Other: Is Your Sony FX6 Soft?

I've never been a fan of S-LOG3 and will only use it if there isn't a better choice on a given the camera. S-LOG2 is far better and easier to grade, but colorists didn't like it because it was different than Arri LOG-C. So Sony gave us S-LOG3.cine on the newer cameras to to mimic Arri. And now we're stuck with it. That means on a camera like the FX6 there are only two viable options: S-LOG3 or S-Cinetone because Sony took away 75% of the paint menus that you find on the FX9. FS7 F55, etc. S-Cinetone sucks outdoors, which is where I do most of my shooting, so S-LOG3 is the only viable option on that camera. But on the A1 there are a lot of choices and options to choose from.
 
AmbiSonde said:
I can see I am wasting my time so I have cleaned up the thread. âDodge and burn before that LUT...â Oh boy...
Carry on as you were.
Click to expand...

It's interesting how you think it is okay to drop a deuce in the middle of the room (to use your vernacular) . . . let it sit for a few hours . . . and then come back and scoop it all up like it never happened. Well, let me tell you, the smell lingers even if you decided to clean up the mess you made on the carpet. You're the only person I know that routinely deletes entire posts or makes substantial edits. Think before you post.
 
ahalpert said:
Not sure if that's a reference to the picture profile I'm talking about, but the point here is not to use a LUT and to grade from scratch. But six of one, half a dozen of another
Click to expand...

Sony would have engineers to develop the lut:transform between log anf 709
So my suggestion is use the lut they developed.
not use your own transform (grade) to go from slog or ungraded hlh3
the engineers did it first - use their work

but if you have captured a scene of wide dr or missed the exposure mark a bit (or exposed a little right) you will need to globally correct, dodge or burn before application of the lut or you may introduce non recoverable clipping

i will carry on as i am.
 
morgan_moore said:
Sony would have engineers to develop the lut:transform between log anf 709
So my suggestion is use the lut they developed.
not use your own transform (grade) to go from slog or ungraded hlh3
the engineers did it first - use their work

but if you have captured a scene of wide dr or missed the exposure mark a bit (or exposed a little right) you will need to globally correct, dodge or burn before application of the lut or you may introduce non recoverable clipping

i will carry on as i am.
Click to expand...

yeah but gamma isn't that hard to play with, is it? just push it around. and I don't use s-gamut3.cine, I'm using colors that are already prepped by the engineers for presentation.

anyway, I think their engineers have done a crap job. I was playing around tonight with an interview that we shot slog3/sgamut3.cine. the color is just not as thick or rich as you can get from the same camera using other settings. and the highlights are hard to get right. I'm using the standard LUT that Sony released. I swear I can get better performance out of the camera by recording in a different setting.
 
Doug Jensen said:
I've never been a fan of S-LOG3 and will only use it if there isn't a better choice on a given the camera. S-LOG2 is far better and easier to grade, but colorists didn't like it because it was different than Arri LOG-C. So Sony gave us S-LOG3.cine on the newer cameras to to mimic Arri. And now we're stuck with it. That means on a camera like the FX6 there are only two viable options: S-LOG3 or S-Cinetone because Sony took away 75% of the paint menus that you find on the FX9. FS7 F55, etc. S-Cinetone sucks outdoors, which is where I do most of my shooting, so S-LOG3 is the only viable option on that camera. But on the A1 there are a lot of choices and options to choose from.
Click to expand...

I've actually declined the new FX3 firmware (released a year or so ago) because I think it deletes the slog2 option, which I rely on frequently. Maybe there's a workaround to get it on there by loading in a LUT or something... but it seems like a dicey proposition. The other new features are breathing correction and timecode in, and I can live without those. They still haven't given it variable shutter (which is an insane omission), but I would gamble on the firmware upgrade if they did.
 
ahalpert said:
yeah but gamma isn't that hard to play with, is it? just push it around. and I don't use s-gamut3.cine, I'm using colors that are already prepped by the engineers for presentation.

anyway, I think their engineers have done a crap job. I was playing around tonight with an interview that we shot slog3/sgamut3.cine. the color is just not as thick or rich as you can get from the same camera using other settings. and the highlights are hard to get right. I'm using the standard LUT that Sony released. I swear I can get better performance out of the camera by recording in a different setting.
Click to expand...

Of course you are controlling your footage to creat the look you want which will be somewhere on a scale from technically correct to artisticly pleasing.

Id add 'artistically pleasing' as a final node after the LUT

If the sensor has a mild magenta shift or suchlike the LUT is where the engineers can use thier test kit to make it good in the LUT. If you look at factory luts using some guile you will see some interesting tweaks on the gamma curve. One assumes these were to introduce technical correctness.

Tweaking a gamma curve as 'inverse log' (mathematically incorrect language?) is not so easy.

The joy of a log curve is the nature of the curve is noted as a specific mathematical thing rather than 'random' of a hypre gamma or twongling with knee in 'paint' - so an engineer with a knowledge of logarithmic algebra can de - log the image correctly. I dont have a high knowledge of logarithmic algebra - others do - so ill let them do the delog.

But indeed for low contrast and studio controlled scenes, with skill and testing, other looks/gammas will allocate more data points to a stop change in light level and will deliver footage that has more discrite digital steps per stop and is therefore more 'malliable' without introducing banding
 
Sony has a good overview of the pro's and con's of the various Colour options - | Help Guide for Creators | Setting basic contrast/coloring (Gamma/Color Mode) (sony.net)

I see that they do note that HLG3 is relatively noisy. I bring this point up as when I first started down the whole HDR rabbit hole, I tried shooting in HLG across both my FX6 and DJI (drone and handheld) with the hope of avoiding grading and an output that would be "ok" for playback on both SDR and HDR displays. I soon found that the HLG option in the DJI Air2s produced woeful footage with incredibly obvious noise and weird purple oversaturation in shadows. That dream was shattered.

Turns out the answer for me was to use Resovle's Colour Managed (DWG or ACES) workspace as their ICT does a great job in recognizing what the footage is and then normalizing footage (as in a technical grade) automatically, ready for the creative grade. After that, their OCT again does a great job it spitting out an HDR/SDR or whatever you want. There are also some like Cullen Kelly now doing creative DWG/ACES creative luts, like his free Kodak FPE Freebie (procolor.ist) film grain emulation if that is your thing.

The only thing I had to decide on then what was the suitable acquisition profile for each of the camera's (eg avoiding HLG in the DJI). I'm sure HLG3 out of the FX6 is fine, but so is SLOG3/SGamut3 ...and both these modes capture 2020 (unlike the more P3 oriented SGamut3.cine).
 
Doug Jensen said:
It's interesting how you think it is okay to drop a deuce in the middle of the room (to use your vernacular) . . . let it sit for a few hours . . . and then come back and scoop it all up like it never happened. Well, let me tell you, the smell lingers even if you decided to clean up the mess you made on the carpet. You're the only person I know that routinely deletes entire posts or makes substantial edits. Think before you post.
Click to expand...

Well let me tell you one last time, I really don't give a flying fig what you think.

It wasn't quite the experience I imagined I'd have on DVXUser but it has become very clear why the forums are dead. DVX is now like a sad old folks home inhabited with dribbling geriatric ignorati who are so clueless they don't realise how clueless they are. The talk of LUTs was all very nostalgic but the world has moved on and so must I.

I've never come across anyone so unaware of their own ignorance as you in 25 years in moving image production. I've met some stupid people but never anyone so completely arrogant and unaware they think being aggressive is a suitable alternative to polite informed discourse. I cleared up my mess because I ended up playing your game and in any case no one is interested in what I had to say for the afore-mentioned reasons.

Sincerely, I hope I never come across you or anyone like you online or IRL again.
 
AmbiSonde Mate - you are taking this way to personally. Doug IS an "old" hand...and "blunt". I've paid to watch his FX6 course and it was great. He has his own workflow that he likes and while he is hard to budge, I found when I suggested using Resolves Colour Mgd Workflow instead, he did actually try it and provide feedback. I did not convince him, but that is fine. It's his preference and I certainty did not take offence he did not prefer what I consider the more "modern" way.

So you posit an intriguing option for acquisition. I'd certainly like to see some examples so we can have a look?
 
Doug Jensen said:
What is variable shutter?
Click to expand...

"Extended clear scan" / "synchro scan". My a7iv has it ("variable shutter" and I think your A1 does as well.) But not my a7siii or fx3 despite them being marketed specifically for video

(Variable shutter on my a7iv has the largest increments of any implementation I've seen at 0.2 of the denominator. So it can only do 1/119.9 or 1/120.1 when what you really want is 1/120. But in my experience it's still close enough to eliminate 60hz banding)
 
morgan_moore said:
If the sensor has a mild magenta shift or suchlike the LUT is where the engineers can use thier test kit to make it good in the LUT. If you look at factory luts using some guile you will see some interesting tweaks on the gamma curve. One assumes these were to introduce technical correctness.
Click to expand...

But wait, our LUTs are not camera-specidic. The engineers would have to defeat the magenta shift before encoding the image in log, no?

And I see your point about not being able to unbend the log curve in a precisely accurate way to restore the gradient to its orignal state. But in practice, I don't think this is actually a problem. Plus, there are subjective decisions being made in how to handle the toe and shoulder in their LUT in the first place. And one of the reasons I start with slog2 is to have a softer highlight roll-off. I'm probably looking for a gentler highlight experience than the standard LUT wants to give me anyway
 
I meant is the fx6?(or whatever) was magenta not “your camera” number 1234

in deed if it looks good incorrect maths is probably splitting hairs

when it comed to mauve vs puce because you work for a jumper shop then being accurate pays in less returned goods
 
morgan_moore said:
when it comed to mauve vs puce because you work for a jumper shop then being accurate pays in less returned goods
Click to expand...

Yes, something to consider. Mostly I use this on beauty work and i have some leeway in the look. For Christie's, we always shoot a chip chart but the most important reference for color correction is a TIFF provided by the photo department. Of course, for Christie's I shoot slog3 90% of the time anyway and use the standard LUT
 
ahalpert said:
"Extended clear scan" / "synchro scan". My a7iv has it ("variable shutter" and I think your A1 does as well.) But not my a7siii or fx3 despite them being marketed specifically for video
Click to expand...

Ah yes. I probably would have been able to figure that out myself it I wasn't one of the dribbling geriatric ignorati. I gotta go change my diaper now and have some soup. Have you seen where I left my teeth?
 
Last edited:
ahalpert You've probably mentioned this elsewhere, but have you ever tried other LUTs to bring your slog3 footage to a better place? I know people like to **** on bespoke LUTs, but I find that Alister Chapman's LUTs and the Phantom LUTs do a great job of bringing my footage to a good starting point (Fs5/FX6/a7S3). I set the LUT as the last node and then do various corrections and adjustments as needed underneath the LUT. I've also done some Color Managed workflow in Resolve, although generally I find using one of these LUTs to be just as easy (especially if I'm not using cameras from a variety of manufacturers).
 
drboffa said:
ahalpert You've probably mentioned this elsewhere, but have you ever tried other LUTs to bring your slog3 footage to a better place? I know people like to **** on bespoke LUTs, but I find that Alister Chapman's LUTs and the Phantom LUTs do a great job of bringing my footage to a good starting point (Fs5/FX6/a7S3). I set the LUT as the last node and then do various corrections and adjustments as needed underneath the LUT. I've also done some Color Managed workflow in Resolve, although generally I find using one of these LUTs to be just as easy (especially if I'm not using cameras from a variety of manufacturers).
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to the LUTs you like? I've tried other LUTs before, and possibly these ones. I think my feeling was that they didn't work as well for every type of footage I threw at them whereas the Sony standard LUT could bring every type of lighting-condition to a standard place and I could work from there. (Of course, if a 3rd party can make a better-looking LUT than Sony themselves, it doesn't say anything good about Sony.)

My most recent source of frustration with Slog3 and Sony LUTs came when I was reviewing some footage I shot ENG following a tour group in direct sunlight. I was looking at it in FCP with the built-in Sony Slog3 LUT applied by the program. (This is done automatically in response to camera metadata, although you can manually turn it off.)

Normally, if I just want to make a minor exposure tweak to the footage, I'll just do that on top of the standard LUT. In this case. I wanted to bring the exposure down about a stop. So i turned off the built-in LUT (because it's the first layer of adjustment) and applied a LUT effect with the standard Sony LUT so that I could do an exposure shift underneath that. (I'm not familiar with Resolve, but I think that basically I wanted to do an exposure shift as my first node followed by the LUT.)

While I was making these changes, I realized that the built-in program LUT didn't look the same as the LUT I had downloaded from Sony. WTF! So, I went back to the well to see which LUT was correct and I re-downloaded the standard LUT from Sony's site. It didn't match either of the 2 LUTs I had been working with. (Although it did render skin tones the best.) So, that was a really frustrating experience to feel like I wasn't working with the right tools and didn't even realize it. I guess that their standard LUT has evolved over time? Either way, shame on me for not being more on top of the situation.
 
ahalpert said:
Do you have a link to the LUTs you like? I've tried other LUTs before, and possibly these ones. I
Click to expand...

I've never been happy with any of the S-LOG3 LUTS from Sony. They all take too much massaging to get an acceptable finished lookf. So I finally started working on building one of my own from scratch last week. Would you be interested in playing with it and giving me some feedback? It should work in Premiere as well as Resolve. I've also been working on a LUT and a Premiere Preset to bring S-Cinetone to life. I'm calling it a "S-Cinetone Booster". I'd be interested in having you take a look at that too when it is ready. Let me know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top