S log at night, daytime, and more fun

eddavid

eddavid

Carbonite Member
here's some stills from a bunch of s log shoots i've been working on. I guess you could say real world tests:

http://www.kittyguerrilla.com/THC_Bible/ - daytime, pushing colors to natural earthtones

http://www.kittyguerrilla.com/Videotape_D5/ - nighttime exteriors, iso 1600 and beyond. dealing with sodium vaporlights

http://www.kittyguerrilla.com/Videotape_D4/ - dramatic - in a bar shooting.

http://www.kittyguerrilla.com/Wings_D1/ - daylight - mixed indoor/outdoor

http://www.kittyguerrilla.com/Wings_D2/ - daylight mixed with windows indoor/outdoor


Also did an Arri Alexa shoot with Sony F3 as b camera. Will see if i can post stills from that.
Ed
 
Shots look amazing! Did you use any external lighting? Was it an 18mm Zeiss Compact Prime that you used for the lens?

Which external recorder did you use? And is this S-Log in 444?
 
amazing Ed! SLog seems really really a powerful investment to our skills, thanks a lot to share stills from shooting
 
all was to ki pro mini. yes used 1x1 litepanels and the new 1x1 by dedolight - the fellino. used zeiss zf lenses - 25mm for the nighttime walking around
 
Just curious why you push your saturation so high in the color corrector 3-way. Even then, the pictures don't look very saturated. Is it normal to de-saturate in camera? Is it for a technical reason or just personal taste?
 
curious about the shot of the militqry guy in fornt of the windows. That's one of the few shots I've seen on the web that really shows what slog can do. But othat depends on the light. I could get that look in 709 If I troed hard enoughy.
My questions:

Were the windows tinted?
What was the light like outside? - Full sun ? hazy very cloudy?
How much lighting did you use indoors.

You don't have any 709 or cinegamma shots to compare do you?
 
"Only 422"? lol

422 is quite good.
Click to expand...


Timur, I am with you on this one. How many shoots would REALLY benefit from 444? Where's it gonna be shown? Who's the viewer? I'd challenge 99 out of 100 viewers to point out the differences to me.
 
LeavingTheCandy said:
Timur, I am with you on this one. How many shoots would REALLY benefit from 444? Where's it gonna be shown? Who's the viewer? I'd challenge 99 out of 100 viewers to point out the differences to me.
Click to expand...

The difference is hardly noticeable visually. IT s noticeable in post though.
 
Lenilenapi said:
curious about the shot of the militqry guy in fornt of the windows. That's one of the few shots I've seen on the web that really shows what slog can do. But othat depends on the light. I could get that look in 709 If I troed hard enoughy.
My questions:

Were the windows tinted?
What was the light like outside? - Full sun ? hazy very cloudy?
How much lighting did you use indoors.

You don't have any 709 or cinegamma shots to compare do you?
Click to expand...

Shooting 4:2:2 to ki pro
I didn't use my lightmeter on that shot. it was sunny outside - like really sunny. The windows were not tinted. We did not ND them. I lit him with a joker 800 with wide angle lens bounced into a b board. after i reviewed the shot - and if i had the chance to shoot it again - i would have probably tried joker with chimera to get more of a punch. He was def. underexposed but the editor was still able to make it look great.

I don't have any 709 or cinegamma shots to compare the stuff to. Sorry guys, busy busy busy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top