F55: Replicating CineEI mode in Custom Mode… S-Gamut3 included. ;)

[Ben Scott]

My brain hurts... So Sony raw doesn't have metadata-based wb?

I assume the 7Q recorded raw DNG does? I've not test it yet.

 

[starcentral]

All sony files RAW and non-RAW have metadata, but not all newest latest and greatest software sees it so that's a bit of a tough one right now.

 

[Ben Scott]

But can you adjust the white balance in the Sony raw metadata?

 

[morgan_moore]

Most Red-shot Hollywood movies have a 'onelight' done in redcine before being exported to DPX and then being graded. At first glance you go 'that's crazy you are missing so much not having the raw' and then you shut up and realise they probably know what they're doing.

No they dont know what they are doing - they are just doing the same old and if that works, well then it does, but in a financially contstrained world that is poor practice. You should either cut your lighting budget and pull your raw files in post (saving at A and costing at B) or shoot a thinner codec and save dit money.

The (bmc4k) feature I shot I sniffed that they were not going to make full use of raw so I elected to shoot pro-res - at a puny 9TB backed up.. which probably saved them more than my entire fee in hard drives - I consider that to be the act of a competent DP.

 

[starcentral]

But can you adjust the white balance in the Sony raw metadata?

Are you asking if you can adjust the white balance later?

 

[Lenilenapi]

I'm glad to see all this interest in WB + slog3 and especially to see Dennis' experiments with slog3.cine/slog3 color space on the F55. I complained a lot about this when the camera came out and had to endure lots of people scoffing that white balance wasn't a true "cinema workflow". Its simply a fact that many of us - especially producers - would like see proper WB on set and that the main competition - RED and Alexa can do that. In fact that's the only big advantage to shooting Red or Alexa today - so what a waste to not have it implemented.
First Re this thread -
- can we ban distracting discussions of whether there is any need to WB in Slog as this thread is for people who want to.
- can we ban talking about what's a cinema camera as who gives a xxxx.

Re Content:
Do we know how Sony implements the LUTs and Looks in the current method?:

1- In the current Cine EI system, does a change in WB presets actually change the Slog3 file itself , or is it only the LUT that is changing?

2 If only the LUT, then sticking with that would require a lot of LUTs for WB and ISO, or a whole new system for an adjustable LUT.
That would be a lot of work for Sony. In fact it would mean Sony already has a ton of LUT's in the camera ( personally that sounds unlikely to me).

3 If instead they are adjusting the underlying color balance on the recorded Slog3 signal, and use the same basic color LUT for each ISO - then there is no reason they should not be able to enable Custom Mode for Slog3 white balance with LUT's. They could easily limit that feature only to slog3.cine/slog3 color space, and could limit it to only 1 or 2 Looks for clarity. 709TypeA would be fine. Then we would basically have an Alexa

Thats why I'm interested in seeing Dennis (or anyone) record a bunch of disparate white balances on an F55 in CUSTOM Slog3 gamma with slog3.cine/slog3 color space and see how they all look with something like 709TypeA applied both on a monitor and I guess in Post as well. If no weird color issues develop this should be easy for Sony.

4 Perhaps there are limits to how far you could shift the color on the original files before artifacting occurred.
In that case couldn't Sony simply create a restricted WB menu within CINE EI that allowed you a limited amount of shift on the green/magenta axis and the warm/cool axis. Limited shifts around the current 3 presets would probably be all that's needed.

5 This is a bit besides the main point but I wonder why Sony has so many different LUT's/Looks available in CINE EI . I've never heard of anything being used other than 709(800%) or 709Type A. Why do we have Hypergamma looks when we could just shoot Hypergamma directly?

7 Perhaps there is a difference here also between a true RAW workflow and the compressed XAVC or ProRes workflow that most people will use.


Lenny Levy

 

[Ben Scott]

No they dont know what they are doing - they are just doing the same old and if that works, well then it does, but in a financially contstrained world that is poor practice. You should either cut your lighting budget and pull your raw files in post (saving at A and costing at B) or shoot a thinner codec and save dit money.

The (bmc4k) feature I shot I sniffed that they were not going to make full use of raw so I elected to shoot pro-res - at a puny 9TB backed up.. which probably saved them more than my entire fee in hard drives - I consider that to be the act of a competent DP.

With the greatest respect, the idea of suggesting the likes of Lightiron don't know what they are doing when handling Red files is utterly absurd.

 

[Ben Scott]

Are you asking if you can adjust the white balance later?

I'm asking if White balance adjustment in post with Sony raw is done via non-destructive metadata as per Redcode, or whether it is not adjustable except with a rendered process of some kind.

 

[Viddovation]

I certainly agree that having this feature would please a large number of users, and that, if the hardware permits, Sony would be wise to implement it, as it would result in increased popularity and sales.

However, may I point out that it is *possible* that there is a hardware limitation? These cameras have multiple in-line signal processing chips, and they split up based on destination. It's possible that there isn't a way to route a Cine/CineEI mode image through a custom (field set) white balance. Within the Cine/CineEI modes, there is probably a separate LUT for each color temp option, allowing a single transform to be done (gamma+color temp) instead having a color temp transform done separate from the gamma transform. Personally, I think this may also tie in with the magenta issue seen in the custom mode, in so much as that the image sensor seems to be very picky about the relative gain levels of the RGB channels depending on the desired color temperature.

Again, I agree this would be a great feature to add, but the hardware may not support it.

 

[Lenilenapi]

Yes , we don't really know what Sony is doing in there, so its pure speculation. I wonder about all the hardware space being taken up with LUTS & LOOKS that probably no one is using.

