This has the best looking skintones to come out of FX6 footage posted anywhere online. Was it graded in Premiere as well. Well done.
Other: Is Your Sony FX6 Soft?
- Thread starter Joshua Milligan
- Start date
This has the best looking skintones to come out of FX6 footage posted anywhere online. Was it graded in Premiere as well. Well done.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
That explains a lot.
Ben Scott
Veteran
I think it's a great commercial look. Not just for YT but for proper commercials too. Have seen a gazillion successful pieces with that style and approach. I much prefer a muted palette. My standard monitoring lut is a touch desaturated and while I haven't settled 100% yet on how I rate the FX6 exposure-wise (still testing whether I prefer 90% @ 61IRE or a stop over and bring it down later) I am still bringing levels down in Resolve afterward to suit my taste. Completely subjective, assuming you've nailed exposure to hit your intended result.
This is the point on here where lots of sculptors making lots of different types of sculptures are divided by the use of a common tool.
At least we've all agreed releasing final work in uncorrected log is the work of the devil
This is the point on here where lots of sculptors making lots of different types of sculptures are divided by the use of a common tool.
At least we've all agreed releasing final work in uncorrected log is the work of the devil
NorBro
Major Contributor
It does...it explains to me how he didn't have to use Resolve and used LUTs to produce a great look during the day in the burning sun when it's incredibly difficult to not make your videos look like a 2000s camcorder.
It's one video, man. People like it, it works.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
I'm allowed to voice my opinion, man, just like everyone else. I don't care if you agree or not. If you like the way the video looks just say so and leave me out of it. I didn't shoot it.
NorBro
Major Contributor
Definitely. But you're the one who quoted me and ambiguously stated, "That explains a lot.".
I would have preferred to hear what it exactly explains and learn something from you/your thought-process which could continue to help me expand my own horizons.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
Perhaps you missed my post #118 where I already went out on a limb and said I didn't like the way this video looked, citing the "muted colors and flat highlights". If it is true, as you suggest, that the video was graded in Premiere with some 3rd party LUTs -- that explains a lot to me because I am of the opinion that Premiere is not a good tool for grading S-LOG. In fact, I am not aware of any professional full-time colorists who use Premiere as their weapon of choice. So if the grading looks bad to me, then the software that was used to grade offers a possible explanation. That's all I meant and I didn't feel it was necessary to repeat my previous comments about not liking the look of the video. I'm not saying there is something wrong with it, I just don't care for it. It's easy to make skin tones look nice at the expense of everything else.
Last edited:
The FX6 has an OLPF and also has the ability to record with no noise reduction or sharpening. The A7S3 has sharpening and noise reduction present even with the settings dialed all the way down. You may simply not have an eye to detect digital sharpening as its happening on the A7S3. Its a lot more subtle and well implemented than something like a gopro for sure.
That could be the extent of what you are seeing. Lenses also definitely make a huge difference. A lot of vintage glass even when stopped down won't resolve as much detail as newer glass.
Swap lenses, put the vintage one on the A7S3 and see what happens. Also turn the detail up a bit on the FX6 and see what happens.
That could be the extent of what you are seeing. Lenses also definitely make a huge difference. A lot of vintage glass even when stopped down won't resolve as much detail as newer glass.
Swap lenses, put the vintage one on the A7S3 and see what happens. Also turn the detail up a bit on the FX6 and see what happens.
Last edited:
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
Are your comments directed to me or someone else?
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Surely they were directed to the OP
I liked the way that "muted, flat" video looked, too
I'm sure that no proper colorists use Premiere. But does that mean that it ruins your footage? Can't one just do more - more secondaries with greater control - in Resolve? And faster to do complex things across multiple clips?
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
I liked the way that "muted, flat" video looked, too
Well, I predicted clear back in post #118 that I would be in the minority, and come off sounding like a dinosaur. Yup, a lot of people like that look and I wish them luck with it in the long run. Does not change my opinion about the video.
jmone
Well-known member
Ahh I fondly remember the good old days of the "dreamy - running your fingers through the wheat" but instead of a pretty girl, you had Rusty at his finest.
To me, this shot helped setup the story.... it was not 'the' story. 20 years later I still remember that sequence every time a see a short using the same techniques.
Watching DEAUVILLE (and similar), I find myself interested in the technical aspects not the actual 'story'.... and from the discussion in so far in this thread it seems most do the same. I think it makes a fine addition to a portfolio of showing what the author is capable of producing with the gear. There seems to be a genre of "content" published where the intent is just to be "cinematic" for it's own sake (which is fine). I'd imagine that smaller portions of such content could be good on Stock Footage sites?
To me, this shot helped setup the story.... it was not 'the' story. 20 years later I still remember that sequence every time a see a short using the same techniques.
Watching DEAUVILLE (and similar), I find myself interested in the technical aspects not the actual 'story'.... and from the discussion in so far in this thread it seems most do the same. I think it makes a fine addition to a portfolio of showing what the author is capable of producing with the gear. There seems to be a genre of "content" published where the intent is just to be "cinematic" for it's own sake (which is fine). I'd imagine that smaller portions of such content could be good on Stock Footage sites?
Rusty? As in Crowe, right? Gladiator?
Surely fingers through the wheat also references Malicks' Days of Heaven which probably set the precedent for a cinematic approach still alive and kicking (especially since his return to film and continued output) - overcranking speed, the play of natural light on faces and bodies and the outdoors, the creation of rich but subtle soundscapes, careful placement of music. A lot of this comes from European and Soviet cinema.
And, without being too cynical, there it is in most wedding videos. LOL. It still works.
Surely fingers through the wheat also references Malicks' Days of Heaven which probably set the precedent for a cinematic approach still alive and kicking (especially since his return to film and continued output) - overcranking speed, the play of natural light on faces and bodies and the outdoors, the creation of rich but subtle soundscapes, careful placement of music. A lot of this comes from European and Soviet cinema.
And, without being too cynical, there it is in most wedding videos. LOL. It still works.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
It's true although a lot of wedding photography (and perhaps videography as well) is going in a high-contrast direction, much more backlit glitz than soft and dreamy. I wonder if Instagram is responsible since a sharp, high-contrast image probably jumps off the phone more
jmone
Well-known member
Yup, Though I hear Crowe is not keen on the Nickname (but it stuck). For good or bad, that technique always reminds me of the start and end of Gladiator... and while I've never seen Days of Heaven I'm sure it's been used many many times.
Teddy_Dem
Well-known member
Lol. That quick? Looking forward to you thoughts on the camera when you feel you have had enough time with it.
NorBro
Major Contributor
I only require about 24-48 hours. I know that may sound insane to some, but I know cameras so well and how they all compare to each other. Definitely will not learn all there is to learn but will know enough.
The FX6 is a beautiful camera.
Not "beautiful" like all my for-sale threads where everything I sell is "beautiful"...no, this one is really beautiful.
Besides one thing which I truly dislike, I actually love the body more than I love the image. (That's not a knock on the image but a personal testament to the hardware.)
There are many people who already spoke and written material about this camera so there is a ton of information out there, and I don't know what exactly everyone said so some of this may sound obvious and known, but it wasn't known to me because I mostly watch test footage, not educational videos.
___
Random thoughts...
- My two D-pads on this camera are the worst pads, control interfaces I have ever used in my 15 years of using cameras. I say my because they couldn't have been designed like this and these are just a malfunctioned anomaly. I am teaching my brain how to navigate with them but still constantly mis-clicking and moving in directions I don't want to be moving.
- But overall, the camera is so compact and fun to use. Nothing else than the above really annoys me about the body besides maybe the angled connector that attaches the side handle and the very stiff scroll wheel on the top handle. But it feels good using a real cinema camera and not a photography camera.
- Side handle is really nice. (I consider RED's DSMC2 the best in the world so that's what I'm comparing it to.)
- eND controlled manually with the index finger dial on the handle...incredible, incredible, incredible.
- Love the programmability. Sony is always at the top of the list (with Panasonic mirrorless').
- Happy to see the menus not look like the a7SIII's. No issues with them on my end because if we want smart cameras they will have to be loaded in way or another, but maybe some things could have been explained a little better in the manual, or worded differently.
- The clear zoom is a fun feature with the zoom rocker. Wouldn't use it a lot but wouldn't hesitate to do some slow prime zooms (albeit very short ones).
- Do the batteries charge extremely fast? IDK, but caught my attention.
- No specific comments about AF...happy to see it work like the mirrorless' although I don't know if it will never be as good as still cameras.
- Not sure why the default option is skipping framerates in S&Q mode but perhaps there is a setting to fine tune them when I want to shoot 92fps or something (should be, but maybe missed it).
___
Now...the question of all questions...is it soft?
The OP clearly saw something early on.
Personally, I don't know yet.
I haven't spent enough time grading the footage, but I can definitely say that it has been difficult for me to grade the way I would like for it to react compared to other cameras. I wish the data was a bit higher. It really could use more information, but I have a feeling any kind of external recording or even RAW recording could really open this camera up.
___
There's probably more but that's all I could think of right now after having it for 2 days.
The FX6 is a beautiful camera.
Not "beautiful" like all my for-sale threads where everything I sell is "beautiful"...no, this one is really beautiful.
Besides one thing which I truly dislike, I actually love the body more than I love the image. (That's not a knock on the image but a personal testament to the hardware.)
There are many people who already spoke and written material about this camera so there is a ton of information out there, and I don't know what exactly everyone said so some of this may sound obvious and known, but it wasn't known to me because I mostly watch test footage, not educational videos.
___
Random thoughts...
- My two D-pads on this camera are the worst pads, control interfaces I have ever used in my 15 years of using cameras. I say my because they couldn't have been designed like this and these are just a malfunctioned anomaly. I am teaching my brain how to navigate with them but still constantly mis-clicking and moving in directions I don't want to be moving.
- But overall, the camera is so compact and fun to use. Nothing else than the above really annoys me about the body besides maybe the angled connector that attaches the side handle and the very stiff scroll wheel on the top handle. But it feels good using a real cinema camera and not a photography camera.
- Side handle is really nice. (I consider RED's DSMC2 the best in the world so that's what I'm comparing it to.)
- eND controlled manually with the index finger dial on the handle...incredible, incredible, incredible.
- Love the programmability. Sony is always at the top of the list (with Panasonic mirrorless').
- Happy to see the menus not look like the a7SIII's. No issues with them on my end because if we want smart cameras they will have to be loaded in way or another, but maybe some things could have been explained a little better in the manual, or worded differently.
- The clear zoom is a fun feature with the zoom rocker. Wouldn't use it a lot but wouldn't hesitate to do some slow prime zooms (albeit very short ones).
- Do the batteries charge extremely fast? IDK, but caught my attention.
- No specific comments about AF...happy to see it work like the mirrorless' although I don't know if it will never be as good as still cameras.
- Not sure why the default option is skipping framerates in S&Q mode but perhaps there is a setting to fine tune them when I want to shoot 92fps or something (should be, but maybe missed it).
___
Now...the question of all questions...is it soft?
The OP clearly saw something early on.
Personally, I don't know yet.
I haven't spent enough time grading the footage, but I can definitely say that it has been difficult for me to grade the way I would like for it to react compared to other cameras. I wish the data was a bit higher. It really could use more information, but I have a feeling any kind of external recording or even RAW recording could really open this camera up.
___
There's probably more but that's all I could think of right now after having it for 2 days.
Teddy_Dem
Well-known member
Thanks for your thoughts on the camera, I definitely appreciate your perspective as I know you have tested several cameras. Do you still feel like the e-ND is what you would rather have as opposed to the superior autofocus on Sony's mirrorless cameras?