Jump to content

Llaasseerr

Members
  • Content Count

    146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Llaasseerr

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I noticed the ugly falloff and stepiness around the blooming blue lights on the left after I posted this image. Without doing some pixel peeping in the chroma channels, I think this may be to do with chroma subsampling and lossy compression. Again, it would be interesting to shoot a scene like this in raw. You would also get the extra 2 bits in log for colour transitions, so that's 4096 vs 1024 discreet integer log steps per channel which is very efficient. It's not that I think raw is a panacea, but it does everything that something like a log encoded ProRes444 does and a little bit more
  2. Re: gamut clipping, I finally took a look at one of the shots on this guy's page. Here's a shot bought into ACES which of course has a larger gamut than sgamut3.cine, then it's remapped to display on a P3D65 monitor. I would say that the issue you're seeing is that on the web page there is no correct gamut transform from a wide gamut to something like rec709. However there is still some funkiness from the digital numbers in the top right corner. I'm not sure if that's a compression artifact, or possibly to do with chroma subsampling, or it could be something that is still out of gamut and requ
  3. IMO The S1H is a "theoretically nice" camera but I would rather get the a7sIII/FX3/FX6 because of the S1H's appalling rolling shutter.
  4. Lol fuck Netflix. But yeah, it is a major pain that this camera has no TC in. Using the Atomos as a workaround is nowhere near as easy. I actually only just realised you can't jam sync with the AtomX Sync module, I thought it had a TC-in. It seems it can only be used as a master and then send a signal over Bluetooth. Way too many things could go wrong on a set. EDIT: obviously there is a lock-in to using the UltraSync Blue (owned by Atomos) with this Bluetooth approach, plus maybe a handful of other devices that allow TC over Bluetooth - the new Zoom F2-BT? I'm unclear on that.
  5. Possibly dumb question, but does this camera do true 24P with ProRes Raw? If you check the official Sony page, all the frame rates for the internal codecs list 23.98. But under the raw specs, it says 24P and also emphasises that you can crop to DCI from 4.2K. I don't think they would say that unless they could fully support the DCI spec with true 24P. https://www.sony.com/electronics/interchangeable-lens-cameras/ilme-fx3/specifications#features
  6. Can't agree more. This is one to watch. A bit disappointing they didn't roll it out with true 24P though.
  7. I use Resolve too, but I ingest raw to dpx, exr or prores444 so it's not a problem for me. There's a bit of a trend at the consumer level to edit in raw, but I only see it as an acquisition format.
  8. If Sony did later add true 24P and shutter angle control to the FX3 there is zero reason why they could not do that with the a7sIII. But it may be enough to tip me to buy this sexy beast. Are you listening Sony? Holding off for now...
  9. I had a workaround in mind with the a7sIII where if you recorded external raw to a Ninja V you could use the AtomX Sync module for TC in - but I haven't tried it.
  10. Welp, it's a very sexy design with Sigma FP vibes, but I'm really surprised it does not have true 24P and shutter angle control at minimum. It does not seem like it's truly compatible right now as a B or C cam with another Sony Cinema cam. And of course I was hoping they would add TC in. I do think there is bandwidth for further features to be added due to the active cooling. So maybe that is Sony's play here, and we will see some divergence from the a7sIII in the future. But we'll have to see. At this point I would definitely still look at the FX6 over this camera though.
  11. That was always my take, maybe I got that wrong on the FP but my sense was it was a 6000 pixels wide sensor that output a 3840 UHD raw image at the full sensor width. But I don't know how that's possible while maintaining the integrity of the photosites and the bayer pattern, because clearly that's not line skipping.
  12. Fair points. The issue with the X-Trans layout, I would still think it would be possible. Raw video doesn't have to be a Bayer pattern any more than raw still images. But I'm not sure how possible line skipping is with the X-Trans layout so maybe it's a moot point. I've seen some cameras with Bayer pattern sensors seem to do downsampled raw, right? The Sigma FP seems to offer HD raw? But yeah it doesn't make total sense to me. I guess because the X-T3/4 sensor is actually higher than 4K and video is downsampled, it's not gonna be possible to just line skip it anyway to get the
  13. I've found that shooting HLG and underexposing by 2 stops with a -2 ND, then bringing it back up in post gives a nice grainy look with the X-T3. In this scenario, I used a HLG IDT in ACES into Resolve. Re: the compression, the best way for me to combat it would have been to shoot everything DCI 4K to an Atomos at ProRes 422HQ and then scale down to 2K DCI. But I shot some stuff internally at 400 ALL-I then converted it to ProRes422HQ, and the compression starts to be a bit of a problem. Also, scaling from 4K to 2K does not fully remove the chroma subsampling artifacts. I basically wa
×
×
  • Create New...