jack jin

Hi @Sage, I hope you've had a great new year so far, I have used the s1alex lut on various personal projects now, gotta say I love the colors that it gives me, much more consistent and pleasing results even in warm or weird lighting compared to the p4k version. But the exposure seems to be quite a bit brighter than the normal rec709 lut. And the lut shows a lot more noise and artifacts then I expected especially at the higher iso gain. I have tried to reduce the exposure using the exposure adjustment luts, but on darker shots it clips the shadows and doesn't roll them off naturally like the braw exposure adjustments. Any advice on how to reduce the noise and artifacts without using noise reduction? (PS: I am using tetrahedral 3d lut interpretation in Davinci Resolve already.)

Filmconvert nitrate already did it, with a match the cineon log scan of a bunch of filmstocks, of course there are still things missing like gate weave, accurate halation etc. But in terms of color, resolution, and dynamic range, something like the c70 already exceeds film.

I think it's just that a mirrorless mount ilke e mount simply do not have enough space for both the flip down electronic nd mechanism and an ibis mechanism.

@IronFilm @Emanuel

Because red is trying to protect their higher end cinema line with a less flexible codec option, it's still named "redcode", but it's dct based like h.264 and prores. Sony's internal Electronic ND is unfortunately not compatible with ibis.

Computational photography is the future, no matter the sensor size. But one thing smartphones are still struggling to do is to deliver a natural looking image. Skintone look plasticy under certain lighting situations, and the aggressive denoising and sharpening isn't helping thing either. The alexa managed to do dual iso 10 years ago, while delivering the most organic digital image ever created. So when smartphone's are able to deliver that level of natural looking photos and video. I think then it's time for computational photography to be widely adopted across all platforms.

It does look great in low iso and with sharp glass, but it's not as sharp as the fullframe 6k downsampled to 4k where the detail just pops off the screen, in lowlight the noise is approximately 2/3 of stop noisier in my experience.

Btw the autofocus is surprisingly a bit faster with the 18-135 compared to my tamron 24-70 g2, even though on a native ef camera the 18-135 is a lot slower then the tamron. Also apsc is limited 12mp, so the resolution you get out of your photos won't be great, same for 4k video, where it is only a one to one readout, so the noise and resolution isn't gonna be the best.

@SageWould you mind test grading 5 dpx in different lighting situations with the different color temperature luts for me? I found some footage online and on facebook. And would just like to see how the tungsten and 4200k variant holds up in difficult situations before buying the camera and lut package.

That's what I'm worried about as well, was this shot in daylight? and was it using the daylight lut?

The linny lut is not strictly accurate, because you don't know what display prep they based the original emulation on. It's a emulation of a scan of a print of a negative. There is so many variables that could change the colors drastically within their pipeline. What if the color timing was off during the printing process? Did they print the negative optically or through laser? Did the negative or print went through Digital Intermediate before the print or scan? What was the machine that scanned the print? Where as the filmconvert nitrate is just simply a conversion to the filmstock's cineon colors. Not to mention the linny lut is ridiclously expensive, with only one stock, where as filmconvert nitrate got 19 stocks, with options for grain emulation for 1/5th the price. And the cinny lut only includes one stock, which filmconvert has, while costing 395 bucks for one lut. It's absolute insanity how much they think they can charge for their luts.

Three nodes, third node you input the status m density rgb matrix shown here: into davinci resolve, set the saturation to 60. On the second node you first put in filmconvert nitrate, select camera profile (must be log for cineon to show up), and then put print film emulation to 0, then you go into the white balance tab to adjust the white balance until it looks neutral, these matrix mess with the white balance so the image might look very magenta and warm, this is where you fix it. I like to use the classic rgb matrix, it gives me the best skintones. Going back to the third node, I just simply manually adjust the gamma/curve to my liking, by setting the black level and then applying a slight s curve to the footage, or I use CST to conform the gamma from cineon log to rec709 with luminance mapping turned on.

Have you tried filmconvert nitrate? The cineon log conversion has spot on colors and contrast, it's their normal emulation laced with their heavy print film colors that looks crap.

Ohhhhhh, so that's why? If I use tungsten version of the lut does the yellow hues and brown hues stays consistent in warmer lights and underexposed situations? Thank you for answering my questions!

Thank you very much for the explanation! Happy that your dad is recovering! But I have noticed that in underexposed situation and in warmer lights the yellow hue with p4kalex shifts to green. Thus I wasn't able to use the lut in those kinds of situations. Is it simply caused the the p4k colorscience or is this common with all v4 color? Since when using the v3 ghalex all the brown and yellow hues have very nice colors to them. Thank you very much!