Sony a7s II underwater use -- All parameters

FCPX, Davinci Resolve and Premiere don't display that kind of data as far as I know.

 

For those coming late to this thread, let me attempt a short summary:

 

For great colors using the Sony cameras (A7, A7II, A6300/6500 line), you really need to shoot with powerful video lights (WB manually set based on the color of your lights). To allow the lights to compete with the ambient light, you're best off shooting early in the morning or in the last hours before sunset when there is less overall ambient light or at depth (30+ meters) where again there is less ambient light to outcompete. Under these circumstances, it helps to underexpose the background around -0.7 to -1.3 EV to get nice richly saturated blues while adjusting the strength of your lights to avoid overexposing the subjects (use the zebras to check for overexposure.)

 

There's no need to shoot in SLOG or any of the cinegammas if you apply the above exposure principles, as the dynamic range of your scene will fit well within the 7-8 stops of exposure you get under standard picture modes or REC709.

 

Forget about trying to shoot without lights and doing a manual white balance. Your results will be disappointing unless you're in very clear water and very shallow (5-10m max). In those circumstances, the Underwater Auto White Balance mode can work ok.

 

My experiments using red filters and manual white balance have been pretty frustrating and disappointing overall, so it's not an option I would recommend.

Frames of the day...

 

Jackson, Gordon and Woodhouse Reefs...

 

Very nice: Are these frames from the 4K video, or are these RAW files from photographs?

 

 

 

Frames of the day...

Jackson, Gordon and Woodhouse Reefs...

Great summary! I think this will help those who are new to this page. Query: Do you just set the WB to 5.2K, or whatever the temp of your lights are? What does this do to the color of the water, at a distance, where the light is not illuminating it? How does this compare to underwater WB using basically the same technique?

 

Thanks for this distillation of wisdom.

 

GLP

 

 

FCPX, Davinci Resolve and Premiere don't display that kind of data as far as I know.

 

For those coming late to this thread, let me attempt a short summary:

 

For great colors using the Sony cameras (A7, A7II, A6300/6500 line), you really need to shoot with powerful video lights (WB manually set based on the color of your lights). To allow the lights to compete with the ambient light, you're best off shooting early in the morning or in the last hours before sunset when there is less overall ambient light or at depth (30+ meters) where again there is less ambient light to outcompete. Under these circumstances, it helps to underexpose the background around -0.7 to -1.3 EV to get nice richly saturated blues while adjusting the strength of your lights to avoid overexposing the subjects (use the zebras to check for overexposure.)

 

There's no need to shoot in SLOG or any of the cinegammas if you apply the above exposure principles, as the dynamic range of your scene will fit well within the 7-8 stops of exposure you get under standard picture modes or REC709.

 

Forget about trying to shoot without lights and doing a manual white balance. Your results will be disappointing unless you're in very clear water and very shallow (5-10m max). In those circumstances, the Underwater Auto White Balance mode can work ok.

 

My experiments using red filters and manual white balance have been pretty frustrating and disappointing overall, so it's not an option I would recommend.

Very nice: Are these frames from the 4K video, or are these RAW files from photographs?

 

 

 

This are 4k frames only...

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G930F mediante Tapatalk

Great summary! I think this will help those who are new to this page. Query: Do you just set the WB to 5.2K, or whatever the temp of your lights are? What does this do to the color of the water, at a distance, where the light is not illuminating it? How does this compare to underwater WB using basically the same technique?

 

Thanks for this distillation of wisdom.

 

GLP

 

 

 

Yes, correct. I usually set the white balance to 5200k because that's the temperature of the lights I'm using. In general, the cooler the white balance (i.e. the lower the kalvin temperature), the more blue the water will look. Alex Mustard wrote a nice article about it some years back now. At 5200k clear tropical water already takes on a nice blue color. A less saturated blue near the surface and a more saturated blue the deeper you go. This is because what you're recording is the color of the sunlight being filtered through all the water between you and the surface. The more water, the more the reds and yellows get filtered out, and thus the more richly saturated the blue. For photography, I usually try to set my white balance even lower (around 4500k) to shift the color of the water column further towards true blue and away from aqua. I then light up the foreground using strobes that have warming gels attached so the foreground subjects render the 'correct' color rather than coming off as too blue.

 

Conversely, setting the white balance to warmer temperatures (say, 10000k) will produce muddier, more aqua/green/grey water backgrounds. It's not a great look in tropical water, IMO. This is essentially what happens when you use the Underwater Auto White Balance mode or try to custom white balance off a white/grey card at depth with or without a red filter. The warmer white balance reintroduces some reds and yellows to your foreground subjects, but turns the water column a desaturated magneta-grey.

 

In temperate waters, a color temperature slightly warmer than daylight like 6000-6500k can make the water column more richly green (emerald) rather than aqua-grey, so that actually can be a stylistic choice.

