austinchimp

this is my best tip too. Learning to do secondary colour correction on skin is one of he best things you can do, then you can push the skin tones where you want them. I frequently rescue and improve shots like this.
of course you need to start with well exposed and white balanced skin in the first place.
if you're editing in Premiere you can use the three-way colour corrector to do secondary correction without having to get into Resolve or Speedgrade. Find a video tutorial and give it a go.

Resolve,Colorista,Speedgrade all have ability to isolate/key/punch skin tone to where you want it to be. If you going in with a heavy orange and teal grade in mind, maybe try to avoid reds and oranges in wardrobe and props where possible. If you can load a LUT onto your camera monitor...great, it will show you the ballpark of what a stylised grade will give you as you shoot. For exterior/overcast weather, you could favor a warmer colour balance to bring skin looking less washed out. If your actor is very pale, that is something you can't do too much about - without helping with makeup.

You can also use davinci resolve or adobe speedgrade (and probably some other software that I don't know about) and pick out the particular hues of skin in footage and adjust them to your desire

thats great andrew!! could you post a couple screengrabs?

SGamut isn't friendly to manual adjustments because of the heavily offset green primary. This is the reason Sony introduced SGamut.Cine which aligns much better with P3 and sRGB/Rec709.
Cinema, Pro and Movie (same as Stills or at least very similar, I think) gamuts have primaries aligned with Rec709/sRGB and are for this reason easily moldable with simple luma curve adjustments without introducing hue disbalance. Skin hues are subtly rotated between these (Cinema is a bit towards yellow, Movie - towards magenta, Pro in the middle; but these are subtle), and there is a small difference in hue compression (Cinema > Pro > Movie; Movie is the most compressed) but all three are fine. I've been shooting s-log2/Cinema, but wouldn't hesitate to use any of these.
It is really a question of how you interpret the color values. Since SGamut is the largest it may appear less saturated (= more subtle) even after treating it. But it certainly does have the problem (without proper remapping) of pulling skin towards yellow.

I think this proves just what a one-off the 1DC has been. Canon and Nikon obviously don't want to make a high-quality 4k DSLR, going by their releases since the 1DC and also Canon's refusal to support that camera in any way with firmware updates or even a proper LUT. Surely they could do better if they tried, but they choose not to.
Why? Market segmentation? Internal politics?

I think this proves just what a one-off the 1DC has been. Canon and Nikon obviously don't want to make a high-quality 4k DSLR, going by their releases since the 1DC and also Canon's refusal to support that camera in any way with firmware updates or even a proper LUT. Surely they could do better if they tried, but they choose not to.
Why? Market segmentation? Internal politics?

In terms of image? I have an NX1 and think it has some nice characteristics, but the poor highlight roll off and general lack of DR put it below the 1DC. As for Sony, the colours just don't cut it, for me.
For overall image and performance as a hybrid, I think the 1DC still reigns supreme.

Not true. You can shot slowmo in raw with the Markiii, not with Markii. Here's a video i made with my 5Diii

Just had a look at your comparison. I'm surprised to see how soft the 1DC is on that screen grab. It looks to me like we're seeing motion blur from the shaking of the 1DC while the Sony is much better stabilised. I wouldn't expect the image to be that different in sharpness otherwise.
so did you shoot the Sony in Andrew's picture profile? Looks incredibly close to the 1DC in colour. Very impressive.

