Which color style do you prefer?

set wrote on 3/25/2019, 7:05 PM

Ok, probably this is more to art and taste rather than technical one...

but, love to know your opinion...


I render to 720p with Timecode applied as this is not final, as this is totally personal experiment of me playing with colors (Color grading?).


Which color style do you prefer from below choices?


Content: A small coffee shop with a place for collaboration.

1 - Normal color


2 - Green in low tones, warm in mid-tones, blue in high-tones (which said to be a trend color lately?)


3 - Less green, but warm-boosted in mid-tones, while keep blue in high-tones. (reason: this is coffee shop - and involved food and coffee... felt if applying greenish color could lead to 'something else'....)



Nick Hope wrote on 3/25/2019, 11:22 PM

I didn't see a great deal of difference to be honest. I saw it most in the guy's skin at 0:11 and preferred it in #2 and #3 over #1.

To me the highlights look very blown out, especially in those high-contrast shots of the garden. But I appreciate that the direct sunlight and harsh shadows makes it very difficult.

Can you reduce the contrast? And maybe push the grading a bit more.

Also it does look quite blurry, for example around 0:34, which makes it a little difficult to make judgements. Maybe upload next one at 1080 with higher bit rate.

set wrote on 3/26/2019, 12:42 AM

about the contrast: this is a very sunny day... very challenging... and, I'm using only DJI Osmo Pocket to record the scene... haven't tried full color grade in 32bit...

Musicvid wrote on 3/26/2019, 10:52 PM

#1 is a bit cyan in the whites. Takes some if the warmth away from the coffee theme.

#2 is neutral and a bit flat in the highlights. meh

#3 is by far the best ad look on my calibrated 50". A bit punchy in the red midtones since you'll deliver 4:2:0, but still works in HD 709 with unenhanced screen settings.

My take is that of an old guy with bad eyesight and a lot of experience. Goes best with a grain of salt.

Dimitrios wrote on 3/27/2019, 2:08 AM

Im not good at color grading or color correction, well im ok, sometimes. I just go by gut of what i think looks good and dont use scopes because none of my edits have ever been broadcast. So dont put much stock IMO. I didn't see much of a difference. If I picked a favorite I'd probably go with the 3rd one. Again not sure why but I just think it looks the best. I took a pass at it. It's probably terrible but it is more noticeable, I only did one grade for the video. Reduced saturation by 25% then took out some green and put in red and a little less blue with color curves. Also used the hitfilm crush blacks and whites effect which to increase contrast a bit.

Dexcon wrote on 3/27/2019, 6:02 AM

I prefer 2 over 1 due to the slightly warmer tone. However, the shadows suggest that the scene is taking place in the late afternoon (depending on the location time zone of course) in which case 3 provides a more atmospheric tone to convey that time of day and is thus more 'inviting'.

BTW set, did you use any stabilisation in post? If not, the DJI is very good.

set wrote on 3/27/2019, 9:36 AM

Hi all, thanks for color feedback... I will try experiment further with these inputs... especially from #3

As for stabilization, no post-stabilizing any further, these are DJI Osmo Pocket shots... unfortunately, I had a shaky with close up cup shots (and backfocus too) (00:05 / 00:15) - probably due to very light camera.. i forgot exactly why - or just my hands are shaky...

I shot this personally for experiment, after I join a run, invited by other running community, for a running-club anniversary, where the start and finish is this place.

(for posting in my IG)

Musicvid wrote on 3/27/2019, 12:06 PM

I think you should spend more time in front of the camera. You look great without being a poser.

set wrote on 3/29/2019, 9:25 AM

Final grading I did....

(also posted in my IG)

*not easy to fix that blown-out highlights due to dynamic range of DJI Osmo Pocket (also quite strong sunny weather) - but I changed pixel format from 8-bit to 32-bit full range, and need to rework again with color, as OFX options are limited in 32-bit.

Musicvid wrote on 3/29/2019, 11:08 AM

I still prefer #3, it pops more, but my calibrated screen is probably flat compared to most home systems.

set wrote on 3/29/2019, 11:42 AM

Thanks Musicvid for input... hmmm, let me try re-upload the previous #3 - but at 1080p resolution....

Just a little bit concerned with a bit over-contrast and a bit highlight-blown... , so I tried reduce it... - but it's possible if I am mistaken...

(also Curve FX is 'not-fully-compatible' in 32bit pixel format color space)

Musicvid wrote on 3/29/2019, 11:57 AM

My take is that of an old guy with bad eyesight .... Goes best with a grain of salt.

I tend to run a flat monitor and teevee screen -- takes me well out of the norm on this one. You apparently nailed the exposure without having any wiggle room, and that's what counts.

One technique I love with HDR high contrast stills is described here -- I'm thinking a 1% highlight mask from your source  may solve your dilemma, without putting a wash on the purest whites.

Although you don't have two actual exposures to work with, you can simulate the layers using different zones from your trn-bit source to create the mask layer. All you have to do is get close; layer transparency takes care of the rest, but go easy. This works because the dynamic range is compressed even further in the final 8 bit 709 output, so no bit depth is actually "lost."