FS7: How do you polish s-log3 in Resolve?

Dennis is right. I know about the "sharpen" feature.

What im really after is the old saying that goes: A sharp image, is not always about sharpness.

So how do you guys create sharp images without using the sharpness slider?
 
Yes shooting "wide open" definitely won't give you the best images in most if not all cases. Test your specific lens. They are not all built equally.
 
4. Shoot wide open

Sorry guys, I have to disagree. Almost all my shooting (especially outdoors wildlife, which is what I am grading today) is shot fully wide open. Same thing for interviews -- wide open for maximum shallow DoF. If I'm not going to shoot wide open, I might as well just use a 2/3" camera.

If your focus is spot-on, I argue that the subject in a narrow DoF shot actually looks sharper because it is surrounded by out of focus bokeh. In some cases, the more of the scene that is in focus, the less sharp the overal shot looks. Counterintuitive.

Also, I beleive the camera does a better job of compression when there is less detail throughout the image. Only the subject needs to be in sharp focus and the rest can be soft.

I've posted this video before and people are probably saying "oh no, there it is again", but it was shot entirely wide open at f/2.8. How do I know for sure? Because I used a dumb adapter that has no iris contol on the FS7. Every shot was f/2.8.

 
Last edited:
Okay, I'll accept that challenge. Today's zoom lenses are not the zoom lenses of yesteryear.
This video was shot entirely wide open when I first got my Canon 200-400 zoom to test how it looked.
Every shot is either f/4 or f/5.6 depending on whether the internal 2x extender was engaged or not.
No sharpening in post.

 
starcentral said:
Like I said it depends on the lens. Try it on a zoom and see what happens.
Click to expand...

I hope I didn't come across as disagreeing with this. Yes, you are correct that the lens really matters. But I don't think all zooms should be painted with the same brush. There are a lot of bad zooms and primes out there!
 
Doug Jensen said:
4. Shoot wide open

Sorry guys, I have to disagree. Almost all my shooting (especially outdoors wildlife, which is what I am grading today) is shot fully wide open. Same thing for interviews -- wide open for maximum shallow DoF. If I'm not going to shoot wide open, I might as well just use a 2/3" camera.

If your focus is spot-on, I argue that the subject in a narrow DoF shot actually looks sharper because it is surrounded by out of focus bokeh. In some cases, the more of the scene that is in focus, the less sharp the overal shot looks. Counterintuitive.

Also, I beleive the camera does a better job of compression when there is less detail throughout the image. Only the subject needs to be in sharp focus and the rest can be soft.

I've posted this video before and people are probably saying "oh no, there it is again", but it was shot entirely wide open at f/2.8. How do I know for sure? Because I used a dumb adapter that has no iris contol on the FS7. Every shot was f/2.8.
Click to expand...



I see your point. Especially the 'wide open way'. I am going to try that. Sadly the lenses I use have noticeable better quality/contrast when closed one stop. And I am not that good in focusing fast and fine. (I need that 2/3 camera with F/22)
But did you ever experimented with sharpening or used/needed it?

I did some simple tests, saw the difference on a 4K 40 inch screen but shown on Youtube and Vimeo there is not much difference. But when using archive material a bit of sharpening sometimes will make the difference.
I think there is a way in between (the editor who does this) 'standard' and the 'Thou shalt not sharpen in post' doctrine.

The question that remains for me is: does the FS7 camera software alter the sharpness internally in any way and if so, is there difference between RAW and slog and/or other modes?
 
Publimix are you in danger of running before you can walk?

The Nik 100-300 AIS is an excellent zoom and is 300mm when unextended which means it is compact for such a long focal length and doesn't need support. I would think this would be much easier to get on your current tripod head, balanced well and much easier to operate than that monstrosity you are currently sporting. Give yourself a chance.

Have you bought the wrong camera? A 1" or 1/3" Broadcast video camera with a decent zoom and autofocus may be a better fit for your needs. You might also want to ask Doug how much his tripod system cost him that provides him with an exceptionally stable base to operate a lens at 400mm and beyond at a moving target.
 
Yes Doug I agree with you, I didn't mean to generalize zooms - for example I own a 80-200 f2.8 Canon for and it really is sharp wide open. It's probably even sharper stopped down, but like you I don't care because it's just that good even completely wide open.

There are however lenses out there (prime or zoom) that won't do this. So again I just mean to say that not all lenses are built equally, and I still insist that "most" lenses do not produce the best results wide open. There are caveats to this as well ie. if you shoot crop then you are shooting through the center of the lens where performance is better than towards the outside of the glass - so in that case "wide open" isn't going to be as bad necessarily as wide open on full sensor view.

In the end people should test, and conclude for themselves.
 
Nirv said:
You might also want to ask Doug how much his tripod system cost him that provides him with an exceptionally stable base to operate a lens at 400mm and beyond at a moving target.
Click to expand...

That is a good point. A lot of people overlook the importance of having an excellent, heavy, stable, smooth, tripod system. Normally I shoot with my O'Connor 1030D system ($8500), which as Nirv suggests, is not a cheap system. But in the long-run, it is a real bargain. I've been using the same basic O'Connor system for 17 years now and there's no reason to think it won't last me the rest of my career, so the ROI is incredible when compared to cheaper systems that might have worn out by now or, even worse, performed poorly for me all those years. After the camera, the tripod is the #1 accessory. Even more important than lenses.

But you don't have to spend the big bucks for a decent setup. 15 years ago I bought a used Sachtler Caddy tripod system for my B-camera (Betacam back in those days) for $3500 on eBay. I've seen the Caddy systems going for around $1500 on eBay now. Any pro should be able to afford that. The Caddy tripod is still going strong and I use it sometimes when I travel because it is smaller and lighter than the O'Connor. In fact, I've been using it this winter in Florida with my FS7 and my big heavy Canon 200-400 and it works 90% as good as the more expensive O'Connor system.

Here's some video I shot last weekend with the FS7, Canon 200-400, and Sachtler Caddy tripod. The Merritt Island video I posted recently was also shot with the Caddy.

 
Doug Jensen said:
Here's some video I shot last weekend with the FS7, Canon 200-400, and Sachtler Caddy tripod. The Merritt Island video I posted recently was also shot with the Caddy.

Click to expand...

Thanks for showing us Doug. Looks great! What would be the ace up the sleeve in Resolve to further make these images "pop" so to speak?
 
Nothing special, just normal grading for the most part. Push the whites up a little, drop the blacks, and maybe increase the saturation a little.
I might try Morgan's suggestion of adding a little sharpening too just to see what it looks like.

To be honest, I'm not that happy with most of the footage and so I won't spend much time on it. The day was too windy (some planes didn't even fly because of the wind) and too hazy for really good footage, plus I used a Speedbooster part of the day that I regret. The speedbooster was the only Canon adapter I have that would give me control over the iris, but I think it softened the images too much and ruined the contrast. I should have stuck with the dumb (no electronics and no glass) adapter that I started with and just given up on having iris control. The stuff shot without the speedbooster doesn't look too bad.

Also, I shot it with S-LOG3 instead of S-LOG2 just as an experiment and I also regret that decision. It confirms my opinion that S-LOG2 is a much better choice outdoors in uncontrolled lighting, but it never hurtst to experiment. It was basically a day of testing.

Oh well, I shot it just for the fun of it and I'm going to donate all the original raw footage to the museum that hosts the show. They get what they pay for! :-)
 
Last edited:
More footage with the FS7, Canon 200-400, Sachtler combo . . .
It's kind of disappointing how it looks on Vimeo compared to what I see on my edit system. :-(

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top