Oversaturated Colors on L220x

My l220x was delivered today and I am having trouble adjusting the oversaturation of colors. I am a photographer and processing has been at a standstill for 8 days since my monitor died, I need help quickly! I need to know specific steps to correct this. I am strongly considering just buying a monitor calibration tool. Suggestions?

welcome to the forum.
i can't imagine developing photos without a hardware calibration device. as a professional graphic designer, i can say with confidence that you should own one regardless of the monitor you're using.
to get you by in the meantime, set your L220x on the sRGB preset profile and use sRGB IEC61966-2.1 as your display profile. this will knock the color saturation down a bit.
keep in mind that this is a wide gamut display and you will always be able to see more colors than you're used to seeing. this includes the colors which seem oversaturated.
ThinkStation C20
ThinkPad X1C · X220 · X60T · s30 · 600

Similar Messages

Oversaturated colors on exporting from CS5.

Hi everybody,
I'd like to try to ask to the forum something that I'm not able to understand.
I just downloaded the trial of the new flash cs5 and I was playing around to have a look at the new version.
What I did:
- picked a png file of a logo, previously exported from illustrator and imported in flash, then exported the whole thing in swf, then embedded in an html page and looked at it on a wide gamut monitor on safari: colors oversaturated, just like when opening, in photoshop, a picture which has no profile;
- tryed again, this time opening the png in photoshop, assigning srgb profile and re-saving the png: again oversaturated;
- tryed again, importing directly the illustrator file, which already was srgb: oversaturated.
Meanwhile, a friend made an flv from an mp4 of mine, which is a slide show of jpeg srgb pictures, and when he embedded it on my site, I saw again wrong colors.
I'm wondering if it depends on my wide gamut monitor, on flash, on safari, or what else.
Did anyone noticed this thing? Any hint?
Thank you, hope someone can help!

Ok, now everything is clear.
I found some explanations about the issue. It seems that it concerns a system with OSX, Safari and a wide gamut monitor. Flash nullifies color tags in the pictures, Safari displays non-tagged pictures as they are monitor-profile tagged... and since the monitor profile is a wide gamut profile, voila, oversaturated colors.
In fact, trying to use Camino browser on the same system, everything works fine and the colors are perfect.
Now, to whom this issue should be addressed? Adobe or Apple?
Meanwhile I'll go browsing with Camino or setting the monitor in srgb mode for internet.

Jagged edges because of oversaturated colors with XDCAM EX

Hi,
i want to export a movie created in after effects as XDCAM EX 1080i50. My problem is, that i get jagged edges in the output file because of the oversaturated color im using in my After Effects composition. In the picture below you can see the star with the magenta color which has the jagged edges. With yellow i dont have this problem. Is there a Matrix of supported colors in XDCAM EX or another solution for this problem?

The stars above have all been created in the same layer. Blue and Yellow looks ok but the magenta has always the jagged edges. I get sharp edges if i change the color to less magenta and more white. It has to be something with the colors. I already tried the effect of broadcast compatible colors or how it sounds but without succes.
My workflow for export / import:
Export in after effects cs 5.5 to QT422 HQ 1920 x 1080
import in premiere cs5.5 in XDCAM EX sequence 1920 x 1080
export to XDCAM EX 1920 x 1080 i 50
if i export in premiere to QT 422 HQ it looks ok also with the magenta.

Oversaturated colors in ML. Can't calibrate them!

Hi!
I was so happy to upgrade my MacPro 2009 to the newest OS, but now I rally regret my decision... Colors have blown up, oversaturation is my profile now:( Red is screaming.
I've got ColorMunki Photo. Calibration is completed with wrong result. Have no idea what to do:(
Marek

You don't say how old your previous Mac was, but if it's been 5 years of more since you upgraded your hardware, there's really nothing wrong. Unless you're buying among the cheapest monitors on the market, pretty much all computer display panels are wide gamut and will make your older screens look lifeless in comparison.
That said, you could be having an issue with the ColorMunki software. As in, it needs to be updated to work correctly with Mountain Lion. Check at X-Rite's web site. We use EIZO monitors with our Mac Pros, and the ColorNavigator monitor profiling software they come with doesn't work at all in ML. This using the exact same computer and monitor, which work just fine in Snow Leopard or Lion. EIZO is expecting to release a Mountain Lion update sometime mid September.
Also, if you're referring to colors in previous images suddenly being very vivid, that's also not really an issue, depending on how you save your RGB images. For instance, if you save everything with Adobe RGB as the embedded profile, that can make a huge difference. Example: the bright, saturated reds in a given image looked perfect to you on your old monitor. Problem, the old monitor could only show you the richest red it was capable of, not the color actually possible in its color space. Now you display the image on your new monitor. Reds the old screen couldn't display pop out like they've been changed, when in reality, your new monitor is simply showing you the color that was always in the image. Closer than the old one could, anyway.

