FS5: Sony PXW-FX6
- Thread starter J.Brown
- Start date
broughtonfilm
Well-known member
I think it's really nicely shot but the grade could have really brought it to life more and evened out some skintones a wee bit.
On that subject I feel there is a difference between shooters who treat the post-pipeline as part of the process to achieve the result they are aiming for and those looking to get everything they want and need straight out of the camera.
Two completely valid but contrasting approaches that sort of travel along the broadcast/narrative schools of thought.
Just as an example here's an example of what I think about when I shoot. FYI the example was deliberately not meant to be a fab shot or anything, just a quick one-light plonk my son down and film situation.
This is straight out of the camera with a S709 LUT. Single LED panel too hot (on purpose for the test) on unwilling subject and with a weird cast. It certainly has less depth and is flatter and has more of those 'video' attributes people speak of.
Original S709 -
Desaturated image overall. Vignette to make the subject come out of the background more. Re-saturated yellow top and gave colour to blown out face and some fine film grain added just for fun.
And there I ended up with something that is eminently useable for my needs and took about 2mins to do and if I were to do similar with a properly composed shot I'd end up v happy with the results.
EDIT: Just to add it's not important if the above is a good shot or not (spoiler: It's not) but rather that there is a consistent methodology in place before you start turning over. ie shooting for how you (or A.N. Other) intend to treat your material.
This is a good example that the whole "Sony look" might be subjective too. These screen grabs were posted as an examples of how good the FX6 can look, but to me they scream "shot on Sony". These are pretty bad grades if you ask me, but clearly to some quite the opposite.
Ben Scott
Veteran
Fair enough, but I repeatedly stated that they were NOT AN EXAMPLE OF HOW GOOD THE FX6 CAN LOOK. You quoted the bit where I said that it's not a good shot.
It was an example of having a methodology or a set bunch of things you do to an image vs wanting to get it in-camera. The second image - and maybe it needs to be in motion - doesn't do anything of the 'scream Sony' sort for me but as you say that's subjective. The first image is not a grade. It's the s709 transform lut.
In its defence it was however exactly what I had described earlier in the thread... A crap single single light panel with a cast set too hot result in a flat image - which is the sort of thing you find with tons of stuff online shot on more inexpensive cameras as opposed to more contrived and controlled shoots done on proper productions with more expensive cameras.
I don't want to subject anyone to it or put anyone on the spot but I feel if I were to post a pre-lockdown reel nobody would be able to tell me which things were shot on which cameras without prior information.
It was an example of having a methodology or a set bunch of things you do to an image vs wanting to get it in-camera. The second image - and maybe it needs to be in motion - doesn't do anything of the 'scream Sony' sort for me but as you say that's subjective. The first image is not a grade. It's the s709 transform lut.
In its defence it was however exactly what I had described earlier in the thread... A crap single single light panel with a cast set too hot result in a flat image - which is the sort of thing you find with tons of stuff online shot on more inexpensive cameras as opposed to more contrived and controlled shoots done on proper productions with more expensive cameras.
I don't want to subject anyone to it or put anyone on the spot but I feel if I were to post a pre-lockdown reel nobody would be able to tell me which things were shot on which cameras without prior information.
Last edited:
broughtonfilm
Well-known member
Yeah whether it's a good shot or not is obvious, you stated clearly it is not, I know. I was talking about the grades. The discussion was about the importance of a good post workflow, proper color correction being key and how most users don't know how to grade Slog3 which contributes to the "Sony color" stigma. But then you post these and say that the grade "took about 2mins to do" and say you would've been happy with it if the shot itself were better. That's why I said it was very subjective because to me it actually looked like an example of a typical bad Slog3 grade, both as a result and as an approach. On the other hand you said the grade which I liked in the Sony promo I posted a link to wasn't the best. This just tells me a lot of it is a subjective personal preference. That's what I was trying to say.
Last edited:
Ben Scott
Veteran
Ahh in my time away I forgot how this forum works.... 
I should know better than to share anything unless it's proper work because it's open to so much interpretation and now I'll forever be immortalised as Dave Crapshooter. As an aside I have 2 thumbdowns on a piece of FX6 footage I shared on YT despite me making it plain that it was a handheld 'try to break the camera' exposure test in lockdown and the sort of thing I would not normally share. Who the hell thumbdowns something like that?
Yes I am happy that my workflow test showed me that it will work on this camera. The shot itself wasn't the point really the point.
You say it's a typical example of a bad SLOG3 grade. I think it's just a typical example of a bad SLOG3 shot.
