Category Archives: UNDERWATER VIDEO

do you need raw video?

We are finally there. Thanks to smaller companies that are keen to get a share of the market we now have at least two cameras with MFT sensor that are able to produce RAW video.

RAW Video and RED

It has been RED to patent the original algorithm to compress raw video data straight out of the sensor before the demosaicing process. Apple tried to circumvent the patent with their ProRes RAW but lost in court the legal battle and now has to pay licenses to Red. Coverage is here.

So RED is the only company that has this science, to avoid paying royalties Blackmagic Design developed an algorithm that uses data taken from a step of the video pipeline after demosaic for their BRAW.

I do not want to discuss if BRAW is better than RedCode or ProRes RAW however with a background in photography I only consider RAW what is straight out of the sensor Analag Digital Converter so for me RAW is RedCode or ProRes RAW and not BMRAW.

How big is RAW Video

If you are a photographer you know that a RAW image data file is roughly the same size in megabytes than the megapixels of your camera.

How is that possible I have a 20 Megapixel camera and the RAW file is only a bit more than 20 megabytes? My Panasonic RW2 files are 24.2 MB without fail out of 20.89 Megapixels so on average 9.26 bits per pixel. Why don’t we have the full 12 bits per pixel and therefore a 31 MB file? Well cameras are made of a grid of pixels that are monochromatic so each pixel is either red, green or blue. In each 2×2 matrix there are 2 green pixels, 1 red and 1 blue pixel. Through a series of steps of which on is to decode this mosaic into an image (demosaic) we rebuild an RGB image for display.

Each one of our camera pixels will not have the full 4096 possible tones, measures from DxoMark suggest that the Sony IMX272AQK only resolves 24 bits colours in total and 9 bits of grey tones. So this is why a lossless raw files is only 24.2 MB. This means that an 8K frame video in RAW would be 9.25 MB and therefore a 24 fps RAW video stream would be 222 MB/s or 1,776 Mb/s if we had equivalent compression efficiency. After chroma subsampling to 422 this would become 1184 Mb/s.

Cameras like the ZCam E2 or the BMPCC4K that can record ProRes 422 HQ approach those bitrates and can be considered virtually lossless.

But now we have ProRes RAW so what changes? The CEO of ZCAM has posted an example of a 50 fps ProRes RAW HQ files and this has a bitrate of 2255 Mb/s if this was 24 fps it would be 1082 Mb/s so we can see how my maths are actually stacking up nicely.

Those bit rates are out of reach of almost all memory card so an SSD drive support is required and this is where Atomos comes into the picture.

Atomos have decided to adopt ProRes RAW and currently offer support for Nikon, Panasonic and Zcam selected model.

ProRes RAW workflow

So with the ProRes RAW file at hand I wanted to test the workflow in Final Cut Pro X. Being an Apple codec all works very well however we encounter a number of issues that photographers have resolved a long time ago.

The first one is that RAW has more dynamic range than your SDR delivery space, this also happens with photos however programs work in larger RGB spaces like ProPhotoRGB at 16 bits and using tone mapping you can edit your images and then bring them back to an 8 bit jpeg that is not as good as the RAW file but is in most cases fine for everyone.

Video NLE are not in the same league of photo raw editors and usually deal with a signal that is already video is not raw data. So the moment you drop your ProRes RAW clip on a SDR timeline it clips as you would expect. A lot of work is required to bring back clips into an SDR space and this is not the purpose of this post.

To avoid big issues I decided to work on an HDR timeline in PQ so that with a super wide gamut and gamma there were no clipping issues. The footage drops perfectly into the timeline without any work required to confirm which is brilliant. So RAW for HDR is definitely the way forward.

ProRes RAW vs LOG

My camera does not have ProRes RAW so I wanted to understand what is lost going through LOG compression? For cameras that have an analog gain on sensor there is no concept of base ISO fixed like it happens on Red or ARRI cameras. Our little cameras have a programmable gain amplifier and as gain goes up DR drops. So the first bad news is that by using LOG you will lose DR from RAW sensors.

This graph shows that on the Panasonic GH5 there is a loss of 1 Ev from ISO 100 to 400 but still we have our 11.3 Ev minimum to play with. I am not interested in the whole DR but I just want to confirm that for those cameras that have more DR than their ADC allows you will have a loss with LOG as this needs gain and gain means clipping sooner.

Panasonic GH5 full resolution 20.9 MPixels DR

What is very interesting is that net of this the ProRes RAW file allowed me to test how good is LOG compression. So in this clip I have :

  1. RAW video unprocessed
  2. RAW video processed using Panasonic LOG
  3. RAW video processed using Canon LOG
  4. RAW video processed using Sony LOG

In this example the ZCAM E2 has a maximum dynamic range of 11.9 Ev (log2(3895)) from Sony IMX299CJK datasheet. As the camera has less DR than the maximum limit of the ADC there is likely to be no loss.

We can see that there are no visible differences between the various log processing options. This confirms that log footage is an effective way to compress dynamic range in a smaller bit depth space (12->10 bits) for MFT sensors.

The same ProRes RAW files processed using log from Panasonic, Canon and Sony shows no visual difference

Final Cut Pro gives you the option to go directly to RAW or go through LOG, this is because all your log based workflow and LUT would continue to work. I can confirm this approach is sound as there is no deterioration that I can see.

Is ProRes RAW worth it?

Now that we know that log compression is effective the question is do I need it? And the answer is it depends…

Going back to our ProRes RAW 1082 Mb/s once 422 subsampling is applied this drops to 721 Mb/s this is pretty much identical to ProRes 422 HQ nominal bit rate of 707 Mb/s. So if you have a Zcam and record ProRes RAW or ProRes 422 HQ you should not be able to see any difference. I can confirm that I have compressed such footage in ProRes 422 HQ and I could not see any difference at all.

However typically with photos a RAW files can hold heavy modifications while a JPEG cannot. We are used processing ProRes and there is no doubt that ProRes 422 HQ can take a lot of beating. In my empirical tests I can see that Final Cut Pro X is very efficient manipulating ProRes RAW files and in terms of holding modifications I cannot see that this codec provides a benefit but this may be due to the lack of capability of FCPX.

For reference Panasonic AVC Intra 422 is identical in terms of quality to ProRes 422 HQ though harder to process, and much harder to process than ProRes RAW.

Conclusion

If you have already a high quality output from your camera such as ProRes 422 HQ or Panasonic AVCI 400 Mbps with the tools at our disposal there is not a lot of difference at least for an MFT sensor. This may have to do with the fact that the sensor DR and colour depth is anyway limited and therefore log compression is effective to the point that ProRes RAW does not appear to make a difference, however there is no doubt that if you have a more capable camera, there is more valuable data there and this may be well worth it.

I am currently looking for Panasonic S1H ProRes RAW files. Atomos only supports 12 bits so the DR of the camera will be capped as RAW is linearly encoded. However SNR will he higher and the camera will have more tones and colors resulting in superior overall image quality, someone calls this incorrectly usable DR but is just image quality. it will be interesting to see if AVCI 10 bits and log is more effective than ProRes RAW 12 bits.

The definitive guide to hdr with the panasonic gh5/s1 in final cut pro x

First of all the requirements for HDR at home are:

  1. Log or HLG footage
  2. Final Cut Pro X 10.4.8
  3. Mac OS Catalina 10.15.4
  4. HDR-10 Monitor with 10 bit gamut

It is possible to work with a non HDR-10 monitor using scopes but is not ideal and only acceptable for HLG and in any case 10 bits is a must.

Recommended reading: https://images.apple.com/final-cut-pro/docs/Working_with_Wide_Color_Gamut_and_High_Dynamic_Range_in_Final_Cut_Pro_X.pdf

HDR Footage

In order to product HDR clips you need HDR footage. This comes in two forms:

  1. Log footage
  2. HLG

Cameras have been shooting HDR since years the issue has been that no consumer operating system or display were capable of displaying it. The situation has changed as Windows 10 and Mac Os now have HDR-10 support. This is limited for example on Mac Os there is no browser support but the Tv app is supported, while on windows you can watch HDR-10 videos on YouTube.

You need to have in mind your target format because Log and HLG are not actually interchangeable. HLG today is really only Tv sets and some smartphones, HDR-10 instead is growing in computer support and is more widely supported. Both are royalty free. This post is not about what is the best standard is just about producing some HDR content.

The process is almost identical but there are some significant differences downstream.

Let me explain why this graph produced using the outstanding online application LutCalc show the output input relationship of V-LOG against a standard display gamma for rec709.

V-LOG -> PQ

Stop diagram V-LOG vs Rec709

Looking at the stop diagram we can appreciate that the curves are not only different but a lot of values differ substantially and this is why we need to use a LUT.

Once we apply a LUT the relationship between V-LOG and Rec709 is clearly not linear and only a small parts of bits fit into the target space.

Output vs Input diagram for V-LOG and Rec709

We can see that V-Log fills Rec709 with just a bit more than 60% IRE so there will need to be a lot of squeezing to be done to fit it back in and this is the reason why many people struggle with V-Log and the reason why I do not use V-Log for SDR content.

However the situation changes if we use V-Log for HDR specifically PQ.

Stop Table V-Log to PQ

You can see that net of an offset the curves are almost identical in shape.

This is more apparent looking at the LUT in / out.

LUT in/Out V-Log to Rec2100 PQ

With the exception of the initial part that for V-Log is linear while PQ is fully logarithmic the curve is almost a straight line. As PQ is a larger space than that V-Log can produce on a consumer camera we do not have issues of squeezing bits in as PQ accommodates all bits just fine.

HLG

Similar to V-LOG HLG does not have a great fit into an SDR space.

Stop Table HLG to Rec709

The situation becomes apparent looking at the In/Out Lutted values.

HLG to Rec709

We can see that as HLG is also a log gamma with a different ramp up 100% is achieved with even less bits that V-Log.

So really in pure mathematical terms the fit of log spaces into Rec709 is not a great idea and should be avoided. Note with the arrival of RAW video we still lack editors capable to work in 16 bit depth space like photo editors do and currently all processes go through LOG because they need to fit into a 10/12 bits working space.

It is also a bad idea to use V-Log for HLG due to the difference of the log curves.

V-Log vs HLG

And the graph demonstrates what I said at the beginning. You need to decide at the outset your output and stick to a compatible format.

Importing Footage in Final Cut Pro X 10.4.8

Once we have HLG or LOG footage we need to import it into a Wide Gamut Library, make sure you check this because SDR is default in FCPX.

Library Settings

HLG footage will not require any processing, but LUTs have to be applied to V-LOG as this is different from any Rec2100 target spaces.

The most convenient way is to go into Organise workspace select all clips than press the i button and select General. Apply the Panasonic V-Log LUT to all clips.

Organise View the LUT option is not available in the Basic view so make sure you select General

Creating a Project

Once all files have been handled as required we create our HDR-10 project which in final cut means Rec2020 PQ.

For HLG project change colour space to HLG

The following screenshots demonstrate the effect of the LUT on footage on a PQ timeline.

LUT not applied footage looks dim as values are limited to 80%

With the LUT applied the V-LOG is expanded in the PQ space and the colours and tones come back.

LUTed clip on PQ timeline

We can see the brightness of the scene is approaching 1000 nits and looks exactly we we experienced it.

Once all edits are finished and just as last step we add the HDR Tools to limit peak brightness to 1000 Nits which is a requirement of YouTube and most consumer displays. The Scope flex slightly with an automatic highlight roll-off.

Exporting the Project

I have been using Panasonic AVCI 400 mbps so I will export a master file using ProRes422 HQ if you use a lower bitrate ProRes 422 may be sufficient but don’t go lower as it won’t be HDR anymore.

Export in ProRes 422 HQ

YouTube and other devices use default settings for HDR-10 metadata so do not fill the mastering display nor content information it is not required and you would not know how to fill it correctly with exception of peak brightness.

Converting for YouTube

I use the free program handbrake and YouTube guidelines for upload to produce a compatible files. It is ESSENTIAL to produce an mp4 file otherwise your TV and YouTube may not be able to display HDR correctly avoid any other format at all costs.

The finished product can be seen here

Home HDR Video HDR-10
HLG Documentary style footage

SDR version from HDR master

There are residual issues with this process one is the production of an SDR version. This currently works much better for HLG than HDR-10 which is interesting because HLG is unsupported on any computer so if you produce HDR HLG you are effectively giving something decent to both audiences.

For HDR-10 YouTube applies their own one fits all LUT and the results can be really bad. You may experience oversaturated colours in some cases, dark footage in others, and some clips may look totally fine.

At professional level you would produce a separate SDR grade however it is possible to improve the quality of YouTube conversion using specific techniques I will cover in a separate post.

Final Remarks

Grading in HDR is not widely supported the only tools available are scopes and Tone Mapping of your display. There is no concept of correct exposure for skin tones, in one scene those have a certain brightness and in another this changes again because this is not a 0-100% relative scale but goes with absolute values.

If you invested in a series of cinema LUT you will find none of them work and compresses the signal to under 100 nits. So there is less headroom for looks. There are other things you can do to give some vintage look like adding grain but you need to be careful as the incredible brightness of the footage and the details of 10 bits means if you push it up too much it looks a mess. Currently I am avoiding adding film grain and if I add it I blend it to 10%-20%.

One thing that is interesting is that Log footage in PQ does have a nice feel to it despite the incredible contrast. After all Log is a way to emulate film specifically Cineon, this is true for almost all log formats. Then you would have the different characteristics of each film stock, this is now our camera sensor and because most of them are made by Sony or Canon the clips tend to look very similar to each other nowadays. So if you want to have something different you need to step in the world of Red or ARRI but this is not in the scope of what I am writing here and what you my readers are interested in.

Am keeping a playlist with all my HDR experiments here and I will keep adding to it.

YouTube HDR Playlist

If you find this useful please donate using the button on the side and I will have a drink on you…Cheers!

SNR in Digital Cameras in 2020

There are significant number of misconceptions about noise in digital cameras and how this depends on variables like the sensor size or the pixel size. In this short post I will try to explain in clear terms the relationship between Signal Noise Ratio (SNR) and sensor size.

Signal (S) is the number of photons captured by the lens and arriving on the sensor, this will be converted in electric signal by the sensor and digitised later on by an Analog Digital Converter (ADC) and further processed by Digital Signal Processors (DSP). Signal depending on light is not affected by pixel size but by sensor size. There are many readings on this subject and you can google it yourself using sentences like ‘does pixel size matter’. Look out for scientific evidence backed up by data and formulas and not YouTube videos.

