Sony Zv-e10 Color Grading
Rashawn Devegowda
Here, the curved color space represents the range of human vision. The gamut of Rec. 709 is much narrower. In contrast, it is easy to appreciate how much broader S-Gamuts used in S-Log recording are.
Unlike 1D LUTs, which mainly adjust luminance, 3D LUTs control hue, saturation, and brightness of each RGB color. LUTs simplify color grading, because without them, instant S-Log video display matching the gamut of Rec. 709 screens would be difficult as you adjust tone curves, hue, saturation, and other details two-dimensionally.
To make it easier to check S-Log video on a Rec. 709 screen as you shoot, use Gamma Display Assist to apply LUTs. The contrast of viewfinder and monitor display will look as if you were not shooting in S-Log. In this way, Gamma Display Assist enables precise camerawork, whether you are checking subjects or adjusting the focus.
These LUTs are designed to provide an easy starting point when color grading for a typical broadcast TV workflow. Originally developed to exploit the exceptional color reproduction and latitude of the F65 and F55, they are also useful for subsequent large format sensor cameras including FS7/FS5 Series.
Sony created these LUTs for on-set monitoring while shooting, as well as for clip review afterward. Developed alongside VENICE and also applicable to FX9, s709 renders imagery in subtle colors, with smooth color gradation and a softer low contrast tone curve. s709 is close to the film color characteristics, and allows directors, DOPs and cinematographers to have the final film look characteristics on location while shooting.
Now, I'm not a professional colorist, but even I know that compiling all of the information on color correction, grading, and timing (color correction with film stock is commonly referred to as "timing," but that's another conversation...) would take eons. It's an incredibly complex art form that can't be learned from one 2-minute video.
Power on your camera, go to your picture settings and make sure that you're setting up your camera and its sensor to record the cleanest, most usable image for the given situation. Some cameras (and the list gets bigger by the day, it seems) shoot in what's called "LOG" (short for logarithmic) profiles, which retains a higher amount of the highlights and shadows in an image (known as dynamic range). If your camera doesn't have a LOG setting, a good way to eke out a stop or two from the camera is to dial back the saturation and contrast in a neutral color profile.
I'm going to assume that you're shooting digitally. When you get to the point where you're dialing in your exposure settings, it's a good idea to overexpose your LOG footage by anywhere from .5 to 2 stops, but it totally depends on the camera's sensitivity and what sort of LOG profile you'll be using...a bit of research on your setup will help solve this issue. My personal setup is with a Sony a7RIII (currently 19% off) and I like to shoot 2 stops over in S-Log 3.Cine and 1 stop over if I'm shooting in HLG in a Rec2020 colorspace. (I learned that from this guy.) Use your exposure meter and, if you have it, your histogram to dial in exposure. Then shoot away!
First thing's first, correction. This is different from grading in that it's a technique to get all of your footage looking like it's all shot similarly with the same settings and in the same sort of method. A good baseline off of which you can operate is to get all of your blacks and whites as close to 0 and 100 IRE as possible, respectively.
Once you have all of your footage graded and looking natural, it's time to move on to color grading which is far too deeply nuanced to cover in a single article. Color grading is different from color correction because it incorporates a story-specific motivation to the colorization of the image. Basically, it's a style choice (here's a great video by Matti Haapoja that goes into more detail about why to grade in a certain way).
We chatted with Sowden about his indie film and how he was able to shoot it using a Blackmagic Production 4K in an indie, but creative, documentary style, plus explored a bit more about how Comic-Con is more than just big-name superheroes.
Joshua Sowden: This project began in 2019 with Guy Birtwhistle. Due to the pandemic, he reworked the script to focus solely on a single character's perspective. In the meantime, I filmed my first feature, Extramundane, as a solo filmmaker. By 2021, Guy and the script were ready, and having done solo filming during Extramundane, we were set to go. Guy's story naturally lent itself to solo filmmaking, which was a beautiful fit.
Joshua Sowden: Guy Birtwhistle, a talented actor and producer, had his first sci-fi feature Alistair 1918 screen at Comic-Con in 2016. Our goal was always to submit Our Man in L.A. to Comic-Con, given its unparalleled platform and networking opportunities. The film's indie vibe and exploration of high sci-fi concepts made it a perfect fit for the festival's film showcase.
Joshua Sowden: I aimed to capture the film in a documentary style, reflecting the protagonist's perspective in this version of L.A. I embraced imperfections like slow focus pulls and harsh lighting to enhance realism and grittiness. This approach required flexibility and forgiveness, except for the final scene in the NASA Bunker, which demanded precision to contrast with the rest of the film.
Joshua Sowden: I predominantly used the Blackmagic Production 4K camera due to its affordability and ability to deliver the desired gritty image. I rigged it for versatility between handheld and tripod setups, allowing quick adjustments during filming. We relied on lav mics and a Rode NTG-2 shotgun for sound.
I would have the Rode mic usually in shotgun form and run the recorder into a fanny pack so that I could run sound and roll camera myself. We often utilized natural light supplemented by occasional bounce and artificial lighting. You will see the occasional DJI drone shots and go pro when the Blackmagic was not an option.
Joshua Sowden: Upon reading Guy's script, I envisioned an indie version of Michael Mann's Miami Vice meets District 9 (without the aliens).' I aimed for a gritty, hot portrayal of L.A., adjusting color tones and employing the camera to achieve a realistic, documentary-like feel.
Didn't want to hijack another thread but in that thread I was noting what I perceive as film-like images from SOOC Fuji photos/video. When I show friends they, too, typically pick Fuji when comparing to Sony/Panny/Canon. They basically, and myself, felt that much of the footage from Fuji felt like a "tv show/movie" but the others looked like high quality "video". Now, I explain to them that much of that is due to lighting, settings, grading, lens selection, etc. but it is the general feel.
1) People can't colour grade and they're trying to buy their way out of learning.
As Resolve has grown in popularity the number of people that got access to a colour-managed workflow or colour space transformations has grown, and the number of people that can get the look they want from whatever camera they are using has also increased.
2) People don't remember what film looks like.
The number of "filmic" images that look nothing like film has gradually turned from a trickle to a vast deluge, to the point now that many people trying to get the look of film may have never seen it, or wouldn't recognise it even if it showed up with the film-strip not yet cropped out. Over the last year or so I've been rewatching older movies and TV shows shot on film, from back when this was how all TV and movies were shot, and at times I've watched several hours of film a day for weeks or months straight. Most so-called "filmic" content online looks nothing like film, in practically any way. It does, however, remind me a lot of 4K GoPro footage, but with 15 times the dynamic range of both a GoPro and most film processes.
3) People have changed what they like.
As time goes on, "cinematic" looks more and more like video every day. The so-called "cinematic" videos that people like, speak fondly of, share, and aspire to, all look nothing like what cinema actually looks like. I lost count of the number of times I argued online about sharpness and resolution and depth of field and colour science and colour grading and began to question myself in the face of almost universal online opposition.... then I'd go see a movie and I'd be reminded that I was right and everyone else was blind, has stopped going to the cinema, is full of shit, or all of the above.