Slog must not be as good as they claim

Douglas Villalba said:
We would't want that, but you should have test footage from before you committed to do a paid job. Unless you learned something new after the tests?
Click to expand...

TimurCivan said:
even a Tiff from Vegas?
Click to expand...

no test footage, i'm usually brought in a week before principle photography, sometimes a little more notice. and if i'm doing any post, color, edit or what not, well... they shot everything already :)
as for learning something new... it's nothing really new, log curve has been around for quite a long time now, you can even do it with r3d if you want to. it's just a gamma curve that retains more information from the sensor and compresses into a usable state for you to toss around back into a image that you want. but there are ways of exposing for it too, and yes you can still mess up your exposure even with log. just like how you still can with film. so while all the time i've been working, something like log isn't really new, but since it's a different camera with a different sensor, more tests should be done to see how you should be exposing for this sensor, and how it reacts. i'm expecting it to be very similar to Alexa, and other cameras that do something similar. the added sensitivity and rating of it the camera should prove more interesting results. might be doing some tests next week actually.



no tiff from vegas Timur, the firmware was beta, it's not something to measure with... better to use the full release package.
 
well,
with all the new VDSLRs and VG20 coming up from Sony, i guess we'll see a decent price drop early 2012 the latest for
the slog update...
at least i desperately hope so... ;-)
 
krost-audiovisual said:
well,
with all the new VDSLRs and VG20 coming up from Sony, i guess we'll see a decent price drop early 2012 the latest for
the slog update...
at least i desperately hope so... ;-)
Click to expand...

highly doubt it, after all it's a firmware upgrade, there's no really parts to manufacture, all it's paying back to is r&d, and than profit. so now like when parts get cheaper, it will get cheaper. even a dvx100 stayed relatively at it's retail price, because of certain parts. As long as there is no competition "log upgrade' from an opposing company I don't see why sony would ever drop the price on it. so unless Panasonic comes out with a cam that has log thats packaged with the cam for X amount of dollars or price the upgrade at X amount of dollars cheaper than Sony, they'll really have no incentive to drop the price on it.

it's just basic business, prerogative to save our wallets is always marginal compared to the grand scheme of what they want. which is profit, it's what any company would want.
 
The verdict is still out. I have seen all the tests out there but non has actually used a light meter. How can you test light without a light meter.
The only reason to use slog is to extend the latitude. What is the use of testing when the test subject doesn't fall outside of the extremes? We know it works with grays on the waveform, real life is not in even stops/shades of gray.
I suggest that you guys that have Slog take out your light meter, find a place or create a set that meets the 13.5 f/stops and then start exposing at 0 dbs (1,600 ISO) for the highlights moving to exposing for the shadows 1 stop at the time. Find what looks best after grading and show us the behind the scenes process. (Easy for me to say :cheesy:)
I am glad that the camera without slog has such great latitude and thats what we can use at 95% of all shoots.
 
obviously if you don't see the value, don't get it, don't use it. no point in spreading FUD. a lot of traine DP's see the test for what it is, and understand that a lot of the shots were incredibly difficult to do on digital cameras without that much dynamic range, because they've been there and had to make some tough choices. You don't need a light meter if you have had the experience to see that, the shot in the underpass for example, would have been pure misery to shoot on lower end cameras. and that's that. I don't have the disposable income for fancy charts, and honestly a light meter doesn't equate so much anymore with digital gamma curves. It's all about waveform and scopes. I see little point in even owning one these days... but that's just me :P
 
The most a light meter is going to do for me when lighting a scene is let me know my ratios which can be useful for getting consistent looks between different scenes for your key, fill, and background (if lit) - but most of this can be done with the marker function built into any decent camera these days. (The HVX had this, HPX, etc... ) and then of course a waveform monitor is really useful to see what's going on in a scene and for setting your exposure. (ooops I forgot about zebras too)
 
