Just got a new camera - Sony F35

From the AC article, it seems like they just created a single 3D LUT that did the whole thing (panalog->mimic kodak500T->print stock simulation->rec709).
I'm currently talking to MotionFx about that, it's only 30e, but not sure it's useful for us at this stage. You'll see why when I post my findings.
 
Great, thanks Mac!

Would motion FX 30e generic LUT(slog->cineon) then be helpful in using the other film print emulation LUTs from Juan Melara's download, that you said weren't useful for us starting with only slog?
 
Jusgorilla said:
Great, thanks Mac!

Would motion FX 30e generic LUT(slog->cineon) then be helpful in using the other film print emulation LUTs from Juan Melara's download, that you said weren't useful for us starting with only slog?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the workflow.
It's not great because it's missing the 500T vision2 emulation, but at least is better than nothing.
But I think we are going to skip the slog-cineon LUT and use one I created myself. Better results so far.
 
The box you use with the Genesis is called the Panavision Genesis Display Processor, and it is a seperate box.

Not sure if the F35 internally can replicate it though.

Dean Semler was very happy using the Genesis on Apocalypto, it was Gibson who got him into shooting digital.

-----

Also, I know this forum has a for sale section, but this thread is basically its own community. I am thinking of selling my Zeiss Standard Speeds, as well as my cinedeck and specially made mount. If anyone is interested, PM me.
 
JMtheDP said:
The box you use with the Genesis is called the Panavision Genesis Display Processor, and it is a seperate box.

Not sure if the F35 internally can replicate it though.
Click to expand...


That does not have to do with the workflow they are describing and what I am trying to do here. :cheesy:
 
For what it's worth one of the reasons I shoot cineform is to use their first-light program, which has a really nice range of pre-built LUTs and you can roll-your-own.
 
Alright, here you go. This is what I'm working on:
Slog to cineon plus a Kodak_2383_average LUT.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13362047/F35 slog to cineon.zip (still WIP)

These are .cube files from Davinci Resolve, so hopefully there is no clipping. This is still a work in progress workflow.

Explanation for dummies?

With a regular Slog to rec709 LUT like the ones we had before, we were able to get really nice images, with vibrant colors and great DR.
But I was looking for something different, I wanted a look that resembled film stock as much as possible. Fortunately the Genesis and F35 were developed to resemble film stock as close as they could, because the Genesis was developed when there was no doubt film was the king and they needed a digital camera to match film stock. These days with F55, F65, RED and such, the goal seems to have moved from matching film emulsions towards super clean images, with vibrant colors, noiseless images and lots of DR in the shadows, which is technically great, but lacks the film look that film stock gives. Color negative film allocates more stops in the highlights and colors are usually not as vibrant, but in return we get exquisite skin tones. Do we all agree on this here?

There's this article which probably most of you have already read about using print simulation LUTs at the end of the chain in a color grading session to get more filmlike results: http://juanmelara.com.au/print-film-emulation-luts-for-download/
This isn't anything new. It's what every single lab has been doing over since the 90s. In summary they used to scan the film as cineon log files, color grade the footage and preview the results with a print simulation LUT (which is later removed before printing back to film and left for digital media such as Blu ray or TV masters).
Until recently most HD digital cameras only recorded in rec709, not log. No big deal, lets apply a rec709 to log conversion and done. Ready to start grading. It might not look as good as film but it's decent.

Now, we've got the advantage that the Genesis/F35 already output images with a colorimetry and tone curve similar to film stock. And they are encoded in log gamma. Nice. So what if we just apply a print emulation LUT to the footage? Will it match film stock as intended by Panavision?
You can try, using the LUTs on Melara's website. Close but not really. Why? Because Slog/Panalog don't match the specifications of cineon log files (slightly different log curve). So we need to convert the log files recorded as Slog to the same log curve that Cineon files use before applying a film stock simulation LUT. Pretty simple right?

And that's the LUT you'll find in the zip file. A Slog to cineon log curve LUT. The way I'd use it would be: Load Slog files -> apply slog to cineon .cube -> color grade nades -> print stock .cube -> more color nodes if needed

This is basically what Efilm are describing on the ACM article. Except that their conversion from Panalog to cineon files might have been slightly different to better mimic Kodak 500Tvision2. We'd probably need to shoot side by side film vs F35 to create a profile that matched not only the specs but the look that particular film stock. That's probably what Efilm did. And other labs probably. And it would be awesome to be able to get that.

But for now, this is pretty decent. We can get more filmlike images from our cameras. It won't necessarily mean more vibrant and punchy colors. But film is usually not too saturated nor punchy as most modern digital cameras this days.

Some examples to come.
 
Last edited:
01%20ALEXA.jpg

This was shot on the F35 and then I applied the Arri Alexa LUT on Davinci Resolve. Result? Punchy image. But what about colors? Not very natural. The blues are electric. Skintones could be better. HIghlights do weird things.

02%20SLOG%20MACGREGOR.jpg

Same shot only that this time I used the antiSlog LUT that I created last year. While technically accurate (it's using Sony Slog whitepaper data), highlights lose saturation, image goes a bit to magenta and while colors are more natural than using the Alexa LUT, they still are a bit electronic.

04%20cinespace.jpg

What if we apply a print simulation LUT to the original Slog file? We get this. Muddy. Why? Because Slog is not mapped in the same way as cineon log. It's interesting to notice how print stock tends to go to cyan/blue on the shadows while keeping highlights warm. More on that later.

03%20FILM.jpg

So what if before applying the print simulation LUT, I go ahead and apply a Slog to cineon log conversion gamma? I get this. Waaay more natural right? Notice here how contrast is nice, highlights are not clipped and keep saturation, and while colors are dimmer, they are much more natural, softer, just like film! Isn't this a great starting point to start grading your footage? Now we can add contrast as we like. And what's better, it is so much easier to color balance shots by only using the midtone wheel towards warm/cold colors (I've seen experience colorists only using the mid wheel for such effect and always wondered why). You'll notice how we can achieve faster and nicer color tones without tinting the blacks, which usually doesn't happen in film. As said, great starting point for shorts or feature film projects.

Watching this images in the forum might not be as revealing, so instead try downloading them and display them in a slideshow. Or grab that LUT and compare within different looks withing Davinci resolve for yourself.
And once more, these LUTs are still WIP, some room to improve still.
 
Mac thanks!!!

I was just about to buy the motion fx slog->cineon LUT when I caught your post.
So I assume your LUT is adequate enough to skip the motion fx slog->cineon LUT? or should i buy it and test?
 
I got a LUT for Davinci Resolve that goes from Slog to film stock emulation in 1 step. Testing the results. So far it looks fine and makes grading much easier.
What curves did you get from them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top