Very interesting, thanks. I convert HLG to PQ and then render an HDR file. It would be interesting if you covered the HDR topic associated with HLG. Thank you
Yes because, from my experience, S-Log3 is much noisier than HLG. To fix the over saturated red colors, you can use the REC.2020 gamut which is towards a more unsaturated yellow.
Hi Harv! Great to see you jumping into HLG. However, I‘ve had a chat with Paul Leeming from Leeming LUTs (which I‘m using for conversion) regarding the proper workflow in FCPX a long time ago. His recommendations were the following: - expose for the subject or slightly to the right - leave the Library‘s Gamma at standard for delivering in rec709 - apply the conversion LUT (in my case Leeming LUT Pro HLG for rec709) - and set the colour space override to rec709 to tell FCPX how to apply the tool adjustments (wheels, curves, …) I‘m shooting HLG ever since (for 4 years now) and it suits my workflow beautifully. When using a conversion LUT and the colour space override I‘ve never experienced any issues with saturation or clipping.
@@HarvVideoAudioStuff Hi Harv. I'm curious, did you have a chance to try Eric's recommendation? Personally, I thought your skin tones in this video example looked more real in HLG3. Really appreciate you putting in so much effort to share your knowledge with the community.
you don't need color space override if using conversion LUT. Override is for cases when metadata is missing from file and Final Cut cannot interpret footage correctly.
Two years later, curious if this still the case for you or if you’ve changed your workflow? Do you still shoot most all of your content in HLG and use leeming luts with a slight ETTR?
@@Arms_KY I changed my workflow but I don't use the Leeming LUTs for my current work since I mainly do RUclips nowadays. Let me know what you're interested in - feel free to send me an email and I'll try to make a video on it. :)
I found it to be the easiest to grade with plenty of dynamic range...not as much as SLOG3 but plenty. I select all HLG3 clips in the library then go to my settings and change the color space to Rec709. If i use the HDR tools it comes out much different and very difficult to grade. I found it to be great in low light due to low native ISO, in fact that is mostly when i use HLG3. I expose 0.0 - 0.3 on the EV depending on the amount of contrast and my Histogram shows in the middle....wave forms show middle grey for skin tones between 45-55 ire which gives me plenty of room to stretch either way. I'm still learning this craft but thought I'd share. Thanks Harv, learning so much from you in the past 3 years...BIG FAN!!
This such fantastic demonstration of the Sony camera in the HLG3 Picture Profile, Harv. The dynamic range is unreal in both of these profiles. I am just curious, but which input color space and which color transformation are you using? My goal is to have a video uploaded to RUclips that is HDR compatible. I am struggling to get the colors right in my recent videos. Here are my settings: Input Color Space: Rec.2020 ; Rec.2100 HLG Timeline Color Space: Rec.2020 ; ST2084 1000 nit Output Color Space: Rec.2020 ; ST2084 10000 nit I would really appreciate the help. I think this video demonstrates the colors so well!
Very nice and well done comparison of HLG and Log. You made clear to me why HLG may show less nosier results than Log, and why Log appears to be more color accurate in the highlights: These bahaviors result from the different gamma curves: Log-curves are bended in the low lights and quite linear in the highlights, while HLG does it the other way round (bending in the highlights). This "bending" of the gamma curves is nothing but applying some type of compression of the signals coming from the sensor to make those fit into the camera-internal processing chain which has only 10bit. And, compression always results in some kind of little inacuracy, either in color or noise or all of it.
I use HLG and love it. I have the zebra set for 105 and expose as much as I can below that point. I edit on XDR iPad Pro (so can see HDR) using Lumafusion. My colour grading is usually confined to a slight increase in contrast. I export as HDR video.
I've seen some stuff out there saying HLG is a better solution for 8bit recording and S-LOG better in 10bit. I've got a A6400 and I've been diving in to picture profiles and really it seems there is no one size fits all profile for diverse shooting situations, but I've seen folks saying HLG with a few tweaks gets close. I also realize I'm way out of my depth here. Just discovered your channel a few days ago. Love everything I've watched so far. Thanks for the great content.
So glad I found this video this morning. I just recently uploaded a video using hlg3 for the first time, and I really don't like the way it looks at all, but after watching this video, I'm going to go back and try again, I think I did everything wrong. I was kind of approaching it like Cine 4, and then comparing it to my slog 2 footage as well, but it just seems to me that hlg3 is completely different than everything else. It was actually closer to the neutral setting without any picture profile in my a6400. Everybody seems to love hlg3 so much, I'm going to continue to work with it for a while and see if I can get a handle on it. Thanks so much, this video really helped me a lot. Keep up the Epic work. It is much appreciated
I have been shooting my videos in HLG3 and I have been pretty happy with it. I have a Sony AX700 and I expose one stop over and on my A6600 I expose at 0EV and it turns out good. I like the way the colors look for the videos I make. I like the way the colors pop where as with SLOG the colors look flat and muddy and the noise is awful with my AX700. As far as grading, Davinci Resolve color management is Black Magic.... with HLG.
