Difference in Sony S-Log2 LUT vs ACES version

Applying the ACES Sony S-Log2 IDT to an S-Log2 clip does what you might expect and contrasts it out, but applying the Sony S-Log2 LUT that comes with Resolve just blows it out of the water and it has to be brought down from off the scale to compare to the ACES version. I can not see why this should be. Anyone got anything to add?

Mike
Bonsall CA

No, in theory both methods should give you about the same look.
It's just theory and reality shows how good LUTs, IDTs are, or not

Sony-specific LUTs are rubbish in Resolve - that's why I only use RCM or ACES (IDTs are much like it).

Piotr

+1
As Piotr says. The Sony LUTs are not really what you want.
I sometimes use the LC709A LUT, but you're better off with dialing in your look without any LUT.

ACES was invented to end the shortcomings with all those LUTing.

It's still prone to the sam problems as LUTs. It's all fixed math made based on ideal scenario. Hardly any recording is ideal
If you good with grading you shouldn't need LUTs anyway- grade straight from LOG, so you have all freedom.

Does Resolve not use Sony official LUTs?

If you good with grading you shouldn't need LUTs anyway- grade straight from LOG, so you have all freedom.

Exactly.

No LUT's, no ACES, no transform/transform/transform. Every image is unique. No LUTtites. If you're not already, just get good at grading (I'm still working on it).

Cheers.

Everyone of us is learning - even the veterans in the colorist trade, not to mention newbies like myself. But the fact is that you can use "scene based" color spaces/gammas in RCM, as well as in ACEScc/cct workflows. No LUT is scene based AFAIK, hence their lower flexibility.

Piotr

Thanks All. I feel disappointed that we have great technology like ACES and S-Log and it can be better not to use it but I just regraded a project from scratch using just DaVinci YRBG and eye and it looks better and was way quicker! But this being so I'm thinking next shoot (I'm going to reshoot my current project) I think I might use Cine4 as in quick testing that gives stronger colors and a cleaner look than I can get with Slog with only limited loss of highlight detail.

Have the problems we are looking at hear caused anyone else to give up on shooting Log?

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong (I'm no colorist by any stretch of the imagination so if I'm doing something right it's probably more by good luck the by design) but I love shooting in SLOG 2 and grading in Resolve - I get way better results then if I'm not in SLOG2

For what its worth - I cannot get clean skin tones from CINE4.
on my A7S I shoot SLOG2 with Pro colour and seems to work for me very well.

I shoot an xrite for Video color chart where at all possible, use that first and then start correcting/grading

When I first got my camera I bought a bunch of SLOG2 Luts.....none have given me any good results, and most destroy the image more then a clutz like myself does.

I would however love to find a decent tutorial on LOG grading

SLog2/3 and most other log-gammas are made for high bandwidth codecs.
I don't like the SLog implementation in Sony's consumer cameras with 8bit codecs. These are prone to banding then when you delog the footage.

SLog works quite nice on high bandwith cameras like F5/55 and FS7 though.

No LUT's, no ACES, no transform/transform/transform. Every image is unique. No LUTtites. If you're not already, just get good at grading (I'm still working on it).

I think there's a lot to be said for this. Where ACES can be useful is when you're combining a lot of camera formats into one show, and that can be very flexible. I don't think it's necessary for a one-camera project, but people have the freedom to do the job any way that gets it done quickly and efficiently.

That's the whole idea behind it and it can help a lot. I think camera companies don't put enough attention/work to create good transformations and this is main issue.

Thanks All. I feel disappointed that we have great technology like ACES and S-Log and it can be better not to use it but I just regraded a project from scratch using just DaVinci YRBG and eye and it looks better and was way quicker! But this being so I'm thinking next shoot (I'm going to reshoot my current project) I think I might use Cine4 as in quick testing that gives stronger colors and a cleaner look than I can get with Slog with only limited loss of highlight detail.

Have the problems we are looking at hear caused anyone else to give up on shooting Log?

Yes, Cine4 in some cases ends up better. Seen this comment quite often on the net from Sony camera users. As Erik said- LOG requires higher quality recording, otherwise footage can break quite quickly.