Portraits for TV spot shot with Alura 18-80mm on PMW-F3, non graded clips

bill totolo said:
Looks nice. How did you create your picture profile?
Click to expand...

Have owned the camera since it's introduction last February, and it's evolved over time. Doug Jensen at Vortex Media was a big help to me initially, using a Leader scope... hired a model to sit there while I set up our "usual" lighting... shot lots of footage over time...and this is the result. Very happy with this look, and haven't seen anything close to this posted online using S-log on the F-3. Kudos have to go to a Panasonic Varicamp seminar many years ago-they taught me how to tweak the camera's matrix using a Chroma du Monde and a vectorscope. If you own a camera at the level of an F-3, you have to spend the $900 for a Chroma du Monde. Great to evaluate comparative lens sharpness, and critical to getting the colorimetry of the camera in the ballpark-then you need a model's face.
 
diegocervo said:
really nice. Have you considered to create a similar matrix using slog?
Click to expand...

S-log doesn't allow for Picture Profiles, it's a form of "raw" recording. You get your "look" in post. What is the fascination with a marketing gimmick like S-log ? Sony knew it had everyone's attention with S-log...-merely an entry path to their big brother cameras F-35 and F-65. And a way to sell external recorders. A good part of the "look" of the images is in the lens. Don't overlook the ability of a lens to add tonal range-especially in the mid-tones. The Alura, at it's price point, is an amazing imager tool. Almost as important as the camera sensor itself.
 
boghav said:
S-log doesn't allow for Picture Profiles, it's a form of "raw" recording. You get your "look" in post. What is the fascination with a marketing gimmick like S-log ? Sony knew it had everyone's attention with S-log...-merely an entry path to their big brother cameras F-35 and F-65. And a way to sell external recorders. A good part of the "look" of the images is in the lens. Don't overlook the ability of a lens to add tonal range-especially in the mid-tones. The Alura, at it's price point, is an amazing imager tool. Almost as important as the camera sensor itself.
Click to expand...

There are two SLOGs for the F3: the one you pay $800 for which enables 444 out and then there is the FREE one included in your Picture Profiles as of firmware update v1.4 (which allows recording to SXS or 422 via outboard rec.)

Either SLOG is still very much about getting your "look" in post but I would not at all call it a marketing gimmick. SLOG renders images from the sensor in a completely different way adding tonal qualities you can not get without it. It adds as much signature as you feel your Alura lens might be. Another benefit of SLOG is the increased dynamic range over non-SLOG and I've found it especially useful for many shoots recently where I'm forced to deal with very high contrast situations and keeping whites from blowing.

Anyway its not something you will appreciate until you try it yourself. I rarely shoot without it now.
 
I am in no way as good a colorist as I am skilled in videography. Until I can find a local colorist, the budget and the time to take advantage of the perceived extended dynamic range of S-log (without sacrificing good color tone) only then I'll upgrade my camera. Yes, if you want to effect a certain unnatural or perhaps "filmic" look, then the latitude of shooting with S-log will give you a wider palette from which to effect your "look". Sorry, but there isn't anything I've seen online that can accomplish what I do in camera, without all the recording extensions, expense, time and effort.
 
You can still upgrade your camera's firmware to benefit from other changes, and chose not to use the SLOG gamma curve from the list of other cine gammas. But definitely if you can get the look you want in camera then there is no reason to use something that requires extra work later,.
 
Richard, great looking video and an excellent example of what can be done simply by paying attention to building a nice picture profile, great lighting, and hitting the right exposure. Nice job.

For every ten S-LOG examples I see people posting, only about one or two of them actually looks good. Why? Because either they didn't expose it correctly or they just don't have the skills to grade it. Sad but true. S-LOG without decent grading in post is a total waste of time. There's a lot of people using S-LOG who would be a lot better served if they'd just pretend it didn't exist and get back to the basics. Just look at the examples peoiple keeping posting!

