Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
Markr041 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,902
Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut
1

https://youtu.be/D-nXKap0A78

It is long but you get a clear explanation of why when shooting dngRAW you do NOT need a log profile in the camera. Essentially, the sensor is linear and RAW captures all the sensor information. You can apply a log profile in post.

Highlight: comparison of the full color gamut of the fp with that of the Sony Venice using the best method of color measurement. The fp is, as shown, clearly better.

The speaker is a top cinematographer (now working on Avatar).

 Markr041's gear list:Markr041's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic LX100 Sony RX100 IV Panasonic ZS100 Olympus TG-5 +12 more
tagscuderia
tagscuderia Senior Member • Posts: 1,679
Re: Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

Markr041 wrote:

...

It is long but you get a clear explanation of why when shooting dngRAW you do NOT need a log profile in the camera. Essentially, the sensor is linear and RAW captures all the sensor information. You can apply a log profile in post.

I'm no filmmaker/videographer and pay little to no attention to video specs et al but... even I know that Log is for those NOT wanting to capture CinemaDNG; 10-bit H.264/265 is far more manageable than RAW and fits into filmmakers' existing workflows.

The fp's USP is full-frame RAW at an aggressive price point, but CinemaDNG creates all sorts of demands that (seemingly) a lot of people don't want to be faced with. It's why internally recording to ProRes LOG is also highly requested.

P.S. cardinal sin of commenting on the internet... I haven't watched the video 

 tagscuderia's gear list:tagscuderia's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma SD1 Merrill Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art Sigma 50-100mm F1.8 DC HSM Art
D Cox Forum Pro • Posts: 26,342
Re: Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

tagscuderia wrote:

Markr041 wrote:

...

It is long but you get a clear explanation of why when shooting dngRAW you do NOT need a log profile in the camera. Essentially, the sensor is linear and RAW captures all the sensor information. You can apply a log profile in post.

I'm no filmmaker/videographer and pay little to no attention to video specs et al but... even I know that Log is for those NOT wanting to capture CinemaDNG; 10-bit H.264/265 is far more manageable than RAW and fits into filmmakers' existing workflows.

The fp's USP is full-frame RAW at an aggressive price point, but CinemaDNG creates all sorts of demands that (seemingly) a lot of people don't want to be faced with. It's why internally recording to ProRes LOG is also highly requested.

P.S. cardinal sin of commenting on the internet... I haven't watched the video

I remember watching it before, I think soon after the fp first came out.

 D Cox's gear list:D Cox's gear list
Sigma fp
SigmaChrome Forum Pro • Posts: 12,528
Re: Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

There's a lot of information in that video, most of which means very little to me as I'm not a cinematographer. But it's a little weird to see Clem Kennedy in the flesh after several phone calls and many email exchanges and never knowing what he looks like.

I'd like to know how much (and which bits) of the new Avatar movie were shot with the fp.

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Vitée
Capture all the light and colour!
http://www.pbase.com/vitee/galleries

 SigmaChrome's gear list:SigmaChrome's gear list
Sigma DP1 Sigma DP2 Merrill Sony RX100 Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp0 Quattro +35 more
OP Markr041 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,902
Re: Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

tagscuderia wrote:

Markr041 wrote:

...

It is long but you get a clear explanation of why when shooting dngRAW you do NOT need a log profile in the camera. Essentially, the sensor is linear and RAW captures all the sensor information. You can apply a log profile in post.

I'm no filmmaker/videographer and pay little to no attention to video specs et al but... even I know that Log is for those NOT wanting to capture CinemaDNG; 10-bit H.264/265 is far more manageable than RAW and fits into filmmakers' existing workflows.

The fp's USP is full-frame RAW at an aggressive price point, but CinemaDNG creates all sorts of demands that (seemingly) a lot of people don't want to be faced with. It's why internally recording to ProRes LOG is also highly requested.

P.S. cardinal sin of commenting on the internet... I haven't watched the video

As far as I am concerned, for video there is no point in using the Sigma fp if one is not going to take advantage of the RAW capability. That is precisely why the fp is superior to most cameras for video. There are plenty of more-useable and compact cameras that have log compressed codecs. Compression is what does the most harm to video quality, and creates the most problems in editing.

And you are wrong, very wrong:  except for space (which is now very cheap), working with cng RAW files in Resolve is EASIER than working with heavily-compressed HEVC or H264 files, log or not. I think that it is ignorance that makes people shy away from shooting in RAW. HEVC is the least "manageable" codec - it creates enormous burdens on the processor, and can barely be played on timelines, thus requiring conversion.

I have shot and edited using HEVC at high bitrates and also RAW, so I know what the performance is in editors.

 Markr041's gear list:Markr041's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic LX100 Sony RX100 IV Panasonic ZS100 Olympus TG-5 +12 more
tantalum181
tantalum181 Regular Member • Posts: 116
Re: Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

D Cox wrote:

tagscuderia wrote:

Markr041 wrote:

...

It is long but you get a clear explanation of why when shooting dngRAW you do NOT need a log profile in the camera. Essentially, the sensor is linear and RAW captures all the sensor information. You can apply a log profile in post.

I'm no filmmaker/videographer and pay little to no attention to video specs et al but... even I know that Log is for those NOT wanting to capture CinemaDNG; 10-bit H.264/265 is far more manageable than RAW and fits into filmmakers' existing workflows.

The fp's USP is full-frame RAW at an aggressive price point, but CinemaDNG creates all sorts of demands that (seemingly) a lot of people don't want to be faced with. It's why internally recording to ProRes LOG is also highly requested.

P.S. cardinal sin of commenting on the internet... I haven't watched the video

I remember watching it before, I think soon after the fp first came out.

The youtube video is dated May 1, 2020, so hopefully very recent.

bob

-- hide signature --

Look where you want to go. Don't look where you don't want to go.

 tantalum181's gear list:tantalum181's gear list
Canon PowerShot S90 Sigma DP2 Merrill Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50 Olympus Tough TG-4 Sigma SD1 Merrill +11 more
D Cox Forum Pro • Posts: 26,342
Re: Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

tantalum181 wrote:

D Cox wrote:

tagscuderia wrote:

Markr041 wrote:

...

It is long but you get a clear explanation of why when shooting dngRAW you do NOT need a log profile in the camera. Essentially, the sensor is linear and RAW captures all the sensor information. You can apply a log profile in post.

I'm no filmmaker/videographer and pay little to no attention to video specs et al but... even I know that Log is for those NOT wanting to capture CinemaDNG; 10-bit H.264/265 is far more manageable than RAW and fits into filmmakers' existing workflows.

The fp's USP is full-frame RAW at an aggressive price point, but CinemaDNG creates all sorts of demands that (seemingly) a lot of people don't want to be faced with. It's why internally recording to ProRes LOG is also highly requested.

P.S. cardinal sin of commenting on the internet... I haven't watched the video

I remember watching it before, I think soon after the fp first came out.

The youtube video is dated May 1, 2020, so hopefully very recent.

bob

Maybe the one I watched was another with the same presenter.

 D Cox's gear list:D Cox's gear list
Sigma fp
saltydogstudios
saltydogstudios Senior Member • Posts: 2,133
Re: Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

Markr041 wrote:

tagscuderia wrote:

Markr041 wrote:

...

It is long but you get a clear explanation of why when shooting dngRAW you do NOT need a log profile in the camera. Essentially, the sensor is linear and RAW captures all the sensor information. You can apply a log profile in post.

I'm no filmmaker/videographer and pay little to no attention to video specs et al but... even I know that Log is for those NOT wanting to capture CinemaDNG; 10-bit H.264/265 is far more manageable than RAW and fits into filmmakers' existing workflows.

The fp's USP is full-frame RAW at an aggressive price point, but CinemaDNG creates all sorts of demands that (seemingly) a lot of people don't want to be faced with. It's why internally recording to ProRes LOG is also highly requested.

P.S. cardinal sin of commenting on the internet... I haven't watched the video

As far as I am concerned, for video there is no point in using the Sigma fp if one is not going to take advantage of the RAW capability. That is precisely why the fp is superior to most cameras for video. There are plenty of more-useable and compact cameras that have log compressed codecs. Compression is what does the most harm to video quality, and creates the most problems in editing.

And you are wrong, very wrong: except for space (which is now very cheap), working with cng RAW files in Resolve is EASIER than working with heavily-compressed HEVC or H264 files, log or not. I think that it is ignorance that makes people shy away from shooting in RAW. HEVC is the least "manageable" codec - it creates enormous burdens on the processor, and can barely be played on timelines, thus requiring conversion.

I have shot and edited using HEVC at high bitrates and also RAW, so I know what the performance is in editors.

yes, space is the issue.

It's basically the difference between CD quality (10 megabytes per minute) and MP3 quality (1 megabyte per minute). Or JPG and RAW.

You need more SSDs on the day, you need a HUGE drive on your editing station to store all that data and so on.

Most amateur cinematographers are happy to shoot in the equivalent of JPG and be done with it.

It is less CPU intensive as it's really not "decoding" anything - but it is very SPACE intensive.

Which I suspect is part of the reason the fp didn't sell as well at launch as they were expecting - they didn't realize how many cinematographers were effectively JPG shooters and they didn't offer in-camera JPG.

-- hide signature --
 saltydogstudios's gear list:saltydogstudios's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital Sigma DP2 Merrill Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp3 Quattro Nikon D7000 +6 more
OP Markr041 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,902
Re: Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

saltydogstudios wrote:

Markr041 wrote:

tagscuderia wrote:

Markr041 wrote:

...

It is long but you get a clear explanation of why when shooting dngRAW you do NOT need a log profile in the camera. Essentially, the sensor is linear and RAW captures all the sensor information. You can apply a log profile in post.

