All posts by alisterchapman

New Firmware Coming For The FX3, FX30 and FX6 – Shutter Angle for FX3/30.

FX-Firmware-Version5-600x470 New Firmware Coming For The FX3, FX30 and FX6 - Shutter Angle for FX3/30.

Before you get too excited – these firmware updates are not coming just yet. But they are coming.

FX6

The FX6 will get an update to Version 5  to quote Sony “in May 2024 or later” which will include:

–  The addition of 1.5x setting to the De-squeeze function

– Monitor & Control app compatibility (ex. Waveform, False colour such as FX3/30 already supported)

–  A new preset 709tone to support to colour match multiple cameras  (I assume this is to match the older Sony Rec-709 look)

– The expansion of supported lenses, such as the SEL100400GM & SEL200600G, for breathing compensation.

FX3 and FX30.

Then later in the year, in September 2024 or later the  FX3 and FX30 will get:

– A Shutter Angle option

– 709tone support

– SRT/RTMP/RTMPS support for Live streaming demand

The addition of shutter angle in the FX3 and FX30 is going to please a lot of owners of these 2 cameras.

 

 

How I shoot the Northern Lights

460x150_xdcam_150dpi How I shoot the Northern Lights

Every year as many of my regular readers will know  I run tours to the very north of Norway taking small groups of adventurers well above the arctic circle in the hope of seeing the Aurora Borealis or Northern Lights. I have been doing this for around 20 years and over the years as cameras have improved it’s become easier and easier to video the Aurora in real time so that what you see in the video matches what you would have seen if you had been there yourself.

In the past Aurora footage was almost always shot using long exposures and time lapse sometimes with photo cameras or with older video cameras like the Sony EX1 or EX3 which resulted in greatly sped up motion and the loss of many of the finer structures seen in the Aurora. I do still shoot time lapse of the Aurora using still photos, but in this video I give you a bit of behind the scenes look at one of my trips with details of how I shoot the Aurora with the Sony FX3 in real time and also with the FX30 using S&Q motion. The video was uploaded in HDR so if you have an HDR display you should see it in HDR, if not it will be streamed to you in normal standard dynamic range. The cameras used are Sony’s FX3 and FX30. The main lenses are the Sony 24mm f1.4 GM and 20mm f1.8 G but when out and about on the snow scooters I use the Sony 18-105 G power zoom on the FX30 for convenience.

I used the Flexible ISO mode in the cameras to shoot S-Log3 with the standard s709 LUT for monitoring. I don’t like going to crazy high ISO values as the images get too noisy, so I tend to stick to 12,800 or 25,600 ISO on the FX3 or a maximum  of 5000 ISO on the FX30 (generally on the FX30 I stay at 2500). If the images are still not bright enough I will use a 1/12th shutter speed at 24fps. This does mean that pairs of frames will be the same, but at least the motion remains real-time and true to life.

If that still isn’t enough rather than raising the ISO still further I will go to the cameras S&Q (slow and quick) mode and drop the frame rate down to perhaps 8fps with a 1/8th shutter, 4fps with a 1/4 shutter or perhaps all the way down to 1fps and a 1 second shutter.  But – once you start shooing at these low frame rates the playback will be sped up and you do start to loose many of the finer, faster moving and more fleeting structures within the aurora because of the extra motion blur. 

So much of all of this will depend on the brightness of the Aurora. Obviously a bright Aurora is easier to shoot in real time than a dim one. This is where patience and perseverance pays off. On a dark arctic night if you are sufficiently far north the Aurora will almost always be there even if very faint. And you can never be sure when it might brighten. It can go from dim and barely visible to bright and dancing all across the sky in seconds – and it can fade away again just as fast. So, you need to stay outside in order to catch the those often brief bright periods. On my trips it is not at all unusual for the group to start the evening outside watching the sky, but after a couple of hours of only a dim display most people head inside to the warm only to miss out when the Aurora brightens. Because of this we do try to have someone on aurora watch.

During 2024 we should be at the peak of the suns 11 year solar cycle, so this winter and next winter should present some of the best Aurora viewing conditions for a long time to come. My February 2024 Norway trip is sold out but I can run extra trips or bespoke tours if wanted so do get in touch if you need my help. There is more information on my tours here: https://www.xdcam-user.com/northern-lights-expeditions-to-norway/

Don’t forget I also have information on filming in cold weather here: https://www.xdcam-user.com/2023/12/filming-in-very-cold-weather/

I will be back in Norway from the 1st of February, keep an eye out for any live streams, I will be taking an Accsoon SeeMo to try to live stream the Aurora.