I have one pciture profile I use for 90% of everything I shoot, and I will put it up against S-LOG in all but the most severe high-contrast situations. And I don't have to grade.

I'm not saying S-LOG isn't a powerful tool in the right hands, but if you don't have the workflow, grading skills, software, monitors, time, and budget to see it through to the end -- then forget it. It's funny that when S-LOG came along it was like some people suddenly believed it was impossible to shoot decent video without it. Yet, we see great video from the Olympics and other live programming that show that today's cameras are totally capable of producing great images with no post processing. Richard's video is just one more example that it can be done, and I'm sure he saved tons of time and hassle in post -- which is an important consideration to those of use are working at full steam already. An hour saved on a production, is an hour I can spend on another paying job.

S-LOG is not a marketing gimmick, but I think sometimes it's like putting matches in the hands of children.
 
Last edited:
boghav said:
Sorry, but there isn't anything I've seen online that can accomplish what I do in camera, without all the recording extensions, expense, time and effort.
Click to expand...
Your are right when you say that you haven't seen anything on line. That's exactly what I thought until I did my test and notice for myself what it actually does. You just have to use it to see how creamy and smooth the transition from light to dark is.
 
Doug Jensen said:
Richard, great looking video and an excellent example of what can be done simply by paying attention to building a nice picture profile, great lighting, and hitting the right exposure. Nice job.

For every ten S-LOG examples I see people posting, only about one or two of them actually looks good. Why? Because either they didn't expose it correctly or they just don't have the skills to grade it. Sad but true. S-LOG without decent grading in post is a total waste of time. There's a lot of people using S-LOG who would be a lot better served if they'd just pretend it didn't exist and get back to the basics. Just look at the examples peoiple keeping posting!

I have one pciture profile I use for 90% of everything I shoot, and I will put it up against S-LOG in all but the most severe high-contrast situations. And I don't have to grade.

I'm not saying S-LOG isn't a powerful tool in the right hands, but if you don't have the workflow, grading skills, software, monitors, time, and budget to see it through to the end -- then forget it. It's funny that when S-LOG came along it was like some people suddenly believed it was impossible to shoot decent video without it. Yet, we see great video from the Olympics and other live programming that show that today's cameras are totally capable of producing great images with no post processing. Richard's video is just one more example that it can be done, and I'm sure he saved tons of time and hassle in post -- which is an important consideration to those of use are working at full steam already. An hour saved on a production, is an hour I can spend on another paying job.

S-LOG is not a marketing gimmick, but I think sometimes it's like putting matches in the hands of children.
Click to expand...

Hey Doug its pretty harsh to criticize people who experiment with SLOG and post their results or progress, there are hundreds of samples of RED footage that look bad and it doesn't mean that RED cameras or its features do not work. Same with SLOG, people have access to it and are posting their results sharing information and sometimes asking for feedback. This is very new for some people right now. Anything that went through an entire proper lifecycle of production to post-production using SLOG I guarantee has superb results.

As for saving time on production as you say it by using picture profiles, there is no "one PP that fits all" depending how drastic your shooting condition is. If your profile fits 90% of what you shoot, then it tells me 90% of what you shoot is the same type of thing. If you want to bake-in your look (as even I sometimes do because I'm just handing over footage) PP will always need some form of tweaks and tests to get it just right.

So whether time is spent up front or in post is a pretty moot point.
 
Good to hear Richard.
I've learned a lot from Alister Chapman's blog, and also use a Chroma DuMonde w/ Vectorscope.
Finally understand settings like Crispening, and Aperture, etc.
 
starcentral said:
Hey Doug its pretty harsh to criticize people who experiment with SLOG and post their results or progress, there are hundreds of samples of RED footage that look bad and it doesn't mean that RED cameras or its features do not work. Same with SLOG, people have access to it and are posting their results sharing information and sometimes asking for feedback. This is very new for some people right now. Anything that went through an entire proper lifecycle of production to post-production using SLOG I guarantee has superb results.

