I think the test footage used would've been better if it was in low light conditions. Exposing to the right in those situations can be quite beneficial
Yea but ETTR is meant for darker scenes so we get clean shadows. Showing bright daylight test footage with nothing really dark, of course ETTR isn't really needed. You can also expose to +1.7 so you don't have to worry about anything about +2.0 being guesswork. Having zebras on will also help you not overexpose.
you are correct. usually when people discuss this issue they are either dealing with daylight footage or studio footage which is not all shooting scenarios. when you do a lot of events you realise very quickly that it's safer to overexpose
I don't know why do you use offset+hdr wheels to "recover" under/uoverexposed footage. Just use global exposure in HDR wheels - it works just like in camera and it's just a few seconds to match the exposure. Secondly, it's better to record too bright, than too dim, so overexposing just a little bit is better, when you for example want to brighten the shadows. And sometines there is no time to set the perfect exposure, so it's easier to just shoot a little too bright, making sure that highlights are protected.
I do both. but I think the rule should be, Properly expose , then nudge it up 1 or 2 stops. The image usually comes out fuller. As a colorist I found out people (DPs) tend to underexpose most times cause of fear of clipping. But this practice has made exposing close to wear the final look will be from set.
Hey! Like you said, you don’t want to blindly overexpose each shot differently. You need a LUT that consistently makes you overexpose by +1 stop so that you can globally bring everything back down by -1 stop (with HDR Global or Linear Gain). You just need to do it once (as part of your global look) and you don’t have to think about it again!
Love the channel but as someone who has only ever shot in S-Log3--I've literally never delivered straight out of camera or shot that way--I strongly disagree with this. My footage always turns out amazing and is highly malleable. I strongly recommend shooting at least +1.7, I always shoot +2 and never clip highlights.
I don’t think there’s a set exposure rule that works for all situations. Generally not much reason to over expose in bright conditions but there are good reasons why it can be beneficial to over expose in low light situations. It depends on the situation and what elements of a particular scene need to be considered.
I have a question: In dark environments is it better to go above native ISO or stick to base ISO and raise exposure in post? Or should I just lower shutter speed a bit and deal with added motion blur. (Sony FX30)
I am an FX30 and FX3 user myself, so I feel free to answer you. In bad lit environments even ISO800 can get pretty noisy on the FX30, so I would never tell you to leave the Base ISO. Since I hate working with Noise Reduction in post I would recommend to either buy a cheap extra light or change the shutterspeed to match the framerate, which is perfectly fine to use in my opinion. Hope that helps you, buddy.
I am personally a fan of properly exposed images and I also rather prefer a slightly underexposed image with details in the highlights over an overexposed image with less noise but no highlight information. But if you manage to preserve all highlight detail the obviously better image is the one that has less noise - so it's the overexposed image. But - and this is important - people have to understand the 4 layers of exposure. Aperture, ISO, shutter speed and ND filters. - Shutter speed is something that shouldn't be changed (apart from being a creative decision) - ND filters only go down, so those can be easily out of question if you're shooting in low light. So that leaves only aperture size and ISO - Setting the ISO is totally useless in regards to overexposing, because it is practically the same as brightening the image in post (apart from loosing detail in camera because it's set too high) - The only thing that's left is the aperture and this comes with the side effect of stronger blurs and less depth of field. Shooting wide open (aperture) lets more light enter the sensor --> highger SNR (signal to noise ratio) --> cleaner image Boosting the ISO (boosting the data from the sensor) --> boosts noise equally as much --> doesn't affect SNR --> dirty image side note: those are idealized concepts. of course there is also data rate and bit depth. Because those can be quite bad (especially on lower end Sony cameras) those will affect the decision making as well. but as a general rule of thumb you should just overexpose enough so you can bring it down in post but don't loose highlight detail while recording.
I have luts from caleb pike that have a 0, 1 stop over and 2 stop over lut. I have tested them side by side and the +2 is by far cleaner when shooting indoors. Your test might not work in all scenarios since everything is well lit outside.
thanks danny . im not sure why we have to go threw fancy exposure multimetering guessing, while we have supposedly expensive gear like this! we should stick to native iso and sometimes have a run n gun situation , i don't know why there isn't yet a flexible overall solution to bypass all this time wasting individual color correction phase after all that time.
I'd say it depends a lot of the scene and light conditions. Examples you have showed are all outdoors clear sky which obviously don't need to be overexposed +2 blinking, I reckon +1.7 is the sweet spot for this kind of scene. I found that exposing lower makes shadow areas look dark losing details.
The correct way to overexpose is to ETTR with zebras. Meters are inaccurate anyway. There's no reason not to keep the noise floor as low as possible. Your point is efficiency, but you had to denoise manually. You're going to have to color (WB) balance each shot manually anyway, and if you're that lazy you don't even want to do that, you might as well just not shoot in log at all. Also, exposure is corrected via the Global Wheel Slider in the HDR panel, so you don't even have to mess with those shadow sliders. I don't see why you're calling yourself a professional if you don't even know these VITAL basics.
@@DannyGanThat seems to be your method. My point was to get as much as possible correct in-camera to utilize the most capability of S-LOG 3, which is what the whole discussion about exposing S-LOG 3 is about. Nobody ever wanted an "easier" workflow with it.
@@DannyGan dude if you want as little work as possible in post, just shoot in rec709. The whole point of log is to get as much information as possible in a reasonable file size, and still have the flexibility in post if we want to work on it. No one uses slog because they want an easier workflow. Professional DPs frequently get it right in camera, but they have show luts for example, and a bunch of crew to get the lighting and angles all correct. Setting up a shot takes forever. I'm pretty sure for 99% of us watching this video, that isn't the case, and it's not reasonable to get it right in camera and expect not to have to fix stuff in post.
Wish you would use some portraits as examples, since they can highly benefiit from properly exposing. While overexposing a human subject, sometimes the skin wont look as good when you bring it down in post, the hues change wont be as soft and natural as when properly exposed. Theres a reason why big productions use middle gray and you will never see roger deakins blindly overexposing +2
Hi Danny, I've sent multiple emails regarding account issues/purchase history on visionary colour but have gotten no answer. Is there an email I can reach out to where I can get some help? Great video by the way.
I think you're making some "mistakes" here. Let me explain myself : This shot doesn't need overexposing that much because it's a high-key scenario, you don't have a lot of shadows to bring up so noise won't matter. Perphaps a low-key shot will be more efficient for some tests. I don't think over exposing is really that linked to sLog, in any cineon like log you always want to find the balance between clamping highlights and crushed shadows, while maintaining correct exposure for your subject. So overexposing while monitoring the highlights will get you a perfect image to grade. The whole point of over exposing is to preserve data, in case you need to bring shadows up and have cleaner ones. When correcting an overexposed shot, if your color management is on point, you should just have to go to the HDR wheels and -1, -2, -X in the global to compensate for stops of light added. And it can be done at group levels if you know that all the shots had the same treatment. But, there is one major flaw a lot of people often get wrong, it's that the more you over expose, the more your skintones are closer to the ceiling, so there is less space to live for them. That's why only 1 or 2 stop are needed. But depending of the contrast of the scene, ETTR could work very well. If i had a choice, I'd prefer to lower my exposure in resolve, than having to denoise, it takes ressources that I don't need to spend on that. Here you seems to want to have the less things to do in post to get your exposure right, and I totally get that, but you live with the risks of noisy shadows in low key scenarios. In the end, what matters is that your image pleases you, and if you have a client, your client ! Everybody is free to adopt the workflow they want, but I really think over exposing log is the way to go, to have as many options as possible in post.
Why are you downgrading a 10bit footage to 8bit rec709 when almost all new displays and TVs support rec 2020? And older ones easily convert rec 2020 to rec 709!
You should NEVER, NEVER, NEVER be using the multi-meter (M.M.) to expose anything. Super inaccurate, as it's the whole frame. Use zebras set correctly and the histogram. Much better. Or false color if you have access to it. Expose to keep the highlights THAT YOU WANT TO KEEP (balanced with exposing correctly for your subject, of course). Never rely on the multi-meter.
CINEMATIC Exposure For S-Log3 (as a colorist) | Sony A7IV A7SIII FX3 FX30
th-cam.com/video/jbsyuqsrGwc/w-d-xo.html
I think the test footage used would've been better if it was in low light conditions. Exposing to the right in those situations can be quite beneficial
Yea but ETTR is meant for darker scenes so we get clean shadows. Showing bright daylight test footage with nothing really dark, of course ETTR isn't really needed. You can also expose to +1.7 so you don't have to worry about anything about +2.0 being guesswork. Having zebras on will also help you not overexpose.
That's right. This footage wasn't showing anything. In dim interiors when you want to brighten the shadows overexposing is very helpfull.
you are correct. usually when people discuss this issue they are either dealing with daylight footage or studio footage which is not all shooting scenarios. when you do a lot of events you realise very quickly that it's safer to overexpose
I don't know why do you use offset+hdr wheels to "recover" under/uoverexposed footage. Just use global exposure in HDR wheels - it works just like in camera and it's just a few seconds to match the exposure. Secondly, it's better to record too bright, than too dim, so overexposing just a little bit is better, when you for example want to brighten the shadows. And sometines there is no time to set the perfect exposure, so it's easier to just shoot a little too bright, making sure that highlights are protected.
I do both. but I think the rule should be, Properly expose , then nudge it up 1 or 2 stops. The image usually comes out fuller. As a colorist I found out people (DPs) tend to underexpose most times cause of fear of clipping. But this practice has made exposing close to wear the final look will be from set.
Hey! Like you said, you don’t want to blindly overexpose each shot differently.
You need a LUT that consistently makes you overexpose by +1 stop so that you can globally bring everything back down by -1 stop (with HDR Global or Linear Gain).
You just need to do it once (as part of your global look) and you don’t have to think about it again!
Love the channel but as someone who has only ever shot in S-Log3--I've literally never delivered straight out of camera or shot that way--I strongly disagree with this. My footage always turns out amazing and is highly malleable. I strongly recommend shooting at least +1.7, I always shoot +2 and never clip highlights.
I don’t think there’s a set exposure rule that works for all situations. Generally not much reason to over expose in bright conditions but there are good reasons why it can be beneficial to over expose in low light situations. It depends on the situation and what elements of a particular scene need to be considered.
Cine EI make overexposing & underexposing slog3 much eaiser
I have a question: In dark environments is it better to go above native ISO or stick to base ISO and raise exposure in post? Or should I just lower shutter speed a bit and deal with added motion blur. (Sony FX30)
I am an FX30 and FX3 user myself, so I feel free to answer you. In bad lit environments even ISO800 can get pretty noisy on the FX30, so I would never tell you to leave the Base ISO. Since I hate working with Noise Reduction in post I would recommend to either buy a cheap extra light or change the shutterspeed to match the framerate, which is perfectly fine to use in my opinion. Hope that helps you, buddy.
I would just raise the ISO then use noise reduction in post
@@chillezxlast311 thanks for the info 🙂
@@DannyGan thanks bro 👍
Raise the iso to second native. Brightening the footage in post always give you more noise than higher iso.
I am personally a fan of properly exposed images and I also rather prefer a slightly underexposed image with details in the highlights over an overexposed image with less noise but no highlight information. But if you manage to preserve all highlight detail the obviously better image is the one that has less noise - so it's the overexposed image.
But - and this is important - people have to understand the 4 layers of exposure. Aperture, ISO, shutter speed and ND filters.
- Shutter speed is something that shouldn't be changed (apart from being a creative decision)
- ND filters only go down, so those can be easily out of question if you're shooting in low light. So that leaves only aperture size and ISO
- Setting the ISO is totally useless in regards to overexposing, because it is practically the same as brightening the image in post (apart from loosing detail in camera because it's set too high)
- The only thing that's left is the aperture and this comes with the side effect of stronger blurs and less depth of field.
Shooting wide open (aperture) lets more light enter the sensor --> highger SNR (signal to noise ratio) --> cleaner image
Boosting the ISO (boosting the data from the sensor) --> boosts noise equally as much --> doesn't affect SNR --> dirty image
side note: those are idealized concepts. of course there is also data rate and bit depth. Because those can be quite bad (especially on lower end Sony cameras) those will affect the decision making as well. but as a general rule of thumb you should just overexpose enough so you can bring it down in post but don't loose highlight detail while recording.
I have luts from caleb pike that have a 0, 1 stop over and 2 stop over lut. I have tested them side by side and the +2 is by far cleaner when shooting indoors. Your test might not work in all scenarios since everything is well lit outside.
thanks danny . im not sure why we have to go threw fancy exposure multimetering guessing, while we have supposedly expensive gear like this! we should stick to native iso and sometimes have a run n gun situation , i don't know why there isn't yet a flexible overall solution to bypass all this time wasting individual color correction phase after all that time.
I'd say it depends a lot of the scene and light conditions. Examples you have showed are all outdoors clear sky which obviously don't need to be overexposed +2 blinking, I reckon +1.7 is the sweet spot for this kind of scene. I found that exposing lower makes shadow areas look dark losing details.
The correct way to overexpose is to ETTR with zebras. Meters are inaccurate anyway. There's no reason not to keep the noise floor as low as possible. Your point is efficiency, but you had to denoise manually. You're going to have to color (WB) balance each shot manually anyway, and if you're that lazy you don't even want to do that, you might as well just not shoot in log at all.
Also, exposure is corrected via the Global Wheel Slider in the HDR panel, so you don't even have to mess with those shadow sliders.
I don't see why you're calling yourself a professional if you don't even know these VITAL basics.
Facts 😅😅😅
Then why hire an experienced DP at all, just give the camera to an amatuer and correct everything in post, am I right?
He only had to denoise manually the underexposed example
@@DannyGanThat seems to be your method. My point was to get as much as possible correct in-camera to utilize the most capability of S-LOG 3, which is what the whole discussion about exposing S-LOG 3 is about. Nobody ever wanted an "easier" workflow with it.
@@DannyGan dude if you want as little work as possible in post, just shoot in rec709. The whole point of log is to get as much information as possible in a reasonable file size, and still have the flexibility in post if we want to work on it. No one uses slog because they want an easier workflow. Professional DPs frequently get it right in camera, but they have show luts for example, and a bunch of crew to get the lighting and angles all correct. Setting up a shot takes forever. I'm pretty sure for 99% of us watching this video, that isn't the case, and it's not reasonable to get it right in camera and expect not to have to fix stuff in post.
The FREE Download Test Footage link is not working anymore.
Still working on my end, what does it show on yours?
Wish you would use some portraits as examples, since they can highly benefiit from properly exposing.
While overexposing a human subject, sometimes the skin wont look as good when you bring it down in post, the hues change wont be as soft and natural as when properly exposed.
Theres a reason why big productions use middle gray and you will never see roger deakins blindly overexposing +2
That's what I'm seeing too. skin tones are such a fragile thing
Im sorry, I didnt catch that, what is the benefit of properly exposing it and not over exposing?
1. No color correction needed
2. Speed in post
3. No risk of clipping highlights
@@DannyGan thank you :)
@@DannyGanalso, skin tones may look better on properly exposed images
The other benefit is a ton of noise in your shadows....
@@jarrodbarker if you dont know how to properly expose and or light a scene
Hi Danny, I've sent multiple emails regarding account issues/purchase history on visionary colour but have gotten no answer. Is there an email I can reach out to where I can get some help? Great video by the way.
I think you're making some "mistakes" here. Let me explain myself :
This shot doesn't need overexposing that much because it's a high-key scenario, you don't have a lot of shadows to bring up so noise won't matter. Perphaps a low-key shot will be more efficient for some tests.
I don't think over exposing is really that linked to sLog, in any cineon like log you always want to find the balance between clamping highlights and crushed shadows, while maintaining correct exposure for your subject. So overexposing while monitoring the highlights will get you a perfect image to grade. The whole point of over exposing is to preserve data, in case you need to bring shadows up and have cleaner ones.
When correcting an overexposed shot, if your color management is on point, you should just have to go to the HDR wheels and -1, -2, -X in the global to compensate for stops of light added. And it can be done at group levels if you know that all the shots had the same treatment.
But, there is one major flaw a lot of people often get wrong, it's that the more you over expose, the more your skintones are closer to the ceiling, so there is less space to live for them. That's why only 1 or 2 stop are needed. But depending of the contrast of the scene, ETTR could work very well.
If i had a choice, I'd prefer to lower my exposure in resolve, than having to denoise, it takes ressources that I don't need to spend on that.
Here you seems to want to have the less things to do in post to get your exposure right, and I totally get that, but you live with the risks of noisy shadows in low key scenarios.
In the end, what matters is that your image pleases you, and if you have a client, your client ! Everybody is free to adopt the workflow they want, but I really think over exposing log is the way to go, to have as many options as possible in post.
great video! insightful! which screen recording software do you use to record a video like this? thank you
Just the MacOS native recording
@ thank you. I can't find an option to turn on the facetime cam, only can record audio and my screen though. Any thoughts what I'm missing? Thank you
Why are you downgrading a 10bit footage to 8bit rec709 when almost all new displays and TVs support rec 2020? And older ones easily convert rec 2020 to rec 709!
Please get your information on bit depth and colour space right.
@ ??
@ I’m talking about HDR videos!!!
good
You should NEVER, NEVER, NEVER be using the multi-meter (M.M.) to expose anything. Super inaccurate, as it's the whole frame. Use zebras set correctly and the histogram. Much better. Or false color if you have access to it. Expose to keep the highlights THAT YOU WANT TO KEEP (balanced with exposing correctly for your subject, of course). Never rely on the multi-meter.
This comment tells me that you didn’t even watch half the video
Many of you are not aware of Focus Point Linked in the Multimeter
@@DannyGan exactly
@@DannyGan I am. Doesn't change my comment.
You can if you know what you doing. Use whatever works for you!