CineGamma for Interviews?

Michael Erlewine

Michael Erlewine

Well-known member
Not that familiar with the CineGammas on the Sony FS700.

I am shooting interviews (talking heads) with a few simple light boxes. Is there one of the CineGamma or profile that would be recommended for interview-like studio shooting?
 
For me, low light or artificial indoor lighting I like Cinegamma 1. For outdoors or lots of highlights, Cine 4. Cine 1 has better shadow detail while Cine 4 has better highlights
 
I am using softboxes of fluorescent bulbs, if that makes any daylight, and they are daylight-style, so I am using the OUTDOORS setting on the FS700.
 
Michael Erlewine said:
I am using softboxes of fluorescent bulbs, if that makes any daylight, and they are daylight-style, so I am using the OUTDOORS setting on the FS700.
Click to expand...

Flo Bulbs are much less powerful than actual daylight. I just shot a series of spots for HGTV. When we shot in the kitchen which had gigantic windows in bright daylight, I used Cinegamma 4. For most of the other indoor scenes, including those artificially lit, I used Cinegamma 1. Cinegamma 1 has the Dynamic Range skewed towards the shadows while Cine 4 has it skewed towards the highlights.

Maybe do some tests before hand and see what you like.
 
Hi Gene, love your work, curious to know why don't you use the S-log II? Indoors (mostly practical lighting) with my kit lens I find S-log to be a challenge sometimes but outdoors it's amazing. Controlled studio lighting I imagine would be good for S-Log too. Thanks for your insight.

Anthony
 
Marino215 said:
Hi Gene, love your work, curious to know why don't you use the S-log II? Indoors (mostly practical lighting) with my kit lens I find S-log to be a challenge sometimes but outdoors it's amazing. Controlled studio lighting I imagine would be good for S-Log too. Thanks for your insight.

Anthony
Click to expand...

Hi Marino, I am going to use S-Log 2 for pretty much all projects once the 7Q recorder comes out. Right now, the studio I work for the most tends to put a lot of graphics and do more heavy grading; so S-Log 8-bit is a bit risky since it might not hold up to the grade. For my personal stuff, I mainly use S-Log, but for Pro jobs I have to be a bit safer / conservative so it's Cinegammas until I have the 7Q.

Also, for the HGTV job, we had to deliver the footage to the client and I think they might freak out seeing how flat S-Log 2 is. So Cinegammas are a bit more graded which would make it easier for them.

But I LOVE S-Log. The extra 1 ++ stops of highlights and the skin tones are insane! I love the look of it.

From all my pixel peeping tests, S-Log 2 works really well in controlled lighting situations. It seems to thrive in good light. I noticed if I shoot it mid-day, the color green seems kind of off, but I probably just have to learn how to use it better.
 
Last edited:
I shoot everything with picture profile off... Maybe I should try some of these presets, does it really change that much?
 
Thanks for the reply, I feel the same way once the Q7 hits. You totally make sense, very smart. It's a great camera, I just tried out using for the first time "auto mode"...ha, shooting a doc soon just trying it out and I must say it performed well. I'd never use it professionally however it works! I'll post the stress test later today. Thanks
 
dapoopta said:
I do a lot of work in post, isn't that what the profiles are doing? Adding adjustments as they record?
Click to expand...

No, the profiles such as Cinegammas give you a lot more to work with in post because the image tends to be flatter and have more dynamic range. S-Log 2 is my favorite FS700 profile, but it won't really shine until the 7Q comes out in 10-bit.

Read this article on FS700 profiles. I learned a lot from it.

http://provideocoalition.com/aadams/story/cameras_sony_fs700_dynamic_range_presentation/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top