So Davinci and HLG = win together? Haven't heard that one before but this is good to know. So far HLG3 temps me as better WYSIWIG profile (S-log 3 blinds you with white scene until you grade it).
I use HLG3/BT2020 in my a7iv and render in the same colour space. I don’t have a HDR reference monitor as many of you guys say. Instead I render small clips and play them in my Sony OLED TV. Since I do this most often now I don’t need to do so. I use an iMac 2021 and it’s screen almost gives me an idea of what’s happening. I also depend on the waveforms and vector scope in DR which I’m now very comfortable!
If you use iMac. Maybe get MacBook Pro from 2021. Display is really good. You can also use iPad I think as external monitor. Aim for what Apple calls XDR display. I was using my Samsung S22 to verify final results, getting HDR capable monitor made life much easier. I noticed that even non XDR are great on MacBooks and I guess in iMac too.
Great video. I have found these official information for correctly exposing Panasonic GH5s VLOG-L: Black (clip) = 7.3 IRE Grey18% = 42 IRE White = 61 IRE Highlights (clip) = 80 IRE Skin = 55-60 IRE I was wondering which IRE levels to be used for HLG? This could give a good start point to play with.
Hey Harv! Recently discovered your videos when looking for details on s-log 2/3. I shoot in HLG currently so this video has also been really insightful! Thanks and I've subscribed - keep up the great work!
Thanks for sharing this. I have founds tons of recommendations to shoot HLG3 on Sony, but I simply cannot get the colors to look anything like reality without a ton of work. SLOG seems to produce accurate colors after applying the appropriate color space settings and calling it a day.
But you must heavely overexpose, making WYSIWYG impossible. Basically this would mean if i travel, i will see ugly S-log 3 white video's until home and they still could be broken (clipped hightlight etc).
Awesome video, thanks. Continued my own confussion on this although. I believe HLG`s are Chroma related and SLog`s are Lumma oriented, thats why the colors on HLG are different.
I'm a fan of the Phantom luts as well and it's too bad just using Davinci's colorspace transform -> change hlg to slog2 -> apply phantom luts doesn't work well.
I have sony a6400 I use HLG2 in PP10 I ETTR (Expose to the right) camera meter is above 1 to 1.7 Footage looks great when there is lot of light For Low light I use custom settings from Make Art Now channel PP2 it works great
Would HLG be better than Cine? I like the look of Cine2 & HLG the most - if not shooting Slog2. But, I'm wondering if HLG would better for dynamic range & colour compared to Cine2?
I shoot HLG (not 1,2,3, I use the base version), import it to DaVinci and export it with colour space and gamma both set to Rec. 709. This squeezes the maximum dynamic range into a 709 file that can be handled just like a Cine gamma video or whatever. As I hate to work with DaVinci, I just use it to transform the recording into a plain 709 version, everything else that I would normally do can be done in iMovie. This way, you get a lot better dynamic range while not having to deal with all this post production stuff you need to do with Log. Personally, I try to use Slog again and again, but it just isn't my way. I like to use Cine4 for regular stuff and HLG if DR is really important. It might not be as good as Slog, but it is for sure quite a bit better than the other gammas. What you said about strange colours: I faced this with HLG3, too. On my Xperia, there is HLG, too, shooting in BT.2100 and that is where colours really look strange. I guess it has to do with the way green is displayed, it is always very strange-looking, very deep, saturated, not nice. In terms of the look itself, I prefer Cinetone over all these guys, but my 7R III doesn't have it and will probably never get it.
