Mark Romero 2

Thanks!!!

Thanks to everyone who has replied. Really appreciate all the input and tips. Here is the latest video I did over the weekend. I think overall the colors are a bit better, as I am becoming a bit more proficient with the qualifier tool. There are still some color casts, but I think that they are a bit better controlled (for the interiors, at least). As for the backyard shots, it appears to me that some of the brightest clouds have a pinkish / magenta tinge to them. Is anyone else seeing that? Mostly in the bright part of the clouds along the horizon, starting at the 1:19 mark. Did I just grade those exterior shots too warm???

If ALL the footage for a project is shot in the same gamma / gamut, then you can use the Resolve Color Management under the settings page to defacto change the color space and gamma. I don't remember the color space transform node off the top of my head, but I would also suggest that you adjust the nits from the default of 100 to something more realistic (I use 350, which is about average for LCD displays, while some iPhones have displays over 500 nits). This will help you monitor your highlights better. If you can't adjust nits using the node method, then you could use the resolve color management in settings and apply it globally, and then for any clips that are NOT in V Log, you could apply a color transform node to those clips to have their input values as REC 709 (or whatever other gamma / gamut they were shot with).

Well... you kind of hit the problem on the head (I think that is a metaphor???) The liquor bottles and the plants are saturated, while the walls are under saturated. I appreciate your suggestions about adjusting the color through color compressor and desaturating other colors (pardon the American spelling), but as you noted, "these are a lot of work in post." So I guess I would kindly ask then if you don't mind taking another look at the original video (by 2gems) and maybe see if you have some suggestions for me for IN CAMERA changes to make? Do you think I am shooting too flat or too desaturated? Your best guess is appreciated. Thanks for all the work you did on this. i really appreciate it. Yes, your images look a lot closer to what I was hoping to accomplish. But now you have to tell me EXACTLY what your recipe was At least, let me ask you how you added the glow to the highlights? Also, your grade seems to avoid some of the nasty color mashups on the walls (where in my video there seems to be kind of a purplish / greenish collision... don't know how else to describe it). And yeah, since this is sony footage, you have to protect the highlights, because if you don't protect highlights with sony 8-bit... well... Thanks for the suggestion. I am certainly not opposed to the Z6... my friend shoots real estate videos on his D750 (I sold my D750 about two months before the Z6 came out because I figured I would probably get a Z6... didn't work out that way). I think if the Z6 had 10-bit 4:2:2 internal I would get one, even though it doesn't have any opportunity for getting 4K 60fps. But who knows??? Maybe when I see the RAW footage out of the Z6 in to an Atomos recorder I will decide to get both. The Panasonic S1 looks PROMISING because (if I remember correctly) you will eventually be able to shoot 10-bit 4:2:2 internal with V Log (all with a paid update). Two problems FOR ME for the S1 are: 1) No 16-35mm lens (which I use 90% of the time for BOTH stills and video), 2) 4K 60fps will be in Super 35 format, but Panasonic doesn't have any aps-c lenses. And I need WIDE lenses.

Thanks for doing the grade. I think in the real world it was more saturated than that, but I don't know how much saturation the files can take before getting all weird. Because... Sony.

Yeah, the BMPCC4K is definitely on my list. Wish it had a tilting screen and / or was a little more gimbal friendly. Still thinking about the X-T3 though... or the Pansonic S1 if they ever develop a reasonable 16-35mm lens. Since 90% of my business is from stills so that means the BMPCC4K would have to be a video-only camera for me. Could go the GH5 route but I think X-T3 might be a bit better for stills and - all things being equal - might give me a bit better low light performance / dynamic range than a GH5 with the aps-c size sensor of the X-T3. If the Z6 had 10-bit internal I could live with that (even though it seems like there is no prospect of Z6 ever having 4K 60fps). Heck, my friend still shoots real estate video in glorious 1080p on his D750.

You could certainly be right about both points. One man's flexibility is another man's overwhelmability... I have avoided LUTs in the past due to the possibility / probability of clipping highlights and nasty rolloff (and believe me, Hell hath no furry like nasty Sony rolloff). But might be worth a try. Yup. I think the benefit of slog for this is 1) most dynamic range for when I have bright windows and dark interiors and I need to do my best to capture the window view (because a lot of the value in the house is from the view of the San Francisco Bay), and 2) to give a bit more flexibility in reducing / adjusting color casts from tungsten / florescent lights.

Here is one example of a troublesome clip with a lot of mixed lighting (and different wall colors) https://www.dropbox.com/s/9i16eqwqzosokob/C0096.MP4?dl=0 I am pretty sure I shot in SLOG 2 (although I usually shoot SLOG 2 at plus 2 and this doesn't look two stops over...) I will post another example later For reference, the window frames should be white. (or close to white). The walls in the near room are green and the walls in the far room (with the round card table) are blue(ish) As you can probably tell from the clip, I shoot with pretty low saturation. Maybe I need to bump saturation up???

Thanks!!! I haven't had a chance to work on the X-T3 files that you sent me yet. But I assume that since the GH5 and the X-T3 or both 10-bit, they would have (more or less) the same flexibility when working with colors??? (Although I guess GH5 is 4:2:2 and X-T3 is only 4:2:0 ???)

Thanks to everyone who has replied @colepat @currensheldon and @kye I really appreciate it. Is it possible that he is using a GH5S instead of the regular GH5??? Also, would it be safe to assume he is using manual focus (meaning, focus about five feet out with a fairly deep DOF and just leave it there for most of the shots)? Yeah, I do a color transform in Resolve color management using Avery Peck's suggestions and it seems to help, but I still get weird colors on neutral surfaces even after using the various hue-based curves... might have to try upping my game with masking which I haven't had too much success with in the past. Shot with an a6500 in SLOG 2 with a custom white balance taken off of a gray card. My gimbal work needs some practice

I've asked him directly in the past, but never received an answer. Can you identify what camera he is using? It seems like he is able to get very clean colors even when shooting in mixed lighting. On my a6500 there is no way I can get clean neutral colors like that when shooting in mixed lighting. So I am guessing he is using a 10-bit codec. Is it the camera that is helping him get clean colors? I don't think he is using all daylight balanced bulbs with a high CRI in the ceiling and fixtures. P.S. He sells a course on real estate videography which covers equipment, so I suspect that is why he never got back to me when I asked.

Yeah, but that's kind of cheating because the 8-bit on the C200 is way better than it should be

I would so totally shoot a cat show with 12 bit raw. BTW: This man with his DIY bubble wrap flash diffuser is my hero. Can one change how much data is allocated above or below middle gray by varying ISO? Black Magic published a chart for the BMPCC4K that showed while the dynamic range is the same from ISO 100 to ISO 1000, the amount of data above and below middle gray changes based on the ISO value. So in the chart above, shooting near ISO 100 uses more data for below middle gray and shooting closer to ISO 1000 gives more stops above middle gray (as far as I understand, but I apologize if I am wrong). EDIT: Maybe I misunderstand the difference between linear RAW and LOG RAW???

So does the original (ungraded) footage look like the scenes at the very beginning and very end of the video? Were you using a particular white balance to "pre-grade" your video? Meaning, did you shoot with a very warm white balance so that your out-of-the-camera video would already be a lot closer to the final grade? Or did you shoot in daylight / auto white balance???

I would be surprised if exposing over 75 IRE would lead to clipping. With Sony SLOG 2 it is often recommended to expose skin tones at 70IRE.

Well... seems kind of unusual... What is the list price on the 6D II ??? BandH says it is on sale until Feb 2nd for 1,299 US but that sale is supposed to end today and it is listed as regularly at $1,799 The MSRP of 6D II at release time of July 2017 was $1,999 The EOS R is currently $2,299 I think you might be on to something here.

Just to build off of @kye post above... It is important to go into the settings and adjust the monitor's NIT values as well, which default to 100 NITs (which is kind of low and will display clipped highlights even when they aren't clipped). I don't know what the "average" brightness is for monitors and smartphone screens. When editing, I set my NIT value to 350 and it seems that is kind of conservative. Most newer iphones have a display brightness of over 600 nits for rec.709

Sounds good. Although i am not really familiar with it. I will pm you my gmail account so that you can share them with me (I think that is what I need to do).

Hmmm... don't know if it is. I have an account with them. I think you can set up a free account but it is only for up to 2GB of files, which isn't very much. https://www.dropbox.com/help/billing/cost

Thank you for letting me know that. That would be awesome. Can you upload them to dropbox?

Thanks for the input. I appreciate any other thoughts you might have on the X-T3, particularly regarding dynamic range or color correction when white balance is off. Thank you for your opinion. So compared to SLOG 2, in F Log there are less stops of dynamic range allocated ABOVE middle gray but more stops of dynamic range allocated below middle gray??? Is the highlight rolloff of F-Log any nicer than 8-bit slog 2 from a6500 / a7 III??? (Lucky for me if I buy the X-T3 the lenses that I most like have stabilization, like the 10-24.)

So the latest rumors are that an update to the Sony a6500 won't be until June. I am sure it will be a good camera, but I know I will be pretty frustrated shooting with my a6500 for the next 6 months. The LCD (resolution and dimming in 4K), the ergonomics / UI, the lack of 4K 60p, and the badness of 1080p are all kind of frustrating, Slog 2 in 8-Bit, and the lack of flexibility in the codec has been a bummer too. The quality of Sony aps-c lenses is kind of frustrating, too. So I am hoping to get feedback from previous sony shooters who are shooting with the X-T3. One real important feature for me is dynamic range, though. I think technically speaking the X-T3 has another stop of DR over the a6500, but I wonder if the better codec of the X-T3 will allow for more USABLE dynamic range. Meaning, are the shadows clean enough in F-Log that I can shoot at +1 stop as opposed to SLOG 2 where I basically have to shoot at +2 stops? Also for stills, the 1/250th of a second flash sync speed is preferable to the 1/160th of the a6500. Anyway, just looking for peoples experience with the X-T3

Maybe, or maybe people just don't care that much about bad rolling shutter... or just have learned to live with it. Of all the things that really bother me about my a6500, rolling shutter is probably only like 6th or 7th on the list. Yeah, the other day my son was trying to shoot with our a5100 indoors and at night and it is winter here, and it overheated in about 8 minutes. It's just NOT a good camera for video unless you rig it up with an external battery, a real fast memory card, AND those cold gel packs to keep it cool. And even after all that you are probably better off recording off the hdmi feed to an external recorder

I think you do a pretty darn good job of constructing a scene in terms of composition and lighting, and you incorporate good camera movement, but don't let it interfere with the actors. Meaning, the talent are appropriately lit for the mood you are trying to convey, and you do a good job of capturing their expressions. I agree with @kye above that one way to describe it might be "kind of loose" although I think there might be some shots that would benefit a bit from a slightly more handheld look. Anyway, those are just my impressions from your work.