Other: FX9 demo footage and testing

And ideally there should be a specific Log curve for each camera tailor made for its sensor?

As long as the recieving 'bucket' is big enough to take all the chip can deliver .. not so.

Specific LUT yes. As there is.

As for ETTR, well this image commented by me but issued by sony would suggest to me that it is best for both. Shades of grey per stop is good. Use em!

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=125451&d=1500998001
 
Last edited:
I think I’m just gonna go back to exposing by eye like I’m doing now with the FS700/Odyssey7Q, this theory is making my brain hurt! ;)
 
dmitrizigany said:
I think I’m just gonna go back to exposing by eye like I’m doing now with the FS700/Odyssey7Q, this theory is making my brain hurt! ;)
Click to expand...

Set Zebra 2 for 75% and allow just a touch of zebra in bright reflected whites. Nails it perfectly in all but the most unusual situations. Accurate and, just as important, consistency in a couple of seconds. Done.
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
Now Im going above my paygrade here because I dont really know how sensors a/d conversion works.

BUt let us say that the 7 can pump out 1v when the pixel is fully driven (white clip) now say the venics clips at 1.5 volt

When wrinting the A/D conversion algorythm you make 1v to be a digital value or 92 and 1.5v to be a digital value of 110 then they can both be put in the same sandbox while still running on the same mapping algorythm. (slog being an algorythm) ???

edit
Here we can see that Slog3 actually goes to 100%.. it is the FS (and 9?) that do not. It has space for more DR that those cameras can capture or sony chose to write.
Click to expand...

Yes, 100% correct!

Now, Sony increase DR from 14 to 15, but the extra stop is below middle gray, instead of 8 stops below now 9, same 6 above. No change to the S-Log/3 curve, still 92%. This is the trend with other cameras too.

IMATEST computes DR to a fixed SNR, thus improve in-cam SNR with temporal NR; DR is improved. But look at the number of data points at -9 stops. It's going to be really hard to see that improvement because display luminance is so low at -9; OLED, dark viewing environment etc. needed. HDR display tech targets the other end, 1000, 2000 even 4000 nits peak brightness.) Fair to ask if there is a visible benefit to -9 stops? My opinion there is but it's from cleaner, lower noise.
 
Tom Roper said:
Fair to ask if there is a visible benefit to -9 stops? My opinion there is but it's from cleaner, lower noise.
Click to expand...

I dont really buy 'middle grey' - I buy the data points per stop and ETTR.

You will see in this http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=125451&d=1500998001 that, using my comments, 'zone of banding hell' I assume the footage drops to 'ungradable' below about 50 data levels per stop (a pure guess based on 20 years of being digital)

Now of course cleaner shadows therefore buys a DR because more stops escape 'the zone of banking hell' dividend but only if one changes ones exposure methodology.

And back to the bathroom lights (!) :) one could guess that the new shadow dividend may imply that 'letting the highlights handle themselves' may be a poor methodology and a better result could have been to shoot a couple of stops darker and use a LUT/grade that has bright shadows, at this point one may see an ability of the FX9 to do things that the FS7 cannot. Im sure given the large sensor that is the case.
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
And back to the bathroom lights (!) :) one could guess that the new shadow dividend may imply that 'letting the highlights handle themselves' may be a poor methodology and a better result could have been to shoot a couple of stops darker and use a LUT/grade that has bright shadows, at this point one may see an ability of the FX9 to do things that the FS7 cannot. Im sure given the large sensor that is the case.
Click to expand...

My expectation from 15 stops DR would have been that you could expose as Doug had, while still getting protected highlights.
 
dmitrizigany said:
That was my expectation also. But it seems that because of no SLog2 the opposite is true?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't go that far, SLog2/3 both still have the same 6 stops above middle gray. SLog2 has more data points above +3. The difference in what you see is small, could be visible or not just depending on the nature of the detail in the hi-key.

The FX9 still has all the image quality of the FS7 and a little more, cleaner, just not anything you could point to in the highlights particularly. And that's before you consider the S-Cinetone color. But the best, most complete assessment by far, is what Doug said, and I agree with all of it 100%.
 
Tom Roper said:
But the best, most complete assessment by far, is what Doug said, and I agree with all of it 100%.
Click to expand...

Just to add, I wasn't going to comment because I don't want my comments at all sounding like a critique of Doug's exposure. I only did because he was welcoming of review. Were it not for the clarity of his exposure methods, it wouldn't have been possible to deduce anything. When it comes to exposure, no one does it better than Doug. Look at his videos. Although most are things like wildlife and aviation, the very best in skin tone reproduction, he'll wish I didn't say, comes straight from the tonality of his own video series, How to Make Money Shooting Stock Footage. He gets it perfect.
 
Regarding the highlights... this may all be part of a new approach Sony is using. I've been shooting with the A7RIV lately, and notice that I absolutely have to protect the highlights. BUT, even with the "no-PP" PP, I can expose to not blow highlights and the shadows will often lift out of obscurity in post without obnoxious noise.
 
semi-non-sequitur Q for Doug or anyone else that would know...

...is there any "standard" way, or at least a way you're established, for testing out new cameras? I'm wanting to get a solid sense of what I can do with my aforementioned A7RIV and convey it to others, but tend to be kind of slipshod putting this info together as I flit from project to project during any given day. I see your results for the FX9, and hey, if you can help me in any way "reverse engineer" your process, it'd of course be helpful (and might help me put out more useful info and samples)

Hey, new product idea! Vortex Media presents "Testing Your New Camera Like You Aren't A Total Muppet, Vol. 1"
 
Tom Roper said:
Just to add, I wasn't going to comment because I don't want my comments at all sounding like a critique of Doug's exposure. I only did because he was welcoming of review. Were it not for the clarity of his exposure methods, it wouldn't have been possible to deduce anything. When it comes to exposure, no one does it better than Doug. Look at his videos. Although most are things like wildlife and aviation, the very best in skin tone reproduction, he'll wish I didn't say, comes straight from the tonality of his own video series, How to Make Money Shooting Stock Footage. He gets it perfect.
Click to expand...

Wow, thanks for the nice comments Tom. Very nice of you to say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top