Fuji X-T3 released

Yeah one of the downsides of the camera is its lacking in glass compared to other options. The glass options are really good, but there aren't as many options as if you used an M43 camera or Canon or Nikon or probably even Sony.
 
NorBro said:
You only asked about the ARRI LUT so I didn't elaborate.

In short and IMO, there isn't one specific way to do something. I wouldn't grade a cooking show the same way I would grade a feature.

---



What's counterintuitive is actually that thought-process (no offense).

Because then you're basically trusting other individuals' brains to make a choice for you based on their own decision-making.

In other words, why is one normalization method for a certain camera technically correct?

If it's a determination of what colors should look like based on some worldwide system then why do we have 10+ different color sciences from all of these companies? Like literally, why can't anyone have the exact same red, green, blue, etc.

Finally, why do we sometimes have multiple generations of color sciences for one camera over the years? For example, the newest firmware update for camera A with 'generation 4' color science is now suddenly correct and 'generation 1' wasn't?

---

It's all relative. To me, experimenting with different LUTs is no different than what engineers are doing before, during and after a camera is complete.
Click to expand...

I do a lot of grading for a living and I view LUT’s as ccasionally helpful shortcuts. However more often than not it takes just as much time to correct from a LUT than from the original LOG image because I frequently have to compensate for the distortions that the LUT creates. Occasionally too a LUT can be too destructive as well pulling the values apart in ways that you actually throw out too much information. The most helpful tool for me are not LUT’s but rather my scopes. An RGB parade to be more specific.
 
Once you have a set workflow for a certain camera it's just like any other grading.

I have even been baking-in LUTs into the image with some cameras using Atomos products for a few years now, so those pictures would be ready to go immediately. Just really have to know your own camera and preferred workflow.

But I do agree...throwing around and mixing random LUTs on something without really knowing what you're doing can and will in many cases destroy the footage and take up way too much time for the process to be helpful.

Personally, I have a "database" - it's really just a FCPX timeline with a bunch of different footage and some notes - that shows stacks of LUTs at different percentages for cameras in certain conditions. (They are like my nodes, ha.)

So if I copy and paste those settings from a C200 clip (or something else) on some new C200 footage in similar conditions, I'll immediately get in the range I'm looking for. But if I use that combination from the C200 clip on something else like an EVA1, it may look crazy. But then again it may not on a Blackmagic.
 
yoclay said:
The most helpful tool for me are not LUT’s but rather my scopes.
Click to expand...

+1.

I get the initial appeal of LUT heavy workflows because they make it possible to obtain excellent looking footage that exceeds someone's current level of talent and manual abilities. Hard to begrudge someone for doing that.

But at the end of the day relying on LUTs is basically like using training wheels on a little kids' bike. Yeah, you'll go forward and you won't fall down, but you're also severely limiting yourself. Eventually most kids get over their fear of falling and take them off so they can ride a real bike, and they go much farther and faster.

For whatever reason seems like a lot of people are afraid to make that leap today. Part of it may be that, as far as technical concepts go, color is probably the single most complex/confusing/shifting field of anything in the digital media ecosystem. And sitting down to learn something challenging is a lot less gratifying than slapping a LUT on and calling it good enough.
 
F-log records in a very wide gamut, BT.2020, when grading for a smaller gamut like BT.709, a gamut mapping is required, either through a 3D LUT, or ACES or other colour management tools. You cannot map a gamut by manual grading using just scopes.
 
marvinhello said:
F-log records in a very wide gamut, BT.2020, when grading for a smaller gamut like BT.709, a gamut mapping is required, either through a 3D LUT, or ACES or other colour management tools. You cannot map a gamut by manual grading using just scopes.
Click to expand...


Gamut remapping LUT's (otherwise known as Utility LUT's) are not the same as de-logging LUT's.
 
Back to Fujifilm X-T3, for those of you operating it on a gimbal, are you using an external microphone? If so, which one? I have a shoot next week with a talent who will be walking around at a party
and I just want to caoture some decent quality ambient, chatting, nothing in detail or straight to camera. I may or may not have an opportunity to put my Tascam DR-10L on talent but would like to
use an on-gimbal mic to get any decent conversation from about 2-3' away. All of my mics are pro XLR type mics that require 48V Phantom, I don't own any 3.5mm output mics.

Røde Video Mic Pro? Reviews say the battery door is really bad and of course, 9V batteries kind of suck. Pro Plus? I don't really want to spend so much on what will just be an ambient mic. I have the Røde VideoMicro but I don't think it will work with the X-T3 as the camera doesn't supply that
little 3V kick this mic needs?
 
puredrifting said:
Back to Fujifilm X-T3, for those of you operating it on a gimbal, are you using an external microphone? If so, which one? I have a shoot next week with a talent who will be walking around at a party
and I just want to caoture some decent quality ambient, chatting, nothing in detail or straight to camera. I may or may not have an opportunity to put my Tascam DR-10L on talent but would like to
use an on-gimbal mic to get any decent conversation from about 2-3' away. All of my mics are pro XLR type mics that require 48V Phantom, I don't own any 3.5mm output mics.

Røde Video Mic Pro? Reviews say the battery door is really bad and of course, 9V batteries kind of suck. Pro Plus? I don't really want to spend so much on what will just be an ambient mic. I have the Røde VideoMicro but I don't think it will work with the X-T3 as the camera doesn't supply that
little 3V kick this mic needs?
Click to expand...

Try the takstar sgc-598. Uses AA battery, has a +10db boost and is absurdly cheap. You'll be surprised by it. I shot my feature with it and barely had to EQ it. For ambient audio it should be more than good enough.
 
Batutta said:
Try the takstar sgc-598. Uses AA battery, has a +10db boost and is absurdly cheap. You'll be surprised by it. I shot my feature with it and barely had to EQ it. For ambient audio it should be more than good enough.
Click to expand...

Try as I might, I would have a hard time using a $29.00 microphone for ambient. Just for scratch yes, but I may actually use the audio.
Thanks for the suggestion but I feel like it needs something at least a little better.
 
puredrifting said:
Matt:

Can't figure out, does the X-T3 supply any power to this mic like 3V or so to power it? In the manual it says the X-T3 supplies zero voltage through it's mic input?
Click to expand...

I don't want this to sound rude, but you can always go to YouTube for 99% of the world's answers, haha:

Random video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJxRRIIAKBU (w/ Rode VideoMicro)

It would be very strange if the camera didn't provide plug-in power as all of the other models do (or many of them).
 
That $30 microphone is enough for 99% in the industry...sounds great and no one would notice a difference between the $30 and a $3000.
 
Has anyone had a chance yet to properly test the latitude of the camera in FLOG yet?

Would be great to know how much overexposure and underexposure headroom there is, above and below middle grey.

Speaking of which, have Fuji stated where middle grey (18%) sits on the FLOG curve? It’s rather important to know where it’s supposed to sit on a waveform.
 
Grug said:
Has anyone had a chance yet to properly test the latitude of the camera in FLOG yet?

Would be great to know how much overexposure and underexposure headroom there is, above and below middle grey.

Speaking of which, have Fuji stated where middle grey (18%) sits on the FLOG curve? It’s rather important to know where it’s supposed to sit on a waveform.
Click to expand...

That's very important. Curious about this too. Also are there any in-camera tools to be able to read it (not just on an external waveform/monitor) ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top