 

All of the above is true whether you're shooting with lights or without, as the lights don't illuminate the water, they pass though it.

Anemone City.... Red Sea.

 

5000K A3M3. 3x7000 lumens torches.

 

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G930F mediante Tapatalk

Batu Bolong... Komodo National Park.

 

 

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G930F mediante Tapatalk

Thanks for the summary and great to be revisiting this. I'm also looking into this solution by Keldan. They're recommending red filters on the lens + ambient light filters on the lights to match the depth from where you will be shooting at. See it here: http://keldanlights.com/english/products/filters/ambient-light-filters/index.html

And a video explanation about it here: https://www.facebook.com/behindthemask.divestories/videos/vb.272990696241330/501138506759880/?type=2&theater

What are your thoughts on these guys?

FCPX, Davinci Resolve and Premiere don't display that kind of data as far as I know.

 

For those coming late to this thread, let me attempt a short summary:

 

For great colors using the Sony cameras (A7, A7II, A6300/6500 line), you really need to shoot with powerful video lights (WB manually set based on the color of your lights). To allow the lights to compete with the ambient light, you're best off shooting early in the morning or in the last hours before sunset when there is less overall ambient light or at depth (30+ meters) where again there is less ambient light to outcompete. Under these circumstances, it helps to underexpose the background around -0.7 to -1.3 EV to get nice richly saturated blues while adjusting the strength of your lights to avoid overexposing the subjects (use the zebras to check for overexposure.)

 

There's no need to shoot in SLOG or any of the cinegammas if you apply the above exposure principles, as the dynamic range of your scene will fit well within the 7-8 stops of exposure you get under standard picture modes or REC709.

 

Forget about trying to shoot without lights and doing a manual white balance. Your results will be disappointing unless you're in very clear water and very shallow (5-10m max). In those circumstances, the Underwater Auto White Balance mode can work ok.

 

My experiments using red filters and manual white balance have been pretty frustrating and disappointing overall, so it's not an option I would recommend.

Thanks for the summary and great to be revisiting this. I'm also looking into this solution by Keldan. They're recommending red filters on the lens + ambient light filters on the lights to match the depth from where you will be shooting at. See it here: http://keldanlights.com/english/products/filters/ambient-light-filters/index.html

 

And a video explanation about it here: https://www.facebook.com/behindthemask.divestories/videos/vb.272990696241330/501138506759880/?type=2&theater

 

What are your thoughts on these guys?

 

 

I had been curious about that setup as well, but recently had a chance to try out a pair of Keldan 8 (the new 13000 lumen, CRI82 ones) paired up with the 10m cyan filters on loan from Reef Photo courtesy of Hergen Spalink.

 

I wasn't using them with the A7+red filter, but rather with a GH5 manually white balanced for the depth (10m). Unfortunately, the filters cut the light output significantly -- at least one stop, probably more. So for reef scenes, I didn't find it to be a viable combination. The Keldans simply didn't put out enough light anymore to make a difference. So for reef scenes, I'd say they're a no-go. Perhaps they might help fill-in the shadows a little bit with sharks that come right up to you, or in very dark ambient light conditions.

 

That said, I think you're better off shooting just ambient light above 10 meters, and using the video lights unmodified below that when the conditions allow. You will get much more vibrant results.

 

I had been curious about that setup as well, but recently had a chance to try out a pair of Keldan 8 (the new 13000 lumen, CRI82 ones) paired up with the 10m cyan filters on loan from Reef Photo courtesy of Hergen Spalink.

 

I wasn't using them with the A7+red filter, but rather with a GH5 manually white balanced for the depth (10m). Unfortunately, the filters cut the light output significantly -- at least one stop, probably more. So for reef scenes, I didn't find it to be a viable combination. The Keldans simply didn't put out enough light anymore to make a difference. So for reef scenes, I'd say they're a no-go. Perhaps they might help fill-in the shadows a little bit with sharks that come right up to you, or in very dark ambient light conditions.

 

That said, I think you're better off shooting just ambient light above 10 meters, and using the video lights unmodified below that when the conditions allow. You will get much more vibrant results.

Just to clarify are the new 2018 Keldan 8x 92 cri? Interesting results. I also heard Kraken is coming out with new Hydra 5000's next month that are 90 cri.I like that it has multiple options and a remote trigger. Having already owned sola f2000's I still seem to be leaning more towards the Keldan 8x's and will just give the filters a try together with the red filter. Perhaps bec. I started with go pro's/red filters and lights. It's my last hope before moving to a Cannon 5dMkIV or 1dx Mk2 which both have exellent white balance.

thanks this post for all the knowledge

 

last month i have a safari in Philippines 18 dives.

 

visibility was 10 meter.

 

i am using Sony a6500 and video lights.

 

i welcome you to watch my video ( it's truly a masterpiece ) edited in Premiere.

 

 

this post helped me a lot!!!

