Blackmagic Pocket Camera 4K vs Arri Alexa

Did you watch this video?

If so, we laugh because we are jealous and trying to fool ourselves into accepting the fact we dont have the money to do the same or its because its really funny/stupid indeed (for the scope of what we are discussing)?

Did you watch this video?

If so, we laugh because we are jealous and trying to fool ourselves into accepting the fact we dont have the money to do the same or its because its really funny/stupid indeed (for the scope of what we are discussing)?

We laugh because despite spending in the six figures on 8K cameras and the post-production requirements, every single video is full of shaky camera, missed focus, and bad exposures. They would be better off with a GH5S on a gimbal.

It seems to be a right of passage for successful YouTube filmmakers that once they make a pile of money, they put it right into 8K Red cameras and the most expensive Leica lenses. And hey, more power to them. I spend all my money (and then some) on fun film toys too. I just have less to spend

Did you watch this video?

If so, we laugh because we are jealous and trying to fool ourselves into accepting the fact we dont have the money to do the same or its because its really funny/stupid indeed (for the scope of what we are discussing)?

We laugh because despite spending in the six figures on 8K cameras and the post-production requirements, every single video is full of shaky camera, missed focus, and bad exposures. They would be better off with a GH5S on a gimbal.

He reveals on a video, their group actually got it because they do other professional productions. But, yeah, when I saw that originally, wow, overkill. Now, if Red actually made a 720p camera for YouTube using that sensor technology. . Common Red, a $1000 vista 720p YouTube camera? . Still, BM should set up the next micro with a YouTube workflow mode.

Did you watch this video?

If so, we laugh because we are jealous and trying to fool ourselves into accepting the fact we dont have the money to do the same or its because its really funny/stupid indeed (for the scope of what we are discussing)?

just rent it madaf**a

Man, I come from all the art expressions. And I can tell you that everything people are talking about cameras here and there, the same things happens in music. You can't figure how much bucks people expend in mouth pieces for saxophones just to play pink panther over and over.

just rent it madaf**a

Man, I come from all the art expressions. And I can tell you that everything people are talking about cameras here and there, the same things happens in music. You can't figure how much bucks people expend in mouth pieces for saxophones just to play pink panther over and over.

Hey!!! I used to play the sax and loved playing Pink Panther!!!!

About todays cameras being already good enough.

This movie is a promotional movie for the Fuji X-T3. I dont believe its a better camera than the Pocket4K, but watch the movie. Tell me if you get distracted about the camera image. Tell me if you spend the whole time thinking about the camera or if you just watch it delightful. Tell me if you cant think it (the final product) is even better than many feature films.

What lacks now is not tech or hardware, its talent!

I want to give Fuji my money just for making a promo that isn't random nature shots or people wandering around a city street!

What lacks now is not tech or hardware, its talent!

And lots and lots of money and/or resources. Look at who made that thing, and what they had available:

https://www.facebook.com/FujifilmXUS/vi ... 871808372/

Even so, the acting, such as it was, and the writing would never succeed on merit, despite all the contacts and clout these famous filmmakers have.

Does love buy money? to quote an early Stanley Kubrick movie.

What lacks now is not tech or hardware, its talent!

And lots and lots of money and/or resources. Look at who made that thing, and what they had available:

https://www.facebook.com/FujifilmXUS/vi ... 871808372/

Even so, the acting, such as it was, and the writing would never succeed on merit, despite all the contacts and clout these famous filmmakers have.

Does love buy money? to quote an early Stanley Kubrick movie.

Yeah! We came to the same conclusion and old cliché: Its not the camera. The camera is enough.

Even so, the acting, such as it was, and the writing would never succeed on merit, despite all the contacts and clout these famous filmmakers have.

It was directed by a cinematographer.

But seriously, even with its narrative faults, I'd rather watch this than any promo Blackmagic has ever produced, so I commend Fuji for commissioning it.

I want to give Fuji my money just for making a promo that isn't random nature shots or people wandering around a city street!

The people who going to buy this camera not gonna use master grip gear. Just we must be realistic a little bit.
Nobody gonna expend 40K renting gear to shot a few minutes demo of this camera.
However, would be great to see promos of those cheap cameras done be Deakins and some great colorists to shup up some mouths...including mine

just rent it madaf**a

Man, I come from all the art expressions. And I can tell you that everything people are talking about cameras here and there, the same things happens in music. You can't figure how much bucks people expend in mouth pieces for saxophones just to play pink panther over and over.

