# 5D Mk3 Grainy footage. Any ideas?



## jarwood (Feb 2, 2014)

Hello everyone, 

I have been shooting with the Mk3 for a few months now, but have recently started seeing some grain in my images. I'm not really sure if it is something on my end causing this, or if it is within the camera. The attached image is a screen grab from a clip I shot wide open at f4 (24-105mm L) with an ISO of 800. The footage gets incredibly grainy when I sharpen in post and I'm not sure why. Could it be that the sky is out of focus? Should I have shot it at a much smaller fstop to avoid this? Any help would be very much appreciated. I'm still pretty new to videography, but I feel I should be getting much cleaner images than I have been. Thanks!


----------



## flowers (Feb 2, 2014)

jarwood said:


> Hello everyone,
> 
> I have been shooting with the Mk3 for a few months now, but have recently started seeing some grain in my images. I'm not really sure if it is something on my end causing this, or if it is within the camera. The attached image is a screen grab from a clip I shot wide open at f4 (24-105mm L) with an ISO of 800. The footage gets incredibly grainy when I sharpen in post and I'm not sure why. Could it be that the sky is out of focus? Should I have shot it at a much smaller fstop to avoid this? Any help would be very much appreciated. I'm still pretty new to videography, but I feel I should be getting much cleaner images than I have been. Thanks!



The histogram of the image above:






As you can see, all the information contained in the two darkest segments (5 darkest stops)
This means that you wasted 87.5% of the information.

It looks grainy because of the lack of information and the inaccuracy of the photon count. If you try to bring up the exposure it will look noisy even at a low ISO.

The darkest parts lack the most information, it cannot be effectively recovered. Below you can see how much information can be recovered and how much is lost. First image a quick manipulation to show the really noisy parts with very little information. The second picture a more realistic attempt at pushing the image as far as it will go.


----------



## flowers (Feb 2, 2014)

You didn't post EXIF. If you don't post more information, we can't help you. What settings did you use? Choosing your ISO correctly is also important, some lower ISOs can actually be noisier than higher ISOs. One way to get cleaner video is to
expose brighter
and then bring the brightness down in post and push the blacks to crush the noisy shadows:


----------



## jarwood (Feb 2, 2014)

Thank you so much for your insight! I have just been at a loss. I haven't accessed the EXIF data before, how would be the easiest way to do so?

Also, I had a breakthrough today. I was working with one of my clips and noticed there was a lot of vertical banding. I realized I had been shooting in IPB, which I thought wouldn't affect anything. So just as a test is switched to ALL-I and filmed similar shots. The ALL-I was much cleaner and did not produce the grain or vertical banding. Is this a common occurrence or is something wrong with my IPB?


----------



## flowers (Feb 2, 2014)

jarwood said:


> Thank you so much for your insight! I have just been at a loss. I haven't accessed the EXIF data before, how would be the easiest way to do so?
> 
> Also, I had a breakthrough today. I was working with one of my clips and noticed there was a lot of vertical banding. I realized I had been shooting in IPB, which I thought wouldn't affect anything. So just as a test is switched to ALL-I and filmed similar shots. The ALL-I was much cleaner and did not produce the grain or vertical banding. Is this a common occurrence or is something wrong with my IPB?


I'm sorry, I was not thinking straight when I wrote the first part of the message. I was dealing with other things at the same time so I momentarily forgot we were talking about video. Video files have no EXIF data!
Do you remember what settings you used for shutter/ISO/aperture? 

IPB features better compression but personally I'd always use ALL-I. It makes life easier. It shouldn't have any direct effect on noise, but editing IPB material can result in worse IQ in the final video.


----------



## jarwood (Feb 2, 2014)

No worries.

ISO was 800. Frame rate 24. Shutter 1/50. Aperture f4. IPB compression.

I really have no idea why, but the ALL-I was a ton cleaner than IPB. Even after sharpening, there was minimal grain. I've noticed the vertical banding before, but it had never been too much of an issue. So I won't be shooting in IPB anymore.