S = P * e where P is the photon arrival rate that is directly proportional to the surface area of the sensor, through physical aperture of the lens and solid angle of view, and e is the exposure time.

This equation also means that once we equalise lens aperture there is no difference in performance between sensors. Example two lenses with equivalent field of view 24mm and 12mm on full frame and MFT with crop 2x when the lens aperture is equalised produce the same SNR. Considering a full frame at f/2.8 and the MFT at f/1.4 gives the same result as 24/2.8=12/1.4 this is called constrained depth of field. And until there is sufficient light ensures SNR is identical between formats.

Noise is made of three components:

  1. Photon Noise (PN) is the inherent noise in the light, that is made of particles even though is approximated in optics with linear beams
  2. Read Noise (RN) is the combined read noise of the sensor and the downstream electronic noise
  3. Dark Current Noise (DN) is the thermal noise generated by long exposure heating up the sensor

I have discovered wordpress has no equation editor so forgive if the formulas appear rough.

Photo Noise is well mapped by Poisson distribution and the average level can be approximated with SQRT(S).

The ‘apparent’ read noise is generally constant and does not depend on the signal intensity.

While 3 is fundamental to Astrophotography it can be neglected for majority of photographic applications as long as the sensor does not heat up so we will ignore it for this discussion.

If we write down the Noise equation we obtain the following:

Noise=sqrt({PN}^2+{RN}^2+{DN}^2)

Ignoring DN in our application we have two scenarios, the first one is where the signal is strong enough that the Read Noise is considerably smaller than Photon Noise. This is the typical scenario in standard working conditions of a camera. If PN >> RN the signal to noise ratio becomes:

SNR =sqrt S

S is unrelated to pixel size but is affected by sensor size. If we take a camera with a full frame and one with a 2x crop factor at high signal rate the full frame camera and identical f/number it has double the SNR of the smaller 2x crop. Because the signal is high enough this benefit is almost not visible in normal conditions. If we operate at constrained depth of field the larger sensor camera has no benefit on the smaller sensor.

When the number of photons collected drops the Read Noise becomes more important than the photon noise. The trigger point will change depending on the size of the sensor and smaller sensor will become subject to Read Noise sooner than larger sensors but broadly the SNR benefit will remain double. If we look at DxOMark measurements of the Panasonic S1 full frame vs the GH5 micro four thirds we see that the benefit is around 6 dB at the same ISO value, so almost spot on with the theory.

Full Frame vs MFT SNR graph shows 2 stop benefit over 2x crop

Due to the way the curve of SNR drops the larger sensor camera will have a benefit or two stops also on ISO and this is the reason why DxOMark Sport Score for the GH5 is 807 while the S1 has a sport score of 3333 a total difference of 2.046 stops. The values of 807 and 3333 are measured and correspond to 1250 and 5000 on the actual GH5 and S1 cameras.

If we consider two Nikon camera the D850 full frame and the D7500 APSC we should find the difference to be one stop ISO and the SNR to drop at the same 3 dB per ISO increment.

The graphic from DxoMark confirms the theory.

Full Frame vs APSC SNR graph shows 1 stop benefit over 1.5x crop

If the SNR does not depend on pixel size, why do professional video cameras and, some high end SLR, have smaller pixel count? This is due to a feature called dual native ISO. It is obvious that a sensor has only one sensitivity and this cannot change, so what is happening then? We have seen that when signal drops, the SNR becomes dominated by the Read Noise of the sensor so what manufacturers do is to cap the full well capacity of the sensor and therefore cap the maximum dynamic range and apply a much stronger amplification through a low signal amplifier stage. In order to have enough signal to be effective the cameras have large pixel pitch so that the maximum signal per pixel is sufficiently high that even clipped is high enough to benefit from the amplification. This has the effect of pushing the SNR up two stops on average. Graphic of the read noise of the GH5s and S1 show a similar pattern.

Panasonic Dual Gain Amplifier in MFT and Full Frame cameras shows knees in the read noise graphs

Sone manufacturers like Sony appear to use dual gain systematically even with smaller pixel pitch in those cases the benefit is reduced from 2 stops to sometimes 1 or less. Look carefully for the read noise charts on sites like photonsforphotos to understand the kind of circuit in your camera and make the most of the SNR.

Because most of the low light situation have limited dynamic range, and the viewer is more sensitive to noise than DR, when the noise goes above a certain floor the limitation of the DR is seen as acceptable. The actual DR is falling well below values that would be considered acceptable for photography, but with photos you can intervene on noise in post processing but not DR, so highest DR is always the priority. This does not mean however that one should artificially inflate requirements introducing incorrect concepts like Useable DR especially when the dual gain circuit reduce maximum DR. Many cameras from Sony and Panasonic and other manufacturers have a dual gain amplifier, sometimes advertised other times not. A SNR of 1 or 0 dB is the standard to define useable signal because you can still see an image when noise and signal are comparable.

It is important to understand that once depth of field is equalised all performance indicators flatten and the benefit of one format on the other is at the edges of the ISO range, at very low ISO values and very high ISO and in both cases is the ability of the sensor to collect more photons that makes the difference, net of other structural issues in the camera.

As majority of users do not work at the boundaries of the ISO range or in low light and the differences in the more usual values get equalised, we can understand why many users prefer smaller sensor formats, that make not just the camera bodies smaller, but also the lenses.

In conclusion a larger sensor will always be superior to a smaller sensor camera regardless all additional improvement made by dual gain circuits. A full frame camera will be able to offer sustained dynamic range together with acceptable SNR value until higher ISO levels. Looking for example at the Panasonic video orientated S1H the trade off point of ISO 4000 is sufficient on a full frame camera to cover most real-life situation while the 2500 of the GH5s leaves out a large chunk of night scenes where in addition to good SNR, some dynamic range may still be required.

HDR or SDR with the Panasonic GH5

As you have read, I have been at the forefront of HDR use at home. I have a total of 5 devices with HDR certification of which 2 supporting all standards all the way to Dolby Vision and 3 supporting at least HLG and HDR-10. The consumption of content is composed for most of Netflix or Amazon originals and occasional BBC HLG broadcasts that are streamed concurrently to live programs. So, it is fair to say I have some practical experience on the subject and two years ago I started writing about shooting HLG with the GH5. This was mostly limited by lack of editing capabilities on the display side, but recently Mac OS 10.15.4 has brought HDR-10 support that means you can see HDR signal on a compatible HDMI or DisplayPort device. This is not HLG but there are ways around it as I wrote in a recent post. This post makes some considerations on the issues of shooting HDR and why as of 2020 shooting SDR Rec709 with your Panasonic GH5 is still my preferred option for underwater video and not.

Real vs Theoretical Dynamic Range

You will recall the schematic of a digital camera from a previous post.

This was presented to discuss dual gain circuits but if you ignore the two gain circuits it remains valid. In this post we will focus on the ADC which stands for Analog to Digital Converter. Contemporary cameras have 12- and 14-bits ADC, typically 14 bits ADC are a prerogative of DSLR cameras or high-end cameras. If we want to simplify to the extremes the signal arriving to the ADC will be digitalised on a 12- or 14-bits scale. In the case of the GH5 we have a 12-bits ADC, it is unclear if the GH5s has a 14-bits ADC despite producing 14-bits RAW, for the purpose of this post I will ignore this possibility and focus on 12-bits ADC.