I think most of us would rather have some kind of WB adjustments than User LUt's though. Arri & RED pretty much get by with one. (I guess RED has a couple but they are mainly legacy in my understanding.)

 

[starcentral]

I'm asking if White balance adjustment in post with Sony raw is done via non-destructive metadata as per Redcode, or whether it is not adjustable except with a rendered process of some kind.

I see. It's done with metadata by your definition. ie. you adjust a slider and it's happening right in front of your eyes type of thing. No re-rendering required, etc..



Guys my theory on RAW baking in one of the three presets might be wrong then. It barely makes sense. Surely Sony has just chosen some baseline color temperature (native to the sensor I would think) and then everything is just adjusted in post as "metadata".

As James points out, if anything its a routing / hardware / 'oops we didn't think of it in advance' issue.

 

[morgan_moore]

With the greatest respect, the idea of suggesting the likes of Lightiron don't know what they are doing when handling Red files is utterly absurd.

Not really. I am sure they, the post house, are entirely competent. But the complex route of studios, film school, 'how stuff is done', DPs from film, directors who do stuff the same old way, and post house is a complex route that has not really 'got' raw yet - or if they have 'got' it they are rarely employing it - or it just doens't stack up economically to build a look in post not on set - the result is in effect most stuff could be shot baked 422 or 444 at 1/4 the data load and half the post time and still look right.

 

[Viddovation]

I see. It's done with metadata by your definition. ie. you adjust a slider and it's happening right in front of your eyes type of thing. No re-rendering required, etc..



Guys my theory on RAW baking in one of the three presets might be wrong then. It barely makes sense. Surely Sony has just chosen some baseline color temperature (native to the sensor I would think) and then everything is just adjusted in post as "metadata".

As James points out, if anything its a routing / hardware / 'oops we didn't think of it in advance' issue.

To concur with Dennis, but to also point out - this seems to be an issue for the F5/F55 as well, and when the FS7 was in development it potentially could have been addressed, but given that the FS7 is the new cheap/value camera, perhaps it didn't make sense to put an extra $$$ board inside that gave it an advantage over the more expensive cameras.

Mind you, the above is all conjecture, but based on cost alone, you'd think if it's a hardware cost issue, the FS7 might be the least likely to get the extra hardware.

 

[morgan_moore]

Guys my theory on RAW baking in one of the three presets might be wrong then.

With raw if you go off the native sensor then you are clipping DR, for example a 3200 scene on a native raw chip of 5500k will be short of blue, so if the sensor is 14stops but the blue is three stops down (it will clip at the bottom) then the effective DR becomes 11stops

To make up for this effect in a 10bit environment you need to add amplification to the blue channel before baking or the DR becomes too crushed. Hence for a 10bit cam the closest you can get to a fixed WB is the three levels sony have included.

 

[morgan_moore]

The weird thing about this 'debate' to me is that yes I shoot a lot of off colour gunge like in offices - but those jobs don't really have fussy directors clamouring over 200k shift on the monitor (and Im using Custom anyway!) . The more upmarket shoots I do tend to be lit either to 55k or 32k and are therefore catered for by the presets!

When do you guys ever not shoot at 32 or 55?

 

[Gene Sung]

Hi Morgan, I have tons of post experience so an off white balance is not an issue for me. One of the reason why CineEI needs custom WB is also professional perception. Like I said, some of the older and way better DPs than myself in LA just want to be able to dial in WB on set. They don't care that you can do it all n post, they want to see it on set.

it's a matter of perception. If Sony truly wants to roll with the big boys, they just have to at least offer what the other cameras take for granted like WB settings. Things like the WB issue might not be too critical in reality, but it does make people roll their eyes and that's often enough for the top Pros to pass on the camera.

 

[starcentral]

I totally agree with Ugene 100%. This is about more than perception, its your image and more. You want your client to see how good you've made the image look at the time. Not something that will happen in the future.

I shoot stills for clients too, and often I preview a few shots for them as I take them. It gives them confidence, helps put me at ease. Everyone working on the same page is less stress and a sigh of relief. They are paying me big dollars and I want everything to be perfect, including the color they see on the monitor.

Now imagine for one second I left the WB preset on my DSLR to 3200k but am using 5600k strobes. I take my first shot and my white back ground has gotten a blue tint and their product/skin tone/etc.. is the wrong color or tone.

I wouldn't show them that still in a million years and try to blow it off by explaining it will be corrected in post, etc.. I would fix my white balance, reshoot, and show them the image with PRIDE.


Anyway I agree with Lenny, this thread has gone off topic a bit. I don't think we need to debate having the right color seen on-set.

 

[Lenilenapi]

Thanks Dennis - done to death by now -

I'm still unclear on 2 basic questions
- Does Cine EI currently adjust anything to the base exposure when it changes color temps, or is it just the LUT that's changing?
- What the heck is the native color balance of the FS7 sensor? (This should effect how we expose at high ISO's)

 

[morgan_moore]

I said earlier that I agreed about creating a good on set experience.

--

len - changing the wb in EI does affect your core file . It has to - there is not enough flex in 10bit file to grade out a huge kelvin shift in post

 

[Ben Scott]

Not really. I am sure they, the post house, are entirely competent. But the complex route of studios, film school, 'how stuff is done', DPs from film, directors who do stuff the same old way, and post house is a complex route that has not really 'got' raw yet - or if they have 'got' it they are rarely employing it - or it just doens't stack up economically to build a look in post not on set - the result is in effect most stuff could be shot baked 422 or 444 at 1/4 the data load and half the post time and still look right.

Yep, that's LightIron, named by Red as being at the bleeding edge of Red on set and post-production techniques and subject of countless articles on their processes, and who have just been acquired by Panavision. you're probably right mate... I'm sure they just don't get it.