FS7: Custom LUT usefulness

[Doug Jensen]

Not really because there is not much to say. I only talk about the MLUT choices for a few minutes in my video series because they are just a personal choice and have no direct bearing on the the actual S-LOG being recorded. As has been discussed on this thread, MLUTs are useful for putting on a client monitor so people can see an image that is more polished (I do that frequently). And some people like having an MLUT in their viewfinder (I never do). But it's just a matter of personal preference whether you want to use them or not. And even if you do want to use them there are really only two built-in MLUTs that get used 99% of time -- so there is not much to be said about them that people can't see with their own eyes. But with that said, I do cover how to set them up and the pros and cons of using them.

 

[Alpha Beta Omega]

Doug you really shoot a lot of nice looking footage! I've also started with putting out my footage as Stock footage and already some dollars have dropped in. Your FS7 footage also reveals how strong it is in comparison with other cameras fresh on the market or that are due this year... consider it's and 2014 camera that still rocks like nothing else.

I find MLUTs to give my clients a good view of what things will look like and they appreciate when I provide them with the same LUT for them to apply in post.

 

[LennyLevy]

Lovely shots of Cape Cod Doug.
Shooting Stock footage is an very intriguing idea and seems like it could almost become kind of meditation looking for beautiful images. I always assumed you needed to go to exotic places and have kind of "travelogue" footage for that but perhaps I've been mistaken.

How does one find out what kind of footage sells and how much do you make off a typical sale?
Do you sell the graded shot or the Slog original or both?


Lenny

 

[balazer]

No matter which MLUT someone chooses to view (if any at all) the correct exposure for the underlying S-LOG video being reocorded is exactly the same.

I wholeheartedly disagree with this. The correct exposure is not just a function of the scene. It's a function of what you plan to do with the image in post. If you are shooting for delivery in HDR, for example, you will know you need a certain amount of highlight range. Or maybe you know you're going to apply a certain amount of compression to the highlights. Bottom line, the right exposure depends on the scene and on what you plan to do with the image. An MLUT can help you approximate what you're planning on doing in post, so you can get the right exposure in the camera.

I don't understand why viewing any MLUT would be useful for determining the proper exposure?

Rendering the image with normal contrast in the monitor can be a good enough way to set exposure, without needing a light meter, grey card, histogram, or zebras. In run-and-gun situations I would barely have time for any of those exposure tools, and eyeballing exposure in the monitor is enough to set the exposure. Keep in mind these days it's not hard to linearize a log signal in post and apply perfect exposure compensation.

 

[Liam Hall]

Rendering the image with normal contrast in the monitor can be a good enough way to set exposure, without needing a light meter, grey card, histogram, or zebras. In run-and-gun situations I would barely have time for any of those exposure tools, and eyeballing exposure in the monitor is enough to set the exposure. Keep in mind these days it's not hard to linearize a log signal in post and apply perfect exposure compensation.

I can't agree with this. There are so many things that can go wrong judging exposure from a monitor in a run and gun situation; it is easy to knock the brightness dial on the monitor for example, and you could be exposing a stop or two in the wrong direction, the loupe can steam up easily making it hard to judge the image, your LUT can have too much contrast and lead to a false impression of highlights and shadows. For me, you really need several methods to judge exposure and get used to employing them quickly. Personally, I find a combination of zebras and WFM to be the fastest and most consistently accurate. Takes less than a second.

 

[balazer]

Well it's always worked for me. I run with nothing more than an MLUT and sometimes zebras, and I'm always able to get the exposure within one stop of the correct exposure. I have a couple of stops of exposure latitude, so that's good enough. I have enough to worry about with framing, zooming, and following a moving subject to be riding the exposure perfectly. To give any more attention to the exposure would take away attention from the other things.

To shoot this way you really want to have a proper method of exposure compensation in post, and to have measured your exposure latitude. Do you have both of those?

I don't understand your comment about the monitor brightness. If the brightness gets knocked down, I don't look at the display and think the exposure is too low. I look at that and think the display brightness is too low. I'm not quite sure how I'm able to tell the difference, but I can, to some degree.

 

[Donny 123]

I cant see how its possible to work without an MLUT in the EVF.. I dont think that log of any kind is designed to be "viewed" as it is.. .. how can you tell your lighting, contrast, or even focus for that matter.. there is a big difference between doc shooting and say a commercial in a studio thats for sure.. exposure is where you choose to put it.. I dont see how you can judge that looking at a log image in your EVF running around shooting a doc.. or your lighting in a studio with a cup of tea in your hand sitting in a chair.. each to their own.. but really how do you work off an Slog image .. ? and why would you ever want to..?

