S-CINETONE Booster LUTs for FX6, FX9, etc.

Thanks Chris. Breathing again. Will try it in the nest couple of days and give you my FWIW. It's really generous of you (and Doug) to share like this. Much appreciated.
 
stewhem said:
Thanks Chris. Breathing again. Will try it in the nest couple of days and give you my FWIW. It's really generous of you (and Doug) to share like this. Much appreciated.
Click to expand...

What goes around comes around. Hope you get some mileage out of it. :)

Chris Young
 
cyvideo said:
A good 3D 709 LUT will have its chroma levels set at 75%.
Click to expand...

You could try putting a SMPTE color chart on a timeline with yours or Doug's cube lut, vectorscope boxes at 75%, and again with a 4 color gradient chart with CIE xy 709 scope to see what the lut is doing and that everything is staying legal. Resolve has these charts in the generator toolbox. Just my $0.02, Tom out.
 
Bassman2003 said:
. I picked "Movie" which is very similar or the same as PP off. The Gerald Undone video I linked shows all of the color modes and they are quite different.
Click to expand...

Someone recently linked to a table from Sony describing the different color options on their mirrorless cameras. It turns out that "Movie" color is exactly what you get when the PP is off!
 
Doug Jensen said:
.

BTW, if I had an FX9 I'd never use S-CINETONE or S-LOG becuase there are beter options onboard that camera. It is one of the major advantages of the FX9 over the FX6. But I still choose the FX6 for all the other reasons it beats the FX9. No camera is pefect.
Click to expand...

It's a little bit frustrating how close they come to perfection, though, only to fall short on capabilities that are available on other cameras. I'd happily buy another a7siii or fx3 for my 4th mirrorless body if only it had variable shutter speed... and how much would it cost them to port the paint options from the fx9 to the fx6
 
drboffa said:
).

I'd still make tweaks to the images, but in my view the LUT is a significant improvement over the stock S-Cinetone look.

[
Click to expand...

That seems pretty indisputable in your tests. I feel like some of the pearl-clutching reaction to the "horrific" LUT results in an earlier post had to do with the sunlit grass. But you used the LUT without tweaks and the fact is that no look will work for every scenario. Sunlit grass can be very intense, and that's true to the naked eye as well although our brains compensate to dial it down.
 
ahalpert said:
That seems pretty indisputable in your tests. I feel like some of the pearl-clutching reaction to the "horrific" LUT results in an earlier post had to do with the sunlit grass. But you used the LUT without tweaks and the fact is that no look will work for every scenario. Sunlit grass can be very intense, and that's true to the naked eye as well although our brains compensate to dial it down.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I find this LUT to be another useful tool. Just because it doesn't provide perfect results in every scenario doesn't mean it isn't helpful.

As an aside, I find that rendering grass is pretty challenging overall. So much green can really overwhelm a scene.
 
ahalpert said:
and how much would it cost them to port the paint options from the fx9 to the fx6
Click to expand...

You have it backwards. It probably took extra work for Sony to strip off 90% of the paint menus. It was something they absolutely did on purpose. I was told they looked at the next generatation of shooters and then took steps to make the FX6 as simple as they could. The biggest complaints Sony gets about their cameras is there are too many menus and it's all too confusing. A lot of people just want to turn a camera on and start shooting without really understanding the nuances of different settings. And that is what they built. That is the world we live in now, so get used to it.

My suggestion was that they have two operating systems -- simple and expert. The default mode would be simple, but advanced users could turn on the expert mode and reveal all the hidden menus and other options we've come to expect from their other Sony cine and ENG cameras. They seemed receptive to that idea, so maybe we'll see something like that in an upcoming camera . . . but I wouldn't hold my breath.
 
Others who know more can chime in, but wasn't it the case that the FX6 and FX9 were different development teams within Sony? I.e., the FX9 team was the same group that worked on the FS7, whereas the FX6 development took place within the alpha unit. This is why the FX9 still has the ridiculous RAW setup while the FX6 gives you RAW straight out of the camera (like the alpha cameras).

