F3: The Art & Technology of the F3

I always love the look of the F3. One that is my favorite is a film called Touch Feely shot on a pair of F3s. I remember when it came out. Everyone was blown away. The F3 changed the potential for the owner operator. I was always angling for a way to afford one and never made it happen but I've been on sets with them. It's a great camera.
 
Weird, one of the last pages has comments from Curtis Clark on the development of a specific ACES IDT for the F3. I've never found one. Has anyone ever come across it?
 
It's developed but doesn't mean it can be added by user to specific software.

For example no idea why BMD never incorporated it, yet you can do ACES slog F3 workflow in Sony Vegas 12 which is mega breakthrough if you ask me for anyone really looking to strip out the Sony look from the F3.
 
Last edited:
The F3 is a seriously underrated camera. Probably because its HD in a world that is hell bent on 4k and it doesn't support high speed shooting. And it looks like an overgrown Handycam with a wonky EVF on the back.

But it does have 13.5 stops and can practically see in the dark. That's a big deal, even if all that range is cheated in to rec709 via slog. The color science is dead on with very accurate colors and virtually no color shifting in the highlights. I really can't think of another camera that delivers images of this quality anywhere near the price of the F3, especially if you are buying used.

The biggest problem I have encountered with the F3 is in post. I don't know many people who properly de-log and normalize their footage. Even Davinci 10 did a poor job at that (v11 may be better). I finally managed to set up a pipeline in NUKE that handles the footage properly and extracts every bit of information from the files, turning the camera in to a whole different beast. I'm still very happy with my F3.
 
Harry Lime said:
The F3 is a seriously underrated camera. Probably because its HD in a world that is hell bent on 4k and it doesn't support high speed shooting. And it looks like an overgrown Handycam with a wonky EVF on the back.

But it does have 13.5 stops and can practically see in the dark. That's a big deal, even if all that range is cheated in to rec709 via slog. The color science is dead on with very accurate colors and virtually no color shifting in the highlights. I really can't think of another camera that delivers images of this quality anywhere near the price of the F3, especially if you are buying used.

The biggest problem I have encountered with the F3 is in post. I don't know many people who properly de-log and normalize their footage. Even Davinci 10 did a poor job at that (v11 may be better). I finally managed to set up a pipeline in NUKE that handles the footage properly and extracts every bit of information from the files, turning the camera in to a whole different beast. I'm still very happy with my F3.
Click to expand...


+1 Harry - The F3 delivers! If you find a way to dress your F3 in Element Armor you will be even more pleased with the functionality of the camera in most situations.

Using @StarCentral - F35slog to 709A experimental output LUT in Davinci 11 and a bit of grading - screen grab was pulled from a high speed 60fps 720p clip and looks great up'd to 1080p.
 

Attachments

  • football_throw.jpg
    football_throw.jpg
    34.6 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
@Harry - you couldn't have said it better than that. I remember the many wars and long posts on DVX about slog and whether or not it really made a difference. As an ex-F3 owner as they say "if I knew then what I know now". Half the battle really is normalizing it, and doing it properly.

@Paul - Wow that looks insanely great! I am glad to hear the experimental F35 to LC709A LUT worked out for you. F3 shooters can use it too since after all the same slog is used on both the F35 and F3. WOW WOW WOW is all I can say.

I'm going to add this LUT in the Sony-F3-Resurrection-The-New-Chapter thread.
 
Well, I lay a lot of the blame for the mishandling of slog footage at the feet of Sony. Documentation is poor and cryptic and to this day I don't see them falling over themselves to educate software developers and users how to handle their slog footage properly.

Would it really have killed Sony to include a 'RAW' processing program that properly de-logs the footage? How about a LUT that you can download from their site? Shouldn't they have been in contact with companies like Black Magic to make sure the slog pipeline in Davinci works flawlessly?

You really shouldn't have to be a color scientist or highly experienced DI operator to make this work properly.

On the other hand Arri excels like no other, when it comes to providing documentation. On their website there are step by step instructions on how to import ArriRAW or Log C in to even the most obscure packages. They even offer an online LUT generator etc. It's no wonder that they rule the business.

Sony's behavior is a mystery to me. As far as I know everyone of their cameras from the F23 and F35 to the F3/F5/F55/F65 shoots slog. It's a big part of their sales pitch. But support and documentation is scarce at best. I just don't get it.


I've been working on a fairly elaborate project for the past few months and will post some frames once it's all wrapped up.
 
Harry Lime said:
The F3 is a seriously underrated camera. Probably because its HD in a world that is hell bent on 4k and it doesn't support high speed shooting. And it looks like an overgrown Handycam with a wonky EVF on the back.

But it does have 13.5 stops and can practically see in the dark. That's a big deal, even if all that range is cheated in to rec709 via slog. The color science is dead on with very accurate colors and virtually no color shifting in the highlights. I really can't think of another camera that delivers images of this quality anywhere near the price of the F3, especially if you are buying used.

The biggest problem I have encountered with the F3 is in post. I don't know many people who properly de-log and normalize their footage. Even Davinci 10 did a poor job at that (v11 may be better). I finally managed to set up a pipeline in NUKE that handles the footage properly and extracts every bit of information from the files, turning the camera in to a whole different beast. I'm still very happy with my F3.
Click to expand...

That's the whole issue. Because there is no support (not too little, but none) by Sony the camera has been hugely bypassed. You won't win any brownie points, or even a polite nod, for showing up for a shoot with an F3.

Extracting the best picture shouldn't be that big of a deal. In fact, Sony should have provided settings to get the best image possible right out of the camera. After all the F3 was the camera intended for the small indie filmmaker. It was also crippled by the codec. I would have gladly have paid $1,000 for a new board to change the codec to an accepted 4.2.2 50Mbps.

As far as undercutting their more expensive cameras, heck the HDR-AX100 does HD in 4.2.2 50Mbps and does 4k with a better codec. I want a camera where I can concentrate on the angles, framing and movement not fiddle with the settings trying to get a decent image. A great image should be the default settings.
 
Here is a version of LC709A that I adjusted by eye for the original SLog. Which is to say, it's just a white and black level adjustment.

I can't say whether it's better or worse than Dennis's. After reading this thread I just got curious how well the current SLog3 to LC709A LUT would look on old F3 footage, and it worked well with a tiny bit of levels tweaking.

I do know trying it on some old F3 Slog footage I had on old drives had those shots looking better than anything I managed to pull off in 2011 grading SLog by hand. (or using the Alexa LUT and then backing off that by hand)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9943583/LC709forF3.cube.zip
 
Nate Weaver said:
Here is a version of LC709A that I adjusted by eye for the original SLog. Which is to say, it's just a white and black level adjustment.

I can't say whether it's better or worse than Dennis's. After reading this thread I just got curious how well the current SLog3 to LC709A LUT would look on old F3 footage, and it worked well with a tiny bit of levels tweaking.

I do know trying it on some old F3 Slog footage I had on old drives had those shots looking better than anything I managed to pull off in 2011 grading SLog by hand. (or using the Alexa LUT and then backing off that by hand)

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9943583/LC709forF3.cube.zip
Click to expand...

- Thanks Nate I'll give it a go on some footage this week. Cheers
 
Duke M. said:
You won't win any brownie points, or even a polite nod, for showing up for a shoot with an F3.
Click to expand...


I interviewed about a half dozen DoP for the project and you should have seen the look on their face, when I told them that I wanted them to use my F3.
 
Harry Lime said:
I interviewed about a half dozen DoP for the project and you should have seen the look on their face, when I told them that I wanted them to use my F3.
Click to expand...

Buzz (or rather lack of it) is a hell of a thing. For me, shooting with Sony Cinealtas (and more specifically, selling them to clients) has been a serious uphill battle. I bought into the cameras (first the F3, now the F5) because they offered the widest dynamic range and best skin-tones for the money. Like many, if I could afford one - I'd rather have an Alexa, but lacking the funds the Sonys have always seemed the next best option for achieving that 'look'.

Just last week I lost an indie feature to a Red when a new Director came onboard. And I didn't lose the job to another cinematographer mind you (which would have stung a little less), but to 'a Red'. Went a little something like this:

"The new Director wants to shoot on a Red, he feels that will be most appropriate for the story"
"Okay, that's fine, I'm happy to shoot on Red, I've shot with them before"
"Great! So you have a Red?!"
"No, but we can rent them quite affordably these days"
"Oh... sorry. You'd need to have a Red..."
"..."

I guess it's truly become the age of the owner/operator (and God help you if you don't own the right thing!).
 
Last edited:
Grug said:
I guess it's truly become the age of the owner/operator (and God help you if you don't own the right thing!).
Click to expand...

No, it's become the age of the cheap ass client who doesn't want to pay anything close to what the correct rates are for renting that or any other expensive camera.
 
Grug said:
"Oh... sorry. You'd need to have a Red..."

I guess it's truly become the age of the owner/operator (and God help you if you don't own the right thing!).
Click to expand...

yoclay said:
No, it's become the age of the cheap ass client who doesn't want to pay anything close to what the correct rates are for renting that or any other expensive camera.
Click to expand...

Yoclay has that right, all right.

Might have been a fun job, but probably not. Either way, you weren't going to make any real money on that one, so I'd say who cares.

Besides, just that conversation is a red flag. Like they would assume just because you have a Red that you'd have enough of the right stuff to go with it to get the job done right with no additional rentals. Very green of them.
 
Nobody wants an experienced camera operator now, who they'll let choose the appropriate camera.

It's just "Do you have an EPIC DRAGON for $200 a day? You're hired!"

However, on the topic of S-Log, Sony have drastically improved with S-Log 2 and now 3 I think. They have proper LUTs, are doing courses teaching people about it, etc...

Sony really do learn.
 
Grug said:
Buzz (or rather lack of it) is a hell of a thing. For me, shooting with Sony Cinealtas (and more specifically, selling them to clients) has been a serious uphill battle. I bought into the cameras (first the F3, now the F5) because they offered the widest dynamic range and best skin-tones for the money. Like many, if I could afford one - I'd rather have an Alexa, but lacking the funds the Sonys have always seemed the next best option for achieving that 'look'.
Click to expand...

The responses were interesting. They ranged from 'isn't that like a DVX 2000?" to "all Sony cameras look like video", to "but the RED is 5k, so you can reframe!". The video look and comparison to the DVX 1000/2000 remarks were by far the most common.

The DoP I ended up with had access to an Epic, but I told him that under no circumstances would I go with RED. IMO Red has the worst color science in the business and the resolution is overkill. The footage is also always compressed and after having dealt with countless hours of Redcode I want to avoid it as much as possible. Some of this may have changed with Dragon and the new color science, but I will have to reserve my judgement until I get my hands on some footage.

In any case he took the F3 for a few days and shot some tests. He was surprised that the F3 really did deliver the promised 13.5 stops and that high ASA was clean as a whistle. In the end I think the biggest complaint was that since the F3 is in many ways a video camera, it is a little more complicated to operate than a RAW shooting cinema camera. You really need to pay attention to color temperature settings, since unlike RAW, this is baked in. Other then that he seemed quite content and I am pleased with the results.

But in general, selling the F3 is an uphill battle.

Just last week I lost an indie feature to a Red when a new Director came onboard. And I didn't lose the job to another cinematographer mind you (which would have stung a little less), but to 'a Red'. Went a little something like this:

"The new Director wants to shoot on a Red, he feels that will be most appropriate for the story"
"Okay, that's fine, I'm happy to shoot on Red, I've shot with them before"
"Great! So you have a Red?!"
"No, but we can rent them quite affordably these days"
"Oh... sorry. You'd need to have a Red..."
"..."

I guess it's truly become the age of the owner/operator (and God help you if you don't own the right thing!).
Click to expand...

Don't get me started....
 
Last edited:
JMtheDP said:
However, on the topic of S-Log, Sony have drastically improved with S-Log 2 and now 3 I think. They have proper LUTs, are doing courses teaching people about it, etc...

Sony really do learn.
Click to expand...


Does Sony have this material on their site? Where can I find this?

thanks
 
It was funny to stumble onto the above comments as I just got back from dealing with what turned out to be a huge waste of my time and gas driving across LA for a location review, plus a week of emails back and forth.

Them: Thank you SO much for coming out to work with us. Your reel was by far the best of 50 we were considering.
Me: Oh thanks, glad to be a part of it.

2 hours later
Them: Yeah so we are considering your advice about shooting on the F3 given our budget and how fast you can move with it and I (producer) love the look you showed us but the director is saying he really needs this to be on an Epic but if we have to cut costs we could maybe accept a Scarlet... we just need to be sure we can shoot at 48fps for a few shots. This might end up on TV in some markets so we need to make sure it meets broadcast standards too"

Me: Ummm, yeah, well the budget just isn't there and I can do 60fps and I'm giving you a 10bit 422 ProRes file which will make post so easy.... wait, why did you hire me if you don't want me to manage how this will be done technically?

And this is word for word- Director: "Yeah well I have an editor that just makes red footage look SO HUGE and cinematic and it's because of the camera so we need to use a red"...

Me: (Thinking that I need to leave right now but staying nice) Ok, well.... yeah I can operate a red just fine but... hold on, all those shots that you liked on my reel happen to have been shot on 35mm or on an F3.

Email later:
Them: Thank you so much for coming out today but we just don't have a good vibe about you working on this particular shoot.

Me: I agree and feel the same way about you. I was going to help you out based on location/setting and the music artist involved but since you obviously don't trust me enough to take my advice about a subject that you know nothing about, and you say things like 'your editor and the red camera makes footage look so great' ...well, I have better things to do. You might search the film schools or craigslist where you can find a 23yo kid who's dad bought him a red and he is desperate to prove it was a worthwhile investment... LA is FILLED with those kids (sadly, many are grown men) and good luck getting it all done wtihin the 12 hour window.
 
Sadly pretty much what's been said on this thread is true, our world of production is way different to what it used to be in the days when few DoP's could really afford to own their gear or have good reason to do so, ( talking 35mm film gear and lenses here ). But really good camera rental houses were in most markets and the latest cameras, accessories, and lenses could be rented for the job, film or project. Generally the gear and lenses were well serviced, maintained and set up for each job by the house or an AC on pre-production days and choices of what could be tailored to whatever job were far more than any DoP could afford to own.

Owning a camera kit wasn't really necessary, rental houses could exist and thrive because the cameras had profitable rental lifespans that could be decades, not the six months or so in our new digital times.

Many clients too have changed with the times, mostly in my view for the worse not better, wanting the latest and greatest box of tricks without knowing why. If they are content to choose their DoP primarily on what gear he owns and will bring to the table, ( and can be squeezed to make a better deal for production ), I do agree that they are not worth the time and trouble to deal with, BUT we all have to make a crust so the temptations to dance to the client's tune is hard to resist.

I've owned gear for decades, still have a lot of 16 / Aaton gear as well as some flavours of digital. The film gear back in the day paid for itself swiftly, for me the digital gear not so much. I really question the worth of owning gear now. In the past film production days, yes perhaps but now, no…..The expense, the angst of getting everything rightly set-up, and the inevitable swift depreciation especially these days just doesn't make too much sense to me.

Perhaps it's better to invest in good equipment rental insurance and be able to use/provide whatever new or "old" toy each and every client would prefer the job shot on. Financially I am sure it would make good sense in the long and short run, not having to swallow owned equipment depreciation, ( which still has to be insured anyway ), would easily cover it.

My client base is declining anyway, geography, life choices, and perhaps my attitude to what I want to shoot or not all play into that…..but I cannot see myself buying into any more camera gear, and certainly not in any attempt to please or attract a client on anything other that what my crusty old eyes can still image whatever eyepiece I have to look through…..

Luddite..
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top