Nuemann monitors and a prs. Yep this is the camera reviewer I wanna listen too. Nice review of HLG vs Log. thanks. ps I have a set of nuemanns and love them. cheers
@@hufman9807 The files may be, however the larger colour spaces are used as the input gamut (pre-compression). The point is there's a huge amount of latitude when using SLOG3/sgamut3cine when shooting 10 bit, compared to HLG it's in a different league (check Alister Chapmans writing about it to confirm this).
i prefer HLG to be honest 8:54 HLG is REC2100 whereas LOG is REC709 no matter if you are shooting it 10bit or 8bit. You have more room to work with luma and color with REC2100. HLG is not too saturated/"has strange colors" i assume you don't have the HDR monitor so I suggest getting new M1 pro/max macbook pro
I'm not sure what Log color gammut is in a Sony camery, but with my Panasonic S1H V-Log color gammut is huge and far bigger than Rec2100. Agree with you that 8 bit can be poor. I have built a nice workflow in DR with a color space transform from V-Log into ARRI Log-C to run the whole grading process in ARRI Log-C. Main reason for doing this conversion is the outstanding ARRI color science that is built into DR with those lovely highlight roll offs and beautiful colors. I NEVER GRADE IN REC709 - it's a limited gammut. Then, at the end of the grading tree I need to convert it to my delivery color space which typically is Rec709 by either using another CST node or (even better) the DR built-in Kodak2383 Film Print emulation. If desired I could also export to anything else.
HLG is a confusion for Windows users with SDR monitors. Also for one who buy monitor with HDR marking on it, that is not really HDR. I was wondering the same what is the difference between Log and HLG, both are just flat formats. HDR PQ on Canon was a total confusion till I got MacBook Pro with XDR display. Most talking about tone mapping HDR content (HDR or PQ) into SDR that makes them happy. To fit LOG. HLG or PQ into SDR, need to sacrifice contrast either in highlights or shadows or in between. That makes image looks like HDR photography, one that combines multiple exposure and fits into colorspace of normal display. It is something like shooting on color camera and then convert it for black and white monitors (using black and white monitors). There will be artifacts like glowing neon lights will be very bright or dark compared to "natural" black and white look :) HLG do save more dynamic range than 709, but less then Log and is more suitable for 8 bit sensors. The myth that HLG is easier to grade than Log comes from that it is easier to fit narrow range into 709, but shooter won't be able to capture in a wide dynamic range scene. If shoot in the studio with the controlled light. Then there is no or almost no need to shoot Log or HLG and super easy to deliver 709.
I use SLog3 myselff and haven't shot much with HLG3 but I'm almost certain this isn't how we should be grading HLG3. If anything HLG3 has even higher patch range in technical dynamic range tests (check Gerald Undone's HLG test with his own SLog3 test and CineD's SLog 3 test). And your "stretching" and "tweaks" seem highly suspect but I see a lot of ppl doing the same regardless of the log/colorspace they shoot in. There's also some footage comparing Slog3 and HLG3 on a channel that goes something like 'No Limits On' and HLG seem to have more DR there as well (aligning with patch range from Gerald's video) despite the popular belief that Slog3 yields more. There's no way Hlg3 should be clipping at just 2 stops over exposed and get all wonky with even slight under exposing.
Thanks for you input it's stuff like this i need to shoot either HLG3 or S-log3 before i make mountain video's. So far HLG3 seems to take it again from S-log, because of the crazy overexpose you have to do on S-log, wich makes the video file hidden until post process, even reviewing on camera is pointless. And HLG3 is in most scenarios better then the straight numbers would you have believe (look wise). But i'm not set in stone yet.
whats the "waffle" with should I grade it? Both S-Log and HGL are compressed formats that are ONLY VIEWABLE after de-compression and grading. You cannot view HGL in your SDR project without first transforming it into rec.709
These are genuine questions that people who are just getting into this side of video are asking so I’d say that’s a little unfair on them. Clearly you’re a petty unhappy person with an attitude like that and I’d say a slightly kinder approach would be good. Remember you were a noob once too 👍🏻
HLG PP10 lights up my Sony TV as it should . Showing it on any other monitor/laptop screen is not what it was created. But i can not get the HDR to transfer to You Tube in 8 bit ?
Good morning. I found that to have an excellent HDR movie result, that is with less video noise, with the Sony a7S3 it is better to shoot in HLG3 rather than in SLOG3 / SGamut3.Cine. I export the footage in Rec.2020 PQ 10bit 420. Thanks
I am wondering if the same applies in regards to grading HDR PQ from Canon cameras into rec 709. I have followed a similar style grading but in resolve shooting HDR PQ and transforming it in 709 in resolve..I'd be interested to hear your thoughts about shooting 10 bit HDR PQ instead clog3
it seems that with slog 3 and 8 bit, while you grade you stretch out a very narrow path of information so in 8 bit the picture would break much easier than with 10 bit especially when you have areas with almost the same color like sky, walls concrete etc. 8 bit color has 16.777.216 colors 10 bit billions of it. For the eye it doesnt make a difference, but when you grade you manipulating the colors quite heavily so ugly things like 'color banding' appears. That means with 8 bit cameras you cant colorgrade as brutal as with 10 bit footage. thats why peoply like to use the HLG since there the image profile is not as narrow as in log profiles. Of cause there is not that much dynamic then but you can grade much easier without achieving the image to break up. HLG is quite a dynamic option and makes much more sense than log3 for 8 bit footage. Some people are also using log2 which doesnt have that extremly narrow profile like log3.