As Ben says.. if you know the levels of your MLUT.. you can of course 100% set your exposure off any MLUT.. and ofcourse judge by eye.. when we shot film docs you did that all the time.. you knew the look in the eye piece for the stock..you didnt pull out a light meter even 10 seconds.. one reading and off you went.. anyone who has shot alot of REC709 can do this without even having to think about it.. no..?

 

[icarusfilm]

I use the LUT in my gratical EVF I can toggle it on and of with one click. Sometimes I want to have contrast for critical focus sometimes I want to look into the highlights and shadows. for exposure I pretty much set based on the Waveform monitor in the EVF.

 

[Donny 123]

You have the WF on all the time in the EVF.. ? sure I will sometimes quickly throw on zebras or WF.. or the Hi/Lo I have all on assign .. but as balazer says .. on a doc my concentration is all on the frame and focus and thinking about whats going on action wise.. if I have to change the exposure I do it totally by eye with a REC709 MLUT.. if I bring up any of the tools.. even a second .. and the second to read them.. get back to the action.. thats 3 seconds at least .. I could have missed the shot.. whats more important .. 1 stop here or there means nothing.

 

[icarusfilm]

Well the Waveform is always on but in the Zacuto Graticle its not in the shot its outside of it on black its the Zacuto generated WFW not the FS7.
And yes when things get fast I judge by eyeing the rec709 LUT just glancing at the WFM shows me if the highlights are safe. I really hate zebras.

You have the WF on all the time in the EVF.. ? sure I will sometimes quickly throw on zebras or WF.. or the Hi/Lo I have all on assign .. but as balazer says .. on a doc my concentration is all on the frame and focus and thinking about whats going on action wise.. if I have to change the exposure I do it totally by eye with a REC709 MLUT.. if I bring up any of the tools.. even a second .. and the second to read them.. get back to the action.. thats 3 seconds at least .. I could have missed the shot.. whats more important .. 1 stop here or there means nothing.

 

[LennyLevy]

you really need several methods to judge exposure and get used to employing them quickly.

We all have our methods and they're all good if they work for us. I agree that checking the waveform especially for white levels or grey levels on a doc is way too time consuming so I go by a combination of zebras ( I like 60% with caucasians keeping in mind that flesh tones differ) and the general look of the shot. However when I get a chance I'll check the waveform and both zebras and waveform are a good check for whether or not the EVF or monitors are set right. Usually if they're not something feels "off", but its important to be careful especially if its not your camera or someone else has used it since last time. Even my own monitor could be off if i used it outdoors previously since that usually means pumping up the contrast. You can get way off of the monitor is misadjusted.

Generally i use an MLUT made in LUTcalc with the Varicam gamma because its punchier, I've also used Alistair Chapman's method which is to use the 709(800) MLUT and check HI/LO often to see your real exposure range. That's the closest to just winging it by looking at the EVF.

 

[Liam Hall]

Well it's always worked for me. I run with nothing more than an MLUT and sometimes zebras, and I'm always able to get the exposure within one stop of the correct exposure. I have a couple of stops of exposure latitude, so that's good enough. I have enough to worry about with framing, zooming, and following a moving subject to be riding the exposure perfectly. To give any more attention to the exposure would take away attention from the other things.

That's fine if it works for you. No problem. But, for me, and not wanting to sound like a tool, I need accurate exposure, not ballpark. Using WFM/zebras I can set exposure in under second and get it bang on most of the time.

To shoot this way you really want to have a proper method of exposure compensation in post, and to have measured your exposure latitude. Do you have both of those?

Mostly, I supply a custom LUT to the client, they simply need to drag and drop. Job done. Simple, repeatable, fast and idiot proof.

I don't understand your comment about the monitor brightness. If the brightness gets knocked down, I don't look at the display and think the exposure is too low. I look at that and think the display brightness is too low. I'm not quite sure how I'm able to tell the difference, but I can, to some degree.

If your display brightness is low you might be fooled into increasing exposure if you aren't using WFM, histogram or another method to confirm exposure.

I cant see how its possible to work without an MLUT in the EVF..

No one said not to use an mLUT. Use it. Just don't rely on it for exposure. Particularly if using a contrasty mLUT like the inbuilt 709 one in the FS7. Correct me if I'm wrong Donny, but you have an F5, not an FS7? There are differences. For a start, your EVF is way better.

there is a big difference between doc shooting and say a commercial in a studio thats for sure..

Donny, I got back yesterday from the Niger Delta. I mention this for a number of reasons, firstly, that region is extremely violent and as foreigners with expensive gear, we were a target for the bad guys. Each day we went to work with a platoon of armed soldiers. To say, "speed was of the essence" would be an understatement. Secondly, it was hot and humid, the EVF would mist up and I couldn't rely on it for accuracy. Thirdly, many shots were extremely bright and contrasty, using a 709 LUT would have given a false impression of the scene and forced me to change shots that were fine. Using a contrasty LUT could also have led to clipped highlights as I was dealing with an almighty amount of dynamic range. Finally, I was skipping between normal speed and high frame rate. LUTs don't work in HFR, so I would have to use another method in this situation anyway. Being able to monitor the underlying Slog while using a low-con mLUT meant I could be confident in my exposure.

I dont see how you can judge that looking at a log image in your EVF running around shooting a doc.. or your lighting in a studio with a cup of tea in your hand sitting in a chair.. each to their own.. but really how do you work off an Slog image .. ? and why would you ever want to..?

See above. Lol.

As Ben says.. if you know the levels of your MLUT.. you can of course 100% set your exposure off any MLUT.. and ofcourse judge by eye.. when we shot film docs you did that all the time..

When we shot film we had colour timers at the lab and editors and telecine ops who knew how to grade. I worked with many DoPs who's base exposure was all over the place, but film has latitude, and we all knew what we were doing, so it wasn't a big deal.

if I have to change the exposure I do it totally by eye with a REC709 MLUT.. if I bring up any of the tools.. even a second .. and the second to read them.. get back to the action.. thats 3 seconds at least .. I could have missed the shot.. whats more important .. 1 stop here or there means nothing.

Everyone will have a situation where they absolutely can't take their focus of the action for a millisecond, but that's not to say people shouldn't learn and embrace a more accurate method of setting exposure. In controlled situations I use an external monitor with a range of tools built in, when running about like a headless chicken I use WFM/zebras, but only for a second, as soon as I'm rolling they are banished from the screen.

 

[Liam Hall]

We all have our methods and they're all good if they work for us.

I agree 100%. Always good to talk and share our methods

 

[LennyLevy]

Liam , I'm interested in but confused by what you said about how you set exposure when shooting doc style in Africa where it was very contrasty and you had to shoot high speed without an MLUT. What was your exposure technique and what EI & version of Slog did you favor for that kind of work?

 

[Liam Hall]

I shot CineEI ISO1250. I used the LC709TypeA mLUT for normal speed shooting with the WFM showing the underlying Slog. I would also flick zebras on and off to confirm where 90% white reflectance was falling within the image. It might sound complicated, but really it is very simple, and quick, in practice. When I switched to HFR I would just keep the WFM looking the same as in the normal speed shot. Again, keep it simple!

The reason I don't like the 709 mLUT is because too much of the image will be either burnt out or crushed so giving a false impression. I know some people like using the hi/lo button, not me though!

 

[Doug Jensen]

I really hate zebras.

Whenever I hear someone say that they hate zebras it is an instant red flag that they don't understand how to use zebras. As I have said countless times, zebras are the only thing I need for exposure and they should barely even be seen in the viewfinder -- so what is there to hate about them? If you hate zebras, you're not using them right. I've seen it many times with people at the workshops I teach and not once has any of those zebra haters not done a complete 180 during the class. I don't need an MLUT (alhtough I have nothing against them for people who do want to look at a prettier picture). I don't need a WFM. And I certainly don't need a histogram. Zebra, that's all that is needed for exposure on a modern, electronic, video camera. Zebras are simple, fast, and almost fool proof. In fact, it is faster than exposing by eyeball because I don't have go wth my gut feeling, or second-guess by decision, or even think about it all. With zebras I can nail the exposure in a split second without even thinking about it. I don't usually give any more thought to setting exposure than I would do to tying my shoes or shifting gears in my car. It's just automatic. It's not even something I think about.

Plus, with zebras I can use the same method with any camera I'm shooting with, and zebras are always available in every shooting mode. Zebra and Peaking are turned on 100% of the time in my viewfinders and I wouldn't turn them off for a second. There's no wasted time flipping things on and off -- yeah if you're doing that, then you probably will miss a shot. And yes, I can frame a shot, focus, and expose in a run and gun situation as fast as anyone else and keep up with any breaking new or sports action (never been to a war zone) that is thrown at me. What's the big deal? Uh, that's called doing our job. That's what people pay us to do. They don't pay us to focus and frame but skip exposure with an exceuse that there wasn't time. You're fired! For the first 30 years of my career we had to nail the exposure right on the money because we didn't have the benefit of S-LOG that now allows the folks in post to make up for sloppy exposing in the field. Sloppy exposing would be a personal embrassement and you wouldn't be hired again.

I always wonder if people who say they can expose just by how the picture feels in the viewfinder also ignore the bubble on their tripod head, the audio meters (I don't know what happend, it sounded great in my headphones??!!), the speedometer in their car, and the artificial horizon on their airplane. Instruments? They don't need no stinking instruments. Just one eyeball is all those folks need, and it's built right into their face for convenience. Apparently, ambient light levels, fogging, changing lighting conditions, the poor picture quality of a tiny 1" viewfinder, don't faze them a bit. It must be nice to be so good at guessing the exposure that someone can throw away all the light meters, waveform monitors, scopes, zebras, and everything else that other professionals have had to rely on for decades. I am impressed with that level of skill. But I also feel a little sorry for the folks in post.

 

[Donny 123]

Well the Waveform is always on but in the Zacuto Graticle its not in the shot its outside of it on black its the Zacuto generated WFW not the FS7.
And yes when things get fast I judge by eyeing the rec709 LUT just glancing at the WFM shows me if the highlights are safe. I really hate zebras.

Ah right ok I get it.. yes I have a Zacuto Eye I sometimes use.. the WFM is not in the frame.. yes agree the zebras.. I will toggle them before a lit interview but never have them on during regular shooting..

Yes I know how to use them.. I just dont like that pattern in my VF.. personal taste only

 

[Donny 123]

That's fine if it works for you. No problem. But, for me, and not wanting to sound like a tool, I need accurate exposure, not ballpark. Using WFM/zebras I can set exposure in under second and get it bang on most of the time.





If your display brightness is low you might be fooled into increasing exposure if you aren't using WFM, histogram or another method to confirm exposure.



No one said not to use an mLUT. Use it. Just don't rely on it for exposure. Particularly if using a contrasty mLUT like the inbuilt 709 one in the FS7. Correct me if I'm wrong Donny, but you have an F5, not an FS7? There are differences. For a start, your EVF is way better.




Donny, I got back yesterday from the Niger Delta. I mention this for a number of reasons, firstly, that region is extremely violent and as foreigners with expensive gear, we were a target for the bad guys. Each day we went to work with a platoon of armed soldiers. To say, "speed was of the essence" would be an understatement. Secondly, it was hot and humid, the EVF would mist up and I couldn't rely on it for accuracy. Thirdly, many shots were extremely bright and contrasty, using a 709 LUT would have given a false impression of the scene and forced me to change shots that were fine. Using a contrasty LUT could also have led to clipped highlights as I was dealing with an almighty amount of dynamic range. Finally, I was skipping between normal speed and high frame rate. LUTs don't work in HFR, so I would have to use another method in this situation anyway. Being able to monitor the underlying Slog while using a low-con mLUT meant I could be confident in my exposure.




See above. Lol.




When we shot film we had colour timers at the lab and editors and telecine ops who knew how to grade. I worked with many DoPs who's base exposure was all over the place, but film has latitude, and we all knew what we were doing, so it wasn't a big deal.




Everyone will have a situation where they absolutely can't take their focus of the action for a millisecond, but that's not to say people shouldn't learn and embrace a more accurate method of setting exposure. In controlled situations I use an external monitor with a range of tools built in, when running about like a headless chicken I use WFM/zebras, but only for a second, as soon as I'm rolling they are banished from the screen.

Yes sure everyone has their way.. but I see you do use an actual MLUT..(LC709A).. thats more my point.. I really dont see how anyone can work off the Slog image alone.. hats off to them.. but how could you ever tell your lighting off that image.. its not really ever meant to be seen when you shoot..

 

[Doug Jensen]

How does one find out what kind of footage sells and how much do you make off a typical sale?
Do you sell the graded shot or the Slog original or both?

It is hard to predict what shots will sell and which shots won't. Most of of clips will never sell. Even clips that you know are excellent will never sell. The way the search engines work at the popular stock footage houses is that they give priority to clips that already sold. And the more a clip sells, the more it is shown in search results, so it becomes a snowball effect. I love it when a new shot sells the first time because I know the odds just went up 10x that it will sell again. Check out a book called the "Stock Footage Millionaire" for some advice. I don't agree with everything he says, but there's some good stuff in there.

I only sell graded footage. I don't know any stock footage house that sells ungraded clips.

30-35% is the typical commission on sales. That sounds low, but that's what it is. You either accept it or go do something else with your time. Personally, I think it is well worth my time. The drudgery part is doing the desciptions and keywords. I really hate that part, but it has to be done and is the key to getting your footage seen by customers -- then hopefully the snowball will start rolling down the hill.

 

[Doug Jensen]

Yes I know how to use them.. I just dont like that pattern in my VF.. personal taste only

No you don't. If you are seeing the pattern in your viewfinder during an interview then clearly you do NOT know how to use them. You think you do, but you don't, or you wouldn't have posted this comment.