As a practical expedient, I am working towards a “dump and run” video work flow. it goes against my little voice, but it is what it is.
This requires footage that is basically ok to go out of the can. I know this will potentially* effect overall quality and processing options and my capture processes will have to be top notch but unless things change and a work flow designed around post processing is possible, I have to find a way.
I started off this jourey looking at a lot of Youtube videos about settings to use. In most cases, Natural profile was recommended with a variety of setting changes, some common, some contradictory.
The main one applied is -5 sharpness and sometimes up to -5 Contrast to improve the “Cinematic” look of the files (i.e. reduce digital clarity and hardness). This is also often accompanied by a Black Mist/Net/Glow/Bloom filter of some type to recreate the “Netflix” look and I took the bait.
For context, many of these users intended to still do some post. Without post processing, I need to get to the end point directly.
The main settings rarely varied, but occassionally a Vlogger would choose +0 sharpness and I must admit, I liked it.
So, what is “Cinematic” look and why are so many anxious to emulate it?
The “Netflix” look as I tend to call it is a soft, glowy, look with bloomed highlights and often subdued lighting. It looks big, cinematic (go figure), lush and not a little bit film-stock like.
Looking at some streamed TV the other day, I had a realiseation.
One show “Battle Creek” was a prime example of full Cinebloom capture. One scene, shot in a loft space, had so much blooming, faces were hard to see. I had not realised before how much this annoys me consciously or not.
I realised that two responses bubbled up in me. The first was an old general dislike of “soft focus”, especially “white” or haze softening. The second was a new found dislike for the “cute”, dreamy look that this show and others like “NCIS” or “Jag” are after and use softening filters heavily to achieve. This is generally limited to American feel good or lite shows, helping keep the mood sanitised. Even death is “nice” in these shows..
It is a look I really dislike. It was also something that the latest series of “Vera” used against the grain of previous series and English TV in general and my (our) response was again negative.
The next show I watched was “The Rookie”. This has a far more realistic super high definition look, warts and all. There may be some mild filtering, but it is mild. The likely culprit would be something like a Tiffen Glimmerglass 1/8 or similar because the highlight blooming was very controlled and blemish softening almost non existent. I felt for the actors, but they held together ok.
It is possible to have sharp and smooth at the same time.
This I like a lot more. It still has warmth when needed, but the biting sharpness took me to a happy place and suspension of reality is reduced.
This came at the same time as some feedback from work.
I shot a lot of small clips at the school swimming using a sharpness reduced Natural setting on the G9 and the basic Normal setting for OSMO footage. The OSMO got the most positive reactions. This was partly due to the creative angles it allows (under frikkin water!), but also the sharp, contrasty and clear footage it produces at base settings with nothing applied (it offers no real modifications apart from Cine-D in post).
The end result is a shift back to Natural mode with no mods to any settings at this point. I will do the same with the EM1x, but will add +1 Amber and -1 Contrast, bringing it closer to the G9. When I am capturing basically the same footage out of all three cameras and get some more feedback, then look at slight mods as needed.
I can also now add gentle filtering to this without washing out the already washed out.
*At the end of the day, sharp clear and brilliant video is the desired end point, so within reason, just like with stills, how you get there is irrelevant as long as you get there.