----------



## flowers (Feb 3, 2014)

jarwood said:


> No worries.
> 
> ISO was 800. Frame rate 24. Shutter 1/50. Aperture f4. IPB compression.
> 
> I really have no idea why, but the ALL-I was a ton cleaner than IPB. Even after sharpening, there was minimal grain. I've noticed the vertical banding before, but it had never been too much of an issue. So I won't be shooting in IPB anymore.



Those settings should not result in that kind of noise! Don't be afraid to push the 5d3 to 6400 when you need to! It can handle it (even 12800 in a pinch). Underexposure will be noisier than correct exposure or less underexposure. If you underexpose and push black you'll get a darker image than you shot but if you expose brighter and then bright exposure down and black up you'll have a far better control over the final brightness.


----------



## jarwood (Feb 3, 2014)

I didn't think it should be putting out that kind of noise. Thank you so much for your help!


----------



## flowers (Feb 3, 2014)

jarwood said:


> I didn't think it should be putting out that kind of noise. Thank you so much for your help!


Happy to help!


----------



## mdrewpix (Feb 3, 2014)

Your clip is simply underexposed. Expose it properly and you'll be fine. There's no way to fix a shot like that. And shooting All-I won't make any difference. Underexposed is underexposed. Additionally, shooting All-I is overkill for web video and the like. IPB is fine unless you're shooting for theatrical projection.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Feb 6, 2014)

mdrewpix said:


> Your clip is simply underexposed. Expose it properly and you'll be fine. There's no way to fix a shot like that. And shooting All-I won't make any difference. Underexposed is underexposed. Additionally, shooting All-I is overkill for web video and the like. IPB is fine unless you're shooting for theatrical projection.



I think the banding is making the noise look worse than it actually is. And IPB actually has less banding, so my guess is that All-I would make it look worse.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 7, 2014)

flowers said:


> . Video files have no EXIF data!


 
There is plenty of shooting information for 5D MK III video. Open up DPP and select a video, then right click and select info. 

Here is some from a test video I recently shot.

File Name untitled-6170.MOV
Camera Model Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Firmware Firmware Version 1.2.1
Shooting Date/Time 1/16/2014 9:01:07 PM
Author 
Copyright Notice Mount Spokane Photography-2014
Owner's Name 
Shooting Mode Movie
Tv(Shutter Speed) 1/160
Metering Mode Center-Weighted Average Metering
Exposure Compensation -2/3
ISO Speed Auto
Auto ISO Speed ON
Lens EF70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
Focal Length 70.0mm
Image Size 1920x1080
Movie exposure Shutter-Priority AE
Compression format MPEG-4 AVC/H.264
Movie quality Low compression(intra frame, ALL-I)
Recording Time 143.1 seconds
Frame Rate 29.97
Flash Off
FE lock OFF
White Balance Mode Auto
AF Mode One-Shot AF
Picture Style Faithful
Sharpness 0
Contrast 0
Saturation 0
Color tone 0
Color Space sRGB
Long exposure noise reduction Disable
High ISO speed noise reduction Disable
Highlight tone priority Disable
Auto Lighting Optimizer Disable
Peripheral illumination correction Enable
Chromatic aberration correction Enable
File Size 1523291KB
Drive Mode Movie shooting
Live View Shooting ON
Camera Body No. 062024006599
Comment


----------



## flowers (Feb 7, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> flowers said:
> 
> 
> > . Video files have no EXIF data!
> ...



Oh wow, I didn't know Canon cameras record that much metadata in videos! Thank you for pointing that out. Can you only read it using DPP or can some other programs show it too?


----------



## syder (Feb 9, 2014)

To minimise noise in video using any Canon DSLR shoot with your ISO set in multiples of 160 (so 160, 320, 640, 1250 etc). This makes a surprising amount of difference.

However, in the example frame you've posted, the issue is that the shot is seriously underexposed. Ultimately you can't push a heavily compressed 8-bit video image in the same way you can a 14-bit RAW still (and you'd be pushing it with the level of underexposure in the frame you've posted even it was RAW).


----------



## jdramirez (Feb 10, 2014)

People often mention it... expose to the right... so you over expose your image a little and then in post move it back... less grain... more info that's not lost...


