F5: Shooting RAW/non-RAW -Difference in basic image look?

F

Fotojorno

Well-known member
I understand the clear advantages of shooting RAW for its flexibility and robustness in post, 16 bit and lighter compression etc.

What my question is; if one were to shoot RAW 4K or 2K(final output is HD), convert to S-Log/S-gamut in Sony's RAW viewer with ZERO additional adjustments and output to say ProRes4444 12-bit through Resolve after applying a LUT. Would the image have a inherently different "quality" or look compared with shooting S-Log/S-Gamut in-camera to SR444 10-bit(when it's enabled), going to Resolve to add LUT and export to ProRes444 10-bit. I know this is theoretical as SR is yet to be released but you get the premise. Tech wise the end results would be a 12 bit compared to a 10 bit file but Im more concerned with the look of the image. Does Sony RAW bring a additional mojo the way S-log does compared to a picture profile?

I guess the only people who would truly have a answer to this are those who have run tests but Im open to hear from all. As long as the response is not "RAW is better". Haha..

Thanks guys
 
I have not run my own tests yet... because R5 is not available here in Canada until next month I'm told.

Your question is a good one however. Aside from image robustness for grading or other post enhancements, its hard to say how much difference we can expect. So far I've only read that there appears to be more range in the highlights, but this would be due to range mapping not necessarily raw vs non-raw.

Probably someone else can answer this better than I who has had a chance to work with the R5.
 
I shot both XAVC and raw last week simultaneously

I'll see if I can post some shots in the next day or two. Decoding raw to Slog/Gamut, the decoding SDK puts black and white points at different levels than the camera does, I noticed. So the raw decoded to slog/gamut and then applying the same LUT looks less contrasty

The latitude is not strikingly different. The raw however is easier to get a good look if you biff exposure vs slog.
 
Nate, do you find or agree that slog2 somehow has more latitude than slog (1) ? (speaking strictly recording in 10-bit codec)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top