12-bits means you have 4096 levels of signal for each RGB channel this effectively means the dynamic range limit of the camera is 12 Ev as this is defined as Log10(4096)/Log10(2)=12. Stop wait a minute how is that possible? I have references that the Panasonic GH5 dynamic range is 13 Ev how did this become 12?

Firstly, we need to ignore the effect of oversampling and focus on 1:1 pixel ratio and therefore look at the Screen diagram that shows just a bit more than 12 Ev. We then have to look at how DxOMark measures dynamic range this is explained here. In real life we will not be shooting a grey scale but a coloured scene, so unless you are taking pictures of the moon you will not get much more than 12 stops in any scenarios as the colours will eat the data.

This was for what concerns RAW sensor data before de-mosaicing and digital signal processing that will further deteriorate DR when the signal is converted down to 10-bits even if a nonlinear gamma curve is put in place. We do not know what is really the useable DR of the GH5 but Panasonic statement when V-LOG was announced referenced 12 stops dynamic range using a logarithmic curve so we can safely conclude that the best case is 12 stops when a log curve is used and 10 for a gamma curve with a constant correction factor. Again, it is worth stressing that the 12 stops DR is the absolute maximum at the camera setting with 0 gain applied aka base or native ISO which for the GH5 is 200 corresponding to 400 in log modes.

Shooting HLG vs SDR

Shooting HLG with the GH5 or any other prosumer device is not easy.

The first key issue in shooting HLG is the lack of monitoring capabilities on the internal LCD and on external monitors. Let’s start with the internal monitor that is not capable to display HLG signals and relies on two modes:

  • Mode 1 : priorities the highlights wherever they are
  • Mode 2 prioritise the subject i.e. center of the frame

In essence you are not able to see what you get during the shot. Furthermore, when you set zebra to 90% the camera will be rarely reaching this value. You need to rely on the waveform, that is not user friendly in an underwater scene, or on the exposure meter. If you have a monitor you will find if you are carefully in the spec that the screens are rec709 so will not display the HLG gamma while they will correctly record the colour gamut. https://www.atomos.com/ninjav : if you read under HDR monitoring gamma you see BT.2020 that is not HDR is SDR. So you encounter the same issues albeit on a much brighter 1000 nits display that you have on the LCD and you need to either adapt to the different values of the waveform or trust the exposure meter and zebra that as we have said are not very useful as it take a lot to clip. On the other hand if you shoot an SDR format the LCD and external monitor will show exactly what you are going to get except you shoot in V-LOG, in this case the waveform and the zebra will need to be adjusted to consider that VLOG absolute max is 80% and 90% white is 60%. Once you apply a monitor LUT however, you will see exactly what you are going to get on the internal or external display.

Editing HLG vs SDR

In the editing phase you will be faced with similar challenges although as we have seen there are workarounds to edit HLG if you wish so. A practical consideration is around contrast ratio. Despite all claims that SDR is just 6 stops I have actually dug out the BT.709, BT.1886, BT.2100 recommendations and I this is what I have found.

 Contrast RatioMax BrightnessMin BrightnessAnalog DR
BT.70910001000.19.97
BT.188620001000.0510.97
BT.210020000010000.00517.61
Specifications of ITU display standards

In essence Rec709 has a contrast ratio of 1000 which means 9.97 Stops of DR and already allows for 8- and 10-bits colour. BT.1886 was issued to consider CRT screens no longer exist and this means that the DR goes to 10.97 stops. BT.2100 has a contrast ratio of 200000:1 or 17.61 stops of DR.

StandardContrast RatioMax BrightnessMin BrightnessAnalog DR
HDR40010004000.49.97
HDR50050005000.112.29
HDR60060006000.112.55
HDR10002000010000.0514.29
HDR14007000014000.0216.10
400 TB8000004000.000519.61
500 TB10000005000.000519.93
DisplayHDR Performance Standards

Looking at HDR monitors you see that, with the exception of OLED screens, no consumer devices can meet BT.2100 standards; so even if you have an HDR monitor in most cases is falling short of BT.2100 recommendation.

Our GH5 is capable of a maximum 12 stops DR in V-Log and maybe a bit more in HLG however those values are far below BT.2100 recommendations and more in line with BT.1886 recommendation. If we look at DxOMark DR charts we see that at ISO 1600 nominal that is in effect just above 800 the DR has fallen below 10 Ev. Consider that this is engineering DR practically speaking you are getting your 12 stops just at ISO 200 and your real HDR range is limited to 200-400 ISO range this makes sense as those are the bright scenes. Consider that log photo styles start at ISO 400 but this really translates to ISO 200 on this chart as well as exposure values. Unless you are shooting at low ISO you will get limited DR improvement. Underwater is quite easy to be at higher ISO than 200 and even when you are at 200 unless you are shooting the surface the scene has limited DR anyway. Generally, 10 stops are more than adequate as this is what we get when we produce a Jpeg from a RAW file.

Viewing HDR

I think the final nail in the coffin arrives when we look where the content will be consumed.

StandardContrast RatioMax BrightnessMin BrightnessAnalog DR
IPS/Phones10003500.359.97
LED Tv40004000.111.97
OLED60000006000.000122.52
Typical Devices Performance

Phones have IPS screen with some exceptions and contrast ratio below 1000:1 and so do computer screens. If you share on YouTube you will know phones and computer constitute around 85% of playback devices. Tv are around 10% and a small part of those will be HDR. So other than your own home you will not find many HDR devices out there to give justice to your content.

10-bits vs 8 bits

It is best practice to shoot 10 bits and both SDR and HDR support 10 bits colour depth. For compatibility purposes SDR is delivered with 8 bits colour and HDR on 10 bits colour.

Looking at tonal range for RAW files on 8 Megapixels we see that the camera has 24 bits depth over RGB this means 8 bits per channel and 9 bits tonal range. Tonal range are grey levels so in short, the camera will not produce 10 bits colour bit will have more than 8 bits of grey tones which are helpful to counter banding but only at low ISO, so more useful for blue skies than for blue water. Considering that image for photo competitions are JPEGs and that nobody has felt the need for something more we can conclude that as long as we shot at high bitrate something as close to a raw format 8 bit for delivery are adequate.

Cases for HDR and Decision Tree

There are cases where shooting HLG can be meaningful those include snorkelling at the surface on bright days. You will not be going at depth so the footage will look good straight off the camera, likewise, for bright shots in the sun on the surface. But generally, the benefit will drop when the scene has limited DR or at higher ISO values where DR drops anyway.

What follows is my decision tree to choose between SDR and HDR and 10 bits vs 8 bits formats. I like my pictures and my videos to look better than life and I think editing adds value to the imaging although this is not an excuse for poor capture. There are circumstances where editing is less important, namely when the scene is amazing by itself and requires no extra help, or when I am looking at fast paced, documentary style scenes that do not benefit from editing. For the rest my preference remains for editing friendly formats and high bit rate 10 bits codec all intra. Recently  I have purchased the V-Log upgrade and I have not found difficult to use or expose so I have included this here as possible option.

The future of HDR

Except a cinema like setting with dark surrounding and low ambient light HDR mass consumption remains challenging. Yes, you can have high peak brightness but not high contrast ratio and this can be obtained with SDR for most already. There is a lot of noise in the cinema community at present because the PQ curve is hard to manage and the work in post processing is multiplied, clearly PQ is not a way forward for broadcasting and HLG will prevail thanks to the pioneering efforts of the BBC but the lack of monitoring and editing devices means HLG is not going to fit cine like scenarios and little productions. It could be a good fit for a zero-edit shooter someone that like to see the scene as it was.

Conclusion

When marketing myths and incorrect information is netted out we realise that our prosumer devices are very far away from what would be required to shoot, edit and consume HDR. Like many other things in digital imaging is much more important to focus on shooting techniques and how to make the most of what we have, instead of engaging on a quest for theoretical benefits that may not exist.

Producing and grading HDR content with the Panasonic GH5 in Final Cut Pro X

It has been almost two years from my first posts on HLG capture with the GH5 https://interceptor121.com/2018/06/15/setting-up-your-gh5-for-hlg-hdr-capture/ and last week Apple released Catalina 10.15.4 that now supports HDR-10 with compatible devices. Apple and in general computer are still not supporting HLG and it is unlikely this is ever going to happen as the gaming industry is following VESA DisplayHDR standard that is aligned to HDR-10.

After some initial experiments with GH5 and HLG HDR things have gone quiet and this is for two reasons:

  1. There are no affordable monitors that support HLG
  2. There has been lack of software support

While on the surface it looks like there is still no solution to those issues, in this post I will explain how to grade HLG footage in Final Cut Pro should you wish to do so. The situation is not that different on Windows and DaVinci Resolve that also only support HDR-10 monitors but I leave it to Resolve users to figure out. This tutorial is about final cut pro.

A word about Vlog

It is possible to use Vlog to create HDR content however VLOG is recorded as rec709 10 bits. Panasonic LUT and any other LUT are only mapping the VLOG gamma curve to Rec709 so your luminance and colours will be off.  It would be appropriate to have a VLOG to PQ LUT however I am not aware this exists. Surely Panasonic can create that but the VLOG LUT that comes with the camera is only for processing in Rec709. So, from our perspective we will ignore VLOG for HDR until such time we have a fully working LUT and clarity about the process.

Why is a bad idea to grade directly in HLG

There is a belief that HLG is a delivery format and it is not edit ready. While that may be true, the primary issue with HLG is that no consumer screens support BT.2020 colour space and the HLG gamma curve. Most display are plain sRGB and others support partially or fully DCI-P3 or the computer version Display P3. Although the white point is the same for all those colour spaces there is a different definition of what red, green and blue and therefore without taking into this into account, if you change a hue, the results will not be as expected. You may still white balance or match colours in HLG but you should not attempt anything more.

What do you need for grading HDR?

In order to successfully and correctly grade HDR footage on your computer you need the following:

  • HDR HLG footage
  • Editing software compatible with HDR-10 (Final Cut or DaVinci)
  • An HDR-10 10 bits monitor

If you want to produce and edit HDR content you must have compatible monitor let’s see how we identify one.

Finding an HDR-10 Monitor

HDR is highly unregulated when it comes to monitors, TVs have Ultra HD Premium Alliance and recently Vesa has introduced DisplayHDR standards https://displayhdr.org/ that are dedicated to display devices. So far, the Display HDR certification has been a prerogative of gaming monitors that have quick response time, high contrast but not necessarily high colour accuracy. We can use the certified list of monitors to find a consumer grade device that may be fit for our purpose: https://displayhdr.org/certified-products/

A DisplayHDR 1000 certified is equivalent to a PQ grading device as it has peak brightness of 1000 nits and minimum of 0.005 this is ideally what you want, but you can get by with an HDR-400 certified display as long as it supports wide colour gamut. In HDR terms wide gamut means covering the DCI-P3 colour space at least for 90% so we can use Vesa list to find a monitor that is HDR-10 compatible and has a decent colour accuracy. Even inside the HDR-400 category there are displays that are fit for purpose and reasonably priced. If you prefer a brand more orientated to professional design or imaging look for the usual suspects Eizo, Benq, and others but here it will be harder to find HDR support as usually those manufacturers are focussed on colour accuracy, so you may find a display covering 95% DCI-P3 but not necessarily producing a high brightness. As long as the device supports HDR-10 you are good to go.

I have a Benq PD2720U that is HDR-10 certified, has a maximum brightness of 350 nits and a minimum of 0.35, it covers 100% sRGB and REC709 and 95% DCI-P3, so is adequate for the task. It is worth nothing that a typical monitor with 350-400 nits brightness offers 10 stops of dynamic range.

In summary any of this will work if you do not have a professional grade monitor:

  • Look into Vesa list https://displayhdr.org/certified-products/ and identify a device that supports at least 90% DCI-P3, ideally HDR-1000 but less is ok too
  • Search professional display specifications for HDR-10 compatibility and 10 bits wide gamut > 90% DCI-P3

 

Final Cut Pro Steps

The easy way to have HDR ready content with the GH5 is to shoot with the HLG Photo Style. This produces clips that when analysed have the following characteristics with AVCI coded.

MediaInfo Details HLG 400 Mbps clip

Limited means that it is not using the full 10 bits range for brightness you do not need to worry about that.

With your material ready create a new library in Final Cut Pro that has a Wide Gamut and import your footage.

As we know Apple does not support HLG so when you look at the Luma scope you will see a traditional Rec709 IRE diagram. In addition, the ‘Tone Mapping Functionality’ will not work so you do not have a real idea of colour and brightness accuracy.

At this stage you have two options:

  1. Proceed in HLG and avoid grading
  2. Convert your material in PQ so that you can edit it

We will go on option 2 as we want to grade our footage.

Create a project with PQ gamut and enter your display information in the project properties. In my case the display has a minimum brightness of 0.35 nits and max of 350 and it has P3 primaries with a standard D65 white point. It is important to know those parameters to have a good editing experience otherwise the colours will be off. If you do not know your display parameters do some research. I have a Benq monitor that comes with a calibration certificate the information is right there. Apple screens are typically also P3 with D65 white point and you can find the maximum brightness in the specs. Usually around 500 nits for apple with minimum of 0.5 nits. Do not enter Rec2020 in the monitor information unless your monitor has native primaries in that space (there are almost none). Apple documentation tells you that if you do not know those values you can leave them blank, final cut pro will use the display information from colour sync and try a best match but this is far from ideal.

Monitor Metadata in the Project Properties

For the purpose of grading we will convert HLG to PQ using the HDR tools. The two variants of HDR have a different way to manage brightness so a conversion is required however the colour information is consistent between the two.

Please note that the maximum brightness value is typically 1000 Nits however there are not many displays out there that support this level of brightness, for the purpose of what we are going to do this is irrelevant so DO NOT change this value. Activate tone mapping accessible under the view pull down in the playback window this will adapt the footage to your display according to the parameters of the project without capping the scopes in the project.

Use HDR Tools to convert HLG to PQ

Finalising your project

When you have finished with your editing  you have two options:

  • Stay in PQ and produce an HDR-10 master
  • Delete all HDR tools HLG to PQ conversions and change back the project to HLG

If you produce an HDR-10 master you will need to edit twice for SDR: duplicate the project and apply the HDR tool from HLG to SDR or other LUT of your choice.

If you stay in HLG you will produce a single file but is likely that HDR will only be displayed on a narrower range of devices due to the lack of support of HLG in computers. The HLG clip will have correct grading as the corrections performed when the project was in PQ with tone mapping will survive the editing as HLG and PQ share the same colour mapping. The important thing is that you were able to see the effects of your grade.