So this is absolutely not a scientific test, but I was curious how the A7Rii would hold up to my 1DC, which I believe gives a wonderful cinematic image, especially when filming people. Chalk it up to Canon's color science, a great sensor, 4:2:2 color, whatever -- but at current used prices I think the 1DC is a steal (and it takes amazing stills) That said, it's also getting long in the tooth, and the A7Rii was an attractive potential upgrade, especially with 42mp stills, IBIS, and small body that makes gimbal work manageable. But I wondered how it would fare image-wise, especially when it comes to skin tones.
I didn't want to use S-Log2 or C-Log, since I don't have any experience grading S-Log2 and I know it can be a challenge, especially on the 8-bit codec. So I shot my 1DC in the neutral profile with sharpness and saturation down, which is what I normally do when not using C-Log. I did my best to match it on the A7Rii -- Andrew's EOSHD Flat settings (Cine4, Black levels up, Detail down, Saturation down a bit) come quite close actually, but I used Pro gamma as Cinema gamma just made the reds look off.
Again, this is by no means a scientific or extensive test, and I did very little grading (no LUT, just a single color correction layer in FCPx). And I'm sure someone could do a better job matching the shots, but this at least gives you a sense of the general differences. My big question was whether I could easily get an image out of the A7Rii that could compete with the 1DC without a ton of post work.
Both cameras are using the same white balance, ISO, and aperture, although the crop factor is slightly different due to APS-H vs APS-C. I used a Canon 50mm/1.2 on both cameras, and both are handheld with no loupe to stabilize, making it easy to tell which camera is which due to Sony's IBIS.
Although I did a number of tests, here's a quick comparison for those interested. This is 4k scaled down to 1080p to make it easier to share: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2135/1DC-A7Rii-Test.mov
Here's a frame grab from FCPx that's higher-res (1DC is zoomed slightly to match so will look less sharp when viewed at full res): https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/2135/1DC-A7Rii.jpg
My personal opinion thus far: The A7Rii can indeed put out a beautiful image when filming people, although it's still not quite as gorgeous as the 1DC. This could be because the 1DC is slightly softer (maybe due to the low-pass filter, so perhaps the A7Sii could be better) and the A7Rii sensor detail just doesn't benefit skin (most photographers end up smoothing skin a bit, I imagine), or due to color, or maybe I just need to spend more time tweaking Sony's insane number of settings.
It seems like the 1DC has smoother highlight roll-off, and just gives a touch of softness that benefits people, making it *feel* a bit better to me, even if it's technically inferior.
That said, it's close (some might prefer the A7Rii look). And with the A7Rii I gain a lot of great video features the 1DC does not have. Don't know if I'm quite yet ready to retire my Canon and go all in on Sony... but it's tempting and I will be keeping an eye on FS5 firmware updates.
Curious to hear from anyone else who has worked with the A7Rii or A7Sii when it comes to filming people.

Agree top looks more like Sony color, bottom looks more like Canon. Additionally, bottom has shallower DOF; full frame vs Super 35.
Shooting a live person is the real test- skintones are the toughest to get right.
Here I matched the C300 II to the A7S II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Ulmgc_a39Q
The Canon looked great with little work needed, it took a lot more to get the A7S II to match the Canon (still not perfect, but close enough for a test. C300 II has much more detail). That's the point people are making about Canon/ARRI/Red Dragon-(or later): when time is money, the tools which provide the best quality in the least amount of time will be used, even when the tools cost a bit more up front. Over time, the cost is much less due to less time in post. For hobbyists who only shoot tests, for fun, family, etc., this point doesn't really matter: initial cost is more important.
Sony is indeed getting better with color, however Canon is still ahead (as is ARRI and Red), especially in challenging light (multiple and/or gapped spectrum sources). The best way to see this is to shoot with both cameras on the same shoots in the same conditions.
The C300 II currently has the best skintones + autofocus of any camera at any price. Would love to see ARRI/Red come out with an even better autofocus/assisted-manual focus system.

I haven't seen that till now. Damn. He filtered the shit out of that. Hard to judge image quality.

Hello everybody,
I just build an online web app to test all the LUTs from my pack on JPG/PNG images.
You can test the beta version here : http://luts.iwltbap.com/previewer
The use is pretty simple, you have just to drop/load a JPG/PNG frame on the main container and click a LUT reference in the left sidebar.
In top bar you have a ON/OFF button to enable or disable the LUT effect instantly, and a slider to change the LUT intensity.
Also, you can export the current frame as a PNG by clicking SAVE button.
The LUTs will be applied at low resolution to increase speed (the size of this web app is around 10MB, when my pack of LUTs is around 1.20GB).
So, pixelation and banding will appear in the previewer.
More details in the infos box on the previewer home page.
It's still in beta so all feedback and bug reports are welcome 
Benjamin

Proof in the pudding that "specs" don't mean much. We've probably all seen it.. but this was shot on a GH3. 

It should come as no surprise to many here that I have been spending some time filming and taking stills with Samsung's mighty NX1 camera. What some may not realize is that I have also been getting to know Sony's own heavy weight contender... the A7Rii. In this writing are some of my thoughts and conclusions.
Pros - Samsung NX1:
1. Excellent 16-50mm S-lens (Clean optics, pretty fast... Great performance for the buck).
2. Feels good in the hand.
3. Excellent user interface (Easy to use).
4. Better than expected low-light (Good up to 6400 iso).
5. Future proof H.265 codec means it is compatible with cheaper/slower SD cards.
6. Good auto-focus.
7. Cinema 4k (Very cool).
8. Great OLED display.
9. Good battery life.
Cons - Samsung NX1:
1. Limited lens selection.
2. When recording video you cannot switch back and forth from EVF to rear display panel. 
3. Unnatural motion cadence when panning or recording a moving subject (deal breaker).
4. Limited dynamic range (troublesome).
5. External flash requires purchase of second expensive flash unit for off camera use.
6. Internal flash creates shadow when used with kit 16-50mm S-lens.
7. Stock battery grip does not fit correctly (QC fail).
Pros -  Sony A7Rii
1. Feels like the real deal, solid, well made... Quality (Confidence inspiring).
2. Amazing auto-focus (In a different league).
3. 42MP stills (Wow, just wow!!!).
4. Accessories (Flashes galore, wireless sound with connection though smart hot shoe, grips etc...).
5. Amazing lenses (Zeiss Distagon 35mm with selectable de-clicked aperture... must be seen to believe, Batis 85mm etc... ).
6. Adaptable (Canon lenses focus faster than on native canon bodies).
7. Large EVF (really large).
8. Video motion cadence is good.
9. Pleasing colors (Thank you Sony... at last).
10. Good battery life (With the new firmware I shot all day on a single battery, mix of video and stills).
11. Excellent low-light performance - full frame clean to 12800 and APS-C clean till 25,600 ISO (more than enough, unless you are doing surveillance).
Cons - Sony A7Rii
1. Expensive (Body alone is $3200 US)
2. Native lenses are expensive and mostly slow.
3. Rear LCD display should be better at this price point.
4. Non-intuitive user interface (Doesn't Sony make smartphone also?).
5. Battery grip use requires removing the in body battery.
6. Large file sizes means it takes a long time to write to even the fastest SD cards.
Let me first add that both are great cameras. And truly fantastic results can be accomplished with either. But that said, there really can only be one winner here. And after shooting with both cameras, I can declare with great confidence that if stills are entered into the equations... at all, you can just start saving your pennies now. The A7Rii is an amazing stills camera. The auto-focus is mythical. The burst speed is truly something to marvel at. The A7Rii is without a doubt among the best full frame stills camera currently available. 
As to video, after extensive testing I am forced to realign my previous thoughts regarding the NX1. While it is an excellent camera, it is simply out classed by Sony's offering. Overall image quality is superior on the A7Rii. Colors seem more true to life without the need for tweaking. The video motion cadence seems more natural. Dynamic range is much better also, with far better black levels. Auto-focus in video mode is very good on the A7Rii. 
I need to make a disclosure here, I am not unbiased in this review. I REALLY wanted the Samsung NX1 to blow away the Sony A7Rii. If it had, it would have saved me many thousands of dollars. But in the end, the results where undeniable. The A7Rii is the better camera. If you are on the fence and wondering if it is worth three times the money... Wonder no more. Safe in the knowledge that the new firmware has resolved the worrisome overheat problems that plagued this camera, the only sensible choice is the A7Rii. While the A7Sii does offer 1080p 120fps capture, the A7Rii's ability to deliver super high res stills  combined with the flexibility of filming in both full frame and APS-C video modes make it the clear winner for anyone outside of a private eye on a stakeout.
Verdict: I find for the Sony A7Rii.


