# color/brightness difference between AVCHD video and still images - SONY NEX-5N



## erotavlas (Jan 8, 2012)

Hi I just noticed something today when I was experimenting with different settings on the sony NEX 5N 
I took some still shots of some red berries outside on a bush in sunny weather.  Using apeture prioity mode I took a still image, then took some video (AVCHD at 60i)
I looked at the results on my computer and the video colors and brightness didn't match what I was seeing in the photo.  Video colors looked different and image looks much brighter.

Using the same shutter speed, apeture and ISO as the first image, I set it to Manual mode and took the video again.  This time the colors were better, but still don't match exactly. It almost matches but again the image looks brighter overall.  

I guess my question is why is there a difference?  Is this an effect due to the way the video is being compressed into that format? Or is there some setting that is causing this?


----------



## erotavlas (Jan 14, 2012)

anyone?


----------



## MTVision (Jan 14, 2012)

Are you shooting JPeg or raw?


----------



## erotavlas (Jan 14, 2012)

I have my stills set to RAW + JPEG, but theres not much difference between the two still image files


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 14, 2012)

erotavlas said:


> I have my stills set to RAW + JPEG, but theres not much difference between the two still image files



There won't be.... until you start editing them.  You don't have a lot of latitude when working with the JPEGs.  You've got a gazillions options when editing raws.


----------



## erotavlas (Jan 14, 2012)

480sparky said:


> erotavlas said:
> 
> 
> > I have my stills set to RAW + JPEG, but theres not much difference between the two still image files
> ...



I don't understand what this has to do with the AVCHD video.  The difference I am seeing is between the stills and the video, not between the stills themselves.


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 14, 2012)

erotavlas said:


> I don't understand what this has to do with the AVCHD video.  The difference I am seeing is between the stills and the video, not between the stills themselves.



I think you're comparing apples & oranges.  You're setting up a full-sensor still image (like what, 10 to 12mp?) to a 0.2mp(?) video equivelant.


----------



## erotavlas (Jan 14, 2012)

480sparky said:


> erotavlas said:
> 
> 
> > I don't understand what this has to do with the AVCHD video.  The difference I am seeing is between the stills and the video, not between the stills themselves.
> ...



I see, so its due to compression of the images that are used to create the video?

I thought that the high definition video would retain more data than your suggesting


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 14, 2012)

Not the compression, but simply because the pixel dimensions are so different.


----------



## erotavlas (Jan 14, 2012)

the resulting image pixels?


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 14, 2012)

You're trying to compare a full-size still image to a much-much-much-smaller video frame.  The video won't be composed of thirty 10mp images every second.  The video uses much smaller images to create the video, so a lot of information is scrapped in order to save the video.


----------



## Crollo (Jan 27, 2012)

As sparky said there's so less pixels that the color information _will_ change, dramatically or not. Compare a blu-ray to a DVD and you will see the color difference when you blow dvd up to the same size.


----------