Oversaturated colors in Source and Program Monitor windows

After I updated to Premiere CC 7.1.0 the colors is much more saturated in the Source and Program Monitor windows and also in the Bin thumbnails.
Colors is fine when viewing the video under Export Setting, in the Title window, in the thumbnails on the timeline and also when I open a ProRes export in Quicktime:
I'm on a Macbook Pro bought in January 2013.
I've tried switching the renderer between CUDA, OpenGL and Software Only - no change. I've also tried unchecking "Composite in Linear Color" under Sequence Settings with no luck.
How can I change this?
Best regards,
Kasper

I've been editing in Premiere since 5.1 and this has never been an issue before. So what you're telling me is I can no longer rely on colors when editing on my Macbook without having to plug in an external monitor?
I'm not buying that - it must be possible to view the same colors in both the Source/Program monitor and in the timeline/Title window like always.
What could the problem be associated to?

LR4 color management oversaturated colors on a dull laptop

I'm starting to use LR4.1 on a Lenovo T500 Win7 laptop with a miserable LCD panel and with an external wide-gamut IPS Dell U3011.
I used to use Picasa (non-color-managed), and have calibrated both displays with Eye-one display2. Its profile loads upon Win7 startup and corrects laptop colours considerably, while the change on the U3011 is hardly noticeable. I used near-native white point and gamma so that most of the laptop display's limited gamut is used, and I can work on the laptop when necessary with predictable relationship to the U3011 display.
The color-managment of LR is markedly different; I can see it set in when moving the image more than halfway from one display to the other on the extended desktop. It slightly desaturates the U3011, which is good. And it pumps up the colors on the laptop too much: the pale-colored images do get closer, but any vivid colors are blown on the display. I'm quite positive about this because I see the saturation level in the color channel "staircases" of a sRGB test image that set in just over half-way in the R and B channel, only the G channel is relatively unaffected. In Picasa this does not occur to such extent, and the unsaturted colours are a bit more different due to different white point & gamma.
Initially I suspected a faulty calibration, but I saw very similar behavior on a similar hw setup with LR4 but without calibration, where Win7 CM was using manufacturer-supplied color profiles for both displays. I would not like to revert to the standard sRGB display profile in Win7 CM because that'd have a bad effect on non-managed programs.
Is there any way to make color management in LR work like non-color-managed applications? Or to adjust the white point & gamma for the laptop display by LR so that it would become more useful with vivid images (yet less accurate)?

Remember that "calibration" is actually two procesesses: calibration and profiling.
Calibration brings the monitor to a defined state by correction tables to correct white point and tone response curve. This information is loaded into the display driver at boot-up, and affects the display for virtually all programs (except a few games and such that bypass the driver).
Profiling measures (just measures, doesn't adjust) the colour space and other parameters of the monitor, after calibration. Generally colour space can't be altered, only measured. It is this measurement that goes in the profile. (Confusingly, the calibration corrections tables are also stored in the profile, despite being nothing to do with the profile!)
Colour management is really about the profile (the profile measurement, not the calibration info). Colour managed programs (and only colour managed programs) use the monitor profile (and the image profile) to convert the RGB values in the image from the image colour space (e.g. sRGB) to the monitor's colour space (as measured and information stored in the monitor profile).
So the change you see when the calibration is applied at boot-up is just that - the calibration. Colour management happens when colour-managed programs display images to the screen.
"The color-managment of LR is markedly different."
Or rather, LR is colour managed, Picasa isn't.
"I can see it set in when moving the image more than halfway from one display to the other on the extended desktop. It slightly desaturates the U3011, which is good. And it pumps up the colors on the laptop too much: the pale-colored images do get closer, but any vivid colors are blown on the display."
When you drag an image from one screen to the other, are you using Lightroom (or another colour-managed application)? In which case you shouldn't see a difference between the two monitors. If you do, then one or both monitor profiles is probably bad. If you're using unmanaged applications, then this is what you expect to see. One (or probably both) screens will be displaying incorrect colour. But each will display different incorrect colour.
"Is there any way to make color management in LR work like non-color-managed applications? Or to adjust the white point & gamma for the laptop display by LR so that it would become more useful with vivid images (yet less accurate)?"
Colour management in LR is always on. And in truth, it's a bit pointless trying to make something behave "like non-color-managed applications". Thing is: non colour managed applications will look different on every monitor. Different unmanaged applications may look the same on your monitor, but they'll look different on someone else's. There's no single "look" of non-managed applications.
The best you can do is export to sRGB for the web. Most monitors have roughly sRGB colour space, so this is the best guess you can make at the right colour space for unmanaged browsers. Using an unmanaged colour workflow yourself is simply adding errors in your system to errors in the viewer's unmanaged system. It's likely to make it worse, not better!

