Davide DB

Hi Chris, Welcome aboard!!! Ciao

Hi Kristin, It's difficult to give you here some advice on an encyclopedia like Davinci Resolve. At the moment, I can't think of any specific color grading tutorials. I should recheck to see if I've saved anything in my YouTube links. Anyway, I don't remember seeing an underwater color grading video that fully satisfied me. They all end with mediocre results. And many of the ones for land footage aren't very useful because they start from situations completely different from ours, or, if you notice, the clips they start with are technically perfect, many times shot in raw. Not exactly common cases. Anyway, let's say that, in general a sequence could be: Color: If your footage is in Log or RAW, the first thing to do is convert it into your working color space (for example, Rec.709). This is essential for correctly viewing the colors and brightness on your monitor. Skip this one if you shoot in Rec.709 White Balance: Use the eyedropper or tools like the color wheels or the "Temp" and "Tint" options to remove any color casts and make the whites and grays truly neutral. Exposure Correction: Adjust the image's brightness. Use the "Lift" (for shadows), "Gamma" (for midtones), and "Gain" (for highlights) controls to fix the general contrast and exposure. Saturation and Contrast: Add or remove saturation and contrast to get a clean and defined image. All of this is usually called "Primary Correction". Once your clip looks balanced and technically correct, you can move on to the creative color grading phase. And that's a completely different story. In the end you apply the final touches as noise reduction, sharpening or midtone sharpening etc.. The tool you used is very powerful and should be used sparingly. I almost wouldn't call it a primary correction tool, and in any case, I would use it for specific interventions on certain parts of the image after adjusting everything else. From what I can see, you're using it like a WB tool. Do you shoot in Rec.709 or Log? Do you use lights or natural ambient light? AWB or MWB?

Welcome aboard! I hope you like the forum. I feel cold just from reading you! 🥶

Welcome aboard! Wehope you like the forum. We have a Norse invasion! 😄

Hey Nando, Before we get into the nitty-gritty, let me just say something first. We've talked about this a bunch of times on the forum. I'm convinced everyone has their own position and that it's tough to change minds. But hey, that's life. "Agree to Disagree" is our motto, right? 😉 I just want to point out, though, that the two excerpts from the links you posted have little to nothing to do with what the article is saying. I mean, nothing stops you from using one log curve over another or using slightly different colorimetry (flat, natural, or other mojos) and still following the advice in the article. By the way, the article is full of real-world underwater examples, and honestly, the images from Ben's YT channel just speak for themselves. But actually, does using GPLog make the workflow from the article useless? I don't think so. Is using the natural color profile incompatible with using filters in the ways the article suggests? I don't think so. Actually, it would be awesome if some member did some tests and brought examples to back up their claims. We'd all benefit from it, especially since almost none of us have access to the all latest cameras and uw environments to try all the combinations 🤩 I, from my experience, haven't found any improvements using the GoProLab color related options. But it's me. I get clips with different colors, that's true, but they're absolutely not better than the normal ones shot in flat; they're just different. All the examples I see are shot on land with oversaturated color grading. Are there any underwater examples shot with these settings that we can all agree are beautiful? Personally I still haven't seen a pleasant color grading from YT influencers out there. As for DR (Dynamic Range), I personally think it's one of the most overrated things in underwater shooting. In underwater natural light, the water column acts as a "huge diffuser": it cuts out the reds, then the oranges and yellows > it reduces the spectrum; it lowers the contrast > scenes appear flatter compared to on land; in fact, the sensor doesn't have to handle extreme contrasts like those you find, for example, between the sky and shadows on the surface. so the DR becomes less critical. The real problem isn't the contrast, but the selective loss of colors. At just a few meters deep, everything turns blue/green, and that's where it becomes essential: to use red filters (see the article) at certain depth/conditions, artificial light sources, and in post-production, to work on the white balance and color reconstruction. With lights, it might be a different story, but in reality, the main thing is to light the foreground scene well (making it lit and colorful). No one expects to recover the shadows from the unlit, monochromatic background. I could understand if we were talking about a Sony A7SIII, but we've got a GoPro. Ciao

No, because the person who was supposed to lend me the lens sold it in the meantime, and I didn't get a chance to try it. Isaac hypothesized that they probably all work, but you'll get different FOVs. It would be great to know for sure.

Nikon RumorsNext Nikon announcement is rumored for September 10th (Ni...Nikon is rumored to have another new product announcement on or around September 10th, possibly for the rumored Nikon Zr video-oriented camera (R for RED) with RED tech inside (not a new RED camera wi BTW few weeks ago I watched this amazing documentary on Netherlands!