Project back in HLG you can see how the RGB parade and the scope are back to IRE but all is exactly the same as with PQ

In my case I have an HLG TV so I produce only one file as I can’t be bothered doing the exercise two times.

The steps to produce your master file are identical to any other projects, I recommend creating a ProRes 422 HQ master and from there other formats using handbrake. If you change your project back to HLG you will get a warning about the master display you can ignore it.

Focussing Techniques for Video – Part II Auto Focus Settings

If you have some experience with video on land you will know that many professional videographers do not use autofocus but rely on follow focus devices. Basically those are accessories that control the focus ring of the camera and avoid the shake that you would create if you were turning the focus ring with your hand.

The bad news is that there are no devices to perform follow focus underwater and if you use a focus knob you will indeed create camera shake. This is the primary reason why I do not use focus knobs on any of my lenses with the exception of the Olympus 60mm macro and in those rare occasions I uses it I do not actually use to obtain focus but to ensure I am at the closest working distance.

So how do you achieve good focus if you can’t use a focus ring and continuous autofocus cannot be trusted? There are essentially three methods that I will discuss here and provide some examples:

  1. Set and forget
  2. Set and adjust
  3. Optimised Continuous Autofocus

You have noticed that there is still an option for continuous autofocus in the list. Before we drill down in the method I want to give some background on autofocus technology.

If after reading this post you are still confused I recommend you get some tuition either joining my Red Sea trip or 1 to 1 (offered in Milton Keynes area in UK).

https://interceptor121.com/2019/07/28/calling-out-to-all-image-makers-1st-interceptor121-liveaboard-red-sea-2020/

Contrast Detect vs Phase Detect and Hybrid Autofocus

The internet is full of autofocus videos showing how well or bad certain camera perform and how one system is superior to another. The reality is that professional cameramen will use follow focus in majority of cases and this is because the camera does not know who the subject is.

Though it is true that one focus system may perform better than other you need to consider that Red cameras use contrast detection autofocus same as your cheap compact camera so clearly autofocus must not be that important.

The second fact is that any camera focus system needs contrast including phase detect. Due to scattering of blue light in water there are many situations where the contrast is low in the scene resulting in focus hunt of the camera autofocus system.

So my first recommendation is to ignore the whole discussion about which focus system is superior because the reality is that there will be situation where the focus will be difficult to achieve and the technology will not come to help. You need to devise strategies to make things work and this is what this post is about.

Let’s go now in the techniques.

Method 1: Set and Forget

As the name implies with this method we set focus at the beginning of the shot and never change this again. This means disabling the camera continuous focus in video mode. This is essential so that this technique works.

This works in three situations:

  1. Using a lens at the hyperfocal distance behind a flat port
  2. Using wet wide angle lenses
  3. Using fisheye lenses

Method 1.a Hyperfocal Distance Method

I am not going to write a dissertation on this there is good content on wikipedia worth a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperfocal_distance

The key concept is that depth of field at a given aperture and subject distance will reach infinity. The wider the lens closer this subject distance. For example a 14mm lens on a micro four third body at f/5.6 is 1.65 meters so if you focus on an object at this distance anything between 0.8 meters and infinity will be in focus. As you close the aperture the hyperfocal distance diminishes. This technique is good for medium or reefscape shots where you don’t mind that the whole frame is sharp in focus. It is not suitable for macro or close shots as the aperture required would be too small and diffraction would kick in.

Looking at the past CWK clips if continuous autofocus was disabled and he had focussed just at the start of the scene at 1.85 meters no focus was required until the manta was at 0.9 meters. Note that distances have to be adjusted to account for magnification of water effect.

Once you have your lens and aperture setting you can quickly work out some distances in your scene and fine tune your expertise.

Obviously shooting those shots with a flat port is not exactly the most common method however understanding this technique is paramount to the other two.

Method 1.bc Wet Lenses and Fisheyes

Fisheye lenses tend to have an incredible amount of depth of field even wide open and therefore the set and forget applies in full here without even bothering about hyperfocal distance. Usually focussing on your feet is all is required.

The real revelation to this technique are afocal wet lenses. Afocal means that the focal length of the wet lens is infinity and the light coming through does not diverge or converge. Together with the magnification factor typically 0.3-0.4x means you get to a fisheye situation without the same amount of distortion.
This is the primary reason to buy a lens like the Nauticam WWL-1 or even an Inon wet lens with afocal design.

My Tiger and Hammerhead videos are shot with the camera locked in manual focus after focussing on my feet.

Even when the shark hits the camera the image is in focus

I do not have technical information on newer Nauticam WACP-1 or WACP-2 so am not in a position to confirm if those lenses are afocal or not and therefore I cannot help you. I would think consideration on depth of field still apply. If Nauticam or a shop or user lends me a set up for pool testing I can provide optimise settings for WACP.

Set and forget is the number one method for wide angle and reefscapes underwater and it is easy.

Method 2: Set and Adjust

As the name implies this method sets the focus at the beginning of the shot and then adjusts when required this is necessary especially in macro situations.

The set and adjust method varies depending on how the camera managed push on focus. If the camera manages a refocus using a half press shutter no other settings are required other than disabling continuous auto focus.

For cameras that do not have a refocus half shutter setting you need to operate in manual focus and the set a custom button to perform a single auto focus.

In both cases you need peaking to be active during the shot.

Procedure:

  1. Set the focus as required using half shutter or AF On button
  2. Observe the peaking to ensure the subject is in focus if required moving the camera.
  3. In case of loss of focus refocus using the shutter or the AF On button

This method works well with macro where typically you set focus and then move the camera back and forth to keep focus, in those cases where you want to switch focus on another part of the frame you refocus. This would have helped Brian in the two crab situation.

As the refocus does bring a moment of blur in the clip you need to ensure that when you trigger the refocus the camera will succeed this is best achieved when using a single area of focus.

Method 3: Optimised Continuous Autofocus

Although autofocus has some risks there are situation when this is required those include:

  • Shooting aperture that do not have sufficient depth of field to warrant a set and forget
  • Using dome ports and rectilinear lenses from what I have experienced those lenses do not work well with hyperfocal distances due to physics of dome ports

Obviously the best option remains using a wet lens and set and forget however there are instances where we absolutely want straight lines for example shooting divers or models. In those cases we will use a dome port and as we can’t use a focus gear because the camera would shake we need autofocus.

Focus Area Settings

Cameras have a selection of modes to set the area that will be used by autofocus:

  1. Face / Animal recognition -> locks on recognised shapes
  2. Multi area -> selects the highest contrast area in a number of smaller area of the frame cameras have up to 225 or more areas and you can customise the shape of it
  3. Single area -> an area of selectable size and position in the frame
  4. Tracking -> tracks the contour of an object in the frame

Face recognition and animal recognition are not useful in our case.

Tracking requires the object to keep the shape within the frame this is useful for nudibranches for example or anything that does not change shape in the frame, a fish turning for example will be lost by this method so this is seldom used. To be honest this fails also on land most times.

So we really are left with multi area and single area.

My advice is to avoid multi area because particles in the water for example can generate sufficient contrast to fool the camera and make it lock on it.

So the best option is to use single area, I typically set this to a size smaller than the central third of a nine block grid. With this configuration is also possible to focus on a subject off the centre by moving the area within the frame. This setting works well when the subject is tracked by our movement and the subject is in the centre which is the majority of situations.

This video is shot on a 12-60 mid range zoom using single area AF for all scenes including macro.

The single more significant risk for single area is that if the centre of the frame goes to blue water the camera will go hunting so if you are shooting in caves or on a wall make sure the AF area is on one side of the frame to avoid hunting or lock occasionally focus to prevent the camera seek focus that won’t be found.

Conclusion

Achieving focus in underwater video requires different techniques from land use and a good understanding of ports and optics.

If you think you are not skilled enough and need help from autofocus my advice is to get an afocal wet wide angle lens. This will transform your shooting experience and guarantee all your wide angle to be in focus. If you work in a macro situation you need to master the single AF setting of your camera and make sure you are super stable.

The most difficult scenario is using dome ports and this is one of the reasons I do not recommend those for video. If you are adamant on rectilinear lenses than the specific settings.

Donations are appreciated use the PayPal button on the left.

Focussing Techniques for Video – Part I Problem Diagnostic

Thanks to Brian Lim and WK’S gone diving for providing some examples.

When I started thinking about writing this post I thought of presenting a whole piece on the theory of focus and how a camera achieves it however I later decided it made more sense to start from example and then drill down on the theory based on specific cases.

So we will look at three common issues, understand why they happened and then discuss possible mitigations.

Issue 1: Wide angle Manta Focus Hunt

This clips has been provided by WK’s and has been taken during a trip to Socorro

The water is quite dark and murky and there is a substantial amount of suspended particles in water otherwise we would not have mantas. The water is also fairly milky and therefore the image lacks contrast which is not ideal for the camera to focus as all cameras, including those working on phase detection AF need contrast.

WK’s had a flat port and was shooting quite narrow aperture at f/7.1 which should ensure plenty depth of field on his 14mm lens.

In this clip you can literally see the autofocus pulsating trying to find focus the hunting carries on until the manta is very close at around 15 seconds in the clip. At that point the clips is stable however the overall approach has been ruined.

Diagnostics

The key observations are that the subject was not in focus at the very beginning of the shot and then you can distinctively see how some fairly bright particles come into the scene at 0.04 for example and disturb the camera process as they create a strong contrast against the black manta and the camera can’t decide who is the subject so it starts hunting. When the manta is close and well defined in the frame the camera knows she is the subject and therefore focus issues stop. The white particles in the water when the manta is far are large and bright enough to be picked up by the matrix point of the camera AF this is true regardless of the manta being in the frame and the same would have applied if another fish was doing a photobomb.

Solution

The problem in this clip is not new to video shooters similar things happen when you have the bride walking to the altar and someone the priest or the husband steps into the frame and they are far apart. On land you would keep control using manual focus or if you were really daring you would use tracking. In our case WK’s does not have focus gear and it is not possible for him to manually change the focus.

WK’s could have used tracking  if available on the camera. With tracking you need to ensure that the camera can lock onto the manta and then if it does that the manta does not turn or change shape and nothing bigger comes in front. At this point everything would work. This is a high risk technique only worth trying in clear water and when there are no particle in the water so in this scenario not advised.

The last option and the solution to this issue was for WKs to switch to manual focus and engage peaking. Use a single AF on to focus on his feet or an intermediate target and then check the manta was in focus. If focus was lost WK’s could have triggered AF again at least being able to control how many times the camera was refocussing.

Issue 2: Macro Subject Switching

This other clip has been provided by Brian Lim and it is a macro situation.

We can see that there are particles flying in the water and some other small critters at close range. The main subjects are the large crab and the two small crabs in the foreground.

Brian is not happy about the focus on this shot as not everything is sharp.

Diagnostics

Despite the murky water Brian has correctly locked focus on the crabs in the foreground and due to the high level of magnification the camera does not have sufficient depth of field to make the small and large crab crisp in the frame. It is possible that Brian could not detect on this screen that the crab behind was not sharp which could be avoided with peaking. In any case it is likely that there is no possibility to have this shot sharp end to end. Brian is super stable in the shot so he was set to make it work.

Solution

Brian does not have a focus gear on this camera this would have been required to pull focus in the same shot on the small crab and then go onto the larger crab.

However even in this situation in manual focus Brian could have shot two clips focussing on the two different focal planes and then managed this in post. It is critical to be able to review focus on screen when we shoot or to review right after before we leave the scene.

Issue 3: Too many fish and too much water

The last clip is mine and is taken during a recent trip to Sataya reef.

I have deliberately left this clip uncut because it lets you see that you can use autofocus in water behind a dome port and for most part it works but there are some pitfalls so the most photogenic dolphins at 00:50 are initially blurred.

Diagnostics

I was not expecting the sheer amount of dolphin on the day and certainly I was not expecting them this close so I had a standard zoom lens at 24mm FF equivalent behind a dome port. In most cases I managed to have some fish in the AF area of the camera but at 00:45 and 00:58 the camera does not have anything in the middle of the frame and goes on a hunt.

Solution

Working with a dome port and a lens of that nature does not warrant you will have enough depth of field to leave the camera locked even at f/8 so some refocussing activity was indeed required. In this case I was using a single AF area in the centre and in those moments the camera has just the blue and nothing to focus on and goes on a hunt, as soon as the subject is back in the AF area the camera locks back in. Note that the AF change speed is not fast enough to follow when the dolphin come too close therefore here the only real solution was to have a wider lens, however I could have avoided the hunt if I had set the camera to AF lock and intercepted the moment the AF area was empty preventing the camera to re-engage.

Summary

In all examples of this post the issues have been generated by a lack of intervention. All the situations I have analysed could have been dealt with at time of the shot for most part and did not require extra gear. I believe that when we are in water there is already lots to think about and therefore, we make mistakes or not apply the decisive corrective action that would have saved the shots.

In the next post I will drill down in focus settings and how they can help your underwater shots and also discuss how those apply to macro, wide and mid shots. I am also happy to look at specific examples or issues please get in touch. Specific coaching or troubleshooting is provided in exchange of a drink or two.

Donations are appreciated use the PayPal button on the left.

Announcing New 2020 Offering

Dear readers in 2020 I will be adding some services to the blog to reflect some requirements that have been developing in the last few years.

It happens at times that people get in touch either through comments or directly by email to ask about their current challenges so I thought why not to address this with a bespoke service. Here are my current ideas:

  • Equipment selection – this is generally to do with port lenses, strobes, lights, accessories more than with camera and housing
  • Photo editing clinic – people seem to struggle to handle the editing of their images. While some are definitely skilled majority aren’t and editing an image is almost as important as shooting a good image
  • Video editing clinic – like above but for video that is sometimes even more complex

Those will be offered at the symbolic price of a few beers at UK prices £10 donation using the link on the left hand side.

Other topics that are also becoming interesting are discussions around issues like focus, framing, lens quality. For those I welcome input material by email interceptor121@aol.com send me your images or videos with problems and I will use them to build an article for yours and other benefits.

Currently am working on a feature on focus in video so I am looking for your blurred videos (sorry) as I don’t have many myself I need some help from you guys.

Thank you for reading this short post!

Export Workflows for underwater (and not) video

This is post is going to focus on exporting our videos for consumption on a web platform like YouTube or Vimeo.

This is a typical workflow for video production

We want to focus in the export to publish steps for this post as things are not as straighforward as it may seem.

In general each platform has specific requirements for the uploads and has predefined encoding settings to create their version of the upload this means that is advised to feed those platforms with files that match their expectations.

