Workflow comparison: better raw footage with more or less contrast?

[ThumperStrauss]

As a general rule, is it better to capture with more or less contrast, if one intends to correct the video later on? See attachment.

Image on left with greatest contrast was captured with JVC S3910 -- Panasonic ES15 -- VC500.

Image on right with less contrast was captured with JVC VS30 -- DVK-200 -- AIW9600XT.

[latreche34]

Post the actual frame grabs not a screenshot for better assessment, Go to file, save image and choose quality 100% if there is an option for quality and upload here.

[KhAoS182]

In my opinion, I prefer the first setup.

[Hushpower]

I don't think this is a valid comparison. If you're asking only about different levels of contrast, the comparisons need to be created with exactly the same gear but at different contrast levels set in the procamp.

Re contrast, obviously if it is too high, you'll have blown-out whites from which detail cannot be retrieved. The level has to be low enough that detail can be retrieved by boosting in post-processing but high enough to not be too dark.

[traal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThumperStrauss

As a general rule, is it better to capture with more or less contrast, if one intends to correct the video later on?

Less contrast is better.

Too much contrast crushes blacks and blows out whites, neither of which can be recovered after capture.

Too little contrast can cause banding during levels/curves adjustment if there isn't enough grain to absorb it. VHS has plenty of grain so that's not a problem.

[dpalomaki]

Bottom line is the answer is tape/clip specific. Recorded contrast is driven by the camera/recorder specifics/settings, scene lighting, and original edit decisions. (Some artistic intent may call for blown out highlights and/or inky backs.)

For capture you want the contrast set to the maximum that will still preserves the high lights and shadows of interest (not crushed or blown out) and gives the overall video the look/feel you want for the scenes in question. This can give you the most dynamic range in video to work with in post.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThumperStrauss

As a general rule, is it better to capture with more or less contrast, if one intends to correct the video later on? See attachment.

Less.

Quote:

Image on right with less contrast was captured with JVC VS30 -- DVK-200 -- AIW9600XT.

And that's the better setup, not surprised. The VC500 has bad AGC, and the ES10/15 can cook contrast some (ie, again, why it's not a TBC, transparency is pretty lousy).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hushpower

I don't think this is a valid comparison.

For this specific question, which seems to be not just a question of contrast, but a statement of the gear, it's fair.

Quote:

Originally Posted by traal

Less contrast is better.
Too much contrast crushes blacks and blows out whites, neither of which can be recovered after capture.

Yes.

Quote:

Too little contrast can cause banding

Hmm. That may be related to gear or software more than anything else. Not necessarily the source contrast. This is where bit depth comes in especially (for the software; not the hardware here, unless proc amp, but don't be fooled by high bit numbers alone).

Quote:

Originally Posted by dpalomaki

For capture you want the contrast set to a maximum that will still preserves the high lights and shadows of interest (not crushed or blown out) and gives the overall video the look/feel you want for the scenes in question. This will give you the most to work with in post

For "somewhat raw" footage (referring to color grading, not codec) to be latter software processed, no.
For simple one-and-done transfers, yes.

Maximum (for the sake of being max) is rarely good, even when the max is believed "safe".

[lollo2]

Quote:

As a general rule, is it better to capture with more or less contrast, if one intends to correct the video later on? See attachment.

It is better to capture the video as it is on tape, because the procamps in the cards are generally not that good, and it is better to have the captures as close as possible to the original video.
Reduce the procamp manipulation just to capture inside the range of the card, in order to avoid crushing blacks and clipping whites.

Then, if needed, enhace/reduce contrast and brightness in post-processing.

[lordsmurf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lollo2

It is better to capture the video as it is on tape, because the procamps in the cards are generally not that good, and it is better to have the captures as close as possible to the original video.
Reduce the procamp manipulation just to capture inside the range of the card, in order to avoid crushing blacks and clipping whites.
Then, if needed, enhace/reduce contrast and brightness in post-processing.

This is what I meant. Don't alter it, leave it lower contrast if needed. My understanding is that the hardware was giving those contrast results, the OP didn't alter anything either way.

[lollo2]

Quote:

Originally Posted by lordsmurf

This is what I meant. Don't alter it, leave it lower contrast if needed. My understanding is that the hardware was giving those contrast results, the OP didn't alter anything either way.

It is my understanding as well, but in option 1 there is an ES-15 in the chain, which is not transparent if NR is on, and in any case is not that transparent anyhow, especially for "levels"; in addition, for some models there is a difference between scart output configured in Y/C and S-Video output.
I ignore the setting/control options for DVK-200 in option 2.

In any case, as you proprely noted, if all settings are in the more "neutral" mode possible for the 2 workflows, the difference in the original picture is large!