a7s iii and S-Cinetone Test Video

[Mark Rosenzweig]

YouTube (Short URL)

[Doug Jensen]

Thanks for the sample footage, but I have to say that I don't care for the look. It seems very contrasty to me me with blacks that are too deep and mid-tones that seem too dark. S-Cinetone is supposed to be a WYSIWYG look, but I think this absolutely would need to be graded to at least bring up the mid-tones. And the shutter speeds seems way too fast. Just my opinion.

[Mark Rosenzweig]

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

Thanks for the sample footage, but I have to say that I don't care for the look. It seems very contrasty to me me with blacks that are too deep and mid-tones that seem too dark. S-Cinetone is supposed to be a WYSIWYG look, but I think this absolutely would need to be graded to at least bring up the mid-tones. And the shutter speeds seems way too fast. Just my opinion.

You can make up your own mind about the look of S-Cinetone. But your comment on shutter speed is way off. This video was shot at 60 fps and the shutter speed obeyed the 180 rule = 1/125th. So, you either do not like the look of 60 fps or there is something wrong with your viewing device. I doubt the latter is true. In fact, given your expertise, which I admire, I am totally confused by this comment on shutter speed.

I have attached info on the metadata on one of the original clips - they are all identical.

[Doug Jensen]

Mark, you are welcome to shoot any way you want to, but 1/128th is not the recognized correct shutter speed for 60 fps unless you are shooting for slow-motion. the correct shutter speed for 60 fps is 1/60th. You chose the perfect clip to show the metadata because that just happened to be one of the ones that looked the worst to me. There is no motion blur when he is waving his hands around. We can agree to disagree if you want to, but I am not wrong. It is your creative choice and I happen to disagree with it and do not like the look.

[Mark Rosenzweig]

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

Mark, you are welcome to shoot any way you want to, but 1/128th is not the recognized correct shutter speed for 60 fps unless you are shooting for slow-motion. the correct shutter speed for 60 fps is 1/60th. You chose the perfect clip to show the metadata because that just happened to be one of the ones that looked the worst to me. There is no motion blur when he is waving his hands around. We can agree to disagree if you want to, but I am not wrong. It is your creative choice and I happen to disagree with it and do not like the look.

Thank you for reminding me that I can shoot any way I want. And that I can disagree with you!

You are wrong about what is considered the appropriate fps that merits violating the 180-degree rule, which I followed (the camera shutter speed was set to 125th of a second). What you believe is hardly the consensus for 60 fps video played at and viewed at 60 fps. If viewed at 30p, yes, the shutter speed is too high.
It would be great if others weighed in on the issue of frame rate/shutter speed. I do not have anything to protect.

[Doug Jensen]

Most people will view at 30 fps or 60i, therefore the speed is too high. 60 fps playback is non-standard. You obviously feel quite passionate about it, so I hereby grant you official permission to choose whatever shutter speed you want. Would you like a notorized letter?

[Rainer Listing]

Originally Posted by Mark Rosenzweig

It would be great if others weighed in on the issue of frame rate/shutter speed.

Happy to weigh in. It all begins because video is different from film. Projecting film results in at least one blank frame for every shot frame, depending on the projector. This is an actual strobe effect, which for some people has a physiological effect on their brain. At around 24 fps the effect is subliminal but nevertheless may create the perception of a unique experience: the magic of film. With current technology the effect cannot be replicated on video. But that doesn't stop people from trying. Their approach is to replicate traditional film as far as possible. It accounts for people shooting 24fps. Nothing really wrong with that, it saves space, but glad you got past it, thousands haven't. Shutter speed: back in the day when 24fps became standard for film, film speed was around 10ASA. It was imperative to get as much light on to the emulsion as possible. Back in the day 24fps became standard, film cameras operated with simple rotary shutters. The characteristics of these shutters meant the theoretical maximum shutter angle was 180 degrees. Anything more, and part of your frame was double exposed. Yes, an actual 180 degree rule! Sometime this century someone decided this also applied to video. It didn't, but the idea caught on. Wheee! let's make our video filmic. Must shoot 180 degrees! Note, the 180 degree rule for film rotary shutters is only theoretical, and to allow for mechanical effects the actual maximum for film had to be a bit less, say around 175 degrees for high end cameras like Arris. Of course when it came along after WWII, crystal synch sound cut into that, but film got faster, say 25 ASA, so for synch sound 135 degrees was probably the maximum, and yes, it often looked stroby. Cine shutters became more complex in the 1960's with Mitchell and Panaflex gear able to shoot 240 degrees. Or thereabouts, I forget. Anyway, the 180 degree rule for film no longer applied to these cameras, which were able to shoot over 180 degrees, and Hollywood did. Although 180 degrees is a reasonable rule of thumb for video in many situations, only the ill-informed would regard it as rigid. Experience and practice will let you judge motion and determine settings. Basic video cameras can shoot up to 360 degrees, and there are many situations where you should.

[Aaron Jones Sr.]

Originally Posted by Mark Rosenzweig

You can make up your own mind about the look of S-Cinetone. But your comment on shutter speed is way off. This video was shot at 60 fps and the shutter speed obeyed the 180 rule = 1/125th. So, you either do not like the look of 60 fps or there is something wrong with your viewing device. I doubt the latter is true. In fact, given your expertise, which I admire, I am totally confused by this comment on shutter speed.

I have attached info on the metadata on one of the original clips - they are all identical.

I my self like the vivid contrasty popping colors. Actually I made my own PP that is far more contrast and vibrant than the S-Cinetome. I've noticed that the older generation like the more mute color look and I will probably attribute that to the older film look. Where the newer generation will lean toward the vivid vibrant look. Go figure... Great bro you posted

[Doug Jensen]

I think I qualify to be considered part of the "older generation", however, contrary to your hypothesis, I definitely prefer brighter colors and deeper contrast. I think you are probably 180 degrees incorrect about what generation prefers what look. But regardless of who likes what, blown out highlights and crushed blacks are never acceptable. People can disagree on shutter speed, but some things are not open to debate. My 2 cents.

[Doug Jensen]

I think I qualify to be considered part of the "older generarion", however, contrary to your hypothesis, I definitely prefer brighter colors and deeper contrast. I think you are probably 180 degrees incorrect about which generation prefers which look. But regardless of which generation prefers which look, blown out highlights and crushed blacks are never acceptable. People can disagree on shutter speed, but some things are not open to debate.

[Andrew Smith]

To me it looks mostly under exposed and with a grey-ish cast over it. I can see the colour in it, but for all the work that goes into the workflow it simply isn't worth it if that is all you are getting out of it.

BTW, get the notarised letter from Doug. It's a great offer and will only become more valuable with time.

Andrew

[Mark Rosenzweig]

Originally Posted by Doug Jensen

Most people will view at 30 fps or 60i, therefore the speed is too high. 60 fps playback is non-standard. You obviously feel quite passionate about it, so I hereby grant you official permission to choose whatever shutter speed you want. Would you like a notorized letter?

Ok, now we finally get a straight and now the correct answer rather than an unqualified "shutter speed way too high." Yes, as is well-known, the shutter speed is too high if people do not view the video at the proper frame rate it was shot in - 60 fps viewed as 30 fps but shot in 1/125th will not look right. So, we learn you did not view the video properly given its specs that were known to you. Too bad, as you missed the buttery smooth motion that 60 fps provides. You could have said that you viewed the video at 30p and therefore the shutter speed was too high for that. My original reply to you is that the fault was possibly the viewing device. And, unlike in any of your previous posts, I was right.

What I feel passionate about is criticism that is both curt and incorrect. Some do feel passionate about 60 fps being the only frame rate that provides proper motion and that at that frame rate shutter speeds of at least double are appropriate. I actually do not care that much about that issue. I do care about anyone implying that I do not know what I am doing, unless I actually do not! Then, pour it on.

Btw, I agree with you on S-Cinetone - I prefer more color than S-Cinetone provides and I like the flexibility of the DR of the latest sensors, which S-Cinetone does not exploit fully.

[Mark Rosenzweig]

Originally Posted by Andrew Smith

To me it looks mostly under exposed and with a grey-ish cast over it. I can see the colour in it, but for all the work that goes into the workflow it simply isn't worth it if that is all you are getting out of it.

BTW, get the notarised letter from Doug. It's a great offer and will only become more valuable with time.

Andrew

I tend to agree with Doug Jensen on the look of S-Cinetone and have the same feeling about blown-out video. And I like the look of the videos he makes, though not the tone of most of his posts.

But, I am confused about your workflow comment - Sony's point about S-Cinetone is that you have minimal workflow - you get a "cinematic" look with no work. You have the sign wrong, or I am confused by what you said. The point is if you don't like the look of S-Cinetone, then you have to get to work and exploit those log profiles.

[Mark Rosenzweig]

Originally Posted by Andrew Smith

To me it looks mostly under exposed and with a grey-ish cast over it. I can see the colour in it, but for all the work that goes into the workflow it simply isn't worth it if that is all you are getting out of it.

BTW, get the notarised letter from Doug. It's a great offer and will only become more valuable with time.

Andrew

Here is another S-Cinetone example, shot at 30 fps and 1/60th so suitable for most viewing devices:

YouTube (Short URL)

[Rainer Listing]

I'm thinking within reasonable limits, the great majority of viewers won't care at all about blown highlights, black greys, shutter speed effects. This, I think goes beyond. The grey overall and especially the grey skin is dominant, the effect contrasted by some over saturated mids, But look, this is subjective, only an opinion, you're the creator and the creative choices are yours, trust your own judgement..