HLG must be exposed between -0.3 and +0.3 in EV. Above 1 All the image will be over exposed and the whites blown, so +2 is obviously way to much. + 2 is just for SLOG 3.
Well this is certainly not true for exposing slog3, not these days anyway. Exactly what in your shot are you exposing at -0.3 - +0.3? From what you’ve described it sounds like you’re not doing the HLG to rec709 conversion, this would explain the blown whites. I’d say even better advice is not to use the exposure meter, here’s my video about this ruclips.net/video/1xCzxlfZ5yQ/видео.html
@@HarvVideoAudioStuff I have been using HLG3 and I think I have exposed my videos correctly. However, my skin looks red :-) as opposed to when using S-LOG3. Have you ever encountered a similar problem?
Why would you even compare HLG in rec.709? By default it was designed for HDR (wide gamut HDR) use first of all. You sort of using Ferrari for plowing (?).
Well because so many people use HLG in this way, really the message of the video was if you’re working with an SDR workflow you’re better off using other modes
There's comparisons of al 4 HLG alraedy and the HLG3 is the most preferred. More so then HLG and HLG 1+2. So for me this is less usefull, S-log 3 wins in s-log and HLG3 in HLG, so the others do not matter. Secondly 'dynamic range S-log3>HLG (it's not even close), from what i hear it's 1 stop (on a 12 scale), so that's like 8%. Massive? unless i see otherwise and proven otherwise this is not massive.
I don't know why would someone use HLG when Slog3 gives a lot more dynamic range and better color. You can also transform Slog3 to HLG but not the other way around.
90% of people here don't need hlg or slog3, stop wasting time on these profiles. Use neutral creative style it is the best for most scenarios and it is easy to edit afterwards if needed. Most people think by just turning on slog3 that you will have professional video, you are getting maybe 10% better video on 8bit camera and that's only IF big IF, you managed to nail exposure and color grading.
If you have a time to waste then go a head, lot of clients won't notice a difference, EXCUSE ME if you work for coca cola brand..... you probably make 1k per month and its probably not even your main job. So stop shitting about slog or hlg, since you have 0 use of it.@@flexflex5853
I hope you find this helpful :) remember to like this comment to let me know if you'd like to see an HLG low light video
Very interesting, thanks. I convert HLG to PQ and then render an HDR file. It would be interesting if you covered the HDR topic associated with HLG. Thank you
Yes because, from my experience, S-Log3 is much noisier than HLG.
To fix the over saturated red colors, you can use the REC.2020 gamut which is towards a more unsaturated yellow.
Hi Harv! Great to see you jumping into HLG. However, I‘ve had a chat with Paul Leeming from Leeming LUTs (which I‘m using for conversion) regarding the proper workflow in FCPX a long time ago. His recommendations were the following:
- expose for the subject or slightly to the right
- leave the Library‘s Gamma at standard for delivering in rec709
- apply the conversion LUT (in my case Leeming LUT Pro HLG for rec709)
- and set the colour space override to rec709 to tell FCPX how to apply the tool adjustments (wheels, curves, …)
I‘m shooting HLG ever since (for 4 years now) and it suits my workflow beautifully. When using a conversion LUT and the colour space override I‘ve never experienced any issues with saturation or clipping.
Interesting to hear this technique, I’m definitely going to try it this way. Many thanks 😊
@@HarvVideoAudioStuff Hi Harv. I'm curious, did you have a chance to try Eric's recommendation? Personally, I thought your skin tones in this video example looked more real in HLG3. Really appreciate you putting in so much effort to share your knowledge with the community.
you don't need color space override if using conversion LUT. Override is for cases when metadata is missing from file and Final Cut cannot interpret footage correctly.
Two years later, curious if this still the case for you or if you’ve changed your workflow? Do you still shoot most all of your content in HLG and use leeming luts with a slight ETTR?