Hey!!! I used to play the sax and loved playing Pink Panther!!!!

Do you need a 7K Selmer plus a 1K mouthpiece to play that?...probably not, but who cares, I want it!!
I'm just kidding

Those cheap camera are so great, however never gonna look like Alexa for expert eyes. Even non expert eyes. People aren't stupid, inconsciently they knows what look cheap and what not... I guess... or I hope if I waste money renting some high level tools.
just rumble on

What lacks now is not tech or hardware, its talent!

Which rental house can I get this from?

So the output from the X-T3 is comparable to the BMPCC4K ProRes. I buy the X-T3 and there’s nothing preventing me from making this promotional film except a lack of talent. Nothing to add but talent. Okay, I can live with that. I’m hungry. Would you pass me the Pocket4K please? Is there any gravy left or did FujiFilm eat all the gravy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tell me if you get distracted about the camera image.

Well, when they brilliantly use darkness and silhouettes to compose the frame, it works very beautifully as the creative choices are working well within the limitations of the camera. The moment there are full closeups of faces in brighter light, the plastic way that the camera renders skintones is noticeable and, yes, it is distracting.

Don't get me wrong, there are seriously talented people who did absolutely amazing work on the lighting, blocking, framing and camera movement, but no cheap mirrorless stills camera is designed for this kind of filmmaking. Most narrative films are filled with long close ups on human faces, and highly compressed video cameras simply suck at rendering skintones.

These kind of demos are such a ludicrous test because any production that has the money for everything that was put on screen in that demo certainly has the money to rent at least an Ursa Mini Pro, if not an Alexa.

These kind of demos are such a ludicrous test because any production that has the money for everything that was put on screen in that demo certainly has the money to rent at least an Ursa Mini Pro, if not an Alexa.

These demos aren't aimed at those sorts of productions/people. They are aimed at mortals who want a decent camera to shoot their bread and butter day to day work on, which yes, might include low budget corporates or indie short documentaries shot on virtually no budget. Just because something doesn't have a budget or the filmmaker doesn't have a lot of resources doesn't invalidate what they do. And for those people it's nice to see what the camera they will be spending their hard earned money will be capable of.

These kind of demos are such a ludicrous test because any production that has the money for everything that was put on screen in that demo certainly has the money to rent at least an Ursa Mini Pro, if not an Alexa.

So, if your camera is inexpensive, you should only shoot lame, boring videos to promote it?

We can flip this logic, and say that without good production values, one can easily make an Ursa Mini or an Alexa look bad.

Maybe everyone should simply be required by law to release 10 minutes of color charts, their dog in the backyard, sodium lights at night, a coffee shop, a tree against the sky and whip panning back and forth on their neighbor's fence. Maybe use a gimbal to shoot a girl not quite attractive enough to be a model walking around and call it a "fashion" video?

These kind of demos are such a ludicrous test because any production that has the money for everything that was put on screen in that demo certainly has the money to rent at least an Ursa Mini Pro, if not an Alexa.

We are still saying the same thing. Its not the camera, the camera can do good enough. Nobody said its better or even equal high end cinema cameras. Of course not. But you can do a lot with theses cameras. Its not the camera that will stop you from shooting a high quality video.


As Joe said above, even an Alexa can look pretty bad if shot bad. Todays cameras are good enough for even cinema. Nobody did say its the best or there is no difference.

If you really want to be truthful, the camera matters only if you can afford production value. But if you can afford production value you'd never use a consumer-level camera anyway, unless Fuji paid you to do a promo.

It gets even worse, because the tiny number of low and no-budget movies which have been successful have generally had terrible production values. The biggest gross of all was shot on hand-held consumer hi8, others on mini-dv. There were a couple on 16mm, but the best you could say about them is they look like film, because otherwise, minus zero production values.

The Pocket was available for the last 5 years, at a time when lots of people were shooting features on the 5D, which is indisputably inferior. But is there even one Pocket feature film that got decent play on the festival circuit (a few did, on the 5D)?

Without money, IQ doesn't matter -- except in the head of filmmaker. And in some cases, grunge actually helps the movie's prospects.

Everyone is actually agreeing with all these points. Jamie was rightly pointing out that even when a piece has very high production values, a given camera and colour science (and post) can make a difference. John is also spot on that a bad camera can completely suit a given subject, just not all subjects. Blair Witch wouldn’t be the same success if it had been shot on the Alexa combined with high production values.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you watch this video?

If so, we laugh because we are jealous and trying to fool ourselves into accepting the fact we dont have the money to do the same or its because its really funny/stupid indeed (for the scope of what we are discussing)?

just rent it madaf**a

Man, I come from all the art expressions. And I can tell you that everything people are talking about cameras here and there, the same things happens in music. You can't figure how much bucks people expend in mouth pieces for saxophones just to play pink panther over and over.

You remember that Flying Lizards song Money of 1979 (yes, I'm old). I remember Molly saying it was done for something like $50, but wherever it was studio, filming or everything done in a house (sounds like it) it still sounds incredibly great (though I thought it was black and white around 1983). Equipment costs money but Talent is free.

Here is the original. But it's not a good recording.

But this is clearer:

There was a 450 euro short film called Marla The Movie dine on a Sony MiniDV with 35mm depth of field adaptor which puts much of the stuff to shame, but I don't know where that is now.

But still, I want my set of equator studio horn speakers, and that freakin mike model Madonna used to record Hung Up. Just wait, I need to philosophically slap myself around to get over this gear lust.

Wayne, thanks for the blast from the past. The talent of the vocalist in the second video is much better. Insouciant trumps petulant any day. And she leaves me screaming our favourite gear phrase: “Take my money!”

But it's hard to believe, I can remember what that mike in that Madonna song was. I spent like an hour trying to google it too. You think the film industry is over the top, the music industry is even more. I'm getting so many hits which are just about Madonna coming up with dancing around stage with a microphone or something, and who is Drake, and why is there a while list of seperate articles with the same wording clogging up my screen. Maybe if I add "Steven Spielberg" (see even Google Android keyboard knows how to spell that one by the time I hit the second 'S' creepy) maybe I'll get one result.

BMPCC vs P4K with ISO800 and Expose boosted to 3. Samples taken here https://www.dropbox.com/sh/d6p9k043vnvv ... 4Aw-a?dl=0 . Not sure if that red clipping is normal for P4K, or its a specific sensor defect, or Color Science v4 problem, but P4K noise amount and noise shape makes me cry. And this is 4K downscaled to HD

... but P4K noise amount and noise shape makes me cry. And this is 4K downscaled to HD

Jeesh, you're really committed to that narrative lol You're missing two things.

1. Those shots aren't even taken in the same spot and exposure was not matched.

2. The P4K has a lower native ISO of 400 while the original Pocket has a native ISO of 800. When you're changing the P4K to ISO 800, then pushing it another 3 stops, you're pushing it 4 stops over native, not 3.

The first is at Native ISO with Highlight Recovery ON and Colour Science 1; the second is not Native ISO with Highlight Recovery Off, Colour Science 4. Use Colour Science 1 for both for now. Someone posted from BMCuser that there’s an issue with red in Colour Science 4; so if things look weird try 1.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you John and Rick for picking up what I was saying, but putting it more clearly : )

The Pocket was available for the last 5 years, at a time when lots of people were shooting features on the 5D, which is indisputably inferior. But is there even one Pocket feature film that got decent play on the festival circuit (a few did, on the 5D)?

The original Pocket saw quite a lot of use as a crash cam, car cam, POV helmet mounted camera etc, and slipped in as cutaway shots into a lot of movies that used much more expensive A cameras.

I did see one experimental narrative feature made entirely on the original Pocket that did quite well on the festival circuit. The the story was a bit thin, but it was very beautifully shot and well edited.

https://www.sundance.org/blogs/artist-spotlight/young-turks-talking-to-michal-marczak-about-all-these-sleepless-nights

There was a 450 euro short film called Marla The Movie dine on a Sony MiniDV with 35mm depth of field adaptor which puts much of the stuff to shame, but I don't know where that is now.

I can't believe you just mentioned this! I randomly remembered it yesterday and was looking all over for it.

You remember that Flying Lizards song Money of 1979 (yes, I'm old). I remember Molly saying it was done for something like $50, but wherever it was studio, filming or everything done in a house (sounds like it) it still sounds incredibly great (though I thought it was black and white around 1983). Equipment costs money but Talent is free.

Here is the original. But it's not a good recording.

But this is clearer:

There was a 450 euro short film called Marla The Movie dine on a Sony MiniDV with 35mm depth of field adaptor which puts much of the stuff to shame, but I don't know where that is now.

But still, I want my set of equator studio horn speakers, and that freakin mike model Madonna used to record Hung Up. Just wait, I need to philosophically slap myself around to get over this gear lust.

Love it!
I did't know it. Thanks for share.
I did my try with 35mm adaptor in s8mm years ago, the imagen I got made me think about speed booster in S16mm, but never tried.

I come from the world of skateboarding. take a look Spike Jonze's skate stuff if you have a chance.
I have skated more than 20 years. There are a lot of very creative films and videos, even of influence these days. I know that many skaters end up as filmmakers, photographers, DP, actors...
I started in the 80s, all skaters always with a camera in their hands and without prejudice. Nothing about to try emule Hollywood or whatever, just filming ideas.
That was really great back in the days. But we are in another era, I like to adapt. Let's see what digital era can offer to us.

I'm debating building a BMD Color Science 4 > Arri Alexa LUT. (More of a "stylistic" LUT than one claiming to do some voodoo that turns a P4K into an Alexa.) Does anyone know if one already exists?

I'm debating building a BMD Color Science 4 > Arri Alexa LUT. (More of a "stylistic" LUT than one claiming to do some voodoo that turns a P4K into an Alexa.) Does anyone know if one already exists?

There's a colorist named Juan Melara (sp?) who proposed something like that (not with LUTs but transforms), with his workflow described on a youtube. There's some dispute over whether his method actually achieves anything which can't be arrived at through more conventional methods and/or whether it's more limiting than expanding. You might want to google it.

http://juanmelara.com.au



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Noam Kroll made a nice LUT for the old color science, but I have no idea if he plans to update it for v4.

You remember that Flying Lizards song Money of 1979 (yes, I'm old). I remember Molly saying it was done for something like $50, but wherever it was studio, filming or everything done in a house (sounds like it) it still sounds incredibly great (though I thought it was black and white around 1983). Equipment costs money but Talent is free.

Here is the original. But it's not a good recording.

But this is clearer:

There was a 450 euro short film called Marla The Movie dine on a Sony MiniDV with 35mm depth of field adaptor which puts much of the stuff to shame, but I don't know where that is now.

But still, I want my set of equator studio horn speakers, and that freakin mike model Madonna used to record Hung Up. Just wait, I need to philosophically slap myself around to get over this gear lust.

Love it!
I did't know it. Thanks for share.
I did my try with 35mm adaptor in s8mm years ago, the imagen I got made me think about speed booster in S16mm, but never tried.

I come from the world of skateboarding. take a look Spike Jonze's skate stuff if you have a chance.
I have skated more than 20 years. There are a lot of very creative films and videos, even of influence these days. I know that many skaters end up as filmmakers, photographers, DP, actors...
I started in the 80s, all skaters always with a camera in their hands and without prejudice. Nothing about to try emule Hollywood or whatever, just filming ideas.
That was really great back in the days. But we are in another era, I like to adapt. Let's see what digital era can offer to us.

Yes, the generating ideas is good stuff, you discover great skills. The amount of energy you guys have you can really home in on good stuff. You would really love that Marla the movie on DOF, really homes in on style, sort of Snatch/Fight Club styllistic, makes Blair Witch look like a dogs breakfast. The DOF stuff really got me interested in narrative filming, makes most of the stuff people do look bland. A shame there is no DOF filter for 4k footage

I've found only one recording, without the snazzy sound track that fitted well with it and made it 10x better. But here is one of the songs, to give you an idea. Play both together by double clicking. But it misses all the beautiful timing and transitions of the five songs used:

The footage also looks less film like than the original, which I remember was more grainy with better bokeh. In the elevator scene the image shimmers like film from the CD in the depth of field adaptor wobbling. Even cheaper handycams looked more filmic with these things.

Made by Steve Yedlin, known for movies like The Last Jedi and Looper.

I'm debating building a BMD Color Science 4 > Arri Alexa LUT. (More of a "stylistic" LUT than one claiming to do some voodoo that turns a P4K into an Alexa.) Does anyone know if one already exists?

If you look around online you'll see some colorists demonstrate a method for doing it by using Color Space Transform to go from Pocket 4K (or any other log source image) to Alexa Wide Gamut + Log C and then adding the Alexa REC709 LUT. However, there are some caveats:

1) While in theory it gets things close, it isn't an ideal way to work with files from any camera. The transform is likely to exacerbate noise or introduce clipping at the edges of the gamut.

2) The Color Space Transform OFX defaults to assuming 6000K source when it does the math, so the results will be worse for tungsten compared to daylight.

If your desire to match the Alexa is for a shoot that includes both cameras, it's much better to shoot some good color charts (DSC Labs makes really good ones) on both cameras and match the images manually. Using Davinci Color Managed mode may make it easier, depending on the look you want to achieve. Eventually ACES will be another color managed option, but BMD hasn't yet added an IDT for the 4K Pocket.

If your goal just to quickly get a good look out of the Pocket 4K, I honestly feel that the new BMD Extended Video, either set in the RAW tab for cDNG files, or added as a LUT to ProRes film mode files, is a great starting place for a grade. It will yield a cleaner result than trying to cram the image data into the Alexa LUT through Color Space Transform.

I'm debating building a BMD Color Science 4 > Arri Alexa LUT. (More of a "stylistic" LUT than one claiming to do some voodoo that turns a P4K into an Alexa.) Does anyone know if one already exists?

If you look around online you'll see some colorists demonstrate a method for doing it by using Color Space Transform to go from Pocket 4K (or any other log source image) to Alexa Wide Gamut + Log C and then adding the Alexa REC709 LUT. However, there are some caveats:

1) While in theory it gets things close, it isn't an ideal way to work with files from any camera. The transform is likely to exacerbate noise or introduce clipping at the edges of the gamut.

2) The Color Space Transform OFX defaults to assuming 6000K source when it does the math, so the results will be worse for tungsten compared to daylight.

If your desire to match the Alexa is for a shoot that includes both cameras, it's much better to shoot some good color charts (DSC Labs makes really good ones) on both cameras and match the images manually. Using Davinci Color Managed mode may make it easier, depending on the look you want to achieve. Eventually ACES will be another color managed option, but BMD hasn't yet added an IDT for the 4K Pocket.

If your goal just to quickly get a good look out of the Pocket 4K, I honestly feel that the new BMD Extended Video, either set in the RAW tab for cDNG files, or added as a LUT to ProRes film mode files, is a great starting place for a grade. It will yield a cleaner result than trying to cram the image data into the Alexa LUT through Color Space Transform.

The goal is really *none of the above*.

Think of it as similar to one of the gajillion different stylistic "film look" LUTs. It would be a finishing LUT one could apply over an entire project to tweak the color response and highlight behavior to have a taste of that Alexa flavor that so many find appealing.

If that’s the case, the existing Extended Video LUT is actually already quite similar in terms of color and highlight rolloff, though to get closer to Alexa REC709 you may want to add some saturation to blue vector and shift it a bit toward cyan

So, here's where I am after a day of work:


Blackmagic Design Extended Video


Pocketlexa LUT

It needs more work – I especially want to get the gamma curve closer to the original – but I think it's headed in the right direction. I know this isn't a great image for judging all of the shifting. I'll post something with a color chart tomorrow when I have it a little more dialed in.

Joe, looking good.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, here's where I am after a day of work:


Blackmagic Design Extended Video


Pocketlexa LUT

It needs more work – I especially want to get the gamma curve closer to the original – but I think it's headed in the right direction. I know this isn't a great image for judging all of the shifting. I'll post something with a color chart tomorrow when I have it a little more dialed in.

Keep it up!
Here's a Alexa's screen grab if helps your goal.

Just keep in mind the subtractive watercolor concept.
As more dark= more color. (not grayish shadows)
The brighter= less color. Like transparent film print areas (not weird roll-off colors when clipping)

What's the true background colour the door way of the curtain, is it?

I think people might have forgotten etc, that the real goal in some of these things is super vision. To make the image look above real, more real than real. So, it reflects a lighting dynamic to whatever effect that pleases people. I might argue the extended video lut above looks more natural than Roberto's frame, but Roberto's has just the right hint of lighting in performance, to extend the color across the range. By lighting, I mean how the light is handled by the camera and post, not on set lighting.

But, the interesting thing is, the Alexa must allow better amateur images, simply because lesser cameras are easier to stuff up more of the image. To put it from the opposite direction, big productions are not only fished out by Arrii's marketing of a film look the industry related to, but so many yellowish Red big productions would have been more watchable if filmed on an Arri in the way those crews do. I did not buy a Red for many years because of the look before the Dragon. Immediately I saw the pocket I knew there was something up (actually I can relate to Johns original market test shot with blue on the woman's head dress l I think, as she passed by to blue handling I saw in Room, was it? But BM wouldn't even give a fullhdp50 pocket. It's a shame about the more abrupt skin toning on the first shots of the 4.6k which I have seen in a number of Red films before dragon, which stopped me. The 4.6k turn out pretty good (even in the low light people are suddenly complaining about since the pocket).

Just a slightly tangential segue back to Deborah Evans-Stickland, the vocalist in The Flying Lizards cover of Money (That’s What I Want), from voicemajesty.com:

“Deborah came to prominence in the late 1970's as the slightly scary lead vocalist with ‘the Flying Lizards' whose stripped down version of the Berry Gordy song ‘Money' – produced at a cost of only £6.50 – whizzed up the charts in 1979...

All icily enunciated hauteur and blue-blooded sang-froid, singer Deborah Evans replaces Lennon’s lust rasp with the dead-eyed disdain of the ruling class. It’s no coincidence that ‘Money’ was released a few months after the election of Margaret Thatcher, who spoke in a fake-posh voice not a million miles from Evans’ exaggeratedly aristocratic tones...”

I just thought Deborah was so perfect in the second recording for that song, perfect vocals and perfectly nuanced sangfroid. It’s all on her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

“To make the image look above real, more real than real.” — Wayne Steven

There it is, that’s the goal, isn’t it? That’s what we aspire to. The stuff that dreams are made of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's about talent, and they delivered in a style that suited the quality of the equipment.

Rick, put it this way. I don't think I would want her as prime minister, or Margret Thatcher as a pop star. I don't think the two are that similar, even if it is art trying to imitate life.

There is also a more modern feminist like version on YouTube which I think has her too.

“To make the image look above real, more real than real.” — Wayne Steven

There it is, that’s the goal, isn’t it? That’s what we aspire to. The stuff that dreams are made of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, depends on the vision. I'm just meaning as a basic performance aesthetic.

"a basic performance aesthetic"
That frame I put is just soft and natural interior light. I think this one only shows basic talent skills, not a Storaro DP.

About the real look, I dunno. Cafe Society shot in digital with extreme color grading sometimes, other times more natural ... but Apocalyse Now seems much more natural to me straight form the film print. Same DP, different tools, one overworked in post and other as it is in set.

Natural real look could be as well for instance Forrest Gump film.

Would be great a LUT in camera that bringd this aestheatic and fix some things just with a little touch in post if need it or leave it as it is straight from the camera... dreaming is free!

Just keep in mind the subtractive watercolor concept.
As more dark= more color. (not grayish shadows)
The brighter= less color. Like transparent film print areas (not weird roll-off colors when clipping)

That's an interesting theory from Art Adams, but performing it after-the-fact, by desaturating highlights and saturating shadows in post, doesn't achieve an Alexa miracle.

As I recall, some youtubber a while back claimed that desaturating shadows (not highlights) was an instant and wonderful film-look technique. And the commenters enthusiastically agreed and were full of thanks at the miracle performed in front of their very eyes.

The Emperor was wearing a baseball cap, but no clothes.

"a basic performance aesthetic"
That frame I put is just soft and natural interior light. I think this one only shows basic talent skills, not a Storaro DP.

About the real look, I dunno. Cafe Society shot in digital with extreme color grading sometimes, other times more natural ... but Apocalyse Now seems much more natural to me straight form the film print. Same DP, different tools, one overworked in post and other as it is in set.

Natural real look could be as well for instance Forrest Gump film.

Would be great a LUT in camera that bringd this aestheatic and fix some things just with a little touch in post if need it or leave it as it is straight from the camera... dreaming is free!

Roberto, I'm referring to the sensor performance not lighting or dp in the brand look. Sensors bring in a desaturated image a lot anyway, and then it's boosted/put through colour science, but how well it handles that leads to a situation like you referred. Sure enough, you light to make it look natural, but to me the extended video lut there is doing an OK job.

BTW, the girl in that bus, I think is on the latter android keyboard gifs, doing an impression of a friend's daughter. Hilarious.