Yes he has alot of Galleries named after him .. he could have been framed by Sony too..
FS7: Burn in a LUT?
- Thread starter Bern Caughey
- Start date
Yes he has alot of Galleries named after him .. he could have been framed by Sony too..
Lenny - and to others posting their opinions... maybe this might help - Art in his own words:
https://www.provideocoalition.com/hack-alexa-lut-into-sony-f-cameras/
After that article, I used to use Art's LUT fairly often with my FS7 and did like it more than the Sony LC-709A. But have not used it in quite some time - especially if burning in. I did, however, recently use Lenny's (and forgive me because I don't recall the thread or how long ago you posted it ) STD scene file fairly recently on a shoot where the director wanted a "punchy, high contrast finished look" in camera and I knew we'd be lighting everything indoors to a sort of Rembrandt shadow look.
https://www.provideocoalition.com/hack-alexa-lut-into-sony-f-cameras/
After that article, I used to use Art's LUT fairly often with my FS7 and did like it more than the Sony LC-709A. But have not used it in quite some time - especially if burning in. I did, however, recently use Lenny's (and forgive me because I don't recall the thread or how long ago you posted it ) STD scene file fairly recently on a shoot where the director wanted a "punchy, high contrast finished look" in camera and I knew we'd be lighting everything indoors to a sort of Rembrandt shadow look.
Thanks for that reference - and to paraphrase the immortal Paul Harvey that should be "the Rest of the Story!"
I'll admit that my eyes glaze over a bit when Art gets into the technical weeds on some of these articles as I'm so used to just skimming things on the web, but I will try to get back to it when I have more time.
In another similar (and simpler) article he recommended simply using the Varicam gamma and the LC709A gamut in LUTCALC and that's what I do. I also have been making LUT's for fluorescents for some time now and they work great as well as LUT's with varying amount of warmth. I don't think they are as important for post though since its easy to correct for green in post. In the camera though I find it very hard to deal with mixed light when the image itself is green.
I'll admit that my eyes glaze over a bit when Art gets into the technical weeds on some of these articles as I'm so used to just skimming things on the web, but I will try to get back to it when I have more time.
In another similar (and simpler) article he recommended simply using the Varicam gamma and the LC709A gamut in LUTCALC and that's what I do. I also have been making LUT's for fluorescents for some time now and they work great as well as LUT's with varying amount of warmth. I don't think they are as important for post though since its easy to correct for green in post. In the camera though I find it very hard to deal with mixed light when the image itself is green.
You could have just emailed him directly and kept the better camera .. no..?
Can't say I understand this post. What dilemma are you referring to?
I believe he's referring to the ability of the EVA1 to not only white balance when shooting LOG, but also to save numerous white balances (beyond just your temporary 'A' and 'B' balances) -- thus if you're shooting in a location that has different mixed lighting situations in each of several rooms you can save all those various balances as presets and return to them as you move back to rooms you've already shot in. This approach might simplify your post process by not needing different LUTs for various amounts of green in the location lighting.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
Are the camera's white balance choices saved in the metadata so post knows what settings/values were being used at any given time? And can Resolve read it? And if can read it, can it automatically compensate? If not, it might actually make the post processing more complicated rather than simplifying things. Or maybe it doesn't matter if someone is trying to shoot WYSIWYG and coming closer to a correct WB in camera is the goal. Yeah, I guess that's it. I may have answered my own question. More custom WB options for people who want to use LOG but skip grading.
Last edited:
Or sometimes it's a matter of not being given any time for grading...
Did a shoot a couple of weeks ago -- a series of single-person interviews - two FS7's - client wanted QHD slog3 - they supplied the lut they wanted me to use . Running the two cameras plus recording the audio as an OMB wasn't really a problem - though it did take the hotel electricians several hours to turn off a circuit of annoying (and unflattering) MR-16 style down-spots whose on/off switch didn't work. The issue was that each interview (4 to 6 minutes finished length) was supposed to be rough delivered (meaning basic edit, questions removed, intercutting between wide and tight shots, eliminating all re-starts and stumbles, head and tail titles, logos and lower thirds added, and of course color corrected and then uploaded to Vimeo) within a time frame of about 75 minutes from the end of each interview. Yes, doing a basic white balance and shooting WYSIWYG would have saved me some critical time -- but client's specs were for slog3 -- and the combination of the mixed light and their LUT made for some color correction craziness. So yes, there are times when, even with LOG, getting it closer in the camera would have been really helpful.
Hmm... that's an interesting client. Assume you also eventually had to send the raw files to them... since if you had shot custom - using a white balance... uploaded to Vimeo... how would they have even known? Not trying to be a smart a** - but that's one of those rare occasions where I would have actually tried to talk the client out of Slog... fast turn-around time of handing over footage - especially in mixed lighting you can't control for me usually means custom mode.
cyvideo
Veteran
Sony states there are good reasons for having three preset white balances in Cine EI mode. 1. Is to obtain the most accurate color rendition and maximize dynamic range and 2. The internal processing required for a complete lookup table for WB in single Kelvin steps in 422 10-bit apparently is beyond the current crop of cameras capabilities. Way easier to do in the 8-bit domain hence you can WB on the A7 series in S-LOG. The newer Venice has the increased, dynamic range, processing power and memory capacity to do WB in LOG and RAW and keep the RGB channels from premature clipping during a WB.
A Chapman explained some of it with regards to the gain functions in the RGB channels in one of his articles.
"So why is the S-Gamut white balance fixed to the 3 presets for daylight, fluorescent and tungsten? The main reason is to ensure you get the cameras full dynamic range in each colour. White balance is a gain function, it adjusts the gain of the red, green and blue channels so that white objects appear white under differing light sources. So if the light source lacks blue light – making the pictures look excessively warm – you add extra gain to the blue channel to compensate.
But the problem with this is that gain affects dynamic range. When shooting log (or raw) the camera needs to operate the sensor at the optimum gain level to squeeze the highest possible dynamic range from the it. Changing the gain in just one colour channel to shift the white balance could result in a reduction of dynamic range in the channel. This could manifest itself as colours in one channel that clip sooner than the others. This can be really hard to deal with in post production and can show up as things like bright clouds with a colour cast that isn’t in the rest of the picture."
http://www.xdcam-user.com/2018/05/w...to-3-presets-when-using-s-log2-s-log3-or-raw/
Chris Young
A Chapman explained some of it with regards to the gain functions in the RGB channels in one of his articles.
"So why is the S-Gamut white balance fixed to the 3 presets for daylight, fluorescent and tungsten? The main reason is to ensure you get the cameras full dynamic range in each colour. White balance is a gain function, it adjusts the gain of the red, green and blue channels so that white objects appear white under differing light sources. So if the light source lacks blue light – making the pictures look excessively warm – you add extra gain to the blue channel to compensate.
But the problem with this is that gain affects dynamic range. When shooting log (or raw) the camera needs to operate the sensor at the optimum gain level to squeeze the highest possible dynamic range from the it. Changing the gain in just one colour channel to shift the white balance could result in a reduction of dynamic range in the channel. This could manifest itself as colours in one channel that clip sooner than the others. This can be really hard to deal with in post production and can show up as things like bright clouds with a colour cast that isn’t in the rest of the picture."
http://www.xdcam-user.com/2018/05/w...to-3-presets-when-using-s-log2-s-log3-or-raw/
Chris Young
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
+1
Absolutely. There is no advantage to shooting S-LOG in a controlled lighting situation vs. a nicely crafted scene file. Clearly a case of a client who does not understand the capabilities of the camera's paint menus. A lot of cameras from other companies simply don't have the processing power and choices to allow onboard grading so clients get in that mindset that they need LOG or have to grade in post. Granted, ultimately you have to do whatever the clients wants, but that does'nt mean the client has made the best choice.
I didn't paint the full picture of the extent of the shoot. This was being done at a conference, and the production company had several other FS7's shooting conference presentations, breakout sessions and B-roll -- all shooting slog3. I was doing the interviews with presenters, executives, politicians, etc. And yes, they did get all the raw footage as well (plus somewhere around fifteen PremierePro project files, so they could make adjustments and add b-roll later if desired.) Any suggestion to have 20% of their footage shot custom with the other 80% shot slog would have probably flown like a lead balloon.
They were very happy with the look they got, though if they go back in to make adjustments they may be surprised just how many parameters I ended up needing to adjust in Lumetri.
Meanwhile, I do need to give a big product plug to Samsung for their T5 SSD drives, which provided lightning-fast transfers and totally smooth playback through the UCB-C connectors on the HP Omen I used for data and editing. Keeping all the camera footage and Premiere projects on a single large T5 drive made it easy and quick for production to make a full transfer at the end of the day. Other SSD drives were also used to 'sneakernet' files to/from the producers as needed and for backups.
Run&Gun
Veteran
Am I making too far of a left turn if I bring up the fact that the Myth Busters actually did make a lead balloon AND made it fly?
Sounds like something I should keep in my kit!
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Not read the whole thread.
I dont really get how people can 'get it right on set' maybe with a 24in super monitor.
Was doing something in the studio today Slog2.. basically added a Slog709a lut.. but still getting the skin tone as the correct level and contrast is a very fine thing taking tiny adjustments in resolve.
Im just not convinced that getting it 'in camera' is in any way simple.. even in controlled lighting.
dont share! https://vimeo.com/338092546/ac4ab8db71
I dont really get how people can 'get it right on set' maybe with a 24in super monitor.
Was doing something in the studio today Slog2.. basically added a Slog709a lut.. but still getting the skin tone as the correct level and contrast is a very fine thing taking tiny adjustments in resolve.
Im just not convinced that getting it 'in camera' is in any way simple.. even in controlled lighting.
dont share! https://vimeo.com/338092546/ac4ab8db71
cyvideo;19867905832. The internal processing required for a complete lookup table for WB in single Kelvin steps in 422 10-bit apparently is beyond the current crop of cameras capabilities. Way easier to do in the 8-bit domain hence you can WB on the A7 series in S-LOG. The newer Venice has the increased said:
Haha - Morgan we've been around this one many times in the past. That's where us "old school" moribund camera types have less trouble because we did it for years.
I love shooting log but in some ways prefer handing off Custom or a burn in because then at least I know the editor (whose probably "correcting" this and is not really an expert in color) won't screw it up.
Also you don't need to ever get something exactly perfect in the field in Custom. As long as you are close there is plenty of room for small adjustments that are virtually always needed in post. You don't need log to do color correction.
It reminds of the producer who when I asked him if he wanted WYSIWYG or Log said wide eyed -" Oh can you shoot it without Log? That would be great. I pick up people all the time around the country who seem to think shooting Log absolves them of lighting carefully on set." "They can fix it in Post."
I don't mind being called old school... but "moribund". Ouch, Lenny. Ouch.
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)rogar-BigGrin(DBG)And to Sam's point... shooting Custom in Std mode - or in other words shooting REC709 for REC709 delivery makes getting right in camera - or at least that process - much easier. (again, assuming you have control over lighting, etc on set.) Or at least that's how us old moribund types used to do it.
Last edited: