I tried posting about this on DVXUser and no one replied at all so i figured I would try over here.

I just got S-Log and am wondering how people are monitoring it. My concern is getting an image that my Client can make sense of and will also be useful to me for lighting, set-dressing etc. I've read many people suggesting that it should just be used like film and basically to forget about getting a decent monitor image, but for many reasons esp for clients I would prefer to get something close.

I've tried the LUT's and they all look as unsaturated as S-Log itself just with less DR. Kind of pointless to me. Lack of color is my main issue. Can you add saturation to a LUT? I looked very briefly at Sony's CVP file editor but didn't seem to see a control for Saturation.

I have been playing around with just cranking the Chroma way up on my monitor and that seems to be a pretty good solution. So far it looks pretty similar to what I get in post after grading. I've also played around with expanding the brightness and contrast which also seems to help though its easy to start losing highlights.

Is anyone else doing this? The idea is just to get in the ballpark.

Related issue is the idea of living with just a 3200 or 5600 preset. I've been playing with the S-Log color adjustments and find that they seem to work just like color pots on a paint box. Adding equal amounts of + Red and - Blue looks very similar to warming color temp and vice versa. Likewise +Red and +Blue can get rid of green by adding magenta. Pretty easy really . Seems like it will be simple to find numerical equivalents to CC filters. Also seems like it would be easy for Sony to make these color temp and phase adjustments in firmware.

Why not try to get a half decent picture in your monitor when using s-Log, and why not start off with your color near your final target. Shouldn't that provide a better grade?

Is anyone else doing this?

One last question - Any tips on grading S-Log in Final Cut Pro (old version 7)? I've been playing with the usual tools and it is a little frustrating to get stuff right. Can't use Resolve on my MacbookPro unfortunately. I downloaded a trial SLog filter from Pomfort, but at first glance I wasn't bowled over..

Pick up a blackmagic hd link box and load (or create) a rec709 lut on it, this will turn the slog into a more consumer friendly version of the footage while maintaining the robustness of s-log. just did it on a music video and it worked great.

Leonard,

Go back and read your post. Now ask yourself why you are even using S-LOG? I have found that a good Picture Profile using the Cine Gammas solves all of the problems you are experiencing: WYSIWYG when shooting. A great image on the monitor for clients. No need to struggle or spend time color grading. No need to wait for renders or archive another copy of your files. No need to learn new color grading software. And no need to risk someone else misgrading the footage after it has been handed over.

And for that one shot in a hundred where the extra little dynamic range of S-LOG might have made a difference, I am willing to let that slide. The trade off is well worth it in my opinion.

Am I hack for not drinking the kool-aid and blindly using S-LOG? Some people will say that. But I don't care. I have done my own testing and I know how much more effieicent and productive I can be without S-LOG. And I will be more than happy to do a side-by-side shoot out with anyone who thinks S-LOG is going to make a big difference against a properly setup camera.

I'm not saying S-LOG isn't a terrific tool for the right production, but it's not the right choice for everyone. Some people seem determined to cram a round peg into a square hole even though there is nothing at all wrong with using a square peg in the first place.
Just another point of view.

I don't have the S-log option, so this is just another opinion.
As I undertand it S-log's ISO equivalent is 1600. Are you by any chance over exposing and that is why you are not seen the color when setting the SDI Out to 709-800%?

Thanks Nick, HD Link is am interesting idea though frankly I am very tired buying more and more accessories these days.

Re Doug and Douglas- I'm running my own tests and will decide when and if I want to use sLog rather than cinegammas. It certainly seems that in some situations it can offer a great deal. In the meantime I just want to figure out how to work with it in an efficient way, and am trying to open up a discussion about how to monitor it most effectively.

So I'm curious, is anyone offering decent user made LUT's for the F3?

As I undertand it S-log's ISO equivalent is 1600.

Not according to my testing. S-LOG is more like ISO 1000 if you want to put mid-gray around 38% and whites around 68%.
BTW, with my primary picture profile it's only 250 when exposing whites around 98%.

If your putting reflected white at 98% and coming up with 250 ISO, then I believe that to be incorrect. If your estimating exposure equivalents to film and using a light meter, then white should still be 68%, which would equate to an ISO closer to 400.

BTW, with my primary picture profile it's only 250 when exposing whites around 98%.

If your putting reflected white at 98% and coming up with 250 ISO, then I believe that to be incorrect. If your estimating exposure equivalents to film and using a light meter, then white should still be 68%, which would equate to an ISO closer to 400.

Alister, please notice that in this sentence I am talking about my primary PICTURE PROFILE not S-LOG. There are no picture profiles with S-LOG. If I exposed white at 68% with a PP, and didn't plan to do any grading, I'd be dramatically underexposing.

When using any picture profile I expose whites around 98%, sometimes a little less. I assure you that my F3 would be rated at ISO 250 using my primary picture profile -- not that this number matters very much because I'm not going to be setting my exposure based on a light meter reading. I find it interesting that you are telling me 250 is incorrect when you don't even know what my picture profile settings are.

Of course, when using S-LOG a whole different set of procedures and preferred exposure levels apply, but that is not what I was talking about.

Hi Leonard,
My BG is film and my exposure methods will seem archaic comparing to most everyone on the forum who judges exposure based on where IRE measurements ought to fall for mid grey, skin tone and highlights. With the LUT set on .709, I used both incident and spot meter measurements exposing a grey card w/color chart based on 1600 ASA sensitivity, and judging side by side with both a Panasonic 17" with a scope and a larger consumer Samsung (with its brightness and picture level set below mid point), I tweak the Samsung so both monitors display almost identical images and extremely close to WYSIWYG. I'm a convinced that the 1600 ASA hold up based on the presumption that most home monitors will be set brighter and more chromatic than my monitors, thus will most likely display my color chart and grey scale perceptively brighter and more chromatic than the 18% mid-grey reflectance based on a film exposure approach. Final grading on LightWorks and TV Logic monitors at a local post house confirms my Flintstone's exposure approach is within 'mid printer lights', as film parlance goes.

On the monitoring issues, I stay with LUT .709 on the monitor until camera rolls before switching back to Log. The irony of it all is that we are all falling in love of the slightly de-saturated look of S Log on skin tones and grade our final color correction closer to Log than .709 (which I don't perceive as chromatically flat, but that's very subjective) and of course if you're after high key, high chromatic Kodachrome looks you may not want to bother with S Log at all. I use it because I can pull details out of a face that is 4-5 stops over exposed. Cranking up chroma and contrast on your monitor may give you the ultimate look you desire but I imagine it maybe difficult to maintain a constant & consistent correlation as chromatic values of your subject change but the monitor may not deliver the exact equivalent once cranked up.

Just my two cents worth.

Brian,
Sounds like you are exposing based on the 709 LUT not not trying to peg a grey card at 38% in SLog.
Is that 709 800% or 108%?

I have thought of that, but find even the LUT's way too desaturated compared to a real 709 image. Also I like seeing the sLog on a monitor because then i can really see exactly how my whites are holding up, and to some extent expose accordingly - but its all a grand experiment at this point.

So far I've been surprised how well the "crank up the monitor" solution works and how well I can tweak color with the R/B adjustments. I've only tried it on my Flanders so far though, and as with your method the goal is only to get it in the ballpark.

I would much rather have LUTs I liked though than to have to keep screwing around with the monitor. Presets are a pain even with the Flanders.

For me SLog sounds like a godsend for Ext run & gun without time to control the light. I rely on lot on a 5.6 TV Logic or a SmallHD EVF there and haven't experimented with cranking those guys yet.

Anyone else find the LUT's too desaturated to use? Am I alone in this?