Circus shot with the Sony FR7 PTZ camera

A while back I got the opportunity to shoot a circus with the Sony FR7. The circus is a traditional travelling circus based in the South West of the UK called “Funtasia”. They put on both family shows and adult shows (Cirque du Vulgar) touring during the summer months as well as a Christmas show. 


Filming a traditional circus during a live show is difficult as there is no raised stage as you would find in a theatre. So it is very difficult to use a camera on a tripod without obstructing the audiences view unless you shoot from the back and this isn’t ideal either. The FR7 however allows you to place the camera on the floor, on a stand or to hang it from the the venues structure and then operate it remotely. It is also very small, so won’t obstruct someones view in the same way that a large camera would. 

It can be controlled from a laptop or tablet or with Sony’s RM-IP500 controller (many other PTZ camera controllers can also control it). It can be connected to wirelessly but this adds some latency to the monitoring images that are sent from the camera over the network and for something fast moving like circus this isn’t helpful. So, for this I ran a single ethernet cable from the camera to a basic router and then connected my laptop to the router. I did also have the Sony RM-IP500 remote control panel, but it was easier just to do everything via my laptop.

313521105_845958669754357_6850939375571143587_n-600x400 Circus shot with the Sony FR7 PTZ camera
Operating the FR7 from my laptop



I filmed 4 shows. Two from low down at the front of the performance area and 2 with the FR7 hanging from one of the support trusses of the big top tent. The high shots would not have been possible any other way and they give a unique perspective, especially of some of the aerial acts.

313806757_1197068724545808_2210067909302650202_n-1-600x400 Circus shot with the Sony FR7 PTZ camera
FR7 up on one of the tent supports.


The FR7 is part of Sony’s Cinema Line and is basically a Sony FX6 digital cinema camera in a Pan, Tilt and Zoom housing. It has the same very high image quality as the FX6 as well as all the same recording codecs (plus some extra streaming codecs). And just like the FX6 it can record 4K at up to 120fps. For this shoot I used the Sony 28-135mm power zoom lens with a little bit of Clear Image zoom every now and again to further extend the zoom range.

For more on the FR7 click here. https://www.sony.co.uk/interchangeable-lens-cameras/products/ilme-fr7

For more about Circus Funtasia click here: https://www.circusfuntasia.co.uk/

Filming in very cold weather

It’s that time of year again where for those of us that live in the more northern parts of  Northern Hemisphere the weather really starts to turn cold. So, once again I have updated my guide to filming in the cold which can be found by clicking here. 

I will be off to Norway again in January to shoot the Northern lights, something I do every lear and over the years I’ve worked in temperatures down to -45c. 

Sony Future Film Maker Awards 2024

Screenshot-2023-12-07-at-18.12.05-600x249 Sony Future Film Maker Awards 2024
Sony Future Film Maker Awards 2024

Once again Sony is inviting entries for the Future Film Maker awards. This film contest is aimed at aspiring film makers and includes categories for fiction, non fiction, student films, animation the environment and future formats.

The top 30 entrants will be flown to Los Angeles and to the historic Sony Pictures Studio in Culver City, California, where they will gain exclusive access to experts and unparalleled insight into the inner workings of the industry. Winners additionally receive cash prizes and a range of Sony Digital Imaging equipment.   There is a gala black tie awards ceremony at the Cary Grant Theatre  in Sony’s Culver City studios on the 30th of May 2024.

Entries must be in by the 15th of February 2024, so now is the time to think about entering your film.  Entries are welcome from anywhere in the world, big or small. Don’t be afraid to enter your work.

Click here for more information.

Shooting Anamorphic With an FX3 or FX6.

A lot of people like to shoot anamorphic with the FX3 or FX6. And they do get great looking images. The best example of this most recently is the blockbuster movie “The Creator” which was shot with an FX3 using 2x anamorphic lenses.

But there are a couple of things to consider with Anamorphic.

The first is what aspect ratios does the sensor support and what is the aspect ratio you want to deliver. The FX3 is always either 16:9 or 17:9 so that means that if you want you final output to have that classic 2.39:1 (2.40:1) aspect ratio then you need to use a 1.3x  anamorphic while shooting 16:9 as a 1.3x lens as this will allow you to use the full sensor.

