Thread: 8k r3d 5:1- 6 STOP UNDER AND OVER EXPOSE TEST

Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 58
  1. #21  
    Senior Member Patrick Tresch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Switzerland, Lausanne
    Posts
    4,963
    Quote Originally Posted by Hrvoje Simic View Post

    Red cameras rated at 800 have superior shadow rendition than Alexa. Which also depends on transformation from log.
    Rated at 1600...not really.
    How much superior if 1 stop (rating at 1600iso) is not good any more?


    Quote Originally Posted by AndreasOberg View Post
    I did a more detailed compression test and I can see the difference between
    1:2, 1:5, 1:8, 1:12 and 1:18.

    At 100% zoom already at 1:5 the quality of noise and smaller details are being reduced and at each step there is further reduction.
    Especially at 1:12 the noise has clear compression patters and details are not there as much any more.

    Andreas

    Please show us the difference between 1:2 and 1:8 when using a 6k picture (at 100%).
    Jpeg2000 compression does more harm to the noise details than any RC compression up to 1:12.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member AndreasOberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Leicestershire, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,497
    Hi Patrick,
    I would be happy to upload the test image I did. Just need to find it again.


    Andreas
    www.ObergWildlife.com- Natural History Filmmaking
    www.WildlifeRescueMovie.com- Saving the animals of the Rainforest!
    CF Weapon Helium 8K Strummer Bright Tangerine, Inspire 2 X7, OConnor 2560, Canon 50-1000mm
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Tresch View Post
    How much superior
    By the amount of difference in shadow range compared to Arri's sensor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Tresch View Post
    if 1 stop (rating at 1600iso) is not good any more?
    If it's not a different analog gain implementation, such as in Gemini, Venice, Varicam, etc. "rating" a camera higher in digital ISO equivalent doesn't do anything with the camera's recording properties whatsoever.
    It only presents the same recorded signal differently.

    So when you "rate it" at 1600 equivalence and expose based on that you are not gaining anything that is not there already in ISO800 rated image preview, while you are underexposing by one stop. There is no special magic turning the camera into something else by a different "rating". It is just a digital push, a flick of an image presentational switch, which "stretches" the recorded data.

    The subjective part of how good that seems and to whom is irrelevant to understand the loss of density of the image caused by the loss of incoming light. Which affects overall tonal depth of the image, and especially richness of shadows and transition to blacks.

    Chasing that one stop more in highlights by a one stop underexposure affects the density of the whole image.

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Tresch View Post
    Please show us the difference between 1:2 and 1:8 when using a 6k picture (at 100%).
    Still image does not offer full insight into effects of compression, which also depends on content type and light and exposure levels.
    http://i68.tinypic.com/drcb4y.jpg


    Analog > Camera feel optimization http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Camera performance optimization http://omeneo.com/primers

    imdb


    "Como delfines en el fondo del oceano
    volamos por el universo incentivados por la esperanza"

    "L'esperanza", Sven Väth
    "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards"
    Jung/ Carol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Senior Member Aris_Gavriilidis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by Hrvoje Simic View Post
    By the amount of difference in shadow range compared to Arri's sensor.



    If it's not a different analog gain implementation, such as in Gemini, Venice, Varicam, etc. "rating" a camera higher in digital ISO equivalent doesn't do anything with the camera's recording properties whatsoever.
    It only presents the same recorded signal differently.

    So when you "rate it" at 1600 equivalence and expose based on that you are not gaining anything that is not there already in ISO800 rated image preview, while you are underexposing by one stop. There is no special magic turning the camera into something else by a different "rating". It is just a digital push, a flick of an image presentational switch, which "stretches" the recorded data.

    The subjective part of how good that seems and to whom is irrelevant to understand the loss of density of the image caused by the loss of incoming light. Which affects overall tonal depth of the image, and especially richness of shadows and transition to blacks.

    Chasing that one stop more in highlights by a one stop underexposure affects the density of the whole image.



