fx3 S-Cinetone Widescreen Example and a 12,800 ISO Example at Night (Slog3)

Nice shots.

It's such a shame this camera doesn't have ND filters.

Exactly 10 years ago, 2011, I was in the same place filming test footage on the Sony FS100. Time flies.

[I also lost all of my moxie for randomly filming people like that in my early 30s, ha.]
 
If the daylight stuff is SOOC and S-Cinetone... well personally I just see too much detail lost in the shadows. I like the colors, but to me, the images are just somewhat crushed in the blacks. Pause and look at anything that is black or into the deep shadows. Virtually no details. I downloaded the clip, not the best image obviously but in Resolve I just see so much more detail in the darker areas of the images if I just lift the shadow exposure by .4 to .5 using Resolve's "Shadow" wheel under the HDR wheels. That's also an observation I had with the ExtraShot clip with Paul's pseudo-S-Cinetone match with the FX9. The blacks were pretty heavy. Nice all the same!

EDIT: That's on a 709 calibrated monitor. On a normal PC screen it looks better but seeing that S-Cinetone is a further development of 709 for SOOC use that's where I would expect it to look best, on a 709 display.

Chris Young
 
Last edited:
cyvideo said:
If the daylight stuff is SOOC and S-Cinetone... well personally I just see too much detail lost in the shadows. I like the colors, but to me, the images are just somewhat crushed in the blacks. Pause and look at anything that is black or into the deep shadows. Virtually no details. I downloaded the clip, not the best image obviously but in Resolve I just see so much more detail in the darker areas of the images if I just lift the shadow exposure by .4 to .5 using Resolve's "Shadow" wheel under the HDR wheels. That's also an observation I had with the ExtraShot clip with Paul's pseudo-S-Cinetone match with the FX9. The blacks were pretty heavy. Nice all the same!

EDIT: That's on a 709 calibrated monitor. On a normal PC screen it looks better but seeing that S-Cinetone is a further development of 709 for SOOC use that's where I would expect it to look best, on a 709 display.

Chris Young
Click to expand...

I can't agree completely. On many levels, yes I do agree. If you are able to reveal finer details such as noise or grain-like by lifting the shadows with Resolve, that's an indication some detail actually is present. But if you are just able to reveal a level or two of buried gray shades that otherwise are lacking of fine grain or noise, I don't really consider that as recovering detail, but rather more like recovering low S/N DR. In other words finer details of noise and grain are smudged away by strong NR while not wiping away gray shades, if that makes sense.

I think the image is highly presentable as is. The fundamental question is more about preference; Is it better to present a clinical, noise-free image lacking in the finer shadow details than to reveal organic noise and grain? Which is more objectionable? Personally, I think you want to split the difference, keeping a bit to enhance or reveal those finer shadow details, but no one likes an image swarming with mosquito noise. This is one reason why I like raw; you preserve the noise inherent to the recording while maintaining control over NR in post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top