Also gotta love that cutscene footage endlessly repeating the same incredibly horrible camerawork, sure to look wobbly and meh, holding the camera out at arm's length and just sorta smearing it around the forest.
I feel the biggest mistake from beginners when it comes to exposure is believing the iso is a valid exposure tool. With dual native iso cameras it is ONLY between the two but if it has a native iso if 800 that’s ALL it is. Iso 200 or 3200 doesn’t exist. You may as well shoot iso 800 and adjust exposure in post to match iso 3200 and you’ll have the same noise level. It’s just baking in an exposure lift that can be done later. Cine EI pretty much forces people to think of iso as it is. A digital exposure boost the same as raising exposure in post so if you need things darker you won’t switch to iso 200 where if your highlights clipped at 800 they are still clipped and everything is muddy you’ll be forced to raise your t-stop to darken the image or drop in ND.
Sony you need create a Sony Raw metadata compatible with davinci resolve like BRAW or AppleRes Pro RAW, catalyst is great but is not easy to us exporting the footages first from catalyst and then go to our favorite editing software. I have a Sony Fx3 and Sony Fs7M2 and is tough can't edit Raw in davinci. Think it about it.
@@philliptamez If you filmed with a very good gimbal it is not necessary, but if you filmed handheld camera you have two options: 1) use the catalyst browse to do gyro stabilization 2) or use the stabilization of your favorite software. You should use the LUT as a reference in your display camera, not burn in your footage, so that you have a better dynamic range in your footage without the LUT embedded in your footage.
Can you fix EI in DaVinci Resolve without having to go through Catalyst? it'll be awesome if you can import the gyro metadata directly without Catalyst.
Especially the gyro data would be so epic. It's one of those super annoying sony behaviors that they don't open it up. I hope at least there will be a third party plugin to be able stabilize in an efficiant workflow, directly in resolve... Everything else is just an unnecessary waste of time.
@@SCHAUDENLUCAS Sony loves to pay for the catalyst browse license for us which we don't need. anyway the cost will be subject to the customer. the only advantage of having catalyst browse is that they won't be dependent on Resolve to provide free license.
Such a good ambition by Sony to create a video like this explaining the basics of Cine EI . But, such a shame to have it totally drown in a horrible music score. Why?
I think it'd be nice if colour correction was always acknowledged while talking about colour workflows as being distinct from grading. I just think it's valuable to think about them as separate concepts even thought they're intrinsically related.
Then I guess I would consider a lot of the LUTs they're referring to as 'grading' correction or conversion LUTs and not grading. Unless you think I'm misinterpreting something.
@@ctcwired nah correction is correction. you can get an objectively (numerically evaluated) color accurate image, that represents the scene the best it is technically able. the means do not matter, conversion luts, manual correct etc. some people may disagree which correction may be best but that doesn't change the term. if you are giving a creative spin on the footage - thats the grading part and theres nothing to disagree about here. We have different words for a reason, stop trying to diminish them.
The music , that voice over , they have to be making them in Japan ;) .. doesn't really explain the EI concept at all well . no mention of moving the grey level up or down , its basically just purposely over or under exposing your underlying Slog , (always recorded at native ) , to shift your over /under grey level exposure range. By making the MLUTED image darker or brighter , compensate in EVF/ monitor, to be adjusted in post.
I agree. They need to explain this. They don't say why they're overexposing. It's implied but a beginner would miss that. Also what that might cost in the highlights especially if the scene's dynamic range is wider than the camera can handle. That's why they mention "studio" situations where that's controlled but, again, more implied than explained and easy for a beginner to miss.
Agree completely; not to mention, they gloss over the challenges of exposing correctly in-camera via factors that also include iris and shutter speed, combined with the veracity or not of observing Zebra stripes and their threshold settings. This is classic Alister Chapman barreling through topics, and Sony never daring question him for some weird reason.
@@robinprobyn1971 He's not physically heard in this video, but his short-tempered and pedantic influence on all things CineAlta is deeply entrenched and damaging behind-the-scenes.
Sony. You got it WRONG at 8:05. The image shown for 3200EI appears brighter giving the impression it would be overexposed at that setting. When in fact 3200EI at base 800 would be 2 stops UNDER exposed. And the 200EI would be recorded 2 stops OVER exposed.
The description of iso 800 for bright light and 2500 for low light is wrong. It is the other way around. Shotting with lower iso will provide less noise in shadows and high iso will clean up the highlights
Nice tutorial for sure helpful, but to whine on a high level: 02:09 Headroom? 06:14 what went wrong with exposure/grading? And the music was overall too loud...see like 10:40 Go -6DB please.
I think they overexposed to provide more data for the shadows. Always better to bring down shadows when grading than bring them up resulting in more noise and potential artifacts. Of course, there's the converse given what overexposure can do to the highlights. I think that needs further explanation because there are situations where overexposure may be good for shadows and bad for highlights.
@@seecraig You are right. They say it is easier to retrieve image details from overexposed highlights in slog3 than retrieve it from underexposed shadows.
You don't always need to over expose and perhaps the concept isn't well explained in this video. Previous generations of Sony S-Log cameras were quite noisy so by exposing more brightly you could end up with less noise in the final image because as part of the post production grading process you would be pulling all your extra bright levels down which also brings the noise down. So it was a common recommendation to expose these slightly noisy cameras more brightly than Sony's own recommended levels. However the latest cameras are much less noisy so it is not always necessary to expose more brightly because noise is much less of an issue. When shooting with S-Log you will be grading the image you can still chose to expose more brightly if you wish. A brighter exposure will increase the shadow range and reduce the final noise, but decrease the highlight range. This might be beneficial for scenes with large dark areas where shadow details and textures are important, so for these you would use an EI lower than the base ISO (The low EI makes the LUT darker and as a result you will open the iris and expose the sensor more brightly). Going the other way, a darker exposure will increase the highlight range but decrease the shadow range and result in a more noisy final image. You might need to do this for very bright scenes or scenes with very strong highlights and for this you would use an EI that is higher then the base ISO. CineEI gives you control over your highlight and shadow ranges as well as noise. I don't like the use of the term "over expose" as used in the video because it implies you are doing something bad. If you choose to expose more brightly to improve the way the shadows look and reduce your noise this isn't over exposure, it is simply a decision to expose more brightly. Over exposure generally means that the image has been exposed in such a way that the end result is not how it should be and looks bad. Over exposure is generally a mistake. But here we are exposing more brightly because it may deliver a better final result, so it isn't over exposure it is the correct exposure (which happens to be bright) to achieve the result we desire.
@@alisterchapman Thanks for describing. Do you have your own tutorial video on Exposure Index you can point people to? I think people need to see this visually to understand the difference between ISO and EI, what is seen in the monitor vs what is recorded in the media file.
@10:19 I don't get it when Display Lut is turned off again, it was already turned off a few seconds before, how can it be turned off a second time? Regards
Can I ask a question to some awesome knowledgeable commenter here? I’m super confused about something…. I have an FX30. To shoot in log, I understand I how to change it in “log settings,” yada yada yada. But what’s the deal with Picture Profile via Exposure menu? Can’t I also shoot in log going this route? When I change to log shooting in log settings, picture profile is greyed out. Is picture profile just so you can plug in an additional monitor? Can someone explain this to me? Sorry for being a dingbat. 🙏🙏
Can you tell me if this is correct? You only have 2 Base ISOs that you can choose from in Cine EI. When changing the EI values in your camera you're not actually changing anything with the exposure of your real image file... it only changes how you see the image in your monitor. The reason to adjust your EI values are only for you to see how to adjust the exposure through lighting, ND, or Aperture, So if you want clean shadows you lower your EI value. This darkens the scene in your monitor and you realize you need to bring in more lights for your subject to be properly exposed because everything has gotten darker. Then when you bring this footage into your grading software all looks overexposed. But you'll just bring down the exposure to correctly expose your subject and your shadows will be clean! Is this correct?
But if I‘m recording the same scene with the same base iso with the same light adjustments in the scene (and for example in flexible iso at iso 800 and in Cine EI at base low and EI800) I will get the same S-Log file, right? Cine EI just outsmarts me by monitoring a different picture on the monitor to force me overexposing the S-Log-Footage by 2 stops, right?
I am curious on how to use catalyst browse to how to adjust ISO to get the right exposure in running gun situations. I do not want to manually change the exposure but instead access the metadata. I’m guessing this is possible. Can you make a video on that. Explaining the workflow? I’m guessing we will see a better picture quality doing it this way instead of using flexible ISO in camera. 🤔
You can use Catalyst Browse, which is completely free. Sure, it is separate from FC, but would probably take less time to process since its standalone.
@@raredreamfootage I have had Black Magic on top of the list especially because it had DaVinci resolve and stabilizations as awesome options, but then when I found out it wasn't full frame, I wanted to get something full frame with maybe built in NDs, but my most ideal is C500 M2, but that's SHITLOADS expensive. Then I had Z cam, Lumix BGH1, Sony FX6, Canon C700 on the list right now. Now, i don't mind not having fast autofocus, because I'm not interested much in sports or fast photography so i like to use manual. The basic options like focus peaking, built in ND and maybe in camera de-squeeze for anamorphic are good to have Maybe once i have a full frame cinema camera, i might also get Black Magic, because i love its look for music videos
I’ve shot with many arri and red cameras and I must say that the closest look to those cameras on a budget level is the BM Ursa Mini Pro G2. It’s seriously impressive how good the color and DR perform for the price. The FX9 and C500 II are also pretty nice, not quite as good color but overall more versatile and much more expensive. Next on the list would be the pocket 6k and it’s variants, not quite the color richness of the Ursa but not too far either. Then I would say the Panasonic S1h and S5 would be the color goats in the world of hybrids. Then at the bottom of the pit I’d put Sony FX6, FX3, A7siii, canon C70, R5C, etc. For real it’s a shame that the lower end sony/canon models don’t have much to offer in terms of image quality, cuz they have some of the best features in terms of autofocus, ibis etc. Every colorist can tell you how bad it is when they get footage from these later cameras. Anyways, that’s my tier list!
"Use Catalyst Browse. Use Catalyst Browse. Use Catalyst Browse. It's great, we swear." Nice try Sony. Catalyst Browse is a steaming pile of garbage. Crashes constantly, slow as hell, doesn't let you export in lossless formats or in h.265. Doesn't have any batch processing unless you pay $299/yr for Catalyst Prepare. Big pile of nope.
@ImagingbySony The workflow in this video is completely unuseable and Sony is not responding. Bugs in Catalyst Prepare and Catalyst Prepare Plugin on Mac make it unusable. Contacting Sony through the proper website channels gets no reply.
@@KallusGarnet The camera also supports 16-bit RAW video output via HDMI. While Sony admits that most external recorders on the market don’t support 16-bit RAW recording, the camera is capable of sending that signal and is, therefore, more future-proof.
HAHAHA LOL. I will sell my BMPCC6KPro only to buy new BMPCC... These cameras are NOT comparable. But I will definitely buy fx30 instead of my 6400. Really great camera for run-and-gun for this price.
Raw or bust “The camera also supports 16-bit RAW video output via HDMI. While Sony admits that most external recorders on the market don’t support 16-bit RAW recording, the camera is capable of sending that signal and is, therefore, more future-proof.”
I am glad you are enjoying yourself promoting this camera, however I am going to let your audience know how angry a growing number of current customers feel about this FX line: For many years the Sony A7S (sensitivity) line was the camera for VIDEO centric shooters wile the A7R (resolution) is aimed at photographers and the A7 line caters towards hybrid shooters. The A7SII needed a successor badly and finally after 5 years the A7SIII was released in 2020 and myself as well as many other filmmakers bought this camera. However,just 4 months later out of nowhere you guys released the FX3 also for video shooters with the exact same sensor and exact sama processor and just because this camera falls under the FX line you guys have been treating the FX3 as the "true" camera for video shooters and releasing firmware updates to give it many additional software features while completely abandoning all the people who bought the A7SIII. In 2.5 years you guys released exactly ONE additional feature for the A7SIII in the form of the S-Cinetone profile and literally nothing else besides "stability" updates. This is a camera that costs $3500. The many customers who wanted a video centric camera and already purchased the A7SIII now have to decide to either sell their superfluous cameras at a big loss just to get Sony's "true" consumer video camera for the same (body) price or continue to watch their A7SIIIs become more and more obsolete. I know you are focused on cranking out new bodies so I am not going to waste my time waiting on you treating your A7S customers right. I just hope your potential customers read this message to let them know about your record of customer abandonment.
Sony's been adding video-centric features to every new, less expensive camera they come out with that should have been added to their flagship consumer video cameras the A7SIII ($3500) and the A1($6500). Improved and expanded subject tracking and focus breathing compensation in the A7IV ($2500), Cine EI and updated menu system in the FX30 ($1800). Even my A7C ($1800) got an update to let me use it as a webcam without any additional software. I thought when they added S-Cinetone to the A7SIII not long after the FX3 came out that they were going to keep both cameras fairly close in terms of features, so I felt safe in choosing it. Why not, they're the same camera in different bodies. Now I feel like a fool for getting the A7SIII instead of the FX3. I didn't want to pay extra for that top handle and figured the EVF might be useful in stills shooting. Building an ecosystem means software updates apply across the system as much as possible and giving people meaningful, physical reasons to pick up one camera over another. It's not cranking out new bodies every couple of months with new features, thus leaving people waiting for the next version of the camera they want because that version will have the updates the previous version should have gotten. Apple, and nearly all other electronics companies understands this, why doesn't Sony?
@@dawsonrpowell I did not realize how badly Sony had abandoned their A1 and A7SIII customers until I saw their now former embassador Philip Bloom post a dedicated video about this. You can see in the menu of either camera that you can enable animal eye autofocus in video mode but it simply doesn't work because Sony didn't finish the software in time and just released the cameras as is. You would think they would fix that in a firmware update soon after but it has been over 2.5 years now and they still haven't bothered to fix it via a firmware update and instead focused on releasing new cameras with better software features for less money. "Props' to Sony for completely shafting their loyal A7S followers and whoever bought their $6,500 Sony A1.
@@SanjaySchulz Just watched that video and he and Gerald Undone really articulate the issue well. I was hopeful until the release of the A7RV that maybe we would see revisions of newer cameras with newer physical features, such as the customizable EV dial, along with firmware updates. But the new AI processor makes me think they're probably working on the next models with that chip inside and we'll never see those software updates. It's silly that they're making their existing products that they are still trying to sell obsolete.
@@dawsonrpowell Sonyalpharumors recently reported that a firmware upgrade is coming for the A1 this month. I hope that other high end models like the A7SIII will receive one this month as well.
EI workflow is completely nonsensical. It can all be summarized by: Expose slog 3 by 2 stops to get a clean image. That's it. Having to manually alter the 'look' of the tiny camera monitor is absolutely useless busy-work. Professionals don't care if your catalyst browse has a lut added automatically. This is typical over enthusiastic pandering to amateurs.