Colors different in full screen view

I could as well post this under "Mac OS X", but I think here in the Aperture forum it is more likely to get help.
I have the following problem: when viewing images in full screen mode, their colors are different than in the normal windows mode. The difference is not subtle, but severe. For example blue skies have a lot more red and appear much more saturated.
While trying to narrow down this problem I found out the following (and here it starts to get really strange): I exported one image as a JPEG to the desktop to see what the colors would be. The thumbnail then had the oversaturated colors of the full screen view in Aperture. When clicking on it, Preview showed the correct colors with a normal blue sky. When switching to slideshow mode in Preview, again the oversaturated colors from Aperture full screen came up.
When I disconnect my 23" Cinema Display, the full screen view of Preview shows the same colors on my PB like in window mode. So I believe it has something to do with my 23" CD.
Can anybody come up with a good explanation for this behaviour? Could this be some kind of a profile problem?
Any help appreciated
PB G4/1.5 Mac OS X (10.4.6) Aperture 1.1.1

I read Zausel's post that referred to the Colorsync Utility. Under the Devices tab I was able to see both my monitors and confirm they were both assigned the proper profile (they were). There is an option to "Make Default Display" in this utility. I noticed it was defaulting to the Color LCD of the MacBook Pro. I had already set my 23" to my main screen in the display control panel by dragging the menu bar to the big screen in the layout tab. I selected the 23" screen in Colorsync Utility and selected it as the "Make Default Display". Now my full screen previews are accurate. Aperture must use the display profile for normal view screens, thumbnails, light table, but change to the default display profile when it does full screen. (previously, it was using the profile for the 15" MBPro screen for full screen views; thus the inaccurate color) Now everything is in sync and my color looks good on the big display in both normal view and in full screen. Hope this helps someone else.
Ben
MacBook Pro 15 Mac OS X (10.4.6) 2 GB Ram
MacBook Pro 15 Mac OS X (10.4.6) 2 GB Ram
MacBook Pro 15 Mac OS X (10.4.6) 2 GB Ram

Adjusting saturation of individual color channels?

In Photoshop, the Hue/Saturation adjustment allows individual adjustment to each color channel. So for instance, one can lower the saturation of only red, without affecting global saturation. I've used it thousands of times over the years, especially when shooting with Nikon cameras, which often seem to have artificially over-saturated yellows, or when shooting HDR, which tends to boost reds.
I've been scouring the internet for a plugin (or a hidden slider) to do the same within FCPX, to no avail. I'd love to be able to adjust a clip's global saturation up, while specifically lowering saturation in reds and yellows. Or at times, a clip simply has an oversaturated color that I want to diminish.
I've thought about using selective masks to grab a hue and desaturate, but that's a weird workaround to me.
This is a chance for the haters and maligners of FCPX's color correction to make themselves heard. Any thoughts?

