bernardl wrote:
P1 themselves have shown very convincing data about colors from their CMOS backs (such as the current IQ4-150) being superior to older CCD backs (IQ180 for instance).
Modern sensors are indeed superior to older ones in pure technical specs. They can capture more "true-to-life" images.
So I am not sure it's a sensor tech problem really.
It's definitely not. Problem is within output/look profiles. At old times they were more "aesthetically pleasing" and modern are more "true-to-life" and technically correct. That's two different approaches, with former being easier for an amateur (and for professional, to a degree) to achieve final look without much effort and latter providing better starting point for a serious pro, without any "baked in" look, but require strong vision of the final version of the image and having means and skills to achieve that final look.
Old time Nikon CMOS cameras, like D2X, have the same amazing colors straight-out-the-converter as their CCD siblings. And main factor here is output profiles ("Mode" system vs "Picture control" system). Kodak SLR/n (c) is also another example of a CMOS sensor camera with an "aesthetically pleasing" colors.
But there is some caveat too. Modern Fuji cameras include film simulations, like those in S5 pro, in attempt to provide that "aesthetically pleasing" look. But, unfortunately, they are nowhere near their actual film stock's look. Something were lost along the way. At the time of S3 pro/S5 pro they were at least honest and never named them after real film stock, only cryptonyms like F1a, F1b, F1c. There was a "Fujichrome" also, but again, without specifying which one.
Colleague of mine spent half a year to match the look of his Fuji XT-3 to his S5 pro. Hi bought Color Checker SG reference target, Lumariver Profile Designer, 3D LUT Creator and spent a lot of time mastering his custom profile. Now he claims that 95% of his photos from XT-3 matches look of S5 pro just by applying his custom profile to XT-3 RAWs in Lightroom. Can't verify that claim, but his photos are definitely look much more pleasing in skintone department comparing to result from original XT-3 profiles (including "film simulations"). That's his Flickr account BTW, he also bought Cobalt profiles just for fun, to try someone else's profile to simulate S5 pro look and found it nowhere near the original S5 pro look. And that is my experience also, I yet to find any commercial solution that allows to reliably simulate the look of old CCD cameras from modern's sensors output.
Also, there is a reason why Hollywood still shoots film or use it in post-production, having all the best color correction pro in the world. And the movies/TV series that shot on actual film, usually stand out for me in their pleasing rendition, compared to ones being color corrected to simulate a film stock.
bernardl wrote:
P1 themselves have shown very convincing data about colors from their CMOS backs (such as the current IQ4-150) being superior to older CCD backs (IQ180 for instance).
Modern sensors are indeed superior to older ones in pure technical specs. They can capture more "true-to-life" images.
So I am not sure it's a sensor tech problem really.
It's definitely not. Problem is within output/look profiles. At old times they were more "aesthetically pleasing" and modern are more "true-to-life" and technically correct. That's two different approaches, with former being easier for an amateur (and for professional, to a degree) to achieve final look without much effort and latter providing better starting point for a serious pro, without any "baked in" look, but require strong vision of the final version of the image and having means and skills to achieve that final look.
Old time Nikon CMOS cameras, like D2X, have the same amazing colors straight-out-the-converter as their CCD siblings. And main factor here is output profiles ("Mode" system vs "Picture control" system). Kodak SLR/n (c) is also another example of a CMOS sensor camera with an "aesthetically pleasing" colors.
But there is some caveat too. Modern Fuji cameras include film simulations, like those in S5 pro, in attempt to provide that "aesthetically pleasing" look. But, unfortunately, they are nowhere near their actual film stock's look. Something were lost along the way. At the time of S3 pro/S5 pro they were at least honest and never named them after real film stock, only cryptonyms like F1a, F1b, F1c. There was a "Fujichrome" also, but again, without specifying which one.
Also, there is a reason why Hollywood still shoots film or use it in post-production, having all the best color correction pro in the world. And the movies/TV series that shot on actual film, usually stand out for me in their pleasing rendition, compared to ones being color corrected to simulate a film stock.