If so, perhaps this also explains, in part, why the lack of detailed paint menus? This doesn't negate the assertion that they wanted to build a simple camera—it just might be a factor in why the FX9 and FX6 are so different (if it's true).
 
I'm apparently late to this party but can't seem to find where to download those S-Cinetone LUTs. Got a link for me Doug?

Lenny
 
They are available via a link Doug put on his YouTube video at the link below. Just click on "Show more" to reveal the link.

Chris Young

 
cyvideo said:
Doug, It was all too big to PM via DVXUser so will upload and PM you the link.

Chris Young
Click to expand...

Chris, I have a question for you. I was on the road last week teaching a workshop but now I'm back playing with LUTs and stuff in Resolve.
Have you ever tried the Sony LUT called SONY: Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine To s709 V200.cube? I've used it more often over the last couple of years than any other single LUT. It can be downloaded at the bottom of this page. https://sonycine.com/resources/luts/

It appears to be nearly identical to your CYV_DLAD_SLOG3_709x65 LUT that you sent me a couple of weeks ago. I think it is an almost identical match except yours has slightly more saturated reds. I was wondering if you've tried that Sony LUT, and if so, how you think it compares to your own?
 
Doug Jensen said:
Chris, I have a question for you. I was on the road last week teaching a workshop but now I'm back playing with LUTs and stuff in Resolve.
Have you ever tried the Sony LUT called SONY: Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine To s709 V200.cube? I've used it more often over the last couple of years than any other single LUT. It can be downloaded at the bottom of this page. https://sonycine.com/resources/luts/

It appears to be nearly identical to your CYV_DLAD_SLOG3_709x65 LUT that you sent me a couple of weeks ago. I think it is an almost identical match except yours has slightly more saturated reds. I was wondering if you've tried that Sony LUT, and if so, how you think it compares to your own?
Click to expand...

No. Doug. I don't have that one. I do have one that is labeled "4_SGamut3CineSLog3_To_Cine+709". On looking inside it, I find it described as

"#Sony LookProfile LUT, SLog3SGamut3.CineToCine+709 full in full out v1.04.04".

Its original creation date is 18 Feb 2014.

I'll have a look at this V2 version. I guess it doesn't surprise me that the original, or for that matter the V2 looks similar to mine. Due to the fact that S-LOG3 is based off the Cineon Log system. I guess when Sony were developing LUts for S-LOG they took a similar approach to what I did. That is work from the reference Kodak DLAD digital image, as that is the basis of all Cineon-derived LUTs. How else would one do it? I guess anyone who takes that approach, working from this Cineon LOG reference image and building a technical LUT to meet the SMPTE vector and Luma standards would end up in a similar place. Anything outside those parameters would start to be classified as a style LUT I would suggest.

Having had this discussion on LUTs lately, I revisited mine and did a couple of tweaks to it. Plus added a 100% saturation version in addition to the original 75% vector LUT. Adding the 100% chroma version, which is still broadcast legal as chroma can go to 105%. This was kind of prompted by your higher contrast, more saturated S-Cinetone booster LUT. Just switch on both the 75% and 100% vector boxes at the same time in Resolve's vector scope options if you want to compare the two of them. I'll PM you the link.

PS EDIT.
I've just downloaded the Sony V2 LUT. Will give it a run. But I notice it is a 33 point LUT so designed to use in cameras... as well as post. Whereas the "4_SGamut3CineSLog3_To_Cine+709" original, I had, is a 65-point LUT. Which offers a far higher accuracy of interpolation. Look halfway down this page for examples of the interpolation difference in LUT points, or grids. Not noticeable in the general run of grading with cameras of less than 13 stops. And I mean real stops, not the manufacturer's claimed "stops". Banding can be seen in true over 13 stop images when a very wide dynamic range scene is "Lutted". with a 33 point LUT.

A 17x17x17 cube has 17 different values, 0 to 1 for each R,G and B. This is a total of nearly 5,000 defined points, whereas the 33 cube has around 36,000 points defined. It may sound a lot, but it’s not really, a 10 bit RGB image would need 1024x1024x1024 points, which is 1,073,741,824 points to accurately define every movement of color.