Try this and see if it helps:
http://sight-creations.com/fxexchange/ChannelSaturation.zip
(if you need intallation help: http://sight-creations.com/install4fcpx/)
This is the parameter arrangement:
The Value parameters can be used to darken/lghten the channel. I also added "overall" Brightness and Contrast controls (if you darken or lighten too much with the values.) The Pivot is part of Contrast and is a midpoint of sorts (it more or less is a fine-tuner for contrast.)
Big hint: small moves. Also, once you desaturate a channel, you'll probably want to increase it's Value (and vice versa) to help balance the other channels so that you don't develop an unwanted cast. You can toggle the original state with the effect by clicking on the blue square dot by the effect's name in the inspector.
Here's a little *extreme* before/after:
(untouched original and probably not the best example [but I have problems with oversaturated reds as well.])
(after extreme desaturation of reds, some additional brightness and a little contrast along with the value adjustments — there's a fair amount of latitude with this effect.)
HTH

Printing color photos

When I print photo's the red is so strong the men look like they are wearing lipstick.

What printer model? What operating system? What program are you printing from? If you are printing from a program that gives a choice of CMYK or RGB as a printer model select RGB. (The printer actually uses CMYK inks, but the driver expects RGB data.) Selecting CMYK will result in very oversaturated colors.
Bob Headrick, HP Expert
I am not an employee of HP, I am a volunteer posting here on my own time.
If your problem is solved please click the "Accept as Solution" button ------------V
If my answer was helpful please click the "Thumbs Up" to say "Thank You"--V

W520 FHD LED TFT 95% Gamut Display and Color Sensor with Pantone Calibration - Review

Last week I have received my (first) new Lenovo W520 Thinkpad, which I decided to buy after lots of research on the internet. I am excited about its computing power and feature richness. Its biggest flaw though is the 1920x1080 LED TFT FHD display, which offers the worst color calibration I have seen in a high-end laptop in the last 10 years.
Its color rendering is highly disappointing as it shows unnatural, oversaturated colors that make the monitor useless for professional photo and video editing purposes. Primary tones glare neon-like in a highly disturbing manner. A red stop sign appears pink and flags in the google image search are displayed in a ridiculous way.
I have tried the following approaches to improve the color rendering.
The built-in color sensor in conjunction with the Pantone calibration software lead to the worst outcome. The white background of Windows Explorer becomes yellowish-greenish.
A better outcome canbe achieved using Windows 7 color management for display calibration, which doesn't avoid the neon colors, but at least white is rendered white.
Using the Nvidia graphic card tools and setting back gamma to 0.76 also helps to a very little degree.
Another solution is a free gamma correction tool called QuickMonitorProfile. This brings back the reds to normal tones with the side effect, that all mid-tones are rendered very pale.
I didn't have a possibility to try high-class external calibration hardware. For me the only solution remains to use a decent external monitor.
I have found the following interesting threads related to this topic:
http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/W-Series-ThinkPad-Laptops/How-do-I-lower-the-saturation-on-my-W520-the-r...
http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/W-Series-ThinkPad-Laptops/W510-W520-FHD-color-profile-supplied-by-Lenovo...
http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/W-Series-ThinkPad-Laptops/Very-happy-with-my-W520/m-p/508841#M18189
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Color sensor is bad joke, it's totally useless. Display gives better results without calibration than calibration with color sensor.
I tested calibration with best possible tools, using Eye One with i1Profiler and results are much better but still it's no way near acceptable for serious photography work. Delta variation is 15-20% (meaning colors are 15-20% off from the correct one, compared to Eizo Coloredge monitors where delta variation is around 2%).
Color sensor is just marketing gimmic for Lenovo. As I have stated on another post, Lenovo needs to get on grip on various BIG problems with their top of the Thinkpad laptops.

