I did some quick tests before shooting and discovered that using normal tungsten balanced bulbs was A LOT worse than daylight balanced CFLs. It was night and day with the skin tones. Lit and balanced with CFLs, the skin had depth and character, a lot more detail, and lots of subtle nuances that looked great. BUT lit and balanced for tungsten bulbs, the skin looked basically like it would on a DSLR, pretty flat, still pretty yellow and orange.

I would shoot everything with daylight bulbs if possible, but if you don't have any control then... you don't have any control.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant using all the house lights, most times actually ends up "mixing" light sources. Most places will not have the same bulb in every fixture simply due to maintenance workers replacing them at different times. So now you have multiple, crappy florescent s, hammering down from above, creating all kinds of spikes and color irregularities. Then we're guessing there's no IR cut filter on there. Perfect recipe for a destroyed image. I've never seen an image out this camera that bad (minus the Tiffen 2.1 IRND) and if your daylight shots are fine, there's not many things left.

Actually, come to think of it, that's exactly what it looks like with the Tiffen 2.1 IRND which confuses the sensor into pumping up the red channel to compensate.

Because of the defects in the original, try using the BMD, rather than the hook, LUT. It will give a more neutral image to work with, with less of a red cast. When the cast is neutralized as best you can, you can put a window on the face to bring up her skin tones.

But as noted, there's no way you're going to make this shot beautiful, there's just too much off to begin with.

@CaptainHook Great! That image is looking way better than what I achieved. I just bought an Hoya 72mm UV and IR Cut, but I still get the same problem sometimes indoors. Love your luts and get great results with them when the files are ok. Do you have your latest Luts as .mga for use with LUT-buddy? I totally agree that this should have been fixed in front of the camera, but I'm working on this project by myself and often have to use whatever lights available. With the GH2 I know that I would have been able to get good results in these conditions, but it seems like the bmpcc sensor can't handle this kind of light. There is no problem with the amount of light since this is recorded overexposed at 800 ASA.

My attempt applied to the tiff upload. The compression on the thumbnails here is pretty brutal!

Those images are definitely pretty messed up. I had a go at fixing it (some compression macro blocking in there but hey) using my latest "Simple" LUT and some WB/Tint and curves adjustments.

But honestly this seems like the color temp of the lights you're using plus probably IR issues. Needs to be fixed in front of camera IMHO.

Quick attempt: (in Photoshop, Levels -> Red gamma = 0.93, + curves & sat to grade)

I'm working on a documentary project with the bmpcc. A lot of stuff is shot indoors with the tungsten/compact fluorescent lamp lights available. In some conditions, often with compact fluorescent lamp I got really problems with the colors I'm getting out of the camera. The red channel is getting weird and I find it really hard to separate the colors and to get a natural look in post. I attached some pictures. It was shot with the sigma 18-35 fully opened and the metabones bmpcc to Nikon G adapter. The white balance was set to 3200k. The shot was a bit overexposed (a bit of ettr). Does anyone else have the same issue and maybe any workflow suggestions? The attached pictures shows the flat profile and scopes, also picture and scopes after I applied Hooks lut and at last with hooks lut and the exposure turned down a bit. I didn't include any images after I tried to grade it properly since I just want to illustrate the problem.

I tried to grade the files with a lot of different tools, not just the lut. But it's really hard with any tool.

These are jut quick examples. But you see the red/brown colors all over the image.

Here is my entry for the Vitaly Personal View NEST Video Contest. I had no time to do the grading so I posted there a quick grading version, 720p only. So here are the final version, graded, 1080p. Filmed with BMPCC raw+14-140(old ) with Polaroid ND fader for exterior+Oly 17mm F1.8+Oly 45mm F1.8 for interior. I think oly dos not perform quite well with BMPCC. Maybe a IRcut filter is a must have... DNG were conformed with davinci in BM film,(cloudy or tungsten WB), edit in PPro, graded in davinci. PS Vitaly, can I put this final version on the contest page?

For example, if you conventionally expose but still have two stops headroom before clipping, it means that you're throwing away 2 of the 13 stops dynamic range of the camera.

Don't think this is quite right. For shooting which is more like still photography -- landscapes, skylines, etc. -- it may make sense to ETTR, since this will give you the least noise if your raise the shadows in post and the most DR. However, under controlled conditions, if a metered object isn't the brightest thing in the frame, then obviously you're not "throwing away" stops if there's headroom.

If the metered object is the brightest object in the frame, then you have to ask yourself if you want your subject just below clipping. If it's a face, the answer is probably no. And having headroom doesn't necessarily mean you're "throwing away" stops, though the shot may be noisier than if you had ETTR.

It seems to make sense to overexposure this camera, maybe a stop or so, but there are other considerations in motion (as opposed to still) photography, where you need consistency from shot to shot.

Don't get me wrong: moiré is not easily dealt with!

You can reduce it a bit but never completely get rid of it. The full solution would be an OLPF in camera.

Cool. Thanks for tips guys. Good to hear moire easily dealt with.