If you use a 1.6x lens and do not crop the sides of the image in post you will have a much narrower 2.8:1 aspect ratio. 1.6x lenses work best with 3:2 sensors. With a 2x anamorphic lens you would end up with an extremely narrow 3.5:1 aspect ratio unless you do some serious side cropping – which will reduce the horizontal resolution of the final image. If you use a classic 2x anamorphic lens designed for 35mm film you will almost certainly have a noticeable vignette on either side of the frame as these lenses are designed for the narrow but tall frame of 35mm film. You are going to need to remove this vignette by cropping. If you only deliver in HD this may not be an issue, but for 4K delivery it means your footage is no longer really 4K. As a side note it is interesting that for “The Creator” this is exactly how they shot, using 2x anamorphics. But I am led to believe that extensive use of AI was made when scaling the image in post. If you do need to crop the image the FX9 has a bit of an advantage as the sensor operates at 6K in full frame, so the 4K recordings have higher resolution than the recordings from the FX3 or FX6 (remember a bayer sensor on actually resolves at about 75% of the pixel count, so a 4K sensor delivers a 3K image while a 6K sensor delivers a 4K image). Burano will be a good camera to use as even after you crop in to the 8K (pixel) image what is left will still be around 6K of pixels and full 4K resolution.

Then the other is de-squeeze. It can be quite challenging to focus if you have the wrong de-squeeze and if the collimation of the lens is off you may not notice that the horizontal and vertical focus points are different , so shots may not be as sharp as they should be. You could always use an external monitor with the de-squeeze you need.

So, depending on how you look at it the only lenses that might be considered to be “fully compatible” will be full frame 1.33x anamorphics as these will give the classic 2.40:1 aspect ratio without cropping and the camera supports 1.33x de-squeeze. But these are not common. Any other anamorphic squeeze ratio will require some post work. Classic 2x anamorphics were designed for super 35mm open gate 4:3 sensors and when used like this they still needed a slight side crop for 2.39:1. Use them on a FF 16:9 sensor and you will need to make a big side crop. For Full Frame anamorphic lenses these days it is common to use a 6:5 scan which is more square than 4:3 and the side crop is no longer needed. Additionally for FF, 1.8x squeeze is becoming very common and designed specifically  to work with a FF 6:5 sensor. But – sadly the FX3 doesn’t really have a scan mode tall enough to fully take advantage of modern FF anamorphics. But that doesn’t mean you can’t use them, it’s just not an ideal situation.

Do I Need To Always Overexpose S-Log3?

This is another one from Social Media and it the same question gets asked a lot. The short answer is…………

NO.

Even with Sony’s earlier S-Log3 cameras you didn’t need to ALWAYS over expose. When shooting a very bright well lit scene you could get great results without shooting extra bright. But the previous generations of Sony cameras (FS5/FS7/F5/F55 etc) were much more noisy than the current cameras. So, to get a reasonably noise free image it was normal to expose a bit brighter than the base Sony recommendation, my own preference was to shoot between 1 and 1.5 stops brighter than the Sony recommended levels (click here for the F5/F55, here for the FS7 and here for the FS5).

The latest cameras (FX30, FX3, FX6, FX9 etc) are not nearly as noisy, so for most shots you don’t need to expose extra bright, just expose well (by this I mean exposing correctly for the scene being shot). This doesn’t mean you can’t or shouldn’t expose brighter or darker if you understand how to use a brighter/darker exposure to shift your overall range up and down, perhaps exposing brighter when you want more shadow information and les noise at the expense of some highlight range or exposing darker when you must have more highlight information but can live with a bit more noise and less shadow range.

What I would say is that exposure consistency is very important. If you constantly expose to the right so every shot is near to clipping then your exposure becomes driven by the highlights in the shot rather than the all important mid range where faces, skin tones, plants and foliage etc live. As the gap between highlights and the mids varies greatly exposure based on highlights tends to result in footage where the mid range is up and down and all over the place from shot to shot and this makes grading more challenging as every shot needs a unique grade. Base the exposure on the mid range and shot to shot you will be more consistent and grading will be easier.

This is where the CineEI function really comes into its own as by choosing the most appropriate EI for the type of scene you are shooting and the level of noise you are comfortable with and basing the exposure off the image via the built in LUT will help with consistency (you could even use a light meter set to the ISO that matches the EI setting). Lower EI for scenes where you need more shadow range or less noise, higher EI for scenes where you must have a greater highlight range. And there is no -“One Fits All” setting, it depends on what you are shooting. This is the real skill, using the most appropriate exposure for the scene you are shooting (see here for CineEI with the FX6 and with the FX9)

So how do you get that skill? Experiment for yourself. No one was born knowing exactly how to expose Log, it is a skill learnt through practice and experimentation, making mistakes and learning from them. In addition different people and different clients will be happy with different noise levels. There is no right or wrong amount of noise. Footage with no noise often looks very sterile and lifeless, but that might be what is needed for a corporate shoot. A small to medium amount of noise can look great if you want a more film like look. A large amount of noise might give a grungy look for a music video. Grading also plays a part here as how much contrast you push into the grade alters the way the noise looks and how pleasing or objectionable it might be.

All anyone on here can do is provide some guidance, but really you need to determine what works for you, so go out and shoot at different EI’s or ISO’s, different brightness levels, slate each shot so you know what you did. Then grade it, look at it on a decent sized monitor and pick the exposure that works for you and the kinds of things you shoot – but then also remember different scenes may need a different approach.

Why Doesn’t My Footage Grade Well?

So this came up on social media. Someone had been playing with some sample raw footage provided by a camera manufacturer and he/she was concerned because he felt that this manufacturer supplied footage graded much better than his/her own Sony XAVC-I footage.

There is a lot to a situation like this, but very often the issue isn’t that the other footage was raw while his/her own footage was XAVC-I S-Log. Raw doesn’t normally have more colour or more DR than log. The colour range and the shadow range won’t be significantly different as that tends to be limited by the cameras sensor rather than the recording codec. But what you might have if the raw is 12 bit or greater is a larger bit depth or less compression. Perhaps a bit of both and that can sometimes give some extra precision or finer gradations as well as a bit less noise (although compression can reduce noise). This may come into play when you really start to push and pull the footage very hard in the grade, but generally, if you can’t get the image you want out of 10 bit XAVC-I, 12 bit raw isn’t going to help you. Raw might make it a bit quicker to get to where you want to be and I do love working with the 16 bit X-OCN (raw) from Venice and Burano, but I have never really felt that XAVC S-Log3 is lacking. Even a deeper bit depth might not be all it seems. The sensors in most video cameras under $20K only have 12 bit analog to digital converters and that tends to be the main image quality bottleneck (and this where Venice really shines with its 14 bit A2D).

Sony’s XAVC-I S-log3 grades really well, really, really well. A big issue however is the reliance on LUTs. 3D LUTs divide the image up into 33x or 65x adjustment bands and then it is down to the grading software to interpolate between each band. This can introduce artefacts into the image.

Some people simply skip doing a proper colourspace transform altogether and this may introduce twists into the gamma and colourspace which then makes it hard to get the colours or contrast they really want as it can be hard to bend the colours in a pleasing way without them going “weird”.

Colour managed workflows help to maintain the full range of the original content within the correct output colourspace without any unwanted twists and are often the best way to full realise the potential of the content you have shot.

Plus not all grading software is created equal. I was an Adobe Premiere user for years until I needed to do a lot more grading. When DaVinci Resolve became affordable I switched to Resolve for grading and have never looked back – after all it is a proper grading tool, not edit software with a bunch of plugins bolted on.

But as always the real key is how it was shot. Manufacturer supplied sample content is likely to have been shot very well and highly optimised, after all they want it to make their camera look as good as possible. When comparing footage from different sources you really do need to consider whether just how well it was shot. Was the most appropriate exposure index used for the type of scene. Was it shot at the best possible time of day for the best sun positioning. How much attention went in to things like the careful choice of the colours in the scene to provide pleasing colour contrast. How much time was spent with negative fill to bring down the shadow areas etc, what filtration was used to bleed off highlights or polarise the sky or windows. What lenses were used. All these things will have a massive impact on how gradeable the footage will be.

Sony’s FX3 wins Time Magazine award.

FX3-time-600x401 Sony's FX3 wins Time Magazine award.The Sony FX3 has won Time Magazine’s best inventions of 2023 – accessible film making award. The FX3 won the award because it was the main camera for the Hollywood blockbuster “The Creator”. The FX3 wasn’t a B camera, it was used to shoot the vast majority of the film (I believe there was also a small amount of FX9 footage). 

And this wasn’t a Sony stunt. The director of this sci-Fi film Gareth Edwards chose the FX3 because he felt it was the best camera for the job. In various interviews Edwards has stated that one of the prime reasons for choosing the FX3 was its low light performance. The FX3 allowed him to shoot with real moonlight rather than bringing in complex and expensive lighting rigs. It allowed the DP Oren Soffer to move more freely with the actors as they could do more with the natural available light rather than artificial lights. This in turn led to them shooting longer takes which Edwards feels gives the film a more organic look.

For the film the FX3 was connected to an Atomos Ninja V and they recorded ProRes Raw.Of course – the film went through some extensive post production work and there is a lot that AI can now do to clean up an image or to rescale it. But, I think we are now at a stage where almost every cinema camera that is in the market today, from the FX30 to a Venice could be used to make a feature film and the audience is unlikely to be aware of whether you used a $3K camera or a $75K one. At the same time I do feel that there is a lot to be said for picking the right camera. A studio based film might be quicker and easier to shoot on a Venice. A location based film may benefit from a smaller and lighter package. 

Whichever camera you choose, great story telling remains the main goal. Good lenses, lighting (or the use of the available light in a pleasing way) and composition are key elements in telling that story. Your skills as a film maker are more important than the camera you choose to use, but choosing the right camera can make the job easier. It’s a wonderful time to be a film maker.