Aperture and dual monitor ICC profile problem

I am using an Epson Stylus Pro 3800 and run Aperture 2.1 from a MBP with a Cinema Display 23". I calibrated both displays (the 23" and the MBP display) with my ancient but working ColorVision Spyder, using OptiCal 3.7. I calibrated for a gamma of 2.2. and native white point. I check the results with various test images.
Here is the problem: the calibration produces a perfectly calibrated display, but when I open Aperture some color change is taking place, as if Aperture pulls in a wrong profile for the display (which then also leads to wrong colors in the prints): sometimes the photo which I have printed out before in perfect quality displays with either a nasty yellow cast or with totally oversaturated colors. I have used ColorSync utility to make the 23" the default display and I have also tried to simply close the MBP to work only with the 23", and sometimes either of these this did the trick. Most of the times, however, I get these color casts or oversaturation of the photos which I had worked on for a while and printed earlier with perfection.
I ran Disk Utility to Repair Disk Permissions (many Epson-related permissions were wrong, for example "Library/Printers/EPSON/InkjetPrinter/Libraries/UtilityCore.framework/Versions/ A/Resources/Icon8007.png", should be -rw-rw-r-- , they are -rwxrwxr-x ) and reinstalled the latest Epson driver for 10.5 repeatedly.
Even more surprising, at times the color of the full screen image can be off at the same time the thumbnail looks perfect! How is this possible? It seems as if thumbnail and full image use different display profiles. In addition, if I export the Master and display it in Lightroom or CS2 it looks perfectly fine and prints as expected. (I use the appropriate "canned" ICC profiles for the printer-paper combination).
The most surprising happens, however, when I drag the image from the 23" to the MBP: when the image is about half-way between the two displays (that is, one part is displayed on the 23", the other on the MBP scree) it suddenly changes from off-color or oversaturated to the correct color on the 23". If I then move the image up to the 23" again, the wrong display colors appear again.
I am at a loss: I have spent a lot of money on the gorgeous screen, the great printer, and Aperture (which is a great program), but I cannot get Aperture to print reliably, or rather, I cannot get Aperture to use the right display profile to display the image correctly in a reliable way.
I have read kbeat's color management blog and many entries on this blog here, but I have not found a solution. I appreciate your help.

Kai,Simon,
This is the problem i have been having.Colour profiling is correct,prints are rubbish.I run a fuji frontier
as well as epson printers.Anything from aperture is not what you see on screen.I am running aperture2.1.
Today we are removing 2.1 and doing a reinstall of 1.1 but not upgrading to 2 to test run prints.I have been looking for answers to this for sometime.
Simon,the problems we are have are very similar to you clients,photoshop fine,aperture not.I also have 20"external apple monitor attached which is used as the colour correcting monitor ( as the imac screen is not that good for criticl work ) I will post my findings here.
Simon, if you wish to investigate further,e-mail me,i am in leeds
daisy ( not a happy printer )

Diagram of sRGB values outside of the sRGB gamut?

When I have sRGB selected as my color space in Photoshop (CS6), often I see the out of gamut warning in the color picker. I expected every possible sRGB color value to be within the sRGB color gamut, but apparently I was wrong. I would like to see a horseshoe color space diagram that shows how far the values extend beyond the gamut.
I guess this occurs with all color spaces - you can select color values that are outside of the gamut. I'm not sure what the color space diagrams represent, but I'm guessing they represent the gamut.
Thanks!

It may help your understanding to know the lay of the land a bit better...
Most users are using Internet Explorer, which is HALF color-managed and reads the document color profile - but assumes the monitor is sRGB, so that anyone using IE with a monitor that's reasonably close to sRGB will see reasonable colors and those who have wide-gamut monitors will always see inaccurate (oversaturated) colors.
Safari and Firefox do use both the document and monitor profiles, and assuming the profile actually DOES describe the monitor performance (which I htink is a stretch for the majority of systems) can show proper color. Firefox has some advanced settings to allow a user to set it to a very rational strategy, in which not only images but web page elements are also color-managed, but that's not the default.
I don't know about Chrome's color-management capabilities. I'm generally allergic to running Google malware software so I don't test it much.
But know that color profiles are complex beasts, and can actually be (mis)crafted so that some or all color-management doesn't actually work right.
Gary Ballard (aka gator_soup) recommends publishing web images without a color profile, claiming this can yield a greater likelihood that people will see your images as intended, but I'm not sure I buy into that argument. Personally I lean toward getting the color right in Photoshop, publishing with an embedded sRGB profile, and not worrying about it any further. Anyone who cares about color will work things out on their own system so they're seeing proper color, and as for the others, well, as long as red things are vaguely reddish, and blue things bluish, what's to worry about?
At the end of the day, there are probably more "standard gamut" monitors (i.e., not wide gamut) out there than anything else, so the likelihood that an image will be seen on a device that's sRGB-like is probably higher than all else. This may be why Microsoft feels comfortable with leaving IE broken as it is, though frankly the same thing would be accomplished if they used the monitor profile, since Windows defaults to associating sRGB IEC61966-2.1 with monitors.
If your prime goal is web publishing, consider just making sRGB your working profile of choice, then watch your histograms when you edit to ensure you don't clip black points of any of the channels. Working in sRGB you cannot have an out-of-sRGB gamut color, so that's a non-issue.
By the way, you can show (as a status) what the current color space of your document is in a couple of ways: The little status box at the lower-left of the document editing area, or via the Info Panel.
-Noel

