Skin tones on the af100

Here's some skin (and some moustache!)

5532166298_16aeb93eea_z.jpg


ISO 640 and 2x anamorphic. trying to hone an AF100 filmy look while my friend plays us a song.
Two Kino Flo 15" singles for a key and a little LED light to fill. No CC.
 
lennywood said:
I was going to go buy an F3, but who knows what surprises i will find there. So I figured, I have an Alexa, that camera is as perfect as I have ever known just south of film, so I will just use that, and spend my money on lenses for it.

This is not a great example of that, but here is a frame grab from the alexa:
Click to expand...

If I had an Alexa, I too would be bumming about how inadequate the AF100 was. Of course the batteries and charging station you need to power your alexa for a day 's worth of shooting probably cost almost as much as an AF.
That said, these two cameras are completely different beasts and it seems pretty odd to be comparing them in this forum.

Speaking of the F3 Wassup with that cam? I haven't heard much and it seems they are out in the wild, no?
 
Went for a more pinkish and lively look to this one but I'm happy with these skin tones:

A sloppy test with terrible sound for upcoming web series

 
Skin tones seem great on the af101 to me, especially when the subject is lit competently. But even in available light, looks nice to me. Nicer than the ex1 which seemed to make everyone look a little cold and pasty.
 
ryancglover said:
Here's some skin (and some moustache!)

5532166298_16aeb93eea_z.jpg


ISO 640 and 2x anamorphic. trying to hone an AF100 filmy look while my friend plays us a song.
Two Kino Flo 15" singles for a key and a little LED light to fill. No CC.
Click to expand...

Sorry to be harsh, but I thought this grab was not very nice looking, maybe it's just me though, I prefer a bit less saturation, the skin tones look way red, the white balance seems off, and it's noisy. Is this suppose to be an example of a good grab, or bad grab?
 
maranfilms said:
Sorry to be harsh, but I thought this grab was not very nice looking, maybe it's just me though, I prefer a bit less saturation, the skin tones look way red, the white balance seems off, and it's noisy. Is this suppose to be an example of a good grab, or bad grab?
Click to expand...

Looks good and filmic to me. The skin tone influenced by the light and atmosphere of the scene, creating a mood. Not every scene has to be white balance to local color. But, yeah, it's all subjective really.
 
maranfilms said:
Sorry to be harsh, but I thought this grab was not very nice looking, maybe it's just me though, I prefer a bit less saturation, the skin tones look way red, the white balance seems off, and it's noisy. Is this suppose to be an example of a good grab, or bad grab?
Click to expand...

Not harsh at all, it's all very subjective. My shot is indeed everything you said it was, and that's why I like it. PaPa's footage looks great too, but if I'm filming my buddy in plaid, playing Bob Dylan songs as the sun goes down, I'd pick the look I came up with every time, because that's how the cozy scene felt to me and that's what I wanted to convey to others. I could have lit it with daylight bulbs to match the window and made everything pure white but then the emotion is gone. And I added a lot of noise in photoshop... that's just an aesthetic that appeals to me. The footage was pretty spotless out of the camera.

astigmatic said:
Looks good and filmic to me. The skin tone influenced by the light and atmosphere of the scene, creating a mood. Not every scene has to be white balance to local color. But, yeah, it's all subjective really.
Click to expand...

Thanks! My thoughts exactly.
 
Did some tests last night with my mother as the model. Around 6:40 pm in Montreal, so the sun was on it's way down giving all the backlight some golden tones which was beautiful, but her face was being lit by the open sky, so I white balanced for that so the skin tone should be bang on. These are the first results I'm exceptionally happy with. Still need to do a little more testing on the perfect IRE for skin depending on the look I want.

mominparksmall.jpg
 
nice, those are definitely a much more dramatic look.

I'm going to be shooting a comedy series soon so I'm looking for something that is as natural as possible with smaller contrast ratio's, flattering, but still natural.
 
Either way I'm just saying that the skin tones on the camera are very nice and in my experience so far not too "pink" as some other cameras tend to be. It has that nice peace tone in decent lighting that the Panasonic cameras have always seemed to get right.

Take that last screenshot I posted and just imagine some fill in there so the ratio isn't so much...the skin tones aren't going to change at all.
 
agreed, skin looks great.

I'm finding i tend to stick to skin going around 60-75 IRE for the brightest parts. That seems to give me what I'm looking for as long as white balance is bang on.
 
Skin tones on the AF100 look gorgeous. And skin highlights on the AF100 looks gorgeous. Overexposure on highlights, not so much. That turns yellow. But if you expose properly (which has historically always meant keeping the very brightest highlights at 70 IRE or below) it always looks fantastic.
 
That's what I did on a recent interview shoot (kept highlights below 70 on the persons face) and I thought it looked great.
 
Shooter said:
To add another little extension to skin tone clipping problems that some experience ( due to lack of exposure control IMHO)....there is a very good reason that professionals apply make up to actors / subjects.

Shiny skin is to be avoided because skin tone is no longer what is being photographed / exposed for...it is the oily shiny moist skin. This does not figure in a normal IRE setting for skin tones.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Exposing for oily or sweaty skin kills the rest of your exposure. Good lighting and makeup does wonders. Most video people don't consider carrying a jar of powder and a brush in their kits. Try a wee bit on the nose tip and forehead & cheekbones and you'll be amazed at the subtle result. A good makeup artist is worth their daily rate but simple touch up you can do easily.
 
OKCPicker said:
Totally agree. Exposing for oily or sweaty skin kills the rest of your exposure. Good lighting and makeup does wonders. Most video people don't consider carrying a jar of powder and a brush in their kits. Try a wee bit on the nose tip and forehead & cheekbones and you'll be amazed at the subtle result. A good makeup artist is worth their daily rate but simple touch up you can do easily.
Click to expand...

Yes I am shocked at how many people don't carry powder in their kit. I use the disposable makeup wedges you can get at any drug store and carry 4 shades of powder. Certainly can't do what a makeup artist can do, but I can keep my subjects from being shiny, which too me just looks awful.
 
Yes, makeup is one of the cheapest way to improve production value. And a makeup person is great if it is in the budget.

I always carry about 8 shades of powder and several brushes, that I wash between shoots and reuse. I also always have several towels and wash cloths in my kit. Great for wiping down sweaty talent and damp equipment or shooters sweaty hands and brow. Just like it is very important to carry lots of water bottles for talent and crew, now that we are coming into the hot season up in the northern hemisphere. Water and makeup are key even in the winter though.

Most pro talent I work with will do their own makeup if asked before hand, and they are generally great at this.
 
conclusion:
If the lighting can be perfectly controlled and we can always have make up at hand the AF100 looks fantastic.
ok, I'm sold...on the F3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top