Thread: MINILF-MONSTRO thoughts ;)

Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 12 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 115
  1. #41  
    Senior Member rand thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,629
    Range Rover Arri Alexa .ARX file.


    Last edited by rand thompson; 01-01-2020 at 09:37 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #42  
    Senior Member Audy Erel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Jakarta-Bandung, Indonesia (Bali)
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    Here's one you can try for fun.

    When exposing w/ Monstro versus the LF, in particular in these side by side sort of setups instead of rating at ISO 800, try 1280 and 1600. Even 2000 is worth a stab w/ the Standard OLPF you are using.

    All things being equal that will give you what you want in the highlights and still be cleaner in the shadows when finishing to 4K and 2K.


    This is the old "Dragon trick" many DPs started to utilize in the DSCM Dragon days because they figured out it was a cleaner image and once discovering metering and exposure in relationship to ISO Rating provided more information for the highlights, they ran with it. Which is why some films were shot at higher than ISO 800.
    Thanks Phil! I always do the same with my Dragon Scarlet-W. I never had problem with noise or grain as they always look good to my eye, but not with clipped highlights!
    So, I shot almost everything above 800ISO.
    SCARLET-W #004760
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    A better/easier way to think of it if you are exposing correctly at 18% Gray

    Try:
    - Alexa LF at ISO 800 at whatever T Stop
    - RED Monstro 8K VV at ISO 1600 w/ 0.3 ND at the same T Stop

    So much of this is really about where information lands and exposure logic.
    The information in that case with Monstro lands more than a stop underexposed compared to Alexa and you are paying the appearance of highlights with a half thinner negative. It's not the same image.
    Analog > Apollo wooden handgrip http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Primers - professional image transformation tools 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. #44  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    11,330
    Quote Originally Posted by Hrvoje Simic View Post
    The information in that case with Monstro lands more than a stop underexposed compared to Alexa and you are paying the appearance of highlights with a half thinner negative. It's not the same image.
    No. I am describing an exposure method to retain more stops in the highlights. Monstro is very much cleaner in the shadows in comparison. I hope that's not even an argument based on what I've already shown.

    RED's official stance on Base ISO is ISO 800 on Monstro, but Base ISO is just a recommendation as a good starting place. Plenty is shot at a higher ISO, feature level to do exactly as I have described. Plenty is also shot at lower ISO ratings as well.

    This is more of an exposure logic thing and knowing your camera system. Not really a thinner negative as you're always capturing the same amount of DR. One of Monstro's biggest strengths is it's cleaner shadow detail, which is rather relevant in these HDR finishing times.

    Conversely, it's also why you don't want to do the same on the Alexa as it's pretty noisy once you start getting up there. I don't usually recommend going beyond ISO 800 if finishing for 4K even. ISO 1600 is fine if you don't mind the noise. 3200 is no-go land, but some will say it's fine I'm sure.
    Phil Holland - Cinematographer - Los Angeles
    ________________________________
    phfx.com IMDB
    PHFX | tools

    2X RED Monstro 8K VV Bodies and a lot of things to use with them.

    Data Sheets and Notes:
    Red Weapon/DSMC2
    Red Dragon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #45  
    I agree with phil. Horjve Nd 0.3 is one stop so why would monstro be more than a stop underexposed? And as phil says monstro got more than two more usable stops in the lowlights compared to the alexa but monstro clips one stop before so to utilize both cameras to thier full potential side by side monstro needs to ware shades. 1-1.5 stop of it and then the DR’s are fairly lined up.

    So if alexa is almost cliping red does not get a thinner negative for adding nd3 it just dials the dr to cover the sceane instead of clipping.

    Im not worried shooting 3290iso on monstro but only if light is balanced. As blue channel is quite week on cmos in general and also on red cameras a low kelvin also demand higher exposure than for example scenes wirh higher kelvins. The spouth of tungsten scenes wirh low light is what to worry about.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    No. I am describing an exposure method to retain more stops in the highlights. Monstro is very much cleaner in the shadows in comparison. I hope that's not even an argument based on what I've already shown.
    I didn't negate the exposure method. :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    RED's official stance on Base ISO is ISO 800 on Monstro, but Base ISO is just a recommendation as a good starting place. Plenty is shot at a higher ISO, feature level to do exactly as I have described. Plenty is also shot at lower ISO ratings as well.
    ISO 800 is not just a subjective recommendation, it is related to density you get and by bit depth per luminance range you have.
    The lower you rate the higher the density (at the cost of cutting off highlights), the higher you rate (push) the lower the density.

    If you expose LF to 800 and Monstro on 1600 you don't get the same tonal density with Monstro. It is not the same image.
    You may get the upper reach but pay the price with density. You can't have both. Shadow reach achievable with greater sensor sensitivity and lower noise doesn't change that.
    Because you have to additionally "stretch" the Monstro signal with digital gain by a full stop to get the same levels of brightness. So you loose bits per luminance levels.