    Still image does not offer full insight into effects of compression, which also depends on content type and light and exposure levels.
    This is all true, except, Monstro is designed by default to operate at 1600 ISO, even Panavision says so in their DXL2 so I don't think shooting it at 1600 would really count as underexposure since that number's the base.
    EPIC - X DRAGON #8215 "Allie"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Senior Member Karim D. Ghantous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Melbourne AU
    Posts
    1,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Aris_Gavriilidis View Post
    This is all true, except, Monstro is designed by default to operate at 1600 ISO, even Panavision says so in their DXL2 so I don't think shooting it at 1600 would really count as underexposure since that number's the base.
    I have little to add here, but I can say that Patrick O'Sullivan, host of The Wandering DP podcast, has stated that the base ISO of the DXL2 is indeed 1600 (and that it's the best camera he has ever worked with, which will make RED and Panavision rather happy).
    Good production values may not be noticed. Bad production values will be.
    Pinterest
    | Flickr | Instagram | Martini Ultra (blog)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by Aris_Gavriilidis View Post
    This is all true, except, Monstro is designed by default to operate at 1600 ISO, even Panavision says so in their DXL2 .
    Where does Panavision state Monstro sensor is "designed for 1600" ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Aris_Gavriilidis View Post
    so I don't think shooting it at 1600 would really count as underexposure since that number's the base.
    If the stuff written in previous post is true...exposure to 1600 rating is one stop underexposure compared to exposure for 800 rating.
    On any camera.
    http://i68.tinypic.com/drcb4y.jpg


    Analog > Camera feel optimization http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Camera performance optimization http://omeneo.com/primers

    imdb


    "Como delfines en el fondo del oceano
    volamos por el universo incentivados por la esperanza"

    "L'esperanza", Sven Väth
    "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards"
    Jung/ Carol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member Kemalettin Sert's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles CA
    Posts
    3,290
    Quote Originally Posted by Hrvoje Simic View Post
    Where does Panavision state Monstro sensor is "designed for 1600" ?



    If the stuff written in previous post is true...exposure to 1600 rating is one stop underexposure compared to exposure for 800 rating.
    On any camera.
    https://dxl.panavision.com/
    EPIC-X DRAGON 7424
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kemalettin Sert View Post

    = Nowhere.

    Sensor is not "designed" for any ISO, ISO is equivalency, rated on some criteria and someone's rating doesn't change laws of physics.
    http://i68.tinypic.com/drcb4y.jpg


    Analog > Camera feel optimization http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Camera performance optimization http://omeneo.com/primers

    imdb


    "Como delfines en el fondo del oceano
    volamos por el universo incentivados por la esperanza"

    "L'esperanza", Sven Väth
    "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards"
    Jung/ Carol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Senior Member Aris_Gavriilidis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    104
    Quote Originally Posted by Hrvoje Simic View Post
    = Nowhere.

    Sensor is not "designed" for any ISO, ISO is equivalency, rated on some criteria and someone's rating doesn't change laws of physics.
    The website clearlysays "16 Stops.35 Megapixels.1600 Native ISO." and also, if you go to 0:45 in this link, Michael Cioni states "We're now using the Red Monstro sensor, which is a 1600 native iso sensor.." - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1eR-Em2CWQ

    That's plenty of evidence for me, without even getting into how amazingly clean Monstro shadows are to begin with.
    EPIC - X DRAGON #8215 "Allie"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by Aris_Gavriilidis View Post
    The website clearlysays .
    Quote Originally Posted by Aris_Gavriilidis View Post
    That's plenty of evidence for me, .
    You are missing a distinction between:

    - The property of image density relative to exposure levels

    and

    - Suggestion for image data presentation predetermining judgement calls for exposure levels.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aris_Gavriilidis View Post
    without even getting into how amazingly clean Monstro shadows are to begin with.
    Sensor noise floor and exposure are two different things.

    Sensor noise floor determines what can be captured (on the bottom).
    Exposure determines how many bits you use to capture it.

    Which in case of double ISO rating is half.
    On any camera.
    http://i68.tinypic.com/drcb4y.jpg


    Analog > Camera feel optimization http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Camera performance optimization http://omeneo.com/primers

    imdb


    "Como delfines en el fondo del oceano
    volamos por el universo incentivados por la esperanza"

    "L'esperanza", Sven Väth
    "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards"
    Jung/ Carol
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts