Alistair
Well-known member
It's not a benefit in every scenario, no.
Log shooting
- Thread starter sh1209
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
Alistair
Well-known member
BTW I would also ask why not shoot log, what is the downside?
I think you’re misunderstanding me that should have said do you shoot log not don’t
Alistair
Well-known member
No worries, it doesn't really matter. Folk should just shoot what they like. But I was (rather clumsily) coming to the point that there are some benefits to shooting log and very little downside. So I will generally always shoot log. Suggestions that log requires a lot more work in post processing and/or requires use of a LUT are incorrect. Correct colour management settings in video editing software convert the log footage to the appropriate colour space with no user input. You are then starting at the same place as standard footage. No "colour grading" required. Just minor exposure and contrast tweaks as would be done in standard footage regardless.
Well, I agree with some of your points. I do not agree with applying a standard rec 709 lit will make the footage look like standard footage. That is definitely not been the case in my experience. I have not tried luts as far as phantom luts or anything like that, but the standard rec 709 straight from Sony dropped onto the footage exposed correctly Does not get it anywhere near being presentable. Perhaps I need to try some from different sources and experiment some with that. Even the slog3 LUT included in Final Cut Pro for S log three footage get the footage nowhere near usable. Maybe you need to make a video and put on here to show us how you do it because I would definitely like to see your method.
So do you apply the LuT first step in your editor? I’ve seen conflicting advice on this with some stating to apply the lut after exposure corrections.
Alistair
Well-known member
No never. I have to go out now but I will reply when I get back. This I suspect is at the heart of why folk have issues with log and is well worth exploring.
I look forward to hearing from you. I hate giving up on things and really like to learn as much as possible as far as video and photograph. I can get log to a decent look but just never truly satisfied with it. Hopefully your information will help.
It's the last step. All edits need to occur prior to transformation. Once it's transformed, you're stuck with a lesser file.
Well that could very well be a big part of the problem. It’s weird because some of the videos I’ve watched on it say to drop the lut on first step.
Detailed reply and a screen shot of what it should look like sent.
It's like exporting raw as a jpeg and working on the jpeg.
Ok will do
Alistair
Well-known member
Ok, no pressure. I'll give it a shot!
The first point I suggest is, for the time being at least, to forget LUTs. Especially in Premiere Pro, they conflate two things: colour management and cinematic "look". Forget cinematic "look" for now and just concentrate on colour management. When you want to make a Skandi noir or Californian skater girl movies instead of nature clips then sure, cinematic look here we come.
So concentrating on colour management; you need to convert the colour space of your log footage to a wide gamut intermediate colour space in which you can edit your clip and then convert the edited clip to a colour space that can be used on the web etc. (usually Rec.709 and gamma 2.4). Colour space comprises the colour gamut and the gamma (contrast) curve. Your Sony log footage is shot in S-gamut colour space with a Slog(1,2, or 3) gamma curve (log is effectively just a gamma curve after all). You need to convert that to your video editor's intermediate colour space and gamma curve which will give you a wide gamut for editing. You then need to convert the edited footage to Rec.709 and gamma 2.4. Just those two colour space conversions will make your log footage look great.
All that can be set up in your video editor's colour management on a project level. So once it is set up properly you just drop the log clip in and it converts it straight into Rec.709/gamma 2.4. This should look at least as good as your non-log footage but give you more editing latitude. You can then do minor contrast, brightness, saturation adjustments to get it where you want it.
Do you use Da Vinci Resolve? My impression is that it is a little easier to set up than Premiere Pro in this area, even the free version. In fact last time I looked, a wide gamut intermediate colour space was only available in the beta version of Premiere Pro, but things may have moved on by now.
Thanks for this great information. Like Steve, I'm keen on not giving up on Log and getting through the knotholes. Would you mind if jumped in from time to time and asked a Canon specific question, such as checking with you about my colour management set up in Davinci Resolve?
Rudy
I use Final Cut Pro and have for many years. I have messed around some with resolve. When I import the footage into FCP it says rec 709 already in the inspector and supposedly from what I’ve read Apple does that automatically. It does not look good whatsoever at that point. It’s just a flat washed out look just like in camera. Normally in the inspector I will drop the Sony slog 3 cinetone lut onto the footage right away. Then it does look fairly normal. Then I will stretch the footage including highlights, shadows, contrast and sometimes drop midtones as well as tweak saturation. In theory, the photo should be done at this point but most of the time it still just looks off like there is no punch or real contrast even though shadows are pulled to zero and highlights are pulled from 80 to 100 and it seems to happen with every Clip I try this with.
So this is a screenshot from this am. the one on the right is standard sooc. The one on the left is slog3 edited in FCP fully then applied slog 3 Sony lut at the end. shadows are zero and highlights 90-95% mid tones pulled down and saturation increased significantly. As you can see the standard just looks better
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Alistair
Well-known member
It sounds like FCP converts you footage immediately to Rec.709 and makes you edit in Rec.709 which is a reduced data set. Ideally you want to be editing in a wide gamut space and only deliver in Rec.709.
So if that is the case then should I forego adding a LUT?
Alistair
Well-known member
What is the LH one like if you do not add the LUT, just apply your edits in Rec.709 and render? Can you see what gamma curve FCP has applied before you apply the LUT? Do you still have a copy of DVR installed on your computer?
Now this is DJI Dlog m taken inside my house with no lut applied only exposure/color corrections. to me it looks fine and maybe better than the normal footage. So perhaps with the Sony footage I don't need a lut applied.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Alistair
Well-known member
Yes of course, happy to. The best way to see what is happening in DVR is to use CT nodes. I will post more detail a little bit later.
It just says rec 709 and nothing else other than being hevc
Alistair
Well-known member
Yes, I think so. Because FCP has already converted the footage to Rec.709. Applying the LUT is adding another conversion plus whatever other adjustments the LUT contains.
Alistair
Well-known member
Right. What your workflow is missing is a proper conversion of your log footage to a wide gamut intermediate colour space and appropriate gamma in which you can apply your edits using the full data set contained in the log footage. Only after that should you be shrinking it back down to Rec.709.
So I think you're onto something because I have been adding a rec 709 lut on top of what FCP is already applying
This was shot with the A7RV Slog 3 exposed 1.7+ and only color wheel adjustments applied. To me it already looks far better and appears normal
This was shot with the A7RV Slog 3 exposed 1.7+ and only color wheel adjustments applied. To me it already looks far better and appears normal
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.