 

The second one was so full of holes and such a ridiculous premise that set the whole story in motion - it was flat out awful and had as many holes as the last Christopher Nolan Batman film. After the "terrorist attack" the whole Star Fleet executive branch decides to meet in what looks like a Hilton banquet room with no protection? They don't go underground? And I know it seems far fetched - but they don't go into space where they can't be tracked? I mean they have a whole Star Fleet to protect them, instead they opt for the continental breakfast so they can get slaughtered by one guy in a Jetsons car. Good lord, gimme a break. If I wasn't with my wife, I would have walked out right there. That was beyond stupid and it only got worse as the movie dragged on. I hope in this one the plot doesn't play second fiddle to JJ's idiotic anamorphic shaky cam. KAAAAHHHHHNNNNNN!!!!!!!
I'm going to watch the new movie because Star Wars was the coolest thing I saw as a kid. I hope it doesn't disappoint. With Lucas not very involved, there's a chance.

Anyone knows if it works with El Capitan now? As in works exceptionally well. I had some minor bugs that were really annoying. Updating now....

I don't agree with this blog entry.  Canon for example has all the technology to build perfect and modern cameras.  The only thing you can criticize is that they limit the specs of their products to make people buy 2-4 different instead of 1 cameras, and try to set the prices as high as possible.  This is exactly what Apple is doing!!!  It's all capitalism and strategies of big companies with decision makers that are not complete idiots. 
I don't think camera companies have problems to sell their product because of a lack innovation, more likely it's the competition of smartphones and the consumer's old exisiting DLSR's that are still enough for them for years to come!
In hindsight, even Apple had only detail innovations in all their product series over the years.  They don't give you an open file system in an iPad (which makes no sense at all) and won't do that until they lose significant market share.  I will not upgrade my iPad2 until they do that.
If you look back from the year 2020, then probably Canon and Nikon came out with a GH4 and A7R2 competitor probably 3 years later than Pansonic and Sony.  But so what?  Mercedes just did release a competitor to the BMW X6 more than 7 years later.   In former decades it wasn't like Nikon came out with an answer to a Canon innovation 3 months later, it took years.  People are just too impatient now.  
Other than that of course I am also happy if the perfect camera is out tomorrow for little money.  But a wish doesnt always become reality.

The innovation in the camera world that needs to happen is in the multi device communication.
why can't you use an iPad to apply meta data to the clips in the camera? you can use an ipad to change setting.
why can't wireless mics talk directly to the cameras? 
why can't cameras talk to each other?
We have more and more recording devices on each set and its the editors job to sort them and figure it out but the cameras and the other devices could be doing a huge amount of the labeling, sync data, notes, circle takes, etc...
 
I think there is a huge opportunity in an adhock wireless mesh networking in production. No one seems to want to bother.  

 

Film, Alexa, Red... They can all look thin after numerous compressions. The A7Sii is just extremely thin all around, from start to finish. I really wanted to like it but it's not a great camera at 8 bit via S Log 2/3.
It's not a softness or resolution issue. It's a brittle codec.

true, and after working extensively with the original A7s, Red raw and now the Canon 1DC I can confirm that they all need skilful tweaking straight out of the camera. 
The difference for me has been that with Canon and Red files the first hour or so of grading is correcting the colour (removing weird casts, exposure, getting skin in the right area, making it look natural) and then I can go onto working the general look and feel. Where as with Sony - in any colour profile you choose - the first stage of 'fixing' the image so that it looks natural never really ends. I find it very hard to ever reach a point of having a natural look I'm satisfied with, and then any additional change I make to the image tends to knock all my previous work out of whack. With the Canon files, once I've got it to a natural, neutral point, further creative grading seems to go much smoother and doesn't stray out of a natural getting image as much.
What I'm basically saying is that in my workflow Sony A7s footage requires me to constantly wrestle with the image to stop people looking like aliens or zombies, whereas in Canon footage I can push and pull the image much further while people tend to remain looking like people.
As a working pro those hours saved and reduced stress is hard to put a value on.
as an idiot, I greatly appreciate this!

Image doesn't look as good as the newer GoPros with Protune to my eyes. And with the cheaper standalone gimbals at least you can upgrade the GoPro easily as new models come out.

To answer the question in the article: No, not really. Canon's color space is just more idiot-proof than Sony's. 

Maybe. All I know is that if I asign a guy at work to do a video and he asks to use an A7sii instead of a C100 but needs 3h extra in post. Well, I think we all know what I will say.
And time isnt the whole issue either. If he gets sick and someone else needs to finish it with him being the only one thats familiar with S-log.