@@Arms_KY I changed my workflow but I don't use the Leeming LUTs for my current work since I mainly do RUclips nowadays. Let me know what you're interested in - feel free to send me an email and I'll try to make a video on it. :)
I found it to be the easiest to grade with plenty of dynamic range...not as much as SLOG3 but plenty. I select all HLG3 clips in the library then go to my settings and change the color space to Rec709. If i use the HDR tools it comes out much different and very difficult to grade. I found it to be great in low light due to low native ISO, in fact that is mostly when i use HLG3. I expose 0.0 - 0.3 on the EV depending on the amount of contrast and my Histogram shows in the middle....wave forms show middle grey for skin tones between 45-55 ire which gives me plenty of room to stretch either way. I'm still learning this craft but thought I'd share. Thanks Harv, learning so much from you in the past 3 years...BIG FAN!!
I use directly hl3 rec 709 and it works fine for me ! I think slog 3 its too far for 8 bit speacially If you do a heavy grading
This such fantastic demonstration of the Sony camera in the HLG3 Picture Profile, Harv. The dynamic range is unreal in both of these profiles. I am just curious, but which input color space and which color transformation are you using? My goal is to have a video uploaded to RUclips that is HDR compatible.
I am struggling to get the colors right in my recent videos. Here are my settings:
Input Color Space: Rec.2020 ; Rec.2100 HLG
Timeline Color Space: Rec.2020 ; ST2084 1000 nit
Output Color Space: Rec.2020 ; ST2084 10000 nit
I would really appreciate the help. I think this video demonstrates the colors so well!
Very nice and well done comparison of HLG and Log. You made clear to me why HLG may show less nosier results than Log, and why Log appears to be more color accurate in the highlights:
These bahaviors result from the different gamma curves: Log-curves are bended in the low lights and quite linear in the highlights, while HLG does it the other way round (bending in the highlights). This "bending" of the gamma curves is nothing but applying some type of compression of the signals coming from the sensor to make those fit into the camera-internal processing chain which has only 10bit. And, compression always results in some kind of little inacuracy, either in color or noise or all of it.
I use HLG and love it. I have the zebra set for 105 and expose as much as I can below that point. I edit on XDR iPad Pro (so can see HDR) using Lumafusion. My colour grading is usually confined to a slight increase in contrast. I export as HDR video.
I've seen some stuff out there saying HLG is a better solution for 8bit recording and S-LOG better in 10bit. I've got a A6400 and I've been diving in to picture profiles and really it seems there is no one size fits all profile for diverse shooting situations, but I've seen folks saying HLG with a few tweaks gets close. I also realize I'm way out of my depth here. Just discovered your channel a few days ago. Love everything I've watched so far. Thanks for the great content.
Many thanks and don’t worry about feeling out of your depth, I promise it won’t long until it’s all very comfortable 😄👍🏻
Great video man and definitely would love to see "How To Expose & Grade HLG in low light"
So glad I found this video this morning. I just recently uploaded a video using hlg3 for the first time, and I really don't like the way it looks at all, but after watching this video, I'm going to go back and try again, I think I did everything wrong. I was kind of approaching it like Cine 4, and then comparing it to my slog 2 footage as well, but it just seems to me that hlg3 is completely different than everything else. It was actually closer to the neutral setting without any picture profile in my a6400. Everybody seems to love hlg3 so much, I'm going to continue to work with it for a while and see if I can get a handle on it. Thanks so much, this video really helped me a lot. Keep up the Epic work. It is much appreciated
So glad I could help! 😄
I have been shooting my videos in HLG3 and I have been pretty happy with it. I have a Sony AX700 and I expose one stop over and on my A6600 I expose at 0EV and it turns out good. I like the way the colors look for the videos I make. I like the way the colors pop where as with SLOG the colors look flat and muddy and the noise is awful with my AX700. As far as grading, Davinci Resolve color management is Black Magic.... with HLG.
So Davinci and HLG = win together? Haven't heard that one before but this is good to know. So far HLG3 temps me as better WYSIWIG profile (S-log 3 blinds you with white scene until you grade it).
I use HLG3/BT2020 in my a7iv and render in the same colour space. I don’t have a HDR reference monitor as many of you guys say. Instead I render small clips and play them in my Sony OLED TV. Since I do this most often now I don’t need to do so. I use an iMac 2021 and it’s screen almost gives me an idea of what’s happening. I also depend on the waveforms and vector scope in DR which I’m now very comfortable!
If you use iMac. Maybe get MacBook Pro from 2021. Display is really good. You can also use iPad I think as external monitor. Aim for what Apple calls XDR display. I was using my Samsung S22 to verify final results, getting HDR capable monitor made life much easier. I noticed that even non XDR are great on MacBooks and I guess in iMac too.
Great video. I have found these official information for correctly exposing Panasonic GH5s VLOG-L:
Black (clip) = 7.3 IRE
Grey18% = 42 IRE
White = 61 IRE
Highlights (clip) = 80 IRE
Skin = 55-60 IRE
I was wondering which IRE levels to be used for HLG? This could give a good start point to play with.
I’m subscribing just because you’re a Mets fan. Respect.
LFGM! Especially this season, dear god 🤯
Hey Harv! Recently discovered your videos when looking for details on s-log 2/3. I shoot in HLG currently so this video has also been really insightful! Thanks and I've subscribed - keep up the great work!
Many thanks 🙏🏻 just had a peek at your channel, looks great!
By 'stretching' - do you mean contrast curves? I've never heard it called this before!
Thanks for sharing this. I have founds tons of recommendations to shoot HLG3 on Sony, but I simply cannot get the colors to look anything like reality without a ton of work. SLOG seems to produce accurate colors after applying the appropriate color space settings and calling it a day.
But you must heavely overexpose, making WYSIWYG impossible. Basically this would mean if i travel, i will see ugly S-log 3 white video's until home and they still could be broken (clipped hightlight etc).
Lemming lut is the best way to use hlg3. Set your lower limit zebra to 99+ and exposure to the right.
do you use multi metering mode or only expose for the highlights?
Awesome video, thanks. Continued my own confussion on this although. I believe HLG`s are Chroma related and SLog`s are Lumma oriented, thats why the colors on HLG are different.
I'm a fan of the Phantom luts as well and it's too bad just using Davinci's colorspace transform -> change hlg to slog2 -> apply phantom luts doesn't work well.
really interesting explanation, learned a lot of things here.
Great focused no fluff video. Thanks
I have sony a6400 I use HLG2 in PP10 I ETTR (Expose to the right) camera meter is above 1 to 1.7 Footage looks great when there is lot of light
For Low light I use custom settings from Make Art Now channel PP2 it works great
Hi, May I know the native or higher ISO for HLG 3 on Sony A7Siii and FX3 ?? Much appreciated your response
Would HLG be better than Cine?
I like the look of Cine2 & HLG the most - if not shooting Slog2.
But, I'm wondering if HLG would better for dynamic range & colour compared to Cine2?
What do you mean by "stretching?" Googling it brings up stretching resolution....
Confused because it seemed you didn’t mention whether it was a 10bit Sony camera you used??
Did I not? Well it definitely was, it’s 2022 after all 😄
I shoot HLG (not 1,2,3, I use the base version), import it to DaVinci and export it with colour space and gamma both set to Rec. 709. This squeezes the maximum dynamic range into a 709 file that can be handled just like a Cine gamma video or whatever. As I hate to work with DaVinci, I just use it to transform the recording into a plain 709 version, everything else that I would normally do can be done in iMovie.
This way, you get a lot better dynamic range while not having to deal with all this post production stuff you need to do with Log.
Personally, I try to use Slog again and again, but it just isn't my way. I like to use Cine4 for regular stuff and HLG if DR is really important. It might not be as good as Slog, but it is for sure quite a bit better than the other gammas.
What you said about strange colours: I faced this with HLG3, too. On my Xperia, there is HLG, too, shooting in BT.2100 and that is where colours really look strange. I guess it has to do with the way green is displayed, it is always very strange-looking, very deep, saturated, not nice.
In terms of the look itself, I prefer Cinetone over all these guys, but my 7R III doesn't have it and will probably never get it.
I like the look of Cine2 & HLG, if not shooting Slog2.
But, I'm wondering if HLG going would better for dynamic range and colour compared to Cine2?
Nuemann monitors and a prs. Yep this is the camera reviewer I wanna listen too. Nice review of HLG vs Log. thanks. ps I have a set of nuemanns and love them. cheers
Many thanks, ha ha yes I’m also a guitar/audio nerd 😂
Hlg just seems better on every camera system. Log footage is rec709 with less contrast, while hlg actually uses the larger color space rec2020.
Ah, but it's common to use s-gamut3.cine colour space with SLOG3 which is a far bigger colour space than BT2020
@@HarvVideoAudioStuff check the video metadata, its rec709. All log footage is r709 even arri.
@@hufman9807 The files may be, however the larger colour spaces are used as the input gamut (pre-compression). The point is there's a huge amount of latitude when using SLOG3/sgamut3cine when shooting 10 bit, compared to HLG it's in a different league (check Alister Chapmans writing about it to confirm this).