I feel the grade in the FX3 thing posted earlier actually has mistakes in it rather than just being subjectively something one does or doesn't have a taste for.
I should know better than to share anything unless it's proper work because it's open to so much interpretation and now I'll forever be immortalised as Dave Crapshooter. As an aside I have 2 thumbdowns on a piece of FX6 footage I shared on YT despite me making it plain that it was a handheld 'try to break the camera' exposure test in lockdown and the sort of thing I would not normally share. Who the hell thumbdowns something like that?
Yes I am happy that my workflow test showed me that it will work on this camera. The shot itself wasn't the point really the point.
You say it's a typical example of a bad SLOG3 grade. I think it's just a typical example of a bad SLOG3 shot.
I feel the grade in the FX3 thing posted earlier actually has mistakes in it rather than just being subjectively something one does or doesn't have a taste for.
Ben Scott
Veteran
Well it was over exposed and had a cast to it, which for my purposes was on purpose when I took the shot. I won't try to shoot something beautiful until I have found what a system can and can't do. Got hugely burned doing that on my first paid FS7 gig (a slo-mo studio shoot for a lager) where the kinks hadn't been ironed out of the colour science.
Welcome back, right Ben. (that's sarcasm) Try to post some helpful tests - which might be instructive to those considering and you get the "Video look" card.
The thing I get most tired of (besides pointless political posts which will get locked) on this forum is all the conjecture over "color science" and "filmic", "artistic" looks that A. never take into account the budget and crew size for the piece presented and B. point to You Tube videos to demonstrate those "facts". At the end of the day, one needs to see any differences from different manufacturers in a proper grading room and then make their own subjective decisions (since we all see color a little bit individually anyway). So I appreciate when folks are sharing useful info rather than simply telling me that mfg A colors are SOOOO much better than mfg B, etc.
Carry on!
The thing I get most tired of (besides pointless political posts which will get locked) on this forum is all the conjecture over "color science" and "filmic", "artistic" looks that A. never take into account the budget and crew size for the piece presented and B. point to You Tube videos to demonstrate those "facts". At the end of the day, one needs to see any differences from different manufacturers in a proper grading room and then make their own subjective decisions (since we all see color a little bit individually anyway). So I appreciate when folks are sharing useful info rather than simply telling me that mfg A colors are SOOOO much better than mfg B, etc.
Carry on!
Ben Scott
Veteran
Oh it's all good. Everyone's allowed to have an opinion and I don't take offence at that.
I've been doing the job long enough at a decent enough level that I don't need to be insecure about people not liking something I've done.
It's just an issue for me, in the Youtube thumbdowns especially, when something is being judged for what it isn't and was never meant to be as opposed to what it is.
I try to explain that stuff but nobody reads. At which point I feel I should go with my first instinct of keeping my tests and methodology to myself and only post finished works.
I've been doing the job long enough at a decent enough level that I don't need to be insecure about people not liking something I've done.
It's just an issue for me, in the Youtube thumbdowns especially, when something is being judged for what it isn't and was never meant to be as opposed to what it is.
I try to explain that stuff but nobody reads. At which point I feel I should go with my first instinct of keeping my tests and methodology to myself and only post finished works.
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
Kind of old news now, I guess, but I just wanted to followup. Sony sent me a new LCD monitor and it is nice and rigid. Problem solved.
broughtonfilm
Well-known member
Ha! Mine has been completely loose from the very beginning, it would not hold its own weight when mounted certain way. Good to know it can be fixed. How long did it take them to send you a replacement and how painful was the process?
Doug Jensen
Carbonite Member
It took a couple of weeks after I went straight to one of my contacts at Sony. I don't know how long it would take if you went through regular channels. FYI, if you plan on getting a Zacuto Z-Finder, it might not be worth getting a new LCD because the Zacuto fixes it anyway. But I still wanted a monitor that worked the way it supposed to.
Joshua Milligan
Well-known member
Hey Ben, I'll throw myself in here too so you won't be the only one taking the heat haha. I appreciate people who are willing to share their work or in this case a screenshot to demonstrate something. There's no reason to bash anyone for trying to be helpful. I appreciate you posting your images.
I'm sure people will find fault in my attachments as well which is why I don't normally post things like this on forums or on social media, but I decided to share some examples from my first shoot with the FX6.
This was the perfect job for this camera. A quick afternoon interview shoot where we had access to the smallest room you could possibly imagine with essentially no props or anything to dress the room up and make it look better. The client wanted this done quickly and only wanted me to use this room. You can see from the last picture here how small and not ideal this room was.
