Color - SOOC vs. LUTs/Grading

[SRV1981]

Is it fair to say some cameras produce normative or more pleasing color to most but if using log, you can get similar color/image from most cameras equally?  
 

1. if you wanted a personal camera with fast turn around what brands are you usually happy with color wise?

 

2. when deciding for more professional or bigger projects, how do you decide what system/log system to get?

 

seems canon and then Fuji reign when SOOC is discussed and it’s more nuanced for the latter. 

[kye]

5 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

Is it fair to say some cameras produce normative or more pleasing color to most but if using log, you can get similar color/image from most cameras equally?  

1. if you wanted a personal camera with fast turn around what brands are you usually happy with color wise?

2. when deciding for more professional or bigger projects, how do you decide what system/log system to get?

seems canon and then Fuji reign when SOOC is discussed and it’s more nuanced for the latter. 

In my experience, the internet has a very skewed view of which brands offer the best colour science.

Millions of folks on the internet will tell you that Canon has the best colour, and recently Fuji is in the game with their film emulation presets, but I think this is just confirmation bias in action.

All manufacturers have very high quality colour.

Even Sony, who used to have the most "accurate" colour and looked very unappealing, have turned it around and now have pretty nice colour.

The other great myth is that great colour comes from the camera, it doesn't.

Great colour comes from production design, lighting, and colour grading.

Here is a thread where I show that it's the work in post that makes the images pop.

After reading your recent posts and threads about one aspect of cameras or other, I have some bad news for you...  you can't buy good images.

Good images come from skill, not equipment.  Great images come from skill and large amounts of hard work.

[ghostwind]

17 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

Is it fair to say some cameras produce normative or more pleasing color to most but if using log, you can get similar color/image from most cameras equally?  
 

1. if you wanted a personal camera with fast turn around what brands are you usually happy with color wise?

 

2. when deciding for more professional or bigger projects, how do you decide what system/log system to get?

 

seems canon and then Fuji reign when SOOC is discussed and it’s more nuanced for the latter. 

Unless you're shooting broadcast or live-streaming, I don't see any point in shooting non-log out of any camera. Use a simple CST (or auto CM) in Resolve and you'll spend 5seconds getting the log to look good in 709. 

[SRV1981]

44 minutes ago, ghostwind said:

Unless you're shooting broadcast or live-streaming, I don't see any point in shooting non-log out of any camera. Use a simple CST (or auto CM) in Resolve and you'll spend 5seconds getting the log to look good in 709. 

Sure, even still there seems to be differences between cameras even when trying to match color 

[kye]

2 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Sure, even still there seems to be differences between cameras even when trying to match color 

The answer is either putting in the time to learn colour grading, or putting in the time to earn money to buy multiples of the same camera so the image is identical.

[SRV1981]

28 minutes ago, kye said:

The answer is either putting in the time to learn colour grading, or putting in the time to earn money to buy multiples of the same camera so the image is identical.

If the goal is to match many cameras yes - I was commenting that even if you matched color to your best ability the images will still look different and some will prefer skin tones and the overall look differently.  

[kye]

4 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

If the goal is to match many cameras yes - I was commenting that even if you matched color to your best ability the images will still look different and some will prefer skin tones and the overall look differently.  

If you're cutting between two cameras that were used to shoot the same scene but from different angles then you'd be surprised at how different they can be without the viewer noticing.

This is because:

• The lighting will be different from the different camera angles
• The contents of the frame will be different, either subtly or significantly
• The viewer might (and hold onto your hat here....) be watching the film and not comparing skintones

Besides, I said to learn colour grading.  If you can't edit two cameras together with skin-tones that are similar enough not to bother viewers, then you haven't learned it enough yet.

[SRV1981]

2 minutes ago, kye said:

If you're cutting between two cameras that were used to shoot the same scene but from different angles then you'd be surprised at how different they can be without the viewer noticing.

This is because:

• The lighting will be different from the different camera angles
• The contents of the frame will be different, either subtly or significantly
• The viewer might (and hold onto your hat here....) be watching the film and not comparing skintones

Besides, I said to learn colour grading.  If you can't edit two cameras together with skin-tones that are similar enough not to bother viewers, then you haven't learned it enough yet.

What does that have to do with the original questions? 

[kye]

5 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

What does that have to do with the original questions? 

You seem to care about matching cameras....

49 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Sure, even still there seems to be differences between cameras even when trying to match color 

 

[SRV1981]

Just now, kye said:

You seem to care about matching cameras....

 

No, sorry for confusing - I’m making the statement that even if one tries to match a color profile - cameras will retain differences that affect how pleasing we find it and therefore I was curious, with that given, your view on the original questions. 
 

thanks for clarifying confusion 

[kye]

1 minute ago, SRV1981 said:

No, sorry for confusing - I’m making the statement that even if one tries to match a color profile - cameras will retain differences that affect how pleasing we find it and therefore I was curious, with that given, your view on the original questions. 
 

thanks for clarifying confusion 

Are you referring to a specific situation where you shot in 709 and then in LOG but couldn't match the 709 profile when grading the LOG image?