Chris Young

http://ismini.tvlogic.tv/en/technology/lut03.html
 
Last edited:
Doug, Having looked at the Sony v2 LUT on the Kodak DLAD image I see my assuptions fairly well confirmed in my eye. Sony's Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine_To_s709_V200, the one that you linked to, lands exactly on the 100% Chroma vector boxes. It also has a Luma range that goes to 100%. This to me indicates that this Sony LUT is a Full Range, sometimes referred to as Full Swing LUT that complies with this Kodak Cineon DLAD reference image. Probably built off it.

If you look at the images below, the first one is the "Sony Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine_To_s709_V200" on the Kodak DLAD reference image with absolutely no manipulations applied other than the application of this LUT. This is 100% SMPTE compliant Full Level out LUT.

The second and third images are my two updated LUTs applied to the Kodak DLAD image. Both show Luma peak levels at 95%. I hate pushing Luma levels to 100% as I find a lot of commercial TV's struggle to display these 100% levels without looking "burnt" or clipped. The difference between my two LUTs are the 75% and 100% Chroma levels. Also compared to the Sony Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine_To_s709_V200 LUT I have my mid-levels marginally higher. Especially in the Red channel, where I have the mid-reds sitting at 60% and 62% respectively. Whereas Sony's Slog3-S-Gamut3.Cine_To_s709_V200 has its Red channel sitting at 48%. Which is technically correct for a full 255 red level generator sitting on the timeline. So Sony's LUT is I think as close to 100% accurate as you can get. It's pure SMPTE on spec. A very good point to start from. I wonder if there is a 65 point grid version available?

BTW. The v2 LUT looks way better than the original one I had. I've never liked that one. Wouldn't mind betting that the original came out of the factory in the early days, 2014 going by its creation date. This v2 version is vastly superior. I see its creation date is 22 May 2019. More than likely, I would suggest this was created somewhere else, like by Sony Nth America using DP and colorist input to get it right because the v1 version I have is nowhere as technically accurate or visually attractive.

A few people have already grabbed my updated ones. Hope it's useful for any who want them.

Chris Young

Sony v2 Luma 100 Chroma 100 [1280] comp.jpg - Click image for larger version Name: Sony v2 Luma 100 Chroma 100 [1280] comp.jpg Views: 0 Size: 82.1 KB ID: 5705239
CY Luma 95 Chroma 75 [1280] comp.jpg - Click image for larger version Name: CY Luma 95 Chroma 75 [1280] comp.jpg Views: 0 Size: 81.0 KB ID: 5705240
 

Attachments

  • CY Luma 95 Chroma 100 [1280] comp.jpg
    CY Luma 95 Chroma 100 [1280] comp.jpg
    81.2 KB · Views: 0
cyvideo said:
Having had this discussion on LUTs lately, I revisited mine and did a couple of tweaks to it. Plus added a 100% saturation version in addition to the original 75% vector LUT. Adding the 100% chroma version, which is still broadcast legal as chroma can go to 105%. This was kind of prompted by your higher contrast, more saturated S-Cinetone booster LUT. Just switch on both the 75% and 100% vector boxes at the same time in Resolve's vector scope options if you want to compare the two of them. I'll PM you the link.
]
Click to expand...


Chris, thanks for the in-depth explanation. Very interesting to read. I think it is a feather in your cap that your custom LUT lands almost exactly at the same spot as Sony's, which you didn't even know existed. Yes, please send me the new version of your LUT. I think one with more saturation than Sony's or the first one you sent would better meet my needs. They might be technically correct, but I like a punchier image.

BTW, after having the chance last week to shoot some sit-down interviews with S-CINETONE, I've now created a third S-CINETONE booster LUT for headshots and interviews. My originals are exactly what I want for B-roll, etc. but they are too strong for close-ups of people. The new one fills that gap. The difference between S-CINETONE straight out of the camera and the same shot with the booster applied is quite an improvement. I will post it when I have a chance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top