Fuji X100 RAW conversion

Hello all,
I have noticed that the RAW files from the Fuji X100 when opened in Aperture (v. 3.5), compared to the in-camera processed JPEGS:
1) are significantly more saturated, especially in the BLUE channel (but also in the red one)
2) show a noticeable vignetting
3) show chromatic aberration (while the in-camera JPEG don't)
Did anybody else notice that? It seems clear that Aperture does not correct for vignetting and chromatic aberration (which is NOT good), but also tends to blow out the saturation for the blue....
thanks for any comment
giuseppe

What should be have been changed, Leonie?
The over saturated colors. I did not expect lens correction to be added by a simple raw compatibity update, but we have seen problems with oversaturated colors been caused by faulty raw updates, for example Camera Raw update (4.08) :
See My 2012 iMac is on acid NEF files stopped being displayed on iPhoto and Preview, and all pictures are turning red in my library for examples.
This problem was fixed with Camera Raw update (4.09), but it may have introduced a problem with oversaturated colors, as seen in the examples above, that is why I have been asking -hoping that a new raw compatibility update might solve any such problems.

Thoroughly Confused

Here's the deal. I'm going on the trip of a lifetime to Italy next month and I want to get the best video quality possible from my Canon HF100 and either iMovie 08 or FCE 4.0.1. I've read through these forums as well as forums dealing with my model camcorder and now of course I am utterly confused. The number of frame rate options on my camcorder as well as importing and exporting options on my Mac are overwhelming, and I consider myself to be fairly knowledgeable about AV stuff on the Mac and PC.
I'm looking for direction in two areas I guess. One is what modes/frame rates work best with iMovie 08 and FCE, and once my footage is on my mac what app/export option will yield the best results, and stay as close as possible to the quality of the source material?
The Canon HF100 has options for 24p which they recommend using in tandem with Cinema Mode, but it doesn't say what Cinema Mode does. It also has 60i and 30p. I've heard all kinds of conflicting info about how these frame rates work in my two apps, so many that I'm not even going to start to get into them all. Does iMovie 08 or FCE read all these frame rates? Does it recognize them and then convert them to something else? Which ones work best in the two apps?
As far as exporting goes, do I even know where to start? This is one area where I believe even Apple could not truly simplify things. I eventually want to watch what I shoot on my HDTV of course either streaming it over the network to my XBOX 360 using Connect 360 or burn it on a DVD which I really don't want to because of it's a physical media and It's going to be downgraded to MPEG2. In the past I've used the Apple TV preset in iMovie 08 to stream standard def stuff to my 360 without any issues. That will lower the resolution on the HD video I shoot so thats not the most appealing option. Anyone have any idea of what might be a good export option to accomplish this?
Also depending on what frame rate I shoot in do I need to pay attention to what export option I use as they also have options for frame rates and resolutions?
Can anyone help bring a little clarity to my situation?
Thank You
Joshua