I have done quite extensive side-by-side testing and colour matching of my GH5, GX85 and iPhone 12, and I was quite surprised when trying to match the GH5 to the GX85 because I put a CST on the GH5 and the image was almost identical in terms of the colours etc.  The GH5 has significantly more DR, and the GX85 isn't even showing all of its DR in its 709 profile, so that was a difference of course, but even matching between two vastly different cameras was very easy.

In terms of how different they were from each other, in grading a normal project where I have shots taken outside in uncontrolled conditions the shot-to-shot variance of shots from the same camera was more than the difference between the GH5 LOG and the GX85 709 image.

[ac6000cw]

4 hours ago, kye said:

If you're cutting between two cameras that were used to shoot the same scene but from different angles then you'd be surprised at how different they can be without the viewer noticing.

This is because:

• The lighting will be different from the different camera angles
• The contents of the frame will be different, either subtly or significantly
• The viewer might (and hold onto your hat here....) be watching the film and not comparing skintones

I agree - especially the last point.

SRV1981 - 'Content is King'.  Without decent, interesting content your audience is not going to care about image quality differences because they've stopped watching the movie. If the content is good, they won't be noticing the quality differences because they're engrossed in the story instead.

As an example, I recently posted a video on my (niche, railfan orientated) YT channel using content I recorded 20-25 years ago on 720x576, 50i DV tape-based camcorders. The picture quality is terrible by today's standards (it's noisy, low resolution, has bad colour bleed, poor DR etc.). But the historical content, getting the most out of the ambient sound and keeping the editing reasonably fast-paced seems to have been popular and it's had over 500 views in 4 weeks. Which is pretty good for my channel. I've got other videos on the channel that I thought looked pretty good and were shot in 4k but have only had 60 views in a year...

Below is a still from the editor timeline - note the burnt-out sky, the purple fringing along edge of the canopy, the over-saturated orange patch turning into red, the jaggies on the diagonals and the lack of resolution (and typical western Ireland wet weather!). No pixel-peeping needed to spot the technical defects 🙂

[SRV1981]

For some posts and comments I notice many respond not to the original post or thread but their own concerns or issues. I’m not sure how to course correct this. 

[KnightsFan]

On 4/14/2024 at 3:00 PM, SRV1981 said:

Is it fair to say some cameras produce normative or more pleasing color to most but if using log, you can get similar color/image from most cameras equally?

Yes, 10 bit log is extremely flexible, so you can get similar color from most modern cameras. I say modern because sensors are better now than they used to be.

My one extra note is that I find that the most important thing is to nail your white balance. Many cameras that I have used look way better if you manually set them to a white balance setting, rather than balance to a card. My Panasonic S5 in particular looks terrible balanced to a card. So I always shoot 5600K and correct it later. If you do correct it in post, it's best to use color management and do the corrections in linear gamma. If I recall, my old NX1 actually looked great balanced to a the same white card. So it definitely varies by camera.

On 4/14/2024 at 3:00 PM, SRV1981 said:

1. if you wanted a personal camera with fast turn around what brands are you usually happy with color wise?

I love Fuji's color. I'm not overjoyed by Panasonic's SOOC Rec709 (but am happy with VLog when I have at least 2 minutes to color it). But in a broad sense and with possible exceptions, I am happy with any camera made after 2018 that cost more than $2k at launch. I really disliked older Sonys and Panasonics, but that is no longer true.

On 4/14/2024 at 3:00 PM, SRV1981 said:

2. when deciding for more professional or bigger projects, how do you decide what system/log system to get?

Speaking specifically about color, being able to use Resolve color management is huge. It is faster and better than using LUTs to move between color spaces. Other than that, the only real consideration is the time/quality ratio. How fast can I get to the image I want, or, on the other end, how fast can I get to an image that can be turned in by the deadline. Like you mentioned in your first sentence, images can be made similar, but the question is how quickly.

Speaking about the entire system, compatibility is my #1 concern. Lenses, batteries, audio, rigs--these all have to work together. I've put a lot of effort into things like "put a right angle XLR on the bottom of a boom pole so that it can be set down without damaging the cable." All my lenses are EF. All of them have 77mm filter threads. That sort of thing matters a lot.

Typically, I will do plenty of tests ahead of time. I'll build color nodes in Resolve before the project begins, so I know what settings to use on set, and roughly what I'll do in post. If you have that kind of preparation, the camera used does not matter as much.

On 4/14/2024 at 3:00 PM, SRV1981 said:

seems canon and then Fuji reign when SOOC is discussed and it’s more nuanced for the latter. 

I think 10 years ago, Canon reigned. The 5D3 was much better than Panasonics and Sonys back then. Nowadays I don't think it holds anymore. But that's all subjective.

[SRV1981]

44 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

I love Fuji's color.

Agreed between them and canon for me. How do you deal with AF issues on Fuji? 

 

45 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

How fast can I get to the image I want,

This is exactly my point. 
 

 

46 minutes ago, KnightsFan said:

Nowadays I don't think it holds anymore.

What SOOC or fastest post workflow brand do you like ? 

[KnightsFan]

11 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Agreed between them and canon for me. How do you deal with AF issues on Fuji? 

I've never used AF. Most shoots there are 2 people on camera, so someone pulls focus with a wireless unit. And I can pull focus for myself if not.

13 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

What SOOC or fastest post workflow brand do you like ? 

Any log format that is supported by Resolve's color is ideal. I haven't used everything out there so I'm not going to try to give brand generalizations. Honestly the NX1 was the camera that gave me the best results SOOC, but I can't recommend a discontinued series from 10 years ago. The S5 works really well for me now. The XT3 was great, but if I recall correctly there were issues with FLog in Resolve for a while, so I almost always used HLG and was happy with it.

I haven't shot with any modern blackmagic cameras, but I from what I see in other people's footage, they have the best color with their end-to-end color management. Again, that's not personal experience.

If you need to get good Rec709 color SOOC I'm not the best reference, as everything I've ever shot has had time for coloring.

Another factor that maybe I should state explicitly is that Resolve is the only color software that I like. Assuming you're using a decently nice camera with color management, good software will speed up the color process more than the difference between Sony FX6 and Canon C70.

[kye]

3 hours ago, SRV1981 said:

For some posts and comments I notice many respond not to the original post or thread but their own concerns or issues. I’m not sure how to course correct this. 

This is true.  However, people are also trying to share their experience with you.

For example, if you said that you were hammering in nails with your camera and it was really damaging the camera and you asked how to make the camera tougher, people would reply telling you to buy a hammer.  

Is this answering the question?  No.  Are people trying to help you?  Absolutely.

You have asked a series of questions over the last month or so about technical aspects of cameras that don't have any relevance to real-world shooting except in very very specific scenarios, and when people reply you haven't given any information suggesting that you actually face these scenarios in your own work, you just seem to want to discuss things like these real-world considerations don't actually exist.

For example - do you know what the best ways are to get great skin tones?

1. Shoot someone with great skin tones
2. Shoot someone with good skin tones and good makeup
3. Shoot someone with not terrible skin tones and really good makeup
4. Shoot someone with great makeup
5. Shoot someone with good skin tones and ok makeup and do digital retouching in post
6. Shoot someone with not terrible skin tones and good makeup and do good digital retouching in post
7. Shoot someone with ok makeup and do really great digital retouching in post

Notice that the camera didn't factor into that equation?

I'm sure that you understand that make-up is a pretty big deal on a movie set, but you might not be aware of how much work goes into skin tones and retouching in post.  They say that getting the skin tones right is about half of all colour grading effort.

Here's a video showing the state-of-the-art tools that are dedicated to this - these tools wouldn't exist if there wasn't demand for it......  this is the tools in Baselight which is the main Resolve competitor.

 

[kye]

Getting great skin-tones was also a huge focus of film development.

Here's a pretty strong example I saw recently (linked to timestamp):

In case anyone is allergic to clicking and watching things, if you take this image:

and then apply green under her eyes and magenta on her nose it essentially ruins her skin-tones:

but guess what - if we apply a film look then those variations in her skin tones that looked awful are mostly eliminated:

This is because the film look compresses the green/magenta axis in the image..  

before:

after:

This is a pretty simple colour grading trick.  Any half-decent colourist can do this without thinking about it too much, and most LUTs already have this kind of thing built in.

Notice that this was all done in post, and didn't rely on the camera at all?

[SRV1981]

Very detailed and cool to be honest. That said I have zero clue how this relates to anything I asked I’m beyond lost in the weeds here man. 
 

im just curious about skintones SOOC and how they’re achieved easily. No clue what makeup has to do with anything for the situation I asked. 

[kye]

52 minutes ago, SRV1981 said:

Very detailed and cool to be honest. That said I have zero clue how this relates to anything I asked I’m beyond lost in the weeds here man. 
 

im just curious about skintones SOOC and how they’re achieved easily. No clue what makeup has to do with anything for the situation I asked. 

You asked "what brands are you usually happy with color wise?"

Good colour in an image is basically skin-tones - get them right and the image is good and get them wrong and nothing else matters.

The way to get good skin tones is to film someone with the best skin tones you can find, use makeup to improve the skin-tones in your images, and to colour grade the skin-tones in post.

Great skin-tones (and great coloured images) aren't created by cameras - they're created on-set and in post.

Trying to choose the right camera to get good colour is like trying to choose the right paint and paint brushes that will make your paintings into masterpieces.  You're looking in the wrong place.