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 10, 2014)

jdramirez said:


> People often mention it... expose to the right... so you over expose your image a little and then in post move it back... less grain... more info that's not lost...



This is true for RAW, but not compressed video. H.264 will compress the highlights, using a flat picture style like Cinestyle and exposing normally is the best thing for H.264.


----------



## flowers (Feb 10, 2014)

crazyrunner33 said:


> jdramirez said:
> 
> 
> > People often mention it... expose to the right... so you over expose your image a little and then in post move it back... less grain... more info that's not lost...
> ...



True, compressed h.264 doesn't have the highlight recovery latitude.


----------



## Crapking (Feb 28, 2014)

What about using a clean HDMI out like the Atomos Ninja2 ? With direct compression to ProRes, does the ISO mulitple still benefit from the '160 rule' as much?

And as far as pushing the blacks up / down, can you be a little more specific for the beginners in the audience. If my workflow is MD3 clean video out to atomos ninja2 (with aforementioned ProRes direct compression), and editing in Final Cut or Premiere, what 'other' post-production software / plugin's etc do you recommend? I'm just learning video editing, have access to the Creative Cloud package, but intimidated by the post-production / color grading, etc that is so often needed.


----------



## flowers (Feb 28, 2014)

Crapking said:


> What about using a clean HDMI out like the Atomos Ninja2 ? With direct compression to ProRes, does the ISO mulitple still benefit from the '160 rule' as much?
> 
> And as far as pushing the blacks up / down, can you be a little more specific for the beginners in the audience. If my workflow is MD3 clean video out to atomos ninja2 (with aforementioned ProRes direct compression), and editing in Final Cut or Premiere, what 'other' post-production software / plugin's etc do you recommend? I'm just learning video editing, have access to the Creative Cloud package, but intimidated by the post-production / color grading, etc that is so often needed.



Here's an article you might find of help to answer that question: http://www.photographybay.com/2011/04/17/atomos-ninja-hands-on/

Quote: "That said, you need a camera that sends an uncompressed full-res signal out of the HDMI port. As you may know, most DSLRs don’t do this. In fact, the Canon 5D Mark II, along with other Canon models, actually sends out a less-than-HD signal once you hit the record button."
If I understand it correctly, 5 series models don't output uncompressed video through hdmi, it's compressed before it reaches Ninja (but less than the file written on the SD card... I think!) also it's not full-res. Whatever Ninja outputs is compressed and upscaled. There's a firmware update for 5d iii apparently that give you uncompressed hdmi output (not sure about full res). You might want to consider ML. If you're prepared to handle ProRes then 14-bit RAW is not an incredibly huge step up. Just make sure whatever you're editing on has enough RAM and cores and threads to throw at the software you use to process, grade and edit your raw footage because it will use all you can throw at it. There's no chance of overkill.
ML is your only chance for 7d. There's no way something like 7D would ever output uncompressed clean full res feed, not even two out of three.


----------



## Crapking (Mar 4, 2014)

With a late 2013 8 Core Mac Pro and 32GB RAM, I'm not really worried about my machine freezing, but rather MY inability to correctly / efficiently post-process my video files. Despite using the same custom WB, my colors just don't seem as vibrant/accurate as my stills, and despite meticulous focusing (on a tripod,m statically shooting men's volleyball), the output is not as sharp as I would expect - so if any of the more experienced can point me in the right direction for fast-action video settings and post-processing tips, I'd appreciate that.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Mar 4, 2014)

Crapking said:


> With a late 2013 8 Core Mac Pro and 32GB RAM, I'm not really worried about my machine freezing, but rather MY inability to correctly / efficiently post-process my video files. Despite using the same custom WB, my colors just don't seem as vibrant/accurate as my stills, and despite meticulous focusing (on a tripod,m statically shooting men's volleyball), the output is not as sharp as I would expect - so if any of the more experienced can point me in the right direction for fast-action video settings and post-processing tips, I'd appreciate that.