Yes, all the built-in LUTs are really ugly. But the problems with them go beyond just the saturation.

What other problems do you have with the LUT's besides saturation.

Leonard,
I monitor with .709 108% for more saturation. .709 800% looks even flatter. I don't think I put my exposures 'in a ballpark', it's just my way of calibrating the monitors - seeing the grey card and color charts on the monitor looking exactly as my eyes perceive, at a determined ASA & exposure based on matching readings from incident and reflected spot meters, using a single light source corrected to the exact color temp. the camera is recording on. This is my 'constant' and where I rely on making exposure decisions afterwards. It's like establishing printer points in film days with a monitor. Flipping back to S Log just gives me the comfort of knowing it's recording with more latitude & dynamic range (if needed) and I can surely grade it from flat to super chromatic afterwards.

I take monitors with a grain of salt, given that you can line up 10 identical monitors shooting the same subject, there will still be minor variations in looks due to the nature of the beast, and we certainly have no control over the viewer's home monitor when the finished work is displayed, unlike projection a film in a dedicated theatre where the projector's luminance, color temp. and reflective quality of the screen is within our control.

You're right it's still an experimental era in Log recording and Alister is the expert to go to having explored exposure on a different thread earlier.

Brian,
Do you not use the waveform monitor in your monitor? That's much more reliable than judging anything by picture quality exposure on a monitor as that can be way way off. So far I've been using the camera's IRE readout on a greycard to hit 38%, but I won't always have one.

You're using the 709 LUT though instead of the Std 5 - 709 picture profile which would be another way to go with better saturation , but perhaps a different exposure.

<snip>
And for that one shot in a hundred where the extra little dynamic range of S-LOG might have made a difference, I am willing to let that slide. The trade off is well worth it in my opinion.
properly setup camera.
<snip>
I'm not saying S-LOG isn't a terrific tool for the right production, but it's not the right choice for everyone. Some people seem determined to cram a round peg into a square hole even though there is nothing at all wrong with using a square peg in the first place.
Just another point of view.

Doug, there are far more benefits to S-Log than dynamic range. The roll off on highlights and blow outs comes to mind. I love the regular F3 images, but if you have a practical light come into the scene you usually have an ugly yellow ring around a blow out that simply looks unnatural and video-ish.

As for speeding up production, with picture profiles you save a little time on grading (I think most footage can use a little tweaking for maximum effect) but unless you're in an ENG situation not too much time is saved.

That's because if you are grading many clips you simply copy and paste the attributes to the next clip. If they were shot in the same room at the same time little to nothing extra needs to be done on the subsequent clips (until you have a reverse shot, etc.)

OTOH, S-Log can also speed up your production by allowing you to shoot in situations where you have a lighting situation that picture profiles can't handle. That especially applies to live events where you have little or no control of the lighting.

Finally, as much as I like the skin tones when using F3 picture profiles, I like them even more with S-Log. Shiny highlights are less of a problem, back lit faces are manageable, shadows can be worked around. Sure if you're shooting talking heads those issues rarely arise, but if that's all you're shooting an EX1 is just fine.

S-Log isn't perfect, but the advantages are real. Its that extra 10% that I get out of it that I love about it. I used it on my last two features and one TV show and will never turn back. When someone is paying big money for cast, crew, etc you can't afford to miss a shot. Period.

Duke, it's great that S-LOG is working for you.

I will only say that I disagree with most of what you have posted regarding your perceived problems or shortcomings of shooting with the F3 without S-LOG. Maybe if you're talking about a F3 that came out of the box with factory-default settings, but that is not what I compare S-LOG to.

Doug, next time you are shooting high-contrast footage (such as subject in shade, background in sun), it would be great if you could roll off and then post a full-res frame grab of your preferred profile plus s-log of the same shot, so us devoted s-log users could get an objective sense of what you are describing.

Charles, I have already done that.
PMW-F3 S-LOG & External Recorders Test Drive (http://www.vortexmedia.com/F3_TEST_DRIVE.html)

Besides, my point is not to talk anyone out of using S-LOG who really feels they need it. For some people is is a powerful feature of the F3. My point is that the F3 is a great camera even without S-LOG. And for many of us, that tiny difference that S-LOG might make on a few shots here and there is not enough to outweigh the extra gear required to record it, monitoring issues for clients, grading everything in post, rendering, etc.

The bottom line is that people can still get great results without S-LOG -- and often even better. Why? Because a lot of people using S-LOG obviously do not have the skills, the time, or the right software to deal with the S-LOG footage properly.

Whoa! Impressive sampling work Doug, do you ever sleep?

I have to agree with Doug. I purchased S-LOG but I find it much more time consuming to use, and I have actually reverted to using the camera without it and just the picture profile I developed - which I find is giving me a great punchy sharp image from the camera. Sparky

Would it be rude to suggest that we stick to the subject of the thread. Seems to me its kind of pointless to argue over whether or not you think sLog is worth shooting. If you don't like it don't use it. If you want to discuss pros & cons of sLog start another thread.

Would love to hear more input from people who actually s-Log as to how they monitor and whether they use LUT's.

I could have sworn there was an option to record slog out one port and monitor a corrected lut out of the second port. Am I misremembering that? Would that be a solution?

You can record S-Log from the Dual Link ports and monitor a LUT from either the SDI or HDMI port. If you simultaneously record to SxS cards, the recorded signal will be S-Log

FROM SONY:

As an image using S-Log gamma has low
contrast, it may be unsuitable for image checking
at the shooting location. MLUT (Monitor Look
Up Table) converts the contrast of the image
recorded on the camcorder and the output image
except Dual-Link output (image output from the
HD/SD SDI, HDMI OUT i.LINK, or VIDEO
OUT connector) to produce an image suitable for
checking. Use MLUT when you shoot images
using S-Log gamma without any adjustments, on
the assumption that the images will be output as
Dual-Link output and recorded on an external
device to be processed to post-production.
Notes
• If the setting of “S-Log LUT Select” of the
VIDEO SET menu is other than “Off,” MLUT
is applied to images recorded on the camcorder.
• MLUT conversion does not affect Dual-link
output.
• MLUT can be used only for the output with SLog
gamma.
The camcorder is provided with four preset
LUTs. In addition to the preset LUTs, LUTs that
the user has created independently can be loaded.
A user LUT must be created with
CvFileEditorTM 1) and loaded into the camcorder
via an SxS memory card.
For details, refer to “CvpFileEditor V4.20 User
Guide.”
You can download the latest version of
CvpFileEditor from the“eCSite” software
download site for the professional and business
products of Sony Corporation.
Note
The camcorder supports user LUT data of RGB
10-bit format. LUT data of 12-bit format or
having different RGB values cannot be managed
by the camcorder.
1) CvpFileEditor is a trademark of Sony Corporation.
To select MLUT
When selecting MLUT other than S-Log EI mode
Set “S-Log LUT” of the VIDEO SET menu to
“On” then select the desired MLUT with “S-Log
LUT Select.”

You can record S-Log from the Dual Link ports and monitor a LUT from either the SDI or HDMI port. If you simultaneously record to SxS cards, the recorded signal will be S-Log

On mine the recording on the SxS cards is not S-Log when a monitor LUT is selected. It is the monitor LUT that is recorded on the SxS card.

Sorry, Chris. I meant to say that the LUT will be recorded to the SxS card.

It is what happens when a single-tasking brain attempts to multi-task.

Thanks for catching it.

Ned

Lenny, maybe a previously discussed suggestion but have you tried out the Hypergamma's? HG 33 & 40 I've found them to look pretty good with a minimal amount of monitor tweeking. I've even recorded them instead of S-Log with good results.

Interested to hear other people's take on these two special LUT's.

Thanks Bruce,

Glad to have your input.

I haven't tried them except to look at them briefly. Do you find recording the hypergamma LUT's better than just recording cinegammas?

The major issue I have with all of the LUTs though is that they all seem quite desaturated to me and I'm wondering what other people do about that. I like to see my color and find it helpful.
You mentioned a "minimal amount of monitor tweaking". What are you tweaking ? Is it mainly the saturation ? Do you set it and leave it or tweak for individual shots with an awareness in the back of your mind that you know what's on the sLog and it doesn't matter if you bounce your monitor around a bit.
Are you using the Red and Blue SLog adjustments? I've found them pretty easy to use and quite helpful.

Does anyone have the link to download the CVP editor? I looked for it a couple months back, but I couldn't find it.

From what I have read, I believe the F3 uses 3D LUTs which means you have full control over color including saturation. I have some experience with 3D LUTs from vfx work, and I want to create some LUTs to use within the F3 as well as certain software such as After Effects and Resolve.

For basic grading, I use a Curves effect (a S curve) in PPro which works great to boost contrast and saturation.

For monitoring, I sometimes use the Rec709 (800%) LUT when someone else needs to watch while filming> When its just me and a Director who is experienced with S-Log footage, I don't use a LUT.

Here you have...

Index of /manuals/Sony/CVP File Editor (http://www.bandpro.com/manuals/Sony/CVP%20File%20Editor/)

Courtesy of Stephen Cocklin at DVXuser.com

Thank you Henry.

After reading the user guide, it seems to be fairly complicated. Has anyone successfully created a LUT for the F3? (the program is 4 years old so I don't know if it even works with the F3's LUT system)

Just saw this reply to my questioning Andy Shipsides at Abel Cine after he talked about how good the LUT's were on his tutorial. Sounds like CVP is a dead end:

"Leonard, I agree that the built in LUTs are too desaturated, because they are 1D LUTs there isn't much that can be done about that. In my next blog I'll go over using CVP File Editor to create the in-camera LUTs, but they will always be relatively desaturated. So I'm also going to show creating LUTs with an external box, the HD Link Pro. The CVP File Editor has many different functions that work with the higher end F23/F35/9000 which are locked out, but it can still be used with the F3 in a simple way. :

So thus far it seems to me the current solutions are:

1- Live with desaturated LUT's if you want to bother with them at all and just treat it like film.
2 - Go with an HDLink and software for $1K + or another similar system as described in this informative link for this for using LUT's with an Alexa:
http://www.negativespaces.com/blog/2...w-options.html
3. Try the poor man's solution and adjust your monitor to either an existing LUT or sLog itself.
4. To give post an idea of what you were aiming for the only thing I can see is shooting a few moments of each set-up with standard PP settings , then switch back to sLog. In the field it would be a bit cumbersome but maybe no worse than screwing around with the monitor.

I'll probably play more with the poor man's monitor solution for the time being and will try to come up with Red and Blue adjustments that are equivalent to CC filter corrections.

Thanks for everyone's help, and Still very interested in hearing other people's experience

Another option not mentioned is to use a monitor that supports 3D LUTs such as Eizo and Flanders Scientific.

I have a flanders 1760 which doesn't support LUT's unfortunately. Which ones do?

Another option not mentioned is to use a monitor that supports 3D LUTs such as Eizo and Flanders Scientific.

Are any of these portable, camera-mountable, monitors?

The hdlink is $470 at b&h and the lut software is free from black magic what would you need to buy to get it up to 1k?

Just a guess, I thought I read that you needed another $4-500 software system . If that's not necessary I like the lower cost too. I'm not familiar with HD link at all but it sounds usefull.

.Do you find recording the hypergamma LUT's better than just recording cinegammas? . . . You mentioned a "minimal amount of monitor tweaking". What are you tweaking ? Is it mainly the saturation ? Do you set it and leave it or tweak for individual shots with an awareness in the back of your mind that you know what's on the sLog and it doesn't matter if you bounce your monitor around a bit.

Since the Cinegammas are not available when in S-Log mode, Sony have re-purposed CG1 & CG2 as Hypergamma 33 and 40. One is for exterior use primarily and the other for more controlled lighting shots. I have also found both of them to be on the desaturated side, so the main two monitor tweaks I usually employ are saturation and black level. I've always felt even from tube camera days that if you could do minimal monitor adjustments (stressing minimal) that later in post that look could easily be replicated. This had more to do with bad viewing environments like exteriors where things tend to look washed out on any monitor, etc. I would always set my monitor up to bars in blue, set black pluge, then mark where the knobs were so that I could easily tell how far I was tweaking off of those basic settings. Usually it was just black levels. It's not a recommended process for most shots, but knowing where absolute 0 is then adjusting out from there doesn't usually present big problems later in post. Only cranking things way way out can create issues later.

On the CVP Editor, I used to build basic gamma curves with it for my original F900/3 camera and although it was arcane and akin to witchcraft to make it work, I was for the most part successful in getting some nice curves to work. Once Steve Shaw's curves (Light Illusions) were published though, I only used those for a later F900R camera. You really need to use a test saw pattern to design any camera curve. That feature is buried in the F3 maintenance menu, I haven't quite gotten the secret handshake right to access it. So far what I've been told off the record is to turn off the LCD and close it, then hold the Cancel, Menu and push thumbwheel in to get this menu up. Anyone who has figured this out, please post because if you are planning to create a CVP curve, you will need to get to the test saw to make any progress.

Bruce,
I agree - generally if you can get your monitor to do it, then you can get that look in post as well. Hence my willingness to adjust the monitor to SLog.

The other advantage of the HD Link is when you set your curve or LUT for teh tweaked output of the s-log you can transfer or copy that info over to your color correction system to use as a starting point.

The hdlink is $470 at b&h and the lut software is free from black magic what would you need to buy to get it up to 1k?

I've been looking at solutions and the HDlink with HDLink utility software (comes with the unit) does 3D LUTs and seems like the way to go, Sony's CVP Editor is out of date, does 1D LUTs and only works on a 32bit OS. I've attached the HDLink hardware and software instructions location; http://www.bhphotovideo.com/lit_files/20003.pdf



If anyone has used this setup and has any thoughts pro or con I'd like to hear them.

I used the HDLinks on "Key & Peele" last season with the F3's (because we were shooting 422 S-log and at that time all of the outputs were s-log) and we were able to dial in most of our looks with the HDLinks.There are some definite quirks to the software and it's pretty basic but certainly if all you want to do is create a Rec709 look, it's fine for that.

For more intensive work, definitely take a look at the LiveGrade software which greatly expands the capability of the HDLink:

Pomfort - LiveGrade: Interactive Look Control via SDI (http://pomfort.com/livegrade/)

I haven't had the chance to use this on set but my DIT likes it so we will be using it for season two. You can click a checkbox to immediately enable a Rec709 LUT.

Yeah one of the other DIT's here in town has been playing with the pomfort software and told me to check it out. I haven't had the need to yet, but the prospect of doing live grading through a 500 dollar box instead of an $$$$ truelight box is appealing. Though in all honesty most of the people that the monitors seem to be set up for are absolutely fine with a rec709 look and a lot of the DP's I've worked with are more interested in doing the intensive color grading in a controlled environment in post. But it's still a cool option to have.

Setting a LUT on set doesn't supercede what will happen in the color session, it does mean that the footage going to editorial and dailies will get an approximation of the final look so it's not a surprise for anyone at the end, plus there are many instances especially in TV where the DP can't attend the color session. I was fortunate to be able to make mine on my show but we weren't on a quick turnaround to air.

We are just starting to design our workflow for season two and I will report back how everything works out.