LUMIX s5ii for the same price as a6700. Did you have any experience with vintage Carl zeiss distagon? Is it on the same tier as sigma or is it closer to zeiss otus

Leica the only other lens I’d consider aside from zeiss

Hi, tech info at end of video, entirely shot on BMCC6kFF and Zeiss Milvus 35mm f1.4

Great call! I used to shoot f11 and f22 on a crop sensor starting out all the time without an ND, the diffraction never bothered me so I can confirm this has a great overlooked rendering as well

Welcome glad you enjoy the framing

Perhaps it’s not a common object speed and angle

@@user-lv6et1tg4m this is very subjective, without knowing anything of your needs I’d recommend a 35 or 50mm lens. I would suggest milvus for the best image quality lens but if that’s out of your price range you can consider Sigma Art, Canon or vintage contax Zeiss for cheaper alternatives.

@@dianaa8125 people have more control over their image than they think

Welcome! Hope you enjoy the other content

love received

Glad you are enjoying the content

*Deep focus* - I’ll try to link words less and enunciate word endings more clearly

It’s a peaceful and insightful moment once Cody comments 🙂‍↔️

Thank you for your thoughts. For me I find the rendering on Zeiss to be very distinct at f1.4, it’s not necessarily the bokeh that I prefer. My color deficiency is quite strange, I’m hyper attuned to contrast and subtle color shifts but can’t identify certain hues. There are more blur techniques I didn’t go over, I will cover in more detail if I make a dedicated grading video

@@cleverghostchili I'm guessing you've done the ishihara test - have you got protanomaly, deuteranomaly or something else? I think it's natural to focus on tones/contrast when colours are less prominent - I'm the same. For me (deuteranomaly) there is a sense of wrongness in a lot of colour edits but sometimes it's hard to identify how to fix them.

@@prismcollectionmusic Red-green for me. Vectorscope is a tool i use all the time, it's invaluable for me and how i fix those problems

I have an online acquaintance (was that you?) that did extensive testing on this, redownloading the uploaded RUclips file of several versions with varying grain. There there were inconsistent results, but in some profiles, grain yielded a large file size suggesting it improved RUclips performance. The main problem I’ve had with blur is the smoothing creates more gradients, which are prone to banding especially in the shadows

@@cleverghostchili that wasn't me, sorry. But sounds like what I would expect. Encoding grain is really demanding bitrate wise and bitrate is usually what YT wants to not spend. There may be a point where you can force the encoder to spend more bits for grain to get rid of banding to a point. Excessive banding is another thing that happens when an encode is bitrate-starved. I guess my point is/was: selectively blurring in a discreet fashion lets YT allocate bits to the parts of the image that *you* deemed important. You're kind of tricking the encoder in a visually pleasing way. Obviously this has limits and gradients becoming too flat and free of grain means that banding is more obvious.

@@jaychow94 I think you were there last time too

I also love this frame, great eye

But the megapickles

The journey never ends!

My experience is the base look on the FP is superior to the blackmagic. Bmcc6k has a color science designed for state of the art color grading tools. I think the Blackmagic requires more work to get a good image, but a high image ceiling. It’s also easier to achieve pushed looks due to its color separation where the FP looks more naturally accurate and great for minimal grades. Because the images are gentler in the Blackmagic with lower contrast, you can implement contrasty grading tools like bleach bypass with more balance. The key difference is the information in the highlights emulating the pleasing Arri highlight roll off. FP is fine but slightly muted for pushed color, also because non native log and workflows in Davinci. For pushing exposure, the FP wins by a landslide, much better noise and lowlight and manipulation, I would say the blackmagic performs worse when lifting shadows. Both are great, blackmagic missing the some of that FP immersive texture

@@cleverghostchili That is interesting. i noticed the same thing about the shadows when I downloaded some BMCC braw clips. I'd like to add that the arri like highlight rolloff is easily achievable with the curves node using soft clip tools when using cinemadng files. Blackmagic seems to be processing it internally which is something i'm not a fan of as it compresses the highlights waay too much

One of my key grading techniques is to compress highlights, maybe highlight roll off is not the precise term I’m referencing, but I like how highlights look on the blackmagic more

@@cleverghostchili Oh yes, that might be because the blackmagic looks like the midrange and the upper midrange of the curve is lifted while incorporating more contrast using s-curve. Also it looks like the highlights are less saturated on the bmcc but don't quote me on that i'm not too sure

Getting there, slowly but surely!

So good

Glad it resonates, I value my viewers time as much as my own, no superfluous content here

BMCC 6K FF and Zeiss optics

Yes, specifically zeiss milvus 35mm f1.4. Organic is also the result of the grade

Sounds like the rendering of a certain familiar camera!