HDMI doesn't really improve the video quality much. 

https://vimeo.com/64917111

Canon nerfed the 5D3 pretty good to make it look appreciably worse than their Cinema EOS line. Your only option for increased sharpness and color is magic lantern. 

And with your shiny new Mac Pro, the work flow should be a breeze.


----------



## flowers (Mar 9, 2014)

Crapking said:


> With a late 2013 8 Core Mac Pro and 32GB RAM, I'm not really worried about my machine freezing, but rather MY inability to correctly / efficiently post-process my video files. Despite using the same custom WB, my colors just don't seem as vibrant/accurate as my stills, and despite meticulous focusing (on a tripod,m statically shooting men's volleyball), the output is not as sharp as I would expect - so if any of the more experienced can point me in the right direction for fast-action video settings and post-processing tips, I'd appreciate that.


RAW will help on both accounts. You can take the vibrancy and saturation up as much as you like without artefacts. I recommend Lightroom for batch processing the files. Aperture on Mac can probably also do batch processing? If your denoise plugin doesn't work in batch mode in LR I recommend you get Neat Video, it's a good denoising plugin. You just need to know your workflow in advance because you have to buy the plugin separately for any editor (Vegas Pro, After Effects, Premiere Pro & Elements, Final Cut Pro X 6 & 7, Motion, Final Cut Express, Virtual Dub, DV Resolve or any of the others the plugin supports). It's a little silly but that's how it works. I recommed denoising your RAW before exporting but in case that's not feasible Neat Video is a good alternative for denoising in post after compiling the frames into clips.
Fast action can often benefit from the "jerkiness" (Saving Private Ryan) of fast shutter speeds. If you think that look would fit your movie don't be afraid to use shutter speeds of 1/500 or higher. This will make every frame crisp and sharp from the lack of motion blurring. In LR you can also make settings (including sharpening) and copy and paste them on all the frames. This way you get the same amount of sharpening on all the frames you're working for. Topaz Denoise is the best denoising software you can find. It's amazing and it costs almost nothing considering it's the first and most important step in your processing. It also includes sliders for detail recovery (the second best if not the best detail recovery I've ever used), blur reduction and added grain (in case the noise removal leaves your image too clean and you don't like the look). Detail recovery and sharpening are also important in making your image look crips. There is another thing most people overlook: sharpness perception is based on contrast. Underconstrasted image will look soft no matter how sharp it is. Overall contrast is not the way to go. Selective contrast adjustment is what you want.
If you need more help, please let me know.


----------



## Crapking (Mar 11, 2014)

Assume for a moment, we are starting from scratch to shoot a volleyball match with a tripod (static) game film for the players/coaches. No tracking, just a simple behind the court view, and a second camera zoomed to the net for closeups, and a third camera on the scoreboard for cutaways after each point.
5d3 settings I currently use are 1/60, f8 and ISO to slightly overexpose (usually 2500, 3200 range) with MF achieved by zooming 10x during warmups at the players near the net, (using my 24-70 and 70-200 lenses), with a clean output via HDMI to Atomos Ninja2 on one of my bodies and CF cards on the other two (using IPB-I) and for the Ninja which codes to ProRes HQ [email protected]
I import all 3 large clips to FCP, make my multi cam action edits, then export to H.264 codec to my website for all to view/download. Prior to export, when is the best time to denoise/colorgrade, etc?? Should I batch process each of the 3 large files before the edits, then import into FCP, or create the final timeline, then process??
Any other suggestions ??