The easiest way to do this is to separate the production of the master from the encodes that are needed for the various platforms.

For example in Final cut this means exporting a master file in ProRes 422 HQ in my case with GH5 10 bit material. Each camera differs and if your source material is higher or lower quality you need to adjust however the master file will be a significantly large file with mild compression and based on intermediate codecs.

So how do we produce the various encodes?

Some programs like Final Cut Pro have specific add ons in this case Compressor to tune the export however I have had poor experience with compressor and underwater video to the point I do not use it and do not recommend it. Furthermore we can separate the task of encoding from production if we insert a platform independent software in the workflow.

Today encoding happens primarily by H264 and H265 formats through a number of encoders the most popular being x264 and x265 that are free. There is a commercial right issue to use HEVC (x265 output) for streaming so a platform like YouTube uses the free VP9 codec while Vimeo uses HEVC. This does not matter to us.

So to uploade to YouTube for example we have several options:

  1. Upload the ProRes file
  2. Upload a compressed file that we optimised based on our requirements
  3. Upload a compressed file optimised for YouTube requirements

While Option 1 is technically possible we are talking about 200+ GB/hour which means endless upload time.

Option 2 may lead to unexpected results as you are not sure of the quality of YouTube output and how it matches your file so my recommendation is to follow option 3 and give the platform what they want.

YouTube Recommended Settings are on this link

YouTube recommends H264 settings as follow for SDR (standard dynamic range) Uploads

  • Progressive scan (no interlacing)
  • High Profile
  • 2 consecutive B frames
  • Closed GOP. GOP of half the frame rate.
  • CABAC
  • Variable bitrate. No bitrate limit required, although we offer recommended bitrates below for reference
  • Chroma subsampling: 4:2:0

There is no upper bitrate limit so of course you can make significantly large files however for H264 there is a point in which the quality reaches a point that you can’t see any visible differences.

Recommended video bitrates for SDR uploads

To view new 4K uploads in 4K, use a browser or device that supports VP9.

TypeVideo Bitrate, Standard Frame Rate
(24, 25, 30)
Video Bitrate, High Frame Rate
(48, 50, 60)
2160p (4k)35–45 Mbps53–68 Mbps
1440p (2k)16 Mbps24 Mbps
1080p8 Mbps12 Mbps
720p5 Mbps7.5 Mbps
480p2.5 Mbps4 Mbps
360p1 Mbps1.5 Mbps
YouTube Bitrate table

YouTube recommended settings are actually quite generous and if we perform a high quality encode we may easily be able to create smaller file however we are unsure of the logic that YouTube applies to their compression if we deviate so to be sure we will follow the recommendations.

It is very important to understand that bitrate controls the compression together with other factors however in order to get a good file we need to make sure we put some good logic in the analysis of the file itself this will greatly influence the quality of the compression process.

There is a whole book on x264 settings if you fancy a read here.

For my purposes I use handbrake and to make YouTube happy I use Variable Bit Rate with two pass and target bitrate of 45 Mbps. Together with that I have a preset that takes into account what YouTube does not like and then does a pretty solid analysis of motion as H264 is motion interpolated. This is required to avoid artefacts.

Note the long string of x264 coding commands

I have tested this extensively against the built in Final Cut Pro X YouTube Export.

Starting from the timeline and going directly into YouTube resulted in files of 88 Mb starting from a 7.06 GB ProRes 422 HQ comparable for the project. Following the guidelines and the handbrake process I ended up with 110.1 MB which is a 24% increase.

I have also exported to H264 in FCPX this gave me a 45.8 Mbps file however when I checked on YouTube their file it was still smaller than my manually generated file of 12%. I have used 4K video downloader to retrieve file sizes.

Same source file different encodes different results in YouTube

For HDR files there are higher allowed bitrates and considerations on colour space and color depth but is essentially the same story and I have developed HandBrake presets for that too.

When I have to produce an export for my own use I choose H265 and usually a 16 Mbps bitrate which is what Netflix maxes at. Using Quality at RF=22 produces around 20 Mbps files which is amazing considering the starting point of 400 Mbps for GH5 AVCI files. YouTube own files range between 10 and 20 Mbps to give you an idea once compressed in VP9. I cannot see any difference between my 16 Mbps and 20 Mbps files so I have decided to stay with the same settings of Netflix if it works for them will work for me.

There is also a YouTube video to explain in detail what I just said and some comparative videos here

For all my YouTube and Blog subscribers (need to be both) please fill the form and I will send you my 3 handbrake presets.

Edit following some facebook discussions: if you want to upload HD you have better results if you make the file 4K. According to my tests this is not true. Using x264 and uploading an HD file produces same or better results than the HD clip YouTube created out of the same source using a 4K upload. I would be vary about what you read on the internet unless you know exactly how clips are produced. 90% of the issue is poor quality encoding before it even gets to YouTube!

Colour Correction in underwater video

This is my last instalment of the getting the right colour series.

The first read is the explanation of recording settings

https://interceptor121.com/2018/08/13/panasonic-gh5-demystifying-movie-recording-settings/

This post has been quite popular as it applies generally to the GH5 not just for underwater work.

The second article is about getting the best colours

https://interceptor121.com/2019/08/03/getting-the-best-colors-in-your-underwater-video-with-the-panasonic-gh5/

And then of course the issue of white balance

https://interceptor121.com/2019/09/24/the-importance-of-underwater-white-balance-with-the-panasonic-gh5/

Am not getting into ambient light filters but there are articles on that too.

Now I wanted to discuss editing as I see many posts on line that are plain incorrect. As it is true for photos you don’t edit just looking at an histogram. The histogram is a representation of the average of the image and this is not the right approach to create strong images or videos.

You need to know how the tools work in order to do the appropriate exposure corrections and colour corrections but it is down to you to decide the look you want to achieve.

I like my imaging video or still to be strong with deep blue and generally dark that is the way I go about it and is my look however the tools can be used to have the look you prefer for your materials.

In this YouTube tutorial I explain how to edit and grade footage produced buy the camera and turn it into something I enjoy watching time and time again.

I called this clip Underwater Video Colour Correction Made Easy as it is not difficult to obtain pleasing colours if you followed all the steps.

A few notes just to anticipate possible questions

  1. Why are you not looking to have the Luma or the RGB parades at 50% of the scale?

50% of the IRE scale is for neutral grey 18% I do not want my footage to look washed out which is what happens if you aim at 50%.

2. Is it important to execute the steps in sequence?

Yes. Camera LUT should be applied before grading as they normalise the gamma curve. In terms of correction steps setting the correct white balance has an influence on the RGB curves and therefore needs to be done before further grading is carried out.

3. Why don’t you correct the overall saturation?

Most of the highlights and shadows are in the light grey or dark grey areas. Saturating those can lead to clipping or noise.

4. Is there a difference between using corrections like Vibrancy instead of just saturation?

Yes saturation shifts equally the colours towards higher intensity vibrancy tends to stretch the colours in both direction.

5. Can you avoid an effect LUT and just get the look you want with other tools?

Yes this is entirely down to personal preference.

6. My footage straight from camera does not look like yours and I want it to look good straight away.

That is again down to personal preference however if you crush the blacks or clip the highlights or introduce a hue by clipping one of the RGB channels this can no longer be remediated.

I hope you find this useful wishing all my followers a Merry Xmas and Happy 2020.