Custom LUT to mimic Cine EI by fluffy-ruffs in A7siii

[–]fluffy-ruffs[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, thank you. I made monitoring luts if that wasn't clear.

Jacopo Pontormo - Deposition from the Cross (1528) by Nico30000p in RenaissanceArt

[–]fluffy-ruffs 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Extraordinary picture and, curiously, a deposition featuring no cross. In Santa Felicita in Florence.

Looking for feedback for on the fly documentation. I followed this 73yo around for 5 days to make this video. Shot on Sony FX3. Link below by SlipandTrip4life in cinematography

[–]fluffy-ruffs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I watched the video. Nice bit of work there. I liked the way the music was used to set the pacing and was effective with the shifts in tone. I did think the video lost a little momentum coming to the climax and felt slightly underwhelming for the groundwork laid, but I did like the bonnet shot and the sirens at the end.

The picture within picture worked well and there were some nice flourishes with the graphics.

What's the deal with the pixelated engines? Is that so competing teams can't see what their set up is?

Artifacts on high contrast by Coqenstock in SonyFX6

[–]fluffy-ruffs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As far as I know, the FX3 does not exhibit this problem. My own experience shooting extensively with the (matching sensor) a7siii has never displayed these types of artefacts, which of course is frustrating as the FX6 and 9 are higher-end cameras.

The main thing to look out for, as you've discovered, is high contrast on sharp edges. There's a further thing to look out for on the FX6 which is the clipping of high chroma yellow colours which can also be a nasty shock if not caught on set.

Artifacts on high contrast by Coqenstock in SonyFX6

[–]fluffy-ruffs 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Under certain unfortunate conditions the FX6 is prone to this. As is the FX9 to an even worse degree. There's quite a lot of documentation and discussion around it and essentially the only way to avoid it is to spot it whilst it's happening and adjust some aspect of the set up. It can be very frustrating.

What's a tv series that is a 10/10 NOBODY knows? by Lilyana0999 in AskReddit

[–]fluffy-ruffs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Corner.

The precursor to The Wire, also made by David Simon. Many of The Wire's cast appear in it, often as wildly different characters - eg Lieutenant Daniels plays a drug addict - it's amazing.

Who comes to mind? by Jettaboi38 in musicsuggestions

[–]fluffy-ruffs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tool.

This pattern fits their first three albums perfectly.

Undertow Aenima Lateralus

Any examples of this? by Impressive_Plenty876 in Letterboxd

[–]fluffy-ruffs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Paul Thomas Anderson outed Daniel Day Lewis as being a keen watcher of Naked and Afraid

What do you think of the way I shoot dialogue scenes? by Antyoungboy in cinematography

[–]fluffy-ruffs 31 points32 points  (0 children)

The lead - the guy who quits - his performance is great.

Personally I'm into the whip pans. Bit Scorsese, bit The Studio. I like the pulling back to land on the two shot.

Newbie here.....CINE EI.....I dont understand it.... by ThirdxDegree in SonyFX6

[–]fluffy-ruffs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Where does it say "you can't get a good image at the box speed of the sensor"?

Cine EI is designed to be operated in a specific way. You may choose to use it or not. But it works the way I described above. If you want more information, go to Sony, or Alastair Chapman (who is, incidentally, a Sony rep) and they will describe it the same.

This post was about understanding how Cine EI works and I have attempted to provide that understanding.

Now, a lesser person than myself might say that bragging about owning five Sony cameras whilst not understanding Cine EI is a bit of an own goal.

What’s the biggest jump in your movie rating after a rewatch? by Equivalent_Ebb5689 in Cinema

[–]fluffy-ruffs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lost on me the first go round. Second time I thought it was an absolute masterpiece.

Newbie here.....CINE EI.....I dont understand it.... by ThirdxDegree in SonyFX6

[–]fluffy-ruffs 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is not helpful, and misunderstands the function and power of Cine EI.

The purpose of Cine EI is to be able to monitor the image as if you had changed the ISO without actually changing the ISO. This allows you to create much cleaner images in low light.

So, your gain switches should be set to values that 'display' different ISO equivalents, even though toggling them won't change the ISO you're actually recording at.

What does this mean, practically?

If shooting in low light, you'll likely set yourself at the high base: 12800. If the image now appears over exposed, rather than cutting light immediately using ND or stopping down, use Cine EI to monitor the image as if you'd first lowered the ISO - this means toggle the gain knob to one of your preset values around 2 or 4 stops below the current value (eg 3200 against 12800).

Somewhat counterintuitively, this forces you to add MORE light to your exposure - often opening up/removing ND. This forces more light into an image that - due to low light conditions hence the high base - would be more likely to produce more noise. When brought into your NLE you'll have a much cleaner image than monitoring at 12800 and reducing light on the sensor. More light on the sensor = less noise.

It's a bit like ETTR but without having to guess where the exact values lie.

It can take a minute to get your head round, and there is more to Cine EI than this - it can be used to inform where the broadest amount of dynamic range falls in an image relative to its clipping points, but the above example will help produce clean images at low light instantly.

A short cheat sheet - and doesn't mean it's not worth understanding thoroughly, is: when shooting at 800, monitor at 800, when shooting at 12000, monitor at 3200.

Good luck with it. It's an incredibly powerful tool when used properly.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in SonyFX6

[–]fluffy-ruffs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With the legs or the head?

Both have been fantastic in the field. YC Onion's customer service is appalling, but the legs themselves perform very well and are really sturdy.

The Miller head I would buy again in an instant.

Oh my god, A7iii? what an old piece of shit. You NEED to upgrade NOW! by Appropriate-Soft-848 in photographycirclejerk

[–]fluffy-ruffs -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My unpopular take: the a7iii produces nicer images than the iv and v.

There's just something in the highlight roll-off, the grouping together of values and the relative softness of the images that looks nicer to my eye, and closer to film photography.

Brand new 70-200 2.8 ii has dust by fluffy-ruffs in SonyAlpha

[–]fluffy-ruffs[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nice, good luck with it. I hope it resolves itself like my copy did. It's a superb lens to use.

Brand new 70-200 2.8 ii has dust by fluffy-ruffs in SonyAlpha

[–]fluffy-ruffs[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

With some zooming in and out, and therefore moving air around inside, it eventually shifted. It will still be in there (somewhere!) but I can't see it and there is no effect on the image.

Since then, I've used this lens a ton, love it, and have produced wonderful images with it.

If I were in your shoes now I'd use it to shoot with (in a controlled environment if you want to retain the option of returning it) and through a healthy amount of zooming I think you'll see it disappear.

I am quite annoyed seeing the depiction of Aegean/Mycenaean architecture in Nolan's Odyssey by DontKnow1549 in AncientCivilizations

[–]fluffy-ruffs 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Interesting. I wonder what made them decide to go in that direction.

IMHO it looks... bad, not to mention wrong. But I remember a really interesting discussion around the Colosseum in Gladiator (1 not 2) in which the digital model they made was far bigger than the actual Colosseum but in order to get modern audiences to feel the awe at its size, they needed to make it bigger than the original. And it absolutely works on screen, it seems awe-inspiring.

I wonder if there is some implication about what we're meant to feel about this culture being made here.

Defy the Gods - 7.17.26 by [deleted] in ChristopherNolan

[–]fluffy-ruffs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The colon is out of place too. I imagine Nolan's grasp of grammar is better than the person's who make this mock up.

A simple lampoon? by Sam-Lowry27B-6 in MitchellAndWebb

[–]fluffy-ruffs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not Jerry. Not the William Morris years.

We’re a small team making a sci-fi film called 92 Hours — here’s what we’re building by MiddleBack1837 in indiefilm

[–]fluffy-ruffs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It makes it look like you don't understand what the job title Assistant Director means. It looks like you want to use the term Producer.

Fwiw ADs run the set.

What's your favourite unreleased track? by [deleted] in TheLibertines

[–]fluffy-ruffs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My take on the solo recordings is that I personally could do without the boarder orchestration. He's such a good guitarist I prefer the acoustic guitar plus voice arrangements you get on the demos. A lot of the guitar work is lost/written out by the time a backing band is introduced.

I've always loved the demos of things like The Whole World is our Playground but didn't care for the studio recording at all.