----------



## flowers (Mar 11, 2014)

I would first import the clips, cut and create the timeline as you suggested and then denoise and color grade (first denoise, then color grade). I noticed you said [email protected], 1080i has the same vertical resolution as 720p so it's softer for that reason also. I looked into Atomos Ninja when it seemed to be all the hype, I found it to be too much of a compromise but I don't remember the specifics anymore. Can your atomos record in 1080p? If it can, turn that on. Also your shutter speed of 60 fps? That's fine if you're making a film but have you ever seen sharp frames of volleyball in a movie? Of course not, it's all soft and motion blurry to give it that cinematic feel. You'd only use higher shutter speeds for special occasions, maybe a slo-mo close up of the person hitting the winning "goal" (I have no idea what a goal is called in volleyball) but even then not the jerky crisp kind. you have to decide on the look you want, that's the first thing. your look defines everything else. you don't shoot at 1/60s because it's 1/60s f/4 ISO 1600 outside, you shoot at 1/60s because that's what the look you're going for demands and add or substract light according to the light you have available. i would avoid sharpening the image too much, you might get some artefacts. get neat video, import into fcp, denoise with neat video, add sc sharpen to sharpen the image a little, adjust contrast (the less contrast, the more soft the image appears) and see what you get. have you compared 1080p footage SOOC without ninja and the 1080i (deinterlaced interpreted 1080p but really 720p-verticalres)? which looks softer? is it the camera only being able to output 1080i but not 1080p or is it the limitation of the ninja recorder? you need to find the cause of the perceived softness to see if there's anything you can do about it.


----------



## flowers (Mar 11, 2014)

I've found out that when making the h.264 footage Canon cameras take the raw data from the sensor, downscale it to 1732 X 974, resizes it up and down a few times (to help with moire I assume, a form of VAA), applies chroma subsampling, standard noise reduction that isn't very great and also sharpens the image (unsharp style?) and then compresses it to h.264 and sends it out the usb port (without h.264 compression but not uncompressed). All that resizing and downsampling degrades the image quality and no external recorder can fix that.


----------



## Crapking (Mar 14, 2014)

flowers said:


> I would first import the clips, cut and create the timeline as you suggested and then denoise and color grade (first denoise, then color grade). I noticed you said [email protected], 1080i has the same vertical resolution as 720p so it's softer for that reason also. I looked into Atomos Ninja when it seemed to be all the hype, I found it to be too much of a compromise but I don't remember the specifics anymore. Can your atomos record in 1080p? If it can, turn that on. Also your shutter speed of 60 fps? That's fine if you're making a film but have you ever seen sharp frames of volleyball in a movie? Of course not, it's all soft and motion blurry to give it that cinematic feel. You'd only use higher shutter speeds for special occasions, maybe a slo-mo close up of the person hitting the winning "goal" (I have no idea what a goal is called in volleyball) but even then not the jerky crisp kind. you have to decide on the look you want, that's the first thing. your look defines everything else. you don't shoot at 1/60s because it's 1/60s f/4 ISO 1600 outside, you shoot at 1/60s because that's what the look you're going for demands and add or substract light according to the light you have available. i would avoid sharpening the image too much, you might get some artefacts. get neat video, import into fcp, denoise with neat video, add sc sharpen to sharpen the image a little, adjust contrast (the less contrast, the more soft the image appears) and see what you get. have you compared 1080p footage SOOC without ninja and the 1080i (deinterlaced interpreted 1080p but really 720p-verticalres)? which looks softer? is it the camera only being able to output 1080i but not 1080p or is it the limitation of the ninja recorder? you need to find the cause of the perceived softness to see if there's anything you can do about it.


Thanks for your time / opinions on this - the look I am trying to achieve is the 'sharpest (best-focused) / least motion-blur' game footage for players/parents/coaches.
With these recording options on the Ninja2
(HD 1080i60, 1080i59.94, 1080i50, 1080p30, 1080p25,
1080p24, 1080p23.98, 1080p30(60i), 1080p25(50i),
1080p24(60i), 1080p23.98(60i), 720p60, 720p59.94,
20p50, SD 486i59.94, 576i50)
which would you recommend, and with the 5d3, I am not sure if the compression 'option' is relevant when outputting thru the HDMI, but if it does, which do you prefer? Also, with respect to shutter speed, I chose 1/60 for the 'rule' of 2x frame rate, but should I shoot 1080p30(60i) or go to 720p60/ I do that, then while the NINJA says it supports that, it is not an option when I tried it last time (not sure if I made mistake in camera output) or if it is real limitation (typo) on their end. My ultimate goal is to have a tournament's worth of games on a BLURAY disc look as focused/sharp and correctly colored as possible. 
Appreciate your clarifying my settings/workflow.


----------