As for saving time on production as you say it by using picture profiles, there is no "one PP that fits all" depending how drastic your shooting condition is. If your profile fits 90% of what you shoot, then it tells me 90% of what you shoot is the same type of thing. If you want to bake-in your look (as even I sometimes do because I'm just handing over footage) PP will always need some form of tweaks and tests to get it just right.

So whether time is spent up front or in post is a pretty moot point.
Click to expand...

First, I have not directly criticized any one person's footage.

Second, I strongly encourage people to experiment as much as they can and see what works and what doesn't. But what I take issue with is the results people post here and other places online that seem to say, "Hey look at this great thing I did with S-LOG. There's no way I could have gotten this shot without it." But quite often, the results they have posted are just awful. You know that is true. My point is that S-LOG is not some magic fairy dust that can be sprinkled over every shot to make it look better. And unless someone has the workflow, software, time, grading skills, etc. to go along with S-LOG, a lot of people would be better offsticking with a regular PP that has been properly exposed.


Third, don't make the mistake of thinking that just because YOU don't have a PP that can work well for many different shooting situations doesn't mean that other people haven't been able to do it. And I would never adjust a PP out in the field on a shot-by-shot basis.

Fourth, this debate it is not a moot point because an hour or two spent building a couple of good Picture Profiles when you first get a new camera -- can prevent hundreds of hours grading and "fixing" things in post over the lifetime of the camera. That kind of time savings is not moot in my book.

My point is this: YOU DO NOT HAVE TO USE S-LOG AND HAVE A COMPLICATED WORKFLOW IN POST TO GET GREAT IMAGES WITH THE F3. You are welcome to disagree, but I see it every day.

BTW, just for the record, I do have the paid version of S-LOG and the new version in the PP menus. I have done countless tests with both and I know I am on firm ground with my opinions. The situations where the extra dynamic range of S-LOG will really make a difference are few and far between, but the workflow hassles of dealing with S-LOG properly will be felt on every single shot. In my opinion, it is possible to get nearly the same results without S-LOG 99% of the time.
 
Last edited:
bill totolo said:
Good to hear Richard.
I've learned a lot from Alister Chapman's blog, and also use a Chroma DuMonde w/ Vectorscope.
Finally understand settings like Crispening, and Aperture, etc.
Click to expand...
Bill,

Be careful if adopting other videographer's profiles, as their eyes may not match yours, nor your way of lighting. Trials with your own lenses and lighting will yield the best results for your way of shooting.
 
Hi there. Did you buy the Alura lens. Or hire it for the shoot? How does it handle weight wise on the F3? It has a really useful range being wide and long enough. Thanks
 
Soryy for this month late reply, just noticed your post. I bought the alura before i got the F-3. It was a gamble sight unseen, but it had the focal length i was looking for. Never regretted it for a second. Well, until the Cambio came out, but I can't afford it if I could even get it. The alura is a beautiful lens in the extension of mid-tones unlike other lenses I've borrowed or rented. Hate the Zeiss CP lenses and hate the Red lenses (zoom and prime). I know other have had good luck with Zeiss and Red, but not me. The F-3 demands good glass, and it shows in the final result.
 
boghav said:
Soryy for this month late reply, just noticed your post. I bought the alura before i got the F-3. It was a gamble sight unseen, but it had the focal length i was looking for. Never regretted it for a second. Well, until the Cambio came out, but I can't afford it if I could even get it. The alura is a beautiful lens in the extension of mid-tones unlike other lenses I've borrowed or rented. Hate the Zeiss CP lenses and hate the Red lenses (zoom and prime). I know other have had good luck with Zeiss and Red, but not me. The F-3 demands good glass, and it shows in the final result.
Click to expand...

Good choice.

While the cameras change so fast these days and have become the interchangeable part of the DP's kit, "good glass is forever".

Great image you got there!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top