    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    This is more of an exposure logic thing and knowing your camera system. Not really a thinner negative as you're always capturing the same amount of DR.
    Stop lower exposure is half the light. Which gives a thinner negative.
    The amount of DR doesn't change that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    One of Monstro's biggest strengths is it's cleaner shadow detail, which is rather relevant in these HDR finishing times.
    Of course.
    No one negates that.

    As long as we don't propagate thinking that upper range can be compensated by underexposure without a price.
    Analog > Apollo wooden handgrip http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Primers - professional image transformation tools 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. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    monstro got more than two more usable stops in the lowlights compared to the alexa but monstro clips one stop before so to utilize both cameras to thier full potential side by side monstro needs to ware shades.
    Few comments:

    1) "Potential" interpretation being relative to priorities.

    2) That is capturing half the light and loosing stops which carry most of the data.

    3) Monstro doesn't have more than two usable stops in shadows. It's about a stop. Also, lack of noise and tonal saturation are two different things.
    And if you want to "use" that in the context of pushing those shadows upwards, bye-bye its superior shadow performance. You can't have both. You already "use" them by having a superior depth in the lower luminance range. Shadow performance advantage gives super smooth and deep shadow rendition. Meaning faces will drift off to black smoother and more tonally defined, for example. Meaning dim lit room will look deeper and richer for example. When shadows are kept where they naturally are through a proper gamma curve.
    Proper gamma curve means there is a proper contrast distribution, allowing natural faloff to black while keeping the image density.
    Proper gamma curve is not having one stop for shadows and pushing everything else upwards attempting to chase Alexa.


    Variants of utilizing the potential:


    A) For a top class tonal depth in the same league with Alexa with superior shadow rendition to Alexa and a very good DR distribution = 800 and accepting the reality of highlight capture range

    Solution to capture more range in the highlights:
    - Stopping down while shaping scene light where it matters to keep the same exposure levels for shot priorities on 800 (bringing up the mids and shadows)
    - Toning down car lights, practicals etc.

    or

    B) If it really really really matters a lot to capture more in those clouds and lamps, with zero light control and fill added, more than it does to have rich faces, deep shadows and great post manipulation range > stop underexposure + stop digital push (exposing to 1600 rating) helps to achieve that.
    Analog > Apollo wooden handgrip http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Primers - professional image transformation tools 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  
     

  8. #48  
    Senior Member Jacobo Martinez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Nicaragua
    Posts
    314
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    I agree with phil. Horjve Nd 0.3 is one stop so why would monstro be more than a stop underexposed? And as phil says monstro got more than two more usable stops in the lowlights compared to the alexa but monstro clips one stop before so to utilize both cameras to thier full potential side by side monstro needs to ware shades. 1-1.5 stop of it and then the DR’s are fairly lined up.
    Remember Phil said to expose using nd 0.3 and setting iso to 1600. That is 2 times less light hitting the sensor. With this method you gain more highlight detail but loose shadow density.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacobo Martinez View Post
    Remember Phil said to expose using nd 0.3 and setting iso to 1600. That is 2 times less light hitting the sensor. With this method you gain more highlight detail but loose shadow density.
    No its not. Its half the amount of light. Nd.3 is equal to a stop of light in my book. And yes thats also bout equal to the difference of sensor clipping difference for the two cameras descussed.

    The monster raised iso to 1600 does not change exposure at all. it only digitally gain in post the exposure captured si it will / should look similar in brightness as the alexa pixure developed at 800 iso.
    Then you can use the ipp2 soft highlights and shit should vehave quite the same.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #50  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    11,330
    Quote Originally Posted by Hrvoje Simic View Post
    I didn't negate the exposure method. :)
    Stop lower exposure is half the light. Which gives a thinner negative.
    If we were talking perhaps identical sensor technologies I might agree with your perspective. I do not. Nor do some rather experienced DPs in this case. And this going back to OG Dragon really.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jacobo Martinez View Post
    Remember Phil said to expose using nd 0.3 and setting iso to 1600. That is 2 times less light hitting the sensor. With this method you gain more highlight detail but loose shadow density.
    Yes, but the key thing is Monstro sees more into the shadows and it's cleaner down there.


    You've seen Luigi's and my Xylas. It's all about "where" those stops are and "what" they are at the ceiling and the floor.

    It gets a bit more interesting even when you start talking OLPFs. Something I don't think there's enough conversation about in regards to the RED ecosystem. Specifically once I learned that PV was mainly using the LLO on the DXL/DXL2, like to the tune of 90%+ of their productions. I understand however why they are doing it. I've had