I couldn't spread FUD because I don't even know what FUD is. It is just my opinion and I think I am entitled to it just like you are entitled to yours.
Tom you don't know me and I don't you, but you can't take it personally when I write on a thread that I started myself before you and Timur did your test. I purposely didn't write on anyone's thread so no one could take it personal. I have seen other tests beside your with different results that I also find a lot of holes in them.
You took the time to post a response on the thread that I started so I will answer.
In the film world you can't work without a light meter because you can't see what you are filming until it comes back from the lab. I am sure that you knew that, but you young guys that where born in the digital age trust only electronic equipment and can't relate to something that you don't understand. The same way I can use a waveform/histogram and do often to get an average good exposure, but I think that they are only needed to stay legal when your final delivery is TV. It is not precise 'cause it works just like a reflective light meter. For example flesh tones on a vector scope are all very similar no matter if you are latino like me, black, white or anything in between. However their reflection is different so you can't precisely judge skin's IRE or use a reflective meter to get precise exposure.
Unless you are comfortable using a light meter (Not reflective or even with the half moon incident. use the flat face incident attachment) you will never know what I am talking about. That may be fine with you, but if you don't want to test something else that is fine. You just can't expect me to take your test or anyone else as the only truth.
 
I'm sure everyone has watched the Zacuto 2011 "great camera shootout" and its really too bad it did not include the F3 with SLOG enabled, only without it, but it is worth watching if you haven't already. It gives some really great insight to the various range, capabilities and looks all the different cameras offer along with interesting comments from people within the industry.

There is a lot of good information in there if you have the patience to watch two long episodes. Most surprising to me is the fact of how amazing the F3 without SLOG stood up in the tests next to Alexa, Red MX, etc... WITH SLOG it would have knocked these peoples SOCKS OFF !!!

http://www.zacuto.com/the-great-camera-shootout-2011/episode-one
 
This thread has gone on way too long. If you want some examples of log, turn on your tv. 80% of the commercials you'll see were shot and processed in log. Whether on Alexas, Vipers, Genesis, d-21's, etc. 80% of quick turnaround stuff is shot and processed in log. It's a scientifically proven method for retaining far more detail and gradation that goes far beyond just "Capturing more dynamic range". The luma curve effects how chroma is stored and processed and it has been used for years now. You are welcome to your opinion regarding log, but keep in mind every DP in the modern industry uses it and loves it on a daily basis. Trying to grade a rec.709 recording in comparison to something fully logarithmic is a headache to say the least. Here's the proposed ACES workflow that is utilized on almost everything you will see when you turn on your television - http://fohdeesha.com/data/pictures/other2/ACES.png

Also, as DP's found out once the digital cameras started becoming mainstay, a light meter is absolutely useless with them for anything but checking lighting ratios. Light meters were built to emulate the very specific response curve of silver halide film and are not applicable to exposing digital cinema sensors. The ONLY tool that guarantees 100% accurate exposure on a digital cinema set is a proper waveform, as was discovered, talked about, and displayed in the Camera Assessment Series held by the ASC a year or two ago. You might be able to find it on vimeo.
 
Fohdeesha said:
This thread has gone on way too long. If you want some examples of log, turn on your tv. 80% of the commercials you'll see were shot and processed in log. Whether on Alexas, Vipers, Genesis, d-21's, etc. 80% of quick turnaround stuff is shot and processed in log. It's a scientifically proven method for retaining far more detail and gradation that goes far beyond just "Capturing more dynamic range". The luma curve effects how chroma is stored and processed and it has been used for years now. You are welcome to your opinion regarding log, but keep in mind every DP in the modern industry uses it and loves it on a daily basis. Trying to grade a rec.709 recording in comparison to something fully logarithmic is a headache to say the least. Here's the proposed ACES workflow that is utilized on almost everything you will see when you turn on your television - http://fohdeesha.com/data/pictures/other2/ACES.png

Also, as DP's found out once the digital cameras started becoming mainstay, a light meter is absolutely useless with them for anything but checking lighting ratios. Light meters were built to emulate the very specific response curve of silver halide film and are not applicable to exposing digital cinema sensors. The ONLY tool that guarantees 100% accurate exposure on a digital cinema set is a proper waveform, as was discovered, talked about, and displayed in the Camera Assessment Series held by the ASC a year or two ago. You might be able to find it on vimeo.
Click to expand...

yep. yep. and yep.

I think everything that can be said , has been said. Nothing was taken personally, it's just a matter of view and types of work, that said, gotta get back to it. cheers all.
 
Douglas Villalba said:
I couldn't spread FUD because I don't even know what FUD is. It is just my opinion and I think I am entitled to it just like you are entitled to yours.
Tom you don't know me and I don't you, but you can't take it personally when I write on a thread that I started myself before you and Timur did your test. I purposely didn't write on anyone's thread so no one could take it personal. I have seen other tests beside your with different results that I also find a lot of holes in them.
You took the time to post a response on the thread that I started so I will answer.
In the film world you can't work without a light meter because you can't see what you are filming until it comes back from the lab. I am sure that you knew that, but you young guys that where born in the digital age trust only electronic equipment and can't relate to something that you don't understand. The same way I can use a waveform/histogram and do often to get an average good exposure, but I think that they are only needed to stay legal when your final delivery is TV. It is not precise 'cause it works just like a reflective light meter. For example flesh tones on a vector scope are all very similar no matter if you are latino like me, black, white or anything in between. However their reflection is different so you can't precisely judge skin's IRE or use a reflective meter to get precise exposure.
Unless you are comfortable using a light meter (Not reflective or even with the half moon incident. use the flat face incident attachment) you will never know what I am talking about. That may be fine with you, but if you don't want to test something else that is fine. You just can't expect me to take your test or anyone else as the only truth.
Click to expand...

I cannot tell you how incredibly condescending this post is, as well as just being wrong. I know I had a film camera before I had a video camera. Many others have done projects in film. Yes I used a light meter.

Not because I couldn't see the film (actually with a prism you can see through the lens), but because the human eye will trick you every time. With video cameras a light meter will often give you incorrect results. Video sensors just process the image data differently than film.

Having done several camera tests I can say that there is no such thing as a perfect test. Someone will always want something different. I say that every test will tell you something if analyze the test. There is no right or wrong, just better or worse for being able to judge a certain aspect.

Saying its your opinion and you're entitled to it no matter what is like saying "Black is white, its my opinion and I'm entitled to it." That's why I said before you're on the edge of trolling. If you don't like the way something was graded, download it and check the results yourself. Don't whine and making pronouncements. It really does sound like you just don't want to look at it yourself. No one needs to convince you, you need to convince yourself. Go test it.

Sorry if that offends you, I'm trying to be honest and nudge you into a proactive participant.

EDIT: After posting I note that Fodeesha and Tom Wong have said pretty much the same thing. Hey, I type slow.
 
Well i may be young (28), but iv'e shot 35, in motion and still (actually 35mm stills since i was 10), and even got to shoot on S16 last summer. i know how to use film. It's this experience that helped me so much shooting digital.


Truth is Doug, we have done the tests, and i do use meters. The shots under the overpass, and with Tom in the shade, and the dramatic shots, are all maximizing the DR, and exposed specifically to demonstrate the width of the range. I took the exposure up to 110 IRE in all of them.
 
It is obvious that Slog expands the latitude of the camera. I just haven't seen it and I don't need it right now, so I am not going to spent $3.5k just to prove a point. I'll just wait until someone does or the next Zacuto shootout.

This is the era of instant gratification.

Lets get rid of f stops all together if they don't mean anything. Lets get rid of charts with one stop gradation and just use IREs.
You wouldn't have a way of judging latitude if you don't start with old f stop charts technology.

All I'm saying is do and say what you want. I won't or want to change your mind. You won't change my mine. I just have more tools to work with.

Oh, and if you don't agree with my comments, do what I do with some threads of no interest to me. Don't open it.
 
The first time I shot with LOG was 5 years ago with a VIPER. We were in the desert with blinding hot skies. I remember one shot where I set exposure on a wide shot,and thought for sure that the sky was at 100%. To my surprise, the sky was at 85%. Totally blew me away.

LOG is powerful, and simply gives DOP's another tool (along with lighting,lenses,ect) to get the most
out of their images.

I plan on getting LOG shortly because Frankly, I could not imagine owning this camera and NOT having LOG. Just my opinion.

As for light-meters- Like many here I have shot film for many years, and occasionally pull out a meter for ratios or when lighting a large set. It's kinda like comfort food for me, and allows me to ball-park the lighting . Mostly, I rely on the waveform . It seems I use my color temp meter more often than my light meter.

BTW-Tim, thanks for your post. We are all learning new things as we go, and it is posts like yours that lets me know other people's experiences and results.
 
Douglas Villalba said:
It is obvious that Slog expands the latitude of the camera. I just haven't seen it and I don't need it right now, so I am not going to spent $3.5k just to prove a point..
Click to expand...

What is it that you haven't seen? This is my question. Will full respect, i'm trying to help you see what you are looking for.
 
Is it so hard to understand that without a light meter you just don't know if you have the 13.5 stops. Could some tell me how would you do it in a different way?

NAHA41, Just like you said. Slog, Light meters and your color meters are all tools. The more you know and use them the better you are. Someone is provably saying "Why would you use a color meter? I can see my monitor."
 
Douglas Villalba said:
Is it so hard to understand that without a light meter you just don't know if you have the 13.5 stops. Could some tell me how would you do it in a different way?

NAHA41, Just like you said. Slog, Light meters and your color meters are all tools. The more you know and use them the better you are. Someone is provably saying "Why would you use a color meter? I can see my monitor."
Click to expand...

I have a light meter, what do you want me to do? :P

You are not going to necessarily see 13.5 stops within the playback image, as in something you can measure.... you are really just capturing 13.5 stops of real life, and displaying it into the same range of the playback/final image, which is what?... 110ire, 100ire? (I don't know much about standard playback formats). You still 'see' the same black blacks and bright whites on your television. It's simply about capturing a greater range when shooting and displaying that range in the standard display range. More stops captured does not mean more stops being emitted from the image. It just means you'll get more detail in shadows, or highlights, or both.

That make sense? You can't look at an image and see the range of exposure stops that was actually there. By using knowledge as a photographer or cinematographer, you can make educated guesses at how someone got that exposure... such as "Oh wow, they got the sky exposed and the shadow area... they either had lots of latitude or they had lots of fill.... etc"
 
Last edited:
slogwaveform.jpg


Rear lit step chart.
 
Typically, my color temp meter gets pulled out on location scouts. I need to be able to read the green on floro's, yellow on sodium street lights, ect . in those circumstances it allows me to order the correct gel. On set , it allows me to make precise decisions about color temp.

Same with a light meter. Walk into a space on a scout and determine the ambient. Decide on the basic lighting, and what instruments will allow me to punch the base stop.

Can you shoot with-out LOG? Sure. Can you light a retail store flooded with florescent light without a color temp meter. Probably, but i wouldn't. Depends on how you like to work. What I do know is that I will always try to convince the client to go LOG. My images will be better for it, and the client will benefit.
 
TimurCivan said:
slogwaveform.jpg


Rear lit step chart.
Click to expand...
Timur, I am not questioning the ability of Slog. I have said this a million times. I have seen the charts.
With the charts you know that you have all 13 f stops because the chart represents all 13 stops with different shades of gray.
What I haven't seen is a test like Zacuto that says "The cat under direct sunlight is at f64, the dog in the shade is at f45, 32,22,16,11,8,5.6,4,2.8,2,1.4 and 1.0 That makes all 13 f stops. I don't want all 13, but you need the 1 and the 13 and some in the middle. The idea is not to push to one extreme when you really don't have to.
I have seen interiors shot only with the light coming from the windows and you can see through the window detail outside the house without Slog.
How would you do a latitude test without a light meter and someone that knows how to use it? Sure I don't need a light meter to know that at direct sun light you exposure is f16.5 @ ISO's speed (ISO 125 = 1/125th second) but to do a latitude test you do need it.
I could get into details and write for hours, but if people are happy with what they had seen so far why should I take the time.
I'm anal when it comes to detail. That is why I have read the instructions a couple of times and I don't even have the camera yet.
You can choose to ignore my post or try and use what I have learn in over 35 yrs. I am constantly learning from you and others in these forums. I don't know it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top