So, I worked with what I had and we found a small plant, a stand to put it on, and this really cool antique light that I ended up using as a prop that also provided some interesting light. Anything to make this blank wall look better.
I pulled the subject away from the wall to add a little depth and left the natural window light so that it shined on the right side of her face. To make the window light even more dramatic, I threw a 1'x1' Westcott LED panel set to your typical daylight Kelvin to add even more "window light".
I shot the interview with two cameras, an FX6 (the first picture) and an A7SIII (the second picture). I had both set to S-Log3 / S-Gamut3.Cine with a matching white balance. As a side note, I used the A7SIII's custom white balance tool to set the white balance to a grey card and then matched the FX6 to that manually since the A7SIII's white balance tool is so much better to use than the FX6's.
For lensing, I ran a Zeiss 50mm 1.4 prime on the FX6 and a Sony 70-200 2.8 on the A7SIII, both set to autofocus using eye autofocus. For the entire three hours we were there, neither camera ever lost focus on her eye and neither ever hunted or pulsed like older autofocusing systems used to do. This was incredibly useful for shooting at lower f/stops over a long period of time where the interviewee kept shifting in her seat.
Lastly, I ran a Sennheiser MKH 8040 cardioid mic over the top of her on a fixed boom, running the audio into the FX6 using a wireless plug-on transmitter. This allowed me to run two receivers on the FX6, one set to her audio level and one set 10dB lower in case for any reason she got loud on me when talking. I chose to go with a cardioid mic to help combat the small, echoey room the best I could.
When I got home, I graded the footage using an adjustment layer with a Phantom ARRI LUT that was designed for S-Log3 / S-Gamut3.Cine footage. The specific LUT I chose was for Tungsten which gives a more warmish look. I went with that LUT to compliment the light prop in the background which gave a look I really liked. As another side note, I had a SmallHD 5" FOCUS monitor on the back of the FX6 with the LUT applied to it while I was shooting so that I could see what it looked like on a bigger screen.
When grading the footage, I noticed that I had to make some slight adjustments to the A7SIII to get it to perfectly match the FX6, but overall it was pretty much there to begin with, so matching was a breeze. I also had to sharpen the FX6 footage slightly because it looked a tad soft to me compared to the A7SIII which I liked the sharpness of better. But, a small sharpness adjustment in Lumetri quickly fixed that for me.
Overall, I was very happy with the way this turned out. Considering how little I had to work with, I thought the FX6 and A7SIII handled this very well. For quick projects like this, it's perfect. And the more time I spend with the FX6, the more I can see its value as a tool that can be used for anything from commercial projects to music videos, corporate videos, speaking engagements, TED Talks, livestreaming, short films, documentary projects and more. It's the perfect size, price and quality from an owner operator standpoint and cuts together extremely well with the A7SIII for an awesome 1-2 punch. And now that the A7SIII has S-Cinetone, I can even livestream these two cameras together with a nice baked in image when grading isn't going to happen. Same with any project I'm hired to do where my job is to hand over footage that's ready to go out-of-camera.
I'm sure some of you will look at this image and point to its flaws and claim how it's not ARRI, RED, Canon or Blackmagic, but the fact is that I'M happy with the image and to ME it looks exactly how I like my images to look and ultimately that's what matters. If the camera gives me confidence and my clients are happy with the results, then I'm happy with it too. And if the camera itself is super easy to work with due to its size, built-in ND filters, autofocus, and up to four channels of audio inputs, then it's all that much better.
Thanks again Ben for sharing your images. I'm glad you like the camera. I do too.
I'm sure people will find fault in my attachments as well which is why I don't normally post things like this on forums or on social media, but I decided to share some examples from my first shoot with the FX6.
This was the perfect job for this camera. A quick afternoon interview shoot where we had access to the smallest room you could possibly imagine with essentially no props or anything to dress the room up and make it look better. The client wanted this done quickly and only wanted me to use this room. You can see from the last picture here how small and not ideal this room was.
So, I worked with what I had and we found a small plant, a stand to put it on, and this really cool antique light that I ended up using as a prop that also provided some interesting light. Anything to make this blank wall look better.
I pulled the subject away from the wall to add a little depth and left the natural window light so that it shined on the right side of her face. To make the window light even more dramatic, I threw a 1'x1' Westcott LED panel set to your typical daylight Kelvin to add even more "window light".
I shot the interview with two cameras, an FX6 (the first picture) and an A7SIII (the second picture). I had both set to S-Log3 / S-Gamut3.Cine with a matching white balance. As a side note, I used the A7SIII's custom white balance tool to set the white balance to a grey card and then matched the FX6 to that manually since the A7SIII's white balance tool is so much better to use than the FX6's.
For lensing, I ran a Zeiss 50mm 1.4 prime on the FX6 and a Sony 70-200 2.8 on the A7SIII, both set to autofocus using eye autofocus. For the entire three hours we were there, neither camera ever lost focus on her eye and neither ever hunted or pulsed like older autofocusing systems used to do. This was incredibly useful for shooting at lower f/stops over a long period of time where the interviewee kept shifting in her seat.
Lastly, I ran a Sennheiser MKH 8040 cardioid mic over the top of her on a fixed boom, running the audio into the FX6 using a wireless plug-on transmitter. This allowed me to run two receivers on the FX6, one set to her audio level and one set 10dB lower in case for any reason she got loud on me when talking. I chose to go with a cardioid mic to help combat the small, echoey room the best I could.
When I got home, I graded the footage using an adjustment layer with a Phantom ARRI LUT that was designed for S-Log3 / S-Gamut3.Cine footage. The specific LUT I chose was for Tungsten which gives a more warmish look. I went with that LUT to compliment the light prop in the background which gave a look I really liked. As another side note, I had a SmallHD 5" FOCUS monitor on the back of the FX6 with the LUT applied to it while I was shooting so that I could see what it looked like on a bigger screen.
When grading the footage, I noticed that I had to make some slight adjustments to the A7SIII to get it to perfectly match the FX6, but overall it was pretty much there to begin with, so matching was a breeze. I also had to sharpen the FX6 footage slightly because it looked a tad soft to me compared to the A7SIII which I liked the sharpness of better. But, a small sharpness adjustment in Lumetri quickly fixed that for me.
Overall, I was very happy with the way this turned out. Considering how little I had to work with, I thought the FX6 and A7SIII handled this very well. For quick projects like this, it's perfect. And the more time I spend with the FX6, the more I can see its value as a tool that can be used for anything from commercial projects to music videos, corporate videos, speaking engagements, TED Talks, livestreaming, short films, documentary projects and more. It's the perfect size, price and quality from an owner operator standpoint and cuts together extremely well with the A7SIII for an awesome 1-2 punch. And now that the A7SIII has S-Cinetone, I can even livestream these two cameras together with a nice baked in image when grading isn't going to happen. Same with any project I'm hired to do where my job is to hand over footage that's ready to go out-of-camera.
I'm sure some of you will look at this image and point to its flaws and claim how it's not ARRI, RED, Canon or Blackmagic, but the fact is that I'M happy with the image and to ME it looks exactly how I like my images to look and ultimately that's what matters. If the camera gives me confidence and my clients are happy with the results, then I'm happy with it too. And if the camera itself is super easy to work with due to its size, built-in ND filters, autofocus, and up to four channels of audio inputs, then it's all that much better.
Thanks again Ben for sharing your images. I'm glad you like the camera. I do too.
Last edited:
Ben Scott
Veteran
Man that is the nightmare situation - the tiny box room with 4 white walls. I either get given that, or the nicely coloured breakout room that everyone has to walk through or has their lunch outside. Good rescue job.
I can't wait to use it on a proper gig if they are ever going to happen again.
I can't wait to use it on a proper gig if they are ever going to happen again.
Mate I just want to say thanks for being a part of the discussion and putting out some images for us all to look at. You absolutely qualified what they were.
This finder actually looks great. I love how fast it can be removed.
I agree that the discussion too often reduces to opinion and hyperbole, but many here are more experienced than I am and while I know what I see and what I like, I'm interested in the science behind how to get there. I've already mentioned that I think the difference is most obvious in more natural settings where it can't be disguised by big productions, and the quality of the discussion in general is why I'm here and not on YouTube telling you all that its 4:4:4 or bust
Ben Scott
Veteran
Very kind of you. I think everything will make sense once we are doing proper production again. As it stands right now I've nobody to shoot but the boy and nowhere to shoot but the woods or the front room.
I agree that the discussion too often reduces to opinion and hyperbole, but many here are more experienced than I am and while I know what I see and what I like, I'm interested in the science behind how to get there. I've already mentioned that I think the difference is most obvious in more natural settings where it can't be disguised by big productions, and the quality of the discussion in general is why I'm here and not on YouTube telling you all that its 4:4:4 or bust
On the subject of natural settings, have you seen this? The forest stuff looked great and was a one-man band with autofocus which I tend to loathe. Finally going to give it a try on this camera.
No no no .. come on dude .. whats this about .. if you had shot Arri LF T0.8 special super cinematic Cooke anamorphic 300mm lens .. this would have looked like Roger Deakins had shot it .. get serious people ! .. amateurs ..
cyvideo
Veteran
Great of you to put up some shots Josh. As you indicated you have broad enough shoulders to take the heat so to speak. Good on you.
Agreed, not a nice little loco to shoot in but it happens to all of us, too often, unfortunately. Really interesting to see your match between the two cams. Might I just ask though. What did you shoot the still of the loco on as it appears to have a more natural color balance. Obviously, I can't compare the loco shot with the graded shots but I'm curious. I looked at your images on three different monitors. Two were sRGB and one is a calibrated Rec 709. On all monitors though but especially on the Rec 709 all the graded shots appear to have a fairly green bias. Just curious as to whether this a conscious choice to lean that way or was this the influence of the LUT you used? I've found footage from the Venice to be a little biased towards the green end of town so was curious when I saw your shots. That's a fairly common comment about the Venice, leaning towards green. Quite a few posts about this on this forum when the original Venice Luts came out. The Venice takes after the ARRI in that green bias to some degree. You only have to look at the number of Green minus Lut sets around for the ARRI and the Venice. From the popular Bert Degraeve S7-FS5-F5-F55 Arrilook LUTs to the whole sets of Venice Green1 Minus and Green2 Minus camera and grading Luts to see that a lot of graders are knocking green out of the images they are dealing with.
Forever being a curious cove I thought I'd run your stills through analysis, yes I know stills are not optimum for that but it did confirm my feelings. I did see a green bias in all the camera grabs. The skin tones were well below the skin tone line and heading towards green for sure. As I said this may have been a conscious choice on your part seeing that you graded it or was it the influence of the selected Lut. Have a look at the attached stills. Specifically at the skin tone line on the vector analyzer and the green in the levels analyzer. The second still shows what I had to push and pull on to bring the skin tones back on the skin tone line. Look I'm not being critical just curious. Often I see these biases in the footage I work with and on the whole the clients seem to be a little happier when I show them what I would do on their grade to correct these biases. All very subjective of course. As I said, very generous of you to put your shots up for all of us to look at and think about. More power to you my man.
Chris Young
Original grab
Original grab minus green tweaks
Agreed, not a nice little loco to shoot in but it happens to all of us, too often, unfortunately. Really interesting to see your match between the two cams. Might I just ask though. What did you shoot the still of the loco on as it appears to have a more natural color balance. Obviously, I can't compare the loco shot with the graded shots but I'm curious. I looked at your images on three different monitors. Two were sRGB and one is a calibrated Rec 709. On all monitors though but especially on the Rec 709 all the graded shots appear to have a fairly green bias. Just curious as to whether this a conscious choice to lean that way or was this the influence of the LUT you used? I've found footage from the Venice to be a little biased towards the green end of town so was curious when I saw your shots. That's a fairly common comment about the Venice, leaning towards green. Quite a few posts about this on this forum when the original Venice Luts came out. The Venice takes after the ARRI in that green bias to some degree. You only have to look at the number of Green minus Lut sets around for the ARRI and the Venice. From the popular Bert Degraeve S7-FS5-F5-F55 Arrilook LUTs to the whole sets of Venice Green1 Minus and Green2 Minus camera and grading Luts to see that a lot of graders are knocking green out of the images they are dealing with.
Forever being a curious cove I thought I'd run your stills through analysis, yes I know stills are not optimum for that but it did confirm my feelings. I did see a green bias in all the camera grabs. The skin tones were well below the skin tone line and heading towards green for sure. As I said this may have been a conscious choice on your part seeing that you graded it or was it the influence of the selected Lut. Have a look at the attached stills. Specifically at the skin tone line on the vector analyzer and the green in the levels analyzer. The second still shows what I had to push and pull on to bring the skin tones back on the skin tone line. Look I'm not being critical just curious. Often I see these biases in the footage I work with and on the whole the clients seem to be a little happier when I show them what I would do on their grade to correct these biases. All very subjective of course. As I said, very generous of you to put your shots up for all of us to look at and think about. More power to you my man.
Chris Young
Original grab
Original grab minus green tweaks