Indulge me
Ah I see, the OP 😅
i prefer HLG to be honest 8:54 HLG is REC2100 whereas LOG is REC709 no matter if you are shooting it 10bit or 8bit. You have more room to work with luma and color with REC2100. HLG is not too saturated/"has strange colors" i assume you don't have the HDR monitor so I suggest getting new M1 pro/max macbook pro
I'm not sure what Log color gammut is in a Sony camery, but with my Panasonic S1H V-Log color gammut is huge and far bigger than Rec2100. Agree with you that 8 bit can be poor.
I have built a nice workflow in DR with a color space transform from V-Log into ARRI Log-C to run the whole grading process in ARRI Log-C. Main reason for doing this conversion is the outstanding ARRI color science that is built into DR with those lovely highlight roll offs and beautiful colors. I NEVER GRADE IN REC709 - it's a limited gammut.
Then, at the end of the grading tree I need to convert it to my delivery color space which typically is Rec709 by either using another CST node or (even better) the DR built-in Kodak2383 Film Print emulation. If desired I could also export to anything else.
Did you mention what camera you’re using?
HLG is a confusion for Windows users with SDR monitors. Also for one who buy monitor with HDR marking on it, that is not really HDR.
I was wondering the same what is the difference between Log and HLG, both are just flat formats. HDR PQ on Canon was a total confusion till I got MacBook Pro with XDR display.
Most talking about tone mapping HDR content (HDR or PQ) into SDR that makes them happy. To fit LOG. HLG or PQ into SDR, need to sacrifice contrast either in highlights or shadows or in between. That makes image looks like HDR photography, one that combines multiple exposure and fits into colorspace of normal display.
It is something like shooting on color camera and then convert it for black and white monitors (using black and white monitors). There will be artifacts like glowing neon lights will be very bright or dark compared to "natural" black and white look :)
HLG do save more dynamic range than 709, but less then Log and is more suitable for 8 bit sensors. The myth that HLG is easier to grade than Log comes from that it is easier to fit narrow range into 709, but shooter won't be able to capture in a wide dynamic range scene. If shoot in the studio with the controlled light. Then there is no or almost no need to shoot Log or HLG and super easy to deliver 709.
When shooting with Slog3
Exposure +2 is recommended
So what about the HLG3?
I use SLog3 myselff and haven't shot much with HLG3 but I'm almost certain this isn't how we should be grading HLG3. If anything HLG3 has even higher patch range in technical dynamic range tests (check Gerald Undone's HLG test with his own SLog3 test and CineD's SLog 3 test). And your "stretching" and "tweaks" seem highly suspect but I see a lot of ppl doing the same regardless of the log/colorspace they shoot in.
There's also some footage comparing Slog3 and HLG3 on a channel that goes something like 'No Limits On' and HLG seem to have more DR there as well (aligning with patch range from Gerald's video) despite the popular belief that Slog3 yields more. There's no way Hlg3 should be clipping at just 2 stops over exposed and get all wonky with even slight under exposing.
Thanks for you input it's stuff like this i need to shoot either HLG3 or S-log3 before i make mountain video's. So far HLG3 seems to take it again from S-log, because of the crazy overexpose you have to do on S-log, wich makes the video file hidden until post process, even reviewing on camera is pointless. And HLG3 is in most scenarios better then the straight numbers would you have believe (look wise). But i'm not set in stone yet.
Hi! Is this video valid for the a73?
whats the "waffle" with should I grade it? Both S-Log and HGL are compressed formats that are ONLY VIEWABLE after de-compression and grading. You cannot view HGL in your SDR project without first transforming it into rec.709
Of course they need grading, are you correcting me as if I don’t know this? 😄
And btw if we’re sticking with being pedantic…they’re not referred to as compressed formats, rather they need converting
@@HarvVideoAudioStuff I am correcting because of your pathetic intro going like “should I even grade it or not”
These are genuine questions that people who are just getting into this side of video are asking so I’d say that’s a little unfair on them. Clearly you’re a petty unhappy person with an attitude like that and I’d say a slightly kinder approach would be good. Remember you were a noob once too 👍🏻
Heyyy m’en !! Thank you 🙏🏻 I saw à plugin on your vidéo : lightroom control for fcpx
Where can I find this One ??
Here it is 👍🏻 ruclips.net/video/EFmebEPlu9s/видео.html
HLG PP10 lights up my Sony TV as it should . Showing it on any other monitor/laptop screen is not what it was created. But i can not get the HDR to transfer to You Tube in 8 bit ?
Good morning. I found that to have an excellent HDR movie result, that is with less video noise, with the Sony a7S3 it is better to shoot in HLG3 rather than in SLOG3 / SGamut3.Cine. I export the footage in Rec.2020 PQ 10bit 420. Thanks
Excellent. Thank you!
Maybe check out Leeming LUTs? Pretty good starting points (for me).
I am wondering if the same applies in regards to grading HDR PQ from Canon cameras into rec 709. I have followed a similar style grading but in resolve shooting HDR PQ and transforming it in 709 in resolve..I'd be interested to hear your thoughts about shooting 10 bit HDR PQ instead clog3
i have zve10 and some people say that whit 8bit camera using hlg is better
do you reccomend me to use slog 3?
it seems that with slog 3 and 8 bit, while you grade you stretch out a very narrow path of information so in 8 bit the picture would break much easier than with 10 bit especially when you have areas with almost the same color like sky, walls concrete etc. 8 bit color has 16.777.216 colors 10 bit billions of it. For the eye it doesnt make a difference, but when you grade you manipulating the colors quite heavily so ugly things like 'color banding' appears. That means with 8 bit cameras you cant colorgrade as brutal as with 10 bit footage. thats why peoply like to use the HLG since there the image profile is not as narrow as in log profiles. Of cause there is not that much dynamic then but you can grade much easier without achieving the image to break up. HLG is quite a dynamic option and makes much more sense than log3 for 8 bit footage. Some people are also using log2 which doesnt have that extremly narrow profile like log3.
The problem with slog is bad auto focus … you have to shoot in manual focus .
Which camera are you using? I find it to be fantastic on the a7s3 and a7IV 👍🏻
@@HarvVideoAudioStuff a7r iii... with slog2/3 i cant trust the AF.
HLG must be exposed between -0.3 and +0.3 in EV. Above 1 All the image will be over exposed and the whites blown, so +2 is obviously way to much. + 2 is just for SLOG 3.
Well this is certainly not true for exposing slog3, not these days anyway. Exactly what in your shot are you exposing at -0.3 - +0.3? From what you’ve described it sounds like you’re not doing the HLG to rec709 conversion, this would explain the blown whites. I’d say even better advice is not to use the exposure meter, here’s my video about this ruclips.net/video/1xCzxlfZ5yQ/видео.html
After 2 years, are you still on HLG3 or now on S-LOG3?
It’s always been slog3 for me 😉
@@HarvVideoAudioStuff I have been using HLG3 and I think I have exposed my videos correctly. However, my skin looks red :-) as opposed to when using S-LOG3.
Have you ever encountered a similar problem?
Why would you even compare HLG in rec.709? By default it was designed for HDR (wide gamut HDR) use first of all. You sort of using Ferrari for plowing (?).
Well because so many people use HLG in this way, really the message of the video was if you’re working with an SDR workflow you’re better off using other modes
6:14 to me look better the HLG3 more warm and more highlight and not blueish color
Higher dynamic range than hlg? What are you talking about? It can be clearly seen there's more DR in HLG clip than SLog3.
I’m talking about the gamma rather than the graded clip 👍🏻
There's comparisons of al 4 HLG alraedy and the HLG3 is the most preferred. More so then HLG and HLG 1+2. So for me this is less usefull, S-log 3 wins in s-log and HLG3 in HLG, so the others do not matter. Secondly 'dynamic range S-log3>HLG (it's not even close), from what i hear it's 1 stop (on a 12 scale), so that's like 8%. Massive? unless i see otherwise and proven otherwise this is not massive.
To me hlg looks better
Slog3 looks like more noisy...
I don't know why would someone use HLG when Slog3 gives a lot more dynamic range and better color. You can also transform Slog3 to HLG but not the other way around.
I agree, I’m still using slog3 👍🏻
Also, I think people think HLG/bt2020 is the only choice for HDR content but in fact slog3/sgamut3.cine is more than capable
@@HarvVideoAudioStuff yep, nobody is using HLG for delivery. it's either HDR10 or Dolby Vision
90% of people here don't need hlg or slog3, stop wasting time on these profiles. Use neutral creative style it is the best for most scenarios and it is easy to edit afterwards if needed. Most people think by just turning on slog3 that you will have professional video, you are getting maybe 10% better video on 8bit camera and that's only IF big IF, you managed to nail exposure and color grading.
Just because you don't use it, you made it 90%... crazy😂
@@khaleel898so true lol. What he said is total bullshit
The more I dig into it the more I tend to agree with you. And its my job
If you have a time to waste then go a head, lot of clients won't notice a difference, EXCUSE ME if you work for coca cola brand..... you probably make 1k per month and its probably not even your main job. So stop shitting about slog or hlg, since you have 0 use of it.@@flexflex5853
inaccurate information.
Hlg is better on mcpro24fps