I'm no filmmaker/videographer and pay little to no attention to video specs et al but... even I know that Log is for those NOT wanting to capture CinemaDNG; 10-bit H.264/265 is far more manageable than RAW and fits into filmmakers' existing workflows.

The fp's USP is full-frame RAW at an aggressive price point, but CinemaDNG creates all sorts of demands that (seemingly) a lot of people don't want to be faced with. It's why internally recording to ProRes LOG is also highly requested.

P.S. cardinal sin of commenting on the internet... I haven't watched the video

As far as I am concerned, for video there is no point in using the Sigma fp if one is not going to take advantage of the RAW capability. That is precisely why the fp is superior to most cameras for video. There are plenty of more-useable and compact cameras that have log compressed codecs. Compression is what does the most harm to video quality, and creates the most problems in editing.

And you are wrong, very wrong: except for space (which is now very cheap), working with cng RAW files in Resolve is EASIER than working with heavily-compressed HEVC or H264 files, log or not. I think that it is ignorance that makes people shy away from shooting in RAW. HEVC is the least "manageable" codec - it creates enormous burdens on the processor, and can barely be played on timelines, thus requiring conversion.

I have shot and edited using HEVC at high bitrates and also RAW, so I know what the performance is in editors.

yes, space is the issue.

It's basically the difference between CD quality (10 megabytes per minute) and MP3 quality (1 megabyte per minute). Or JPG and RAW.

You need more SSDs on the day, you need a HUGE drive on your editing station to store all that data and so on.

Most amateur cinematographers are happy to shoot in the equivalent of JPG and be done with it.

It is less CPU intensive as it's really not "decoding" anything - but it is very SPACE intensive.

Which I suspect is part of the reason the fp didn't sell as well at launch as they were expecting - they didn't realize how many cinematographers were effectively JPG shooters and they didn't offer in-camera JPG.

I agree that space is a real issue, and I do not think Sigma does a good job in explaining the value of RAW video files.

There is a a help - a cheap and simple program called SlimRAW losslessly compresses DNG files, very quickly. I have tested it with the Sigma DNG files and the program reduces the size by over a third (63.2% of the original) - that helps!

 Markr041's gear list:Markr041's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic LX100 Sony RX100 IV Panasonic ZS100 Olympus TG-5 +12 more
tagscuderia
tagscuderia Senior Member • Posts: 1,679
Re: Informative Video on the Sigma FP: Why log is irrelevant and info on color gamut

Markr041 wrote:

tagscuderia wrote:

Markr041 wrote:

...

It is long but you get a clear explanation of why when shooting dngRAW you do NOT need a log profile in the camera. Essentially, the sensor is linear and RAW captures all the sensor information. You can apply a log profile in post.

I'm no filmmaker/videographer and pay little to no attention to video specs et al but... even I know that Log is for those NOT wanting to capture CinemaDNG; 10-bit H.264/265 is far more manageable than RAW and fits into filmmakers' existing workflows.

The fp's USP is full-frame RAW at an aggressive price point, but CinemaDNG creates all sorts of demands that (seemingly) a lot of people don't want to be faced with. It's why internally recording to ProRes LOG is also highly requested.

P.S. cardinal sin of commenting on the internet... I haven't watched the video

As far as I am concerned, for video there is no point in using the Sigma fp if one is not going to take advantage of the RAW capability. That is precisely why the fp is superior to most cameras for video. There are plenty of more-useable and compact cameras that have log compressed codecs. Compression is what does the most harm to video quality, and creates the most problems in editing.

Completely agree

And you are wrong, very wrong: except for space (which is now very cheap), working with CinemaDNG files in Resolve is EASIER than working with heavily-compressed HEVC or H264 files, log or not. I think that it is ignorance that makes people shy away from shooting in RAW. HEVC is the least "manageable" codec - it creates enormous burdens on the processor, and can barely be played on timelines, thus requiring conversion.

The only video experience I have is with drones, but from what I've read, file sizes are the issue for a lot of cinematographers/videographers looking at RAW.

If I was buying an fp, I'd be capturing 12-bit 4K CinemaDNG which is external capture only and originally only the Samsung T5 SSD was certified: ~£150 for 1TB but at 12.7MB per frame... 54 minutes?

REDCODE patents prevent in-camera RAW compression but Blackmagic RAW gets around this because it contains de-mosaiced data, SIGMA could achieve the same by using Linear DNG. But that throws away the advantage of using higher quality de-mosaic algorithms in post.

I have shot and edited using HEVC at high bitrates and also RAW, so I know what the performance is in editors.

As far as editing goes, 264/265 are delivery formats but with hardware decoding, even 4K 265 at 60fps is perfectly usable − a lot depends on your machine and the software in play. Personally I use ProRes proxy files for editing.

I digress, I was merely commenting on the obviousness of RAW and Log not being bed-fellows. But perhaps that's an easier concept coming from RAW in photography... ?

 tagscuderia's gear list:tagscuderia's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma SD1 Merrill Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM Art Sigma 50-100mm F1.8 DC HSM Art
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads