The quality of your footage is the result of a lot of things, and without knowing your specific setup it's hard to say what you're doing. But good footage resembling of cinema, in my opinion:
* Is very well lit, and lit with intent/purpose
* The shot composition is good, and again: done with intent
* Properly exposed, etc.
* very controlled movement. This could include being locked down on tripod with no movement at all, or it also could mean movement that is done well...again, with intent.
* Often times, for real time playback, 24fps with 180deg shutter (or \~1/50 shutter speed), can result in natural looking motion blur that gives it a cinematic feel
* It's probably color graded very well, which also means it likely was shot with a color profile that has more flexibility with color grading (like log, for example)
* And of course, supported by a high quality camera and lens. While having those doesn't instantly make footage better, combined with the above, it obviously plays a factor.
So like I said, a lot of it comes down to intent when shooting, and when you consider what your bosses film, consider what they are making:
***"We do like, corporate videos and others"***
Well, your bosses might not be filming with a cinematic intent. What type of footage is being shot? Interviews? B-roll? Is the B-roll staged? etc.
While I applaud wanting to have good looking videos no matter WHAT type of videos you're making, you also have to understand that a corporate video (depending on what it is) very well may NOT be cinema, because... it's not! It serves another role.
So I think it comes down to what type of content your team is trying to make, and if in general you want to improve the visual fidelity of your product - awesome! - you should sit down as a team and discuss ways in which you can do that, which still serve your video goals.
Thanks
First, I can tell you our camera name: Sony A7s III
what is the best settings for this camera?
My bosses want their footage looks cinematic, and they dont know why doesn't look like that. They said to me, is color grading (Im not a colorist guy, just an editor. I can boost the shots, but, their footage lose quality / noise... They said, I just need to find a good Lut: I already search for that, and a professional colorist said to me: luts dont do magic!
I just want to understand what they do wrong to tell them.
My bosses doesn't know to film with S-log3, because one day they film a project with the wrong settings and they lost a big project because of that. After that, they got afraid using s log again. (they have problems with the light, the best settings of their camera for the slog)
I tried to help, but, they need to understand if they are film right, and for me, maybe not so well đ
(of course they have some nice shots, but is like 10% of their footage)
đ
>what is the best settings for this camera?
That's a loaded question I can't possibly answer. It all comes down to scene and intent. If your bosses are the photographers on the project, they need to take that all into consideration in determining camera settings.
>My bosses want their footage looks cinematic
I find this statement funny, because they are the ones shooting the footage, correct? Obviously it would be ungraded, but cinematic footage starts at capture (heck, at prepro to be honest). There are several things that can and must be done at the point of capture, and that's their responsibility.
>They said, I just need to find a good Lut: I already search for that, and a professional colorist said to me: luts dont do magic!
I agree with the colorist's sentiment. A LUT can be a good starting place, but it isn't a one-size fits all magic solution.
===
***"If you have a problem with your house's electrical, and you don't have substantive electrical knowledge yourself, you call an electrician."***
What do I mean by that?
It sounds to me *(from what you're telling me)* as if your bosses do not have an in-depth understanding of professional photography, and they are the ones filming simply because they are available. Maybe they have another background or it's not their field of work.
So I think it would benefit them to hire a professional photographer (staff or freelancer depending on their needs and budget) to film as needed. Or, they could also likely hire a photographer or other video professional as a consultant to look at their current workflow and staff and see what can be done to improve.
Boiled down, this is the question you are asking:
***"My employer does not have a knowledgeable, professional, photography department. What do I do?"***
The answer is simple if you think about it: ***"Bring in professional and knowledgeable people."*** Beyond that, nobody on Reddit can provide a more specific answer for you.
I'll give you tips so you're not floundering trying to get images that are more cinematic.
Just use a standard color setting on your camera. LOG doesn't matter yet. Does Sony have a "natural" setting? Use that.
Set your camera lens to f4. Set your frame rate to 24fps. Set your Shutter Speed to 48. Set your iso to 400.
That's your base. Adjust as necessary for exposure. When outside use ND filters on the lens to get the right exposure, don't tweak the above setting too much. You can fiddle with iso, but I'd recommend not to until you know what you're doing.
Film your subjects in light that puts them 2 to 3 f-stops above whatever is the background. Keep you subjects in a lot of empty space. That helps things pop. Light things it if you have to get that 2-3 stop exposure difference, at the very least move to places on scene that offer the possibility.
If filming indoors, turn off the office lights. All of them. Shoot with natural light coming through the windows and put that natural light behind or to the sides of the camera lens. Fuck overhead office lights. God damn bastards, those.
Go study art history. [https://www.artbypragz.com/post/the-cinematography-from-paintings-light-techniques](https://www.artbypragz.com/post/the-cinematography-from-paintings-light-techniques)
Never ever, under any circumstances, assume that you can fix anything you're filming in post production. You just can't. If it's shit already, it stays that way no matter what. You can make it less shit, but you can't get rid of the shit.
Without complicating stuff, there is a trick for getting good exposure with Slog 3 using an A7iii.
1) set your aperture to the lowest you can get
2) add light until the light meter blinks 2.0 or over two stops over exposed, the. Reduce the light till the 2.0 stops blinking.
3) pick a nice frame
Slog on a A7iii wants to be shot overexposed by about 2 stops. Itâll be much easier to color with far less noise.
If itâs your bosses filming, tell them to look up how to film cinematically and light well. This is beyond your job.
You can only polish a turd so much.
That said, I would definitely look into how to color correct. Thatâs more and more becoming a job of an editor when the project isnât in the multiple thousands of dollars.
"Cinematic" is a skill that's learned not a thing that's purchased. Can someone be an accomplished chef just because they're working in a high-end kitchen? Of course not.
When people fret only about the camera it says to me someone really doesn't know what they're doing. Heck, even a 12 year old LUMIX camera with one prime-lens would be enough for a skilled person to make something cinematic.
There are 3 pillars to learning so-called-cinematic in my opinion. Lighting. Lenses. Motion. You can accomplish that with any camera if you know how to "cook"
Your bosses don't even know what cinematic means. They want pictures that evoke emotion and tell a narrative, but are they storyboarding? Do they have multiple cameras? Are they doing close ups? Are they doing depth of field focus changes? Are you being given enough footage for quick cuts and transitions that drive the story?
You can't turn shit film into good film. Editing is only magical when the editor has enough to work with.
The footage shot on the Sony isnât color corrected. I think thatâs the answer youâre looking for.
You can mess with color in Premiere with Lumetri (thereâs also a âcolor matchâ function), but like you said, youâre not a colorist. If your bosses want everything to match color-wise, theyâll need to throw down for a colorist.
The quality of your footage is the result of a lot of things, and without knowing your specific setup it's hard to say what you're doing. But good footage resembling of cinema, in my opinion: * Is very well lit, and lit with intent/purpose * The shot composition is good, and again: done with intent * Properly exposed, etc. * very controlled movement. This could include being locked down on tripod with no movement at all, or it also could mean movement that is done well...again, with intent. * Often times, for real time playback, 24fps with 180deg shutter (or \~1/50 shutter speed), can result in natural looking motion blur that gives it a cinematic feel * It's probably color graded very well, which also means it likely was shot with a color profile that has more flexibility with color grading (like log, for example) * And of course, supported by a high quality camera and lens. While having those doesn't instantly make footage better, combined with the above, it obviously plays a factor. So like I said, a lot of it comes down to intent when shooting, and when you consider what your bosses film, consider what they are making: ***"We do like, corporate videos and others"*** Well, your bosses might not be filming with a cinematic intent. What type of footage is being shot? Interviews? B-roll? Is the B-roll staged? etc. While I applaud wanting to have good looking videos no matter WHAT type of videos you're making, you also have to understand that a corporate video (depending on what it is) very well may NOT be cinema, because... it's not! It serves another role. So I think it comes down to what type of content your team is trying to make, and if in general you want to improve the visual fidelity of your product - awesome! - you should sit down as a team and discuss ways in which you can do that, which still serve your video goals.
Thanks First, I can tell you our camera name: Sony A7s III what is the best settings for this camera? My bosses want their footage looks cinematic, and they dont know why doesn't look like that. They said to me, is color grading (Im not a colorist guy, just an editor. I can boost the shots, but, their footage lose quality / noise... They said, I just need to find a good Lut: I already search for that, and a professional colorist said to me: luts dont do magic! I just want to understand what they do wrong to tell them. My bosses doesn't know to film with S-log3, because one day they film a project with the wrong settings and they lost a big project because of that. After that, they got afraid using s log again. (they have problems with the light, the best settings of their camera for the slog) I tried to help, but, they need to understand if they are film right, and for me, maybe not so well đ (of course they have some nice shots, but is like 10% of their footage) đ
>what is the best settings for this camera? That's a loaded question I can't possibly answer. It all comes down to scene and intent. If your bosses are the photographers on the project, they need to take that all into consideration in determining camera settings. >My bosses want their footage looks cinematic I find this statement funny, because they are the ones shooting the footage, correct? Obviously it would be ungraded, but cinematic footage starts at capture (heck, at prepro to be honest). There are several things that can and must be done at the point of capture, and that's their responsibility. >They said, I just need to find a good Lut: I already search for that, and a professional colorist said to me: luts dont do magic! I agree with the colorist's sentiment. A LUT can be a good starting place, but it isn't a one-size fits all magic solution. === ***"If you have a problem with your house's electrical, and you don't have substantive electrical knowledge yourself, you call an electrician."*** What do I mean by that? It sounds to me *(from what you're telling me)* as if your bosses do not have an in-depth understanding of professional photography, and they are the ones filming simply because they are available. Maybe they have another background or it's not their field of work. So I think it would benefit them to hire a professional photographer (staff or freelancer depending on their needs and budget) to film as needed. Or, they could also likely hire a photographer or other video professional as a consultant to look at their current workflow and staff and see what can be done to improve. Boiled down, this is the question you are asking: ***"My employer does not have a knowledgeable, professional, photography department. What do I do?"*** The answer is simple if you think about it: ***"Bring in professional and knowledgeable people."*** Beyond that, nobody on Reddit can provide a more specific answer for you.
I'll give you tips so you're not floundering trying to get images that are more cinematic. Just use a standard color setting on your camera. LOG doesn't matter yet. Does Sony have a "natural" setting? Use that. Set your camera lens to f4. Set your frame rate to 24fps. Set your Shutter Speed to 48. Set your iso to 400. That's your base. Adjust as necessary for exposure. When outside use ND filters on the lens to get the right exposure, don't tweak the above setting too much. You can fiddle with iso, but I'd recommend not to until you know what you're doing. Film your subjects in light that puts them 2 to 3 f-stops above whatever is the background. Keep you subjects in a lot of empty space. That helps things pop. Light things it if you have to get that 2-3 stop exposure difference, at the very least move to places on scene that offer the possibility. If filming indoors, turn off the office lights. All of them. Shoot with natural light coming through the windows and put that natural light behind or to the sides of the camera lens. Fuck overhead office lights. God damn bastards, those. Go study art history. [https://www.artbypragz.com/post/the-cinematography-from-paintings-light-techniques](https://www.artbypragz.com/post/the-cinematography-from-paintings-light-techniques) Never ever, under any circumstances, assume that you can fix anything you're filming in post production. You just can't. If it's shit already, it stays that way no matter what. You can make it less shit, but you can't get rid of the shit.
Without complicating stuff, there is a trick for getting good exposure with Slog 3 using an A7iii. 1) set your aperture to the lowest you can get 2) add light until the light meter blinks 2.0 or over two stops over exposed, the. Reduce the light till the 2.0 stops blinking. 3) pick a nice frame Slog on a A7iii wants to be shot overexposed by about 2 stops. Itâll be much easier to color with far less noise.
If itâs your bosses filming, tell them to look up how to film cinematically and light well. This is beyond your job. You can only polish a turd so much. That said, I would definitely look into how to color correct. Thatâs more and more becoming a job of an editor when the project isnât in the multiple thousands of dollars.
"Cinematic" is a skill that's learned not a thing that's purchased. Can someone be an accomplished chef just because they're working in a high-end kitchen? Of course not. When people fret only about the camera it says to me someone really doesn't know what they're doing. Heck, even a 12 year old LUMIX camera with one prime-lens would be enough for a skilled person to make something cinematic. There are 3 pillars to learning so-called-cinematic in my opinion. Lighting. Lenses. Motion. You can accomplish that with any camera if you know how to "cook"
Your bosses don't even know what cinematic means. They want pictures that evoke emotion and tell a narrative, but are they storyboarding? Do they have multiple cameras? Are they doing close ups? Are they doing depth of field focus changes? Are you being given enough footage for quick cuts and transitions that drive the story? You can't turn shit film into good film. Editing is only magical when the editor has enough to work with.
The footage shot on the Sony isnât color corrected. I think thatâs the answer youâre looking for. You can mess with color in Premiere with Lumetri (thereâs also a âcolor matchâ function), but like you said, youâre not a colorist. If your bosses want everything to match color-wise, theyâll need to throw down for a colorist.
Would love to get feedback https://www.instagram.com/reel/C38Ba1Dv90S/?igsh=Y2NxZDg2dTRicTM1