Welcome to the community, Hilmar! We're glad you've finally joined. It's awesome to have another passionate underwater filmmaker in the mix. The jump from a TG-6 to a Z CAM E2 is a serious one. The dream of a RED camera is a familiar on. Start saving now! I think we will have some big news from Nikon - Red in the next few weeks. Maybe the current models will become cheaper? Feel free to share some of your videos and projects when you get a chance. Ciao

Welcome aboard Lyle! Actually we have an ongoing thread about Tonga, it would be nice if you could add your suggestions:

Ok got it! As soon as I have some spare time I will update the table with your data. Thanks

And do not forget you (probably) have strobes or lights and arms...

Hi Roman, really good addiction. If you have the spreadsheet file I could try to add those info on our table. P.S. Why do you need a specific flip button? I thought some monitors have an auto flipping fature. Ciao

@Gudge Congratulations on the result, and the photo is truly stunning! It looks like a painting! Bravo!

Why four?

Yes once the usb-c was removed, the camera continued flawlessly recording using the internal battery, so it's a completely use case from the video you posted. Here the internal battery act a sort of last reserve. Good question, I guess it depends on how much current the camera draws while recording. So I can choose between serial or parallel circuit. I haven't a tester here now. I'm not at home so the only test I could do is putting the camera battery in that space.The battery (55mm) fits only lengthwise, and just one millimeter more and the housing won't close. So with the 18500s, I wouldn't have space for the battery holder. If I use "bare" batteries instead, I have more freedom of choice. Another option is using LiPo packs that usually have squared shapes.

I did a quick test of the first option, connecting the camera with a full battery to a normal USB charger. Upon connection, the camera warns you that the connected power source is weak and can only charge the battery when the camera is off. I started recording in FHD (otherwise I would have filled the card) and after 50 minutes the recording was still going and the battery was still at 100%. When the USB charger was disconnected, the recording continued without issues, using the battery. So I would feel confident in confirming that a couple of small batteries in parallel with a step-up converter with the proper protections would be enough. In my housing, the main problem is space.

Yes I knew that video and it's absolutely true for the O.G. GH5. Normally UW I use the GH5II that has a different charger. With the MK2 they introduced an USB-C port with PD (Power Delivery) and it works in two ways: If you connect a normal 5V source (classic phone charger or power bank) it will be able to power on the camera but not charging the battery at the same time. IIRC when you power off the camera, then the battery is charged. If you connect a P.D. source (9V 3A) it will power the camera and charge the battery at the same time. I've used the first method several times doing time lapses at home just connecting the camera to a phone charger and wall socket. In an UW scenario, maybe even the first option would work: The camera start using the external battery and when it's depleted (the BMS cut out the voltage) the camera switch to the internal battery. I should try on my desk with a small power bank. The second method requires a more specific circuit board (P.D.) and IDK if two 18350 are enough to power everything. Regardless of the method, I'm agree with you: I would never, never power my camera simply connecting directly one or two battery. Maybe it works (previous posts shows that it works with Sony cameras. probably different camera brand implemented different logics. I would use a step-up converte with all the protections. Here a video that shows the different options on latest Lumix cameras:

Hi Aqua Shutter, Welcome aboard! I'm sure you will find a lot of options in our classified section. Ciao

Wow nearly 4A, really too much

I thought that 3,7V were not enough to charge the camera. Thanks, I'll check the dimensions. P.S. Googling for that battery I came across a lot of extreme solutions 😄

I don't understand, do those batteries provide output voltage even through the USB charging port? Can you take a photo of what you've assembled? 1 or 2 batteries? A 18650 doesn't fit in my housing. The only free space is the space for the strobe trigger, but even there there are only 5 cm.

Well, it partly depends on your needs (video or photos) and partly on the camera you use. In my opinion, brightness and weight are basic factors to start from. The 500 nits of past generations are absolutely insufficient for working at shallow depths and strong lighting typical of tropical waters. I have a similar old monitor and was forced to build a huge sunshade to see anything. A reduced weight is equally important since mirrorless camera bodies are very small and, consequently, so are their housings. For video, it's important to have a balanced setup, not just a neutral one. Managing to balance the whole kit with a monitor that weighs almost a kilogram and is placed on top of the housing is a real mess. Then it depends on whether the monitor must have or compensate for features that the camera lacks: focus peaking, histograms, waveforms, and LUTs. From this point of view, I have a Lumix GH5M2 that has everything, so fundamentally, I'm just looking for an excellent bright image. Moreover some cameras have limitations on the image format and the features that are transmitted via HDMI. To give one example: many monitors now advertise that they can accept a 4K@60p signal. With Panasonics, I have always set the downscaling to 1080p directly in the camera but some cameras actually transmit a signal via HDMI that is identical to what is being used. So these are some thought to start with. Ciao

Hi Vitaly, We have a pinned thread updated with nearly all the monitor's out there. Personally, the latest Weefine checks all my requirements.

Welcome aboard Stemi, I hope you enjoy the forum! Ciao