 

 

you are welcome to like my video and subscribe.

 

i would love to hear what you think about it (-:

 

thanks everyone.

 

Thanks for share. You should make your video shorter, like 4 min. Select the best and order it. Otherwise people will get bored.

Sony A7RII + 16-35 OSS.

 

https://vimeo.com/238739272

Just to clarify are the new 2018 Keldan 8x 92 cri? Interesting results. I also heard Kraken is coming out with new Hydra 5000's next month that are 90 cri.I like that it has multiple options and a remote trigger. Having already owned sola f2000's I still seem to be leaning more towards the Keldan 8x's and will just give the filters a try together with the red filter. Perhaps bec. I started with go pro's/red filters and lights. It's my last hope before moving to a Cannon 5dMkIV or 1dx Mk2 which both have exellent white balance.

​Hello just want to update that I was able to get the Keldan's (13,000 lumens 92cri) with red lens filters and ambient filter gels for the lights. I was quite happy with the results.

Here's the video from our blog.

The mantas are shot with the red filters and ambient light while the grey reef shark getting cleaned did not have the filters. Both were at the same dive site German Channel. Slightly deeper for the shark but still you can see the difference. Both were graded using the standard tools from FCPX.

 

The rest of the blog is on our site:

 

https://briananddonna.com/about/palau2018/

 

Next I want to try out the suggestions here. (https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4188494) And upon some suggestions to work on manually changing some white balance settings, picture profiles and saturation/de saturation for wide and macro.

 

Once I get to try those out including the settings from EOSHD. I can update here if anyone is interested.

 

 

Allready try EOSHD Pro color but nothing special.

Shooting w Magic Filter + lights you just have to know that magic filter is +2000K, A+6, M+6. BUT you loose 3 or 4 stops and you loose image quallity as those filters aren't glass optical quallity filters ready for 4K video.

We can not have it ALL....

Allready try EOSHD Pro color but nothing special.

Shooting w Magic Filter + lights you just have to know that magic filter is +2000K, A+6, M+6. BUT you loose 3 or 4 stops and you loose image quallity as those filters aren't glass optical quallity filters ready for 4K video.

We can not have it ALL....

 

Sorry but what's "A+6, M+6"? Since magic filter is +2000k does that mean that you can make the manual white balance less by 2000k? ie: if Custom white balance is set at 9,900k with the filters then you can manually adjust it to 7,900k? So it won't be too red.

 

Did you see his video with the EOShd and red filters? To me it looks good enough.

https://youtu.be/5m2X1d4PHRs

 

I wonder if Keldan's spectrum filters are glass optical quality. Seems to be a better quality than the magic filter gels.

 

I saw the article but is nothing new.

 

A+6, M+6 is Ambar +6, Magenta +6 at the BIAS square...

 

Dont think Keldan filters are optical grade GLASS filters. Anyway whe you put on the blue filter to your torche you will loose like 30-40% of light. And you loose an other 30% of light with red filter on your camera. Dont think is a good deal, but maybe Im wrong...

I saw the article but is nothing new.

 

A+6, M+6 is Ambar +6, Magenta +6 at the BIAS square...

 

Dont think Keldan filters are optical grade GLASS filters. Anyway whe you put on the blue filter to your torche you will loose like 30-40% of light. And you loose an other 30% of light with red filter on your camera. Dont think is a good deal, but maybe Im wrong...

 

Are these the EOShd settings? Thanks!

A+6, M+6 is Ambar +6, Magenta +6 at the BIAS square

 

"Dont think Keldan filters are optical grade GLASS filters. Anyway whe you put on the blue filter to your torche you will loose like 30-40% of light. And you loose an other 30% of light with red filter on your camera. Dont think is a good deal, but maybe Im wrong..."

 

This is what I also thought and read about it before getting them. However I just had to give it a try. It does take away a good portion of the light but for subjects within 12ft they fine when I cranked up the intensity to full since they have 13,000 lumens anyways. That way i'm not stuck with having to decide wether to have just red filters or lights but can actually use them both on a single dive.

 

 

 

Are these the EOShd settings? Thanks!

A+6, M+6 is Ambar +6, Magenta +6 at the BIAS square

 

"Dont think Keldan filters are optical grade GLASS filters. Anyway whe you put on the blue filter to your torche you will loose like 30-40% of light. And you loose an other 30% of light with red filter on your camera. Dont think is a good deal, but maybe Im wrong..."

 

This is what I also thought and read about it before getting them. However I just had to give it a try. It does take away a good portion of the light but for subjects within 12ft they fine when I cranked up the intensity to full since they have 13,000 lumens anyways. That way i'm not stuck with having to decide wether to have just red filters or lights but can actually use them both on a single dive.

 

 

My setting is standar creative style. Actually my last minivideo from Similan Island is strait out from camera. I know it needs some color correction, but It is just an objetive test...