ProVideo Coalition.com: Stunning Good Looks by Art Adams

The AF-100 has a lot of potential, and I’d definitely go with it when the alternative is an HDSLR. Its layout and controls are familiar and it’s designed to do what it does, so it’s much faster and easier to program, judge focus and expose than an HDSLR. It also doesn’t moire like an HDSLR will.

On the negative side, though, it’s still basically an HVX-200 with a larger sensor. It clips roughly the same way, which is not a good look in a large sensor camera, and it’s noisy too. The odd thing about the noise, though, is that it’s consistent throughout the exposure range: there’s no discernible change in noise between EI 200 and EI 800, and the exposure latitude doesn’t seem to be affected either. Typically you’d have more underexposure latitude and less overexposure headroom at EI 200, and the reverse at EI 800, but I couldn’t see any difference at all when I tested this camera during prep. At EI 1600 you can see that Panasonic is doing some noise reduction: Adam says the noise gets a little blocker, and there’s some odd motion blur that implies that they may be averaging noise across multiple frames in order to reduce it. Still, the camera is very usable at high EI’s and I’m not afraid to rate it at EI 800. In fact, for another project shot mostly under available light in a church, that’s exactly what I’m doing. (I rated the camera at EI 400 for this project.)

There are some differences between this camera and its predecessors when it comes to gamma settings. CineLike V has, in the past, been the all-around winner in the HVX-200 and HPX-170 as it rolls off fairly pleasantly at the upper and lower portions of the gamma curve and is pleasing on flesh tones. On the AF-100, though, CineLike V is very crunchy and does unpleasant things to flesh tones, causing them to chroma clip much too soon. As I mentioned before, I like to slightly overexpose flesh tones in certain situations and CineLike V doesn’t allow me to do that.

After a bit of testing I settled on “Low” gamma, which seems to push middle gray down the gamma curve and results in slightly crushed shadows but pleasantly stretched highlights. (Crushing highlights can make them look clipped sooner than they really are, so pulling gamma down opens up that highlight range and allows for a greater range of bright skin tones.) This is similar to what I do when working with a Sony EX1 or EX3: I use the CineLike 4 curve (which is a great all-around gamma curve) and then set overall gamma somewhere between -10 and -40, depending on the situation. This crushes the shadows a little but makes the highlights a lot smoother.

Speaking of highlights, I did a little testing on my own to determine whether I could return some detail to clipped highlights in post.

This picture is a still from the original footage, uncorrected. The shiny portions of the actress’s skin are getting into that compressed-highlight portion of the gamma curve where they start to look a bit electronic and unrealistic.

This is what happened when I went into Final Cut Pro and applied Tiffen DFX2’s Halo filter. Halo is my all-time favorite digital filter as it emulates the filter-in-the-telecine look: in days of old (this was popular in the late 1980s) there was a trend of putting a glass diffusion filter in the telecine path when transferring film negative, which had the effect of adding a glow to the shadows instead of a glow to the highlights. It also added a softening effect and desaturated the image as well. I’ve backed way off on that look, adjusting the filter so that most of the effect is desaturation with a touch of diffusion thrown in, and the results aren’t bad. I’ve probably gone a little too far in softening and desaturating, but you can see how the flesh tones look a little more filmic and pleasant without being overly saturated.

What I wanted to do was to smooth and spread out that highlight so that the edges looked a little less electronic. I ran into a bit of a roadblock, though:

This is interesting but it’s not there yet. I used the Halo filter again and combined it with a filter that’s not in Tiffen DFX2: Skin Smoother. This filter places an adjustable mask over skin tone and then gives it an isolated blur. It’s a start but I’ll have to see this image in motion to see if it really works. (The Skin Smoother filter is part of an old filter package called 55mm, which evolved into the Tiffen DFX filter package.)

What jumps out at me is that I can see a weird cartoony effect in the skin tone highlights that looks to be an artifact of 8-bit compression. Yes, that’s right—the AF-100 records 8-bit AVCHD. As an experiment Jeff Regan brought a KiPro along and we recorded in ProRes as well, but unlike the Sony EX1 and EX3 cameras the HD-SDI output of the camera is NOT 10-bit.

Recording 10-bit out of an EX1/EX3 is a great solution when shooting green screens because the 8-bit internal long-GOP XDCAM codec does really horrible things to motion blur, making keying and rotoscoping very difficult. Recording the camera output to ProRes, however, results in a VERY clean signal that is great for visual effects work.

Not so with the AF-100. The HD-SDI output is 8-bit as well, and I question how good this camera will be for green screen work. We tend to need greater depth of field for green screen work anyway, so I’m always talking producers out of shooting green screen with an HDSLR in favor of an EX1/EX3 so we don’t have to worry about focus. (On larger shoots with Alexas and RED ONEs we tend to have the budget to light for a deeper stop.) It would be nice to have another option for low-budget green screen, but sadly the AF-100 is probably not it.

We’re going to compare the AVCHD and ProRes footage later on and see if there’s a noticeable difference between the two.

As you’ve read this far, you deserve a bit of a reward. The AF-100 did something really odd on this shoot, and while it hasn’t happened to me again I think you should know that it is possible. Watch this clip:

Black balancing is recommended every time the camera EI is changed, probably because black balancing plays a part in noise reduction. You black balance by holding the white balance button down for a couple of seconds, at which point the camera caps itself internally and does its thing.

This problem seems directly related to having a heavy lens on the camera. As we were the first to use the AF-100 locally, and we were desperate to give it a try instead of using an HDSLR, Shooting Star Video provided a commonly available lens support setup with the full expectation that it would work properly with the AF-100 and the Alura.. Apparently the lens support bracket allowed the lens to sag slightly on occasion. When that happened the capping shutter engaged, sometimes for only a moment but occasionally it stayed closed until we smacked the lens or adjusted the lens support bracket. (Smacking tended to happen during takes, of which only two were ruined.)

I’ve since used this same camera with Shooting Star’s new bracket specifically made to support this lens and it’s worked flawlessly. The current theory is that the lens shifted in the mount in such a way that it pressed against a couple of contacts and triggered the internal capping shutter, but we don’t know for sure what was going on. Just know that a heavy lens like the Alura must be properly supported (and that’s a good idea on any camera).

If this happens to you with an Alura please feel free to smack the lens. It can take it, and it feels good after the surprise of suddenly seeing black through the viewfinder. Then re-seat the lens and check the support bracket.

The great reveal: words scratched into a hood, to be added in post. At magic hour, under low contrast illumination, the AF-100 is beautiful.

Lower end cameras that exhibit a lot of contrast are like slide, or transparency, film: it doesn’t handle extreme contrast well at all, but under controlled circumstances it can yield very pretty pictures indeed. This is true of all the small camcorders, but it is especially true of the AF-100. The limited contrast, the horrible clipping and the inability to record 10-bit from the HD-SDI spigot hold this camera back from being, by far, the best in its class. But given the choice between this camera and an HDSLR—and if small size and form factor aren’t a concern—I’ll pick this camera every time. The combination of reduced depth of field, video camera controls and focus and exposure feedback win over the HDSLR any time.

And I have been picking this camera regularly over HDSLRs. As I mentioned earlier, I’ve been shooting a charity project in a church and getting wonderful results under available and slightly augmented lighting conditions, and I’ve got a corporate talking head shoot later this week where this camera is the perfect choice for the space we’re shooting in and the budget we’re working with.

Every tool has its purpose, but I wish this tool was just a little more versatile. Then again, if it was it would quickly cut into Varicam sales… and we can’t have that. Or Panasonic can’t. (I wouldn’t mind a bit.)

But one has to wonder if a future software upgrade that made clipped highlights more pleasing wouldn’t add a lot of life to this product.

Disclosure: The Tiffen DFX2 filter package referenced in this article is a review copy sent to me by Tiffen at no charge.

Art Adams is a pretty sharp guy, though his background is often out of focus. His website is at www.artadamsdp.com.

The Best of Stunning Good Looks

Art Adams | 08/30

A directory of my best articles, sorted by topic.

This entry is a guide to my best articles, sorted by topic. Enjoy!

NAB 2012: Assorted Snapshots

Adam Wilt | 05/08

A few cool things I saw at the show that didn’t fit into any other articles.

NAB is too big a show in too short a time to see more than a fraction of it. I’ve covered a few things in some depth (as have other PVC folks), but there’s plenty more that slips by without proper coverage. Here, I have a few photos…

NAB 2012: RED

Adam Wilt | 05/07

RED’s Ted Schilowitz discusses 2012’s products, and a photo gallery.

RED’s “Leader of the Rebellion” Ted Schilowitz held a press conference at NAB on Monday, describing the projects and products RED is working on. Rather than paraphrase him, I’ve got him on card (well, it’s not “on…

You must be registered to comment. This is an effort to reduce spam. Please REGISTER HERE.

As to the lens issue: Jeff had the camera, the lens, and the Hot Rod Cameras PL mount, an E.T. universal bridge plate with both 19mm and 15mm studio rod fittings, and a 15mm lens support fitting for the Alura. I had our Arri MB20 matte box and FF5 follow-focus rig, but only 19mm rods (that is, between us, we only had long-enough rods in 19mm size; the MB20 and FF5 can work with either rod size, but at Meets The Eye we’re set up with 19mm rods only). We didn’t have a prep day, so we jury-rigged on location, winding up with the 19mm support system running from the camera to the matte box, and then 15mm rods running back from the matte box to support the lens. The vertical alignment wasn’t perfect so it’s likely we were putting some torque on the camera’s front plate; I recall thinking that the lens seemed to be tilted up a bit more than I’d like. My guess is that our hasty rigging stressed the AF100 a bit, and that’s why we saw the poor thing capping intermittently.

The preceding Thursday, we had the lens properly supported on a 15mm rod system with no capping issues, but the PL adapter in that rig had flange-depth issues, and the 15mm rods didn’t extend far enough for a matte box. Jeff had only had the AF100 for a few days and hadn’t had time to assemble a full support kit, hence our last-minute cobbling with the MTE-supplied support kit and the attendant issues.

The moral? No matter how low-budget the spot, no matter how pressing the schedule, you give up your prep day at your peril.

Highlight handling: On that Thursday test day, I had my GH1 along, and looked at its highlight handling alongside the AF100. The GH1 handled overexposure on saturated colors much more naturally than the AF100 did, which surprised me—both cameras are made by the same company; couldn’t the vid-side folks see what the stills-side folks were up to?

And no, I don’t think the issue on your color-correction would be helped much if at all by 10-bit files. The transitions from normal to kneed and then to clipped are so quick, so sudden, that having 4x the tonal resolution would be irrelevant: the transition zones are so abrupt that they go from OK to NG in the space of a pixel or two, and with a very steep slope to the tone curve despite the knee. Whether you’re crashing into clipping at 254 or at 1023, it’s still a hard crash.

The fix here was clearly to have had Luke and his assistant stationed sunward, just out of frame, ready to run across the street with the hero, carrying another 12x12 silk to soften the light. Yes, their shadows would have been visible, but I’m sure Ian could roto them out; he can fix anything in post, or so I hear… [grin].

Looking forward to seeing the completed spot!

Posted by Adam Wilt on 02/08 at 10:16 PM

Nice, thanks Art! Good write up with information I can use if I ever shoot with the AF100. You seem to be the pioneer with the arrows in his back, so now I know where to look out for the dangers. Will you post a link to the finished spot?

Thanks,
-Graham

Posted by Graham Futerfas on 02/09 at 09:44 AM

Guys, you must fix your commenting system. Comments “stick” to a page you were reading, not to a whole article. Comments, made on the first page are not seen on other pages, and vice versa.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 02/11 at 04:26 PM

The commenting software company has been contacted and they are reviewing code and such to determine what the problem is. As quickly as they get back to me, we will institute a fix.

We’re trying, it’s a code thing from the developer…

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 02/11 at 04:51 PM

Actually, comments “stick” wherever they darned well feel like, sometimes on the page one comments on, sometimes on a different page (as in my previous comment here, which was posted on page 3), and sometimes—wonder of wonders—on the whole fleeping article!

It’s a vexatious problem with infrastructure of the site, and the site minders are well aware of it. The solution is actively being sought, but it is even more elusive than my Panasonic GH2, which was ordered well over a month ago and has yet to be seen… [grin].

Posted by Adam Wilt on 02/11 at 04:52 PM

I have to say, one of the MAJOR features of the camera, especially as opposed to a vDSLR is the complete lack of junk strapped, attached, jury-rigged and becabled just to make the whole thing work.

If it weren’t for the monitor on top, this’d be the cleanest camera rig we’ve seen in a long, long while.

Personally, I like to attach my monitor to the tripod so it’s easier to see- especially like in that high, tilt-over shot you have there. But even with the monitor on top, this demonstrates the value of a purpose built piece of hardware, as opposed to jury-rigging something that wasn’t meant to do this.

Posted by IEBA on 02/15 at 07:51 PM

Art, great to see you putting this new camera to use. It would be nice to see something from that camera with a “lower cost” lens, perhaps a stock Panasonic? That Alura is still very pricey for most people!
Keep it coming!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 02/17 at 10:05 AM

Re: the commenting: Consider a switch to the Disqus commenting system (http://disqus.com). It works great, people comment even more, it’s awesome for mobile devices, etc. Click through my link to see how I have it set up for my Expression Engine site (which I think this site runs also). People don’t have to sign in every time, which is also nice. Many large blogs are running Disqus nowadays.

And having to login to PVC every time just to comment is a royal, frickin’ pain. =)

The benefits were strong, and I just got tired of comment spam and managing each blog individually.

PS Just got to play with an AF100 at a local video show, looked good. Wish you could knee those highlights though.

Posted by Allan W. on 02/22 at 03:32 PM

Allan,

I’ve been eyeing Disqus for some time. My concern was losing all the existing great comments we have.

Would love to talk offline. Feel free to email me: sgentry (at) provideocoalition (dot) com.

Thanks!

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 02/22 at 03:41 PM

I will not use Disqus simply because I want to use different accounts - and hats - on different forums. Google already has enough info on me, I do not want Disqus to have as much or even more. No, thanks. But my comments are not of any real importance so why you guys should care?

P.S. I do not login every time to PVC, I have a cookie.

Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 02/22 at 04:54 PM

Art / Wilt,
Great info - thanks. We are considering the AF-100 to replace our HVX-200 for our lo/no projects. Would like to get your opinion.
1. You comment that the AF-100 is basically an HVX with a larger sensor. Do you feel that it is on par with HVX in regard to the recorded image, or were you more refering to the functionality?
2. I am curious as to how the the Ki Pro footage you recorded compares to the footage recorded natively to the camera. We are considering a nonoflash, so I am a bit bummed that that HDSDI tap is 8 bit instead of 10. However, if the Ki Pro footage compares favorably against the native footage, it might still be worth our while.
Thanks,
Brent

Posted by particleman on 04/05 at 04:37 PM

It’s on par with HVX-200 image quality, but unfortunately when it comes to highlights that’s not saying much. Both suffer horrible-looking clipping around highlights, especially saturated highlights.

I haven’t looked at the KiPro footage, to be honest with you. The fact that it’s 8-bit as well has just left me cold. It’s amazing what you can do with an EX1 or EX3 by recording the HD-SDI out and it’s very disappointing that Panasonic doesn’t offer a 10-bit output. This may be because it was a way to cut costs or maybe they don’t want to cut into sales of the impending single-sensor Varicam.

Posted by Art Adams on 04/05 at 05:56 PM

Thanks for the feedback.
I suspect you are correct in both assumptions: Cutting costs and cutting into Varicam profit

I think might still go with it as we are familiar with the HVX and it’s limitations. Additionally, we can adapt a lot more of our lenses to it than it’s Sony peer. So I guess we will go for the depth of field option and forgo the 10 bit option. It’s always a trade off isn’t it?

Posted by particleman on 04/06 at 05:54 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:

Panasonic AF-100: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly