A7Rii and A7Sii Profiles

[DBounce]

So you have one of the above cameras? Let see your favorite picture profile settings. Please post a frame grab also... so we can see what the end result is. DO NOT grade in post. This is so we can see what is capable straight out of the camera. Personally, I am still not settled on any profile. I found my NX1 far easier in regards to color... And don't get me started on my Canons, they really were effortless in regards to color. So let see em, perhaps we can find enough great profiles to help make these cameras shine.

[Don Kotlos]

There are few settings posted there...

[DBounce]

2 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

There are few settings posted there...

Do you have any screen grabs of this?

[richg101]

a7rii tested on TRUMP88 with a 1.5x oval aperture. camera was set to AWB, neutral picture profile, -3,0--3, auto exposure for 0.0ev, multi mode exposure metering. No grading. Just a film scan overlay from cinegrain. no ibis

[markr041]

1 hour ago, richg101 said:

a7rii tested on TRUMP88 with a 1.5x oval aperture. camera was set to AWB, neutral picture profile, -3,0--3, auto exposure for 0.0ev, multi mode exposure metering. No grading. Just a film scan overlay from cinegrain. no ibis

First, "Neutral" is not a Picture Profile. Second, if you put a film scan overlay on top, how can we tell what your settings look like? What the heck does a "film scan overlay" do? Why do you use it?

[richg101]

6 minutes ago, markr041 said:

First, "Neutral" is not a Picture Profile. Second, if you put a film scan overlay on top, how can we tell what your settings look like? What the heck does a "film scan overlay" do? Why do you use it?

forum etiquette

[markr041]

2 minutes ago, richg101 said:

forum etiquette

Are you objecting to the word "heck"? or what?

[richg101]

Neutral is a picture profile. Just because it's not labelled as one doesn;t mean it's not a profile.  

A film scan overlay just provides grain.  it can be overlayed with settings to not change the image colour or contrast.  I wouldn;t have posted my sample if the film overlay had changed the image any more than film texture.

[markr041]

35 minutes ago, richg101 said:

Neutral is a picture profile. Just because it's not labelled as one doesn;t mean it's not a profile.  

A film scan overlay just provides grain.  it can be overlayed with settings to not change the image colour or contrast.  I wouldn;t have posted my sample if the film overlay had changed the image any more than film texture.

Thanks, that is helpful (unlike "etiquette"), though I take labels seriously; it's ok if you don't, but it will confuse people when labels are used any which way. Neutral is called a Creative Style in the Sony menus and manuals. It's completely arbitrary, I agree.

[markr041]

Sorry, I was being too polite. The difference between PP or CS is not arbitrary, without meaning. Creative Styles have completely different - much more limited - controls over picture quality than do the Picture Profiles. There is no choice of black level, black gamma, overall gamma, color gamuts, knee settings, color phase, etc. controls in Creative Styles. And sharpness has at least 4 parameters in PP's, not just a slider. PP's are for video; Creative Styles are for P&S cameras. This does not mean that one cannot prefer a particular Creative Style or that there is no interest in seeing examples. But 0,-3, +2 has no meaning whatsoever in Picture Profiles.

[DBounce]

53 minutes ago, markr041 said:

Sorry, I was being too polite. The difference between PP or CS is not arbitrary, without meaning. Creative Styles have completely different - much more limited - controls over picture quality than do the Picture Profiles. There is no choice of black level, black gamma, overall gamma, color gamuts, knee settings, color phase, etc. controls in Creative Styles. And sharpness has at least 4 parameters in PP's, not just a slider. PP's are for video; Creative Styles are for P&S cameras. This does not mean that one cannot prefer a particular Creative Style or that there is no interest in seeing examples. But 0,-3, +2 has no meaning whatsoever in Picture Profiles.

So with all this debate aside, do you have one to post? 

[Moshimo Garcia]

On the subject of the A7sii; seems like there are some really experienced people with its use. I wanted to ask; what Picture Profiles would you use if you had a SUPER short turnaround for a project-- talking like the edit is due the day of the shoot (interviewing). Secondly, for those on Macs, do you all convert the XAVC footage to Pro Res for editing use in Premiere? I was editing some of the footage that I shot yesterday, and it took significantly longer to render even despite the fact that I shot in 1080 compared to my GH 3 footage. 

[DBounce]

FYI I will be posting some comparos of settings this weekend. And BTW: just bit the bullet and pulled the trigger on a Canon 1DX Mkii. I'll let yhall know how that works out.

[Arizona Sunset]

19 hours ago, Moshimo Garcia said:

On the subject of the A7sii; seems like there are some really experienced people with its use. I wanted to ask; what Picture Profiles would you use if you had a SUPER short turnaround for a project-- talking like the edit is due the day of the shoot (interviewing). Secondly, for those on Macs, do you all convert the XAVC footage to Pro Res for editing use in Premiere? I was editing some of the footage that I shot yesterday, and it took significantly longer to render even despite the fact that I shot in 1080 compared to my GH 3 footage. 

The S II has an insane amount of settings for Picture Profiles.

I'd like to narrow this question even further with the following:

• A) Straight out of camera, which picture profile (and settings therein) gives the very best DR + most accurate/realistic look
• B) Straight out of camera, which picture profile (and settings therein) gives the very best DR + most cinematic look
• C) How do you configure these, step by step?

Since I can't answer these questions due to experience level and time to test, for turn-around time I don't use Picture Profiles, I use the Creative Styles, which doesn't really unlock the full potential of the camera, but nevertheless, gives me what I want:

• A) For a nice "clean" image - Standard 0 -1 +1 with stronger saturation applied in post
• B) For a sort-of-but-not really cinematic Neutral -1 -1 -1 with slightly stronger saturation, especially reds, and definitely stronger blacks in post
• C) "Settings" > "Camera" > "5" (menu number 5) >  "Creative Style" > Select "Standard" or "Neutral" > Configure # # # with up or down clicks on Wheely Button.  Note that I usually set Creative Style and Picture Profile to the "Function" Button shortcut to bypass the first three clicks. 

Still, if the more experienced or knowledgeable forum members could help with the first set above, that would be really useful I think.  I know this topic has been covered before, but consolidated and distilled, it has not.  

Got a little yoda there at the end, but you get the gist. 

[Andrew Reid]

S-LOG 2 with Stills colour mode seems to avoid the worst of the white balance problems S-Gamut introduces. Weird reds in sunlight, that sort of stuff.

S-LOG 2 is of course good for LUTs, better than any other profile, so if you want to make use of your custom looks in post shoot S-LOG 2.

S-LOG 3 is a joke and to be avoided due to the banding in skies, etc.

S-LOG 2 however does sacrifice tonality and colour for more dynamic range.

The Creative Styles are all a bit naff and will toss your highlights onto the fire, very very bad for dynamic range.

Vivid however has lovely contrast, colour and a punch to it, with no effort in post.

The Picture Profiles are a weird mess of old video profiles from Sony's boffins, a lot of them hopefully fired by now because they did a terrible job.

ITU 709 for example looks like a Canon C300 that somebody threw up on.

It's so far away from Arri, Fuji or Canon that it is quite laughable.

Once you realise there is only one good Picture Profile aside from S-LOG 2 and that is Cine 4, matters improve a bundle.

Cine 4 preserves the most highlight detail of any of the non LOG styles or profiles on the Sony cameras.

I dial up the saturation and lower the black levels to improve colour and tonality, gives it a nice saturated Canon-like feel direct off the card and it doesn't then need so much fuss in post.

I really like the results and dynamic range is very close to S-LOG 2 once the latter is graded and normal contrast introduced back to the image.

I would usually prefer to shoot with Cine 4 as it avoids the weird colour and compression issues that so many people seem to have with S-LOG 2 occasionally.

[Arizona Sunset]

Thanks Andrew!  

For Cine4, what do you set for:

• Black Level
• Black Gamma
• Knee
• Color Mode
• Saturation

Is there any mix of the for SLOG2 that is accept for SOOC shooting?

[Arizona Sunset]

I went ahead and ran a NOOB-like test or threeve on CINE 4, as recommended, and I dig it. 

For the configuration, I settled on:

• Gamma = Cine4
• Black Level = +3
  • Helps with shadows in FCP X - honestly, I think this could go higher if you want to simulate "SLOG2 Light"
• Black Gamma = defaults
• Knee = defaults
• Color Mode
  • Zero grading = *Movie*
  • Slight grading = Cinema 
    • Boosting in Camera Saturation + Cinema results in more red/orange cast than I prefer (others have recommended this in the past), similar to what happens with SLOG2 with in camera boosts - there's just enough balanced color to the boost for a "quick" grade in my opinion (for a new user like myself)
• Saturation = defaults
• Color Phase = defaults
• Color Depth = defaults 
• Detail = -3

Lots to learn, but overall, way happier with the look than anything else so far.

Thanks guys!

[DBounce]

Frame grabs?

[austinchimp]

I have no doubt that with the millions of possible permutations if you dig into the Sony picture profile settings you can come up with any look you want, but the reality is that nobody has the time or knowledge to really understand how to do that.

Basically I feel like Sony should do a better job on their default profiles instead of abdicating responsibility and expecting people to go through all those esoteric menus and settings.

[Xavier Plagaro Mussard]

On 3/10/2016 at 2:11 AM, Moshimo Garcia said:

On the subject of the A7sii; seems like there are some really experienced people with its use. I wanted to ask; what Picture Profiles would you use if you had a SUPER short turnaround for a project-- talking like the edit is due the day of the shoot (interviewing). Secondly, for those on Macs, do you all convert the XAVC footage to Pro Res for editing use in Premiere? I was editing some of the footage that I shot yesterday, and it took significantly longer to render even despite the fact that I shot in 1080 compared to my GH 3 footage. 

I don't have one. I would avoid LOG and use something you can directly use. If you are really on a hurry, rent a recorder, so you use ProRes which Macs are optimized for.

41 minutes ago, austinchimp said:

I have no doubt that with the millions of possible permutations if you dig into the Sony picture profile settings you can come up with any look you want, but the reality is that nobody has the time or knowledge to really understand how to do that.

Not only, they sell you this shit as it was a way to have more possibilities! Just give us one preset that makes the image as what it was the real thing. If you want to go away from that there are infinite possibilities in post to go away. The path to go back from twisted to reality is way harder!!!