Joshua,
From Canon USA's website pages about the HF100: http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=177&mo delid=16187#ModelFeaturesAct
"..24p Cinema Mode enables all aspiring moviemakers to achieve a professional "film-look." You can change the camcorder's frame capture rate to 24p (recorded at 60i), which provides the appearance of the same frame rate as movie film.." (..My italics..)
I'm not going to respond to Steve, but I'll try to explain this, and to answer your question.
The camera can record single, complete frames of video. These frames are normally - or until recently have been generally - composed of two separate "fields" of information, each comprising half the total number of lines down a video, or TV, screen. One field has odd-numbered lines, the other consists of even-numbered lines. When these two fields are shown rapidly one after the other as 60 "interlaced" fields per second, the fields blend into each other, and the effect is of 30 complete frames of video per second.
The HF100 appears to record not separate half-a-full-frame-of-information fields, but complete, whole frames of info (..known as 'progressive' frames; progressing all the way down the screen, as lines 1,2,3,4,5,6 etc, instead of 1,3,5,7,9 followed by 2,4,6,8,10, etc..)
But note that Canon's own description says that you can "..change the camcorder's frame capture rate to 24p (recorded at 60i).." which means that the 24 genuine full frames of info are then separated, split or duplicated so that 60 separate fields are produced from those full frames, to allow the video to be recorded - and replayed - in the normal 60-interlaced-fields-per second manner.
Now, 24 doesn't divide exactly into 60. There are 60 fields to provide every second (..they could be identical fields; they don't necessarily need to be different from each other..) but to divide up 24 frames into 60 pieces means that each of those 60 fields may contain 0.4 of a original frame. Just using simple mathematics: 24/60=0.4.
The frames may be assigned differently, as it's unlikely that any field will be assigned 0.4 (two fifths) of a frame. Let's say that every two of the 60 fields-each-second are the same. That gives us 30 full and complete frames to be manufactured out of the original 24. That would mean that each of the 30 frames per second is composed of 1.25 of the original 24fps frames. Now, one-and-a-quarter of the original 24 squeezed into each of the recorded-to-chip 30 frames would still not really be feasible. So there must be a method to -d-i-s-t-r-i-b-u-t-e- those 24 frames more-or-less equally between the final 30 per second frames (..or 60 interleaved fields per second..) which the camcorder records onto a chip.
The way that it's usually done is - as Adam Wilt described - chopping things up so that half-frames, i.e; "fields" of video, get distributed between the resultant 30 frames ..or 60 fields.. per second - some of which may be identical to each other, and others not.
Here's how he describes it, starting at 24p Standard about a fifth of the way down the page: it's "..the same 2:3 or 3:2 pulldown cadence long used to transfer 24fps film to NTSC video. The first 24p frame is written to two fields of 60i video, the next is written to three, the next to two, and the next to three again, as shown in the graphic."
So the various chopped-up portions of the original 24-distinct-and-complete-frames-captured-each-second are "farmed out" between the resultant recorded-to-chip 30 frames per second ..which Canon acknowledges are actually recorded onto the chip as being "..recorded at 60i.."
"24p Cinema Mode" (sic), as Canon describes it, above, is a mixture of shooting at 24 frames-per-second (though it appears to be then chopped-up and redistributed as 60 interlaced fields per second, like normal video, but jerkier) to look like the 'jerky' motion of film, with optional adjustments as well to the comparative brightness of regions of the picture, to make the video look more like the 'linear' (constant) brightness changes which film records. (Video is usually made brighter in 'mid-white' or mid brightness regions of the picture, because cathode ray tube picture screens traditionally didn't cope with brightness the same way in mid-tones as in dark or very bright regions.) ..That's the "gamma" which Steve referred to.
On the "Auto/Manual Controls" page http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Vixia-HF100-Camcorder-Review-35094/Au to--Manual-Controls.htm of that Camcorderinfo review which I mentioned, their description of "Cine Mode" explains that: "..Cine Mode is an alternate gamma mode for how the camcorder processes colors, meant to make the HF100 match something closer to Canon's professional line rather than the oversaturated colors standard on most consumer camcorders. When active, the highlights and shadows are compressed and the midtones are expanded. Cine mode presumes, to some extent, that you've properly lit your scene. This is not the best run-and-gun setting, as you'll lose more details in the shadows and highlights. However, if the lighting is good, the image tends to have great looking colors.."
So, I repeat what I explained earlier, in answer to your previous question; ".."..it doesn't say what Cinema Mode does.." It takes half of one frame, adds it to another frame, and tries to produce the effect of genuine cinema film. It just produces jerky video. Don't bother with it. Don't waste this "trip of a lifetime" by shooting unsatisfactory, jerky "pretend film".
Now if you want your video to be "Fellini-esque" - as you're going to Italy - and want it to look like films made in Italy (..instead of looking like normal video..) you could use "24p Cinema Mode" - as Canon describes it - and switch to shooting at 24p, and adjust your "gamma" (the relative brightness of mid-tones) so that your "trip of a lifetime" looks like "Juliet of the Spirits" (..though that's rather super-bright!..) or Ginger and Fred ..but if you DO want to make your video look more like film, then - as I suggested - "..practise with the camera before you go, so that you know everything about how to use it before you even get there.."
I don't recommend Canon's "24p Cinema Mode", though, as things will look rather jerkier than normal. (..Shooting at 24p frame rate is often - mistakenly, in my view - thought to make a video look like a film, but the rate at which films are shown on cinema screens is actually two brief views of each of those 24 frames each second ..so you actually see 48 images per second, each image being shown twice ..and so the effect is rather different from simply seeing 24 images per second, which would flicker terribly. The 60i, or 30fps, manner in which those 24 frames per second are shown on a video screen differs markedly different from the 48 images-per-second which you see in a cinema or theatre. The so-called "film look" which video shooters strive for involves a different "depth of field" (amount of the shot that's in focus) when shot with a video camera, than the depth of field which a larger-frame film camera provides, too. So it's really very simplistic to think that shooting in "24p Cinema Mode" will provide a movie which really does look genuinely like a film!..)
Anyway, as I don't want to get into a discussion with Steve, I won't post any more comments or advice in this thread, because I think that his and my temperaments don't match, and I just don't enjoy the harangue.
Enjoy your trip to Italy, and I hope that you get lots of great footage!

So which LED Tv would you guys suggest?

Hello I recently purchased a Panasonic p50g20 but it had numerous problems and I don't like all the hassle that comes with plasma's. Most of the time instead of just enjoying myself I was worried bout image retention, etc..
So , anyways, I am looking to buy an LED. When I was shopping around for a Plasma in my budget (1100-1500) it became pretty obvious the Panasonic G20 series was the way to go for plasmas. I am hoping there is a similar brand/model that is the "go to" so to speak for this budget? I want at least a 46 inch. Anyone have any suggestions? Thank you

Nokia wrote:
You bought into all the Samsung and LG scare tactics for plasmas. Burn-in is no longer a problem for plasmas, except in extreme circumstances. If I were you, I'd stick with a plasma. They still are less expensive for the large sizes, and give a better picture. LCD still can't beat their black levels.
This is not true. Especially when you consider that Samsung churns out some of the best quality plasmas out there. I don't really get the whole black level thing that supposedly makes Panasonics "superior". The black levels on Samsungs are really good. Yes, Panasonics do have better black levels, but the differences are minute. Where Samsung excels is the color saturation. Colors look very, very realistic. I had the PN50B860 series and I was very shocked that I had to make virtually no picture adjustments. I'm very big on faithful colors. Dynamic and oversaturated colors look good for animated and 3d rendered films, but for the rest I like my colors to look natural.
Permanent burn in for plasmas are virtually a thing of the past now. However, they are still plagued with Image Retention problems. This is a big problem for gamers. The IR is not permanent, but it is annoying. It goes away after a few minutes or you can always utilize the pixel washing feature. There are also burn-in prevention steps that you can take. This includes leaving your Plasma running with a constant moving picture for 100 hours, or using the pixel wash for 30 hours. This uniformally ages the pixels and greatly reduces the chances of perm burn-in.
I agree with Nokia on the superior picture quality of Plasmas. LCDs are plagued with motion problems. My biggest issue with LCDs while watching HD content is this phenomena called the "Soap Opera Effect". It used to bug me to no end and I once believed it to be a problem with all HD content. I later found out that this effect is due to the LCDs' judder reduction engines. Watching HD on Plasmas is far more eye pleasing than LCDs.
As for your original question about the best LEDs... Samsung's LED TVs win hands down. One word of caution though, although I'm not familiar with current year models, the 6000 series Samsung LEDs have ghosting issues that they never corrected through firmware updates. The 7 and 8 series did get an update which fixed this issue. Another thing you need to consider is their auto-dimming feature. You can't shut it off and trust me, it gets really annoying. I had the 6 series and the combination of auto-dim and ghosting problems made me quickly return the unit. The redeaming factor is the outstanding picture quality. With some video adjustments and tuning, the picture on this set was outstanding. The best picture quality out of any LED by a good margin.
Vizio also makes good LEDTVs. They are also very affordable. Keep in mind, Vizio LCD screens are made by LG. Their plasmas are made by Panasonic. Panasonic has openly admitted that Vizio buys their seconds which include factory defects. LG doesn't say anything about their relationship with Vizio.
I've seen good Sony LEDTVs as well. Of course, they aren't priced very competitively lol. Verdict: Get a Samsung if you want LED. They deliver the closest picture competition to the best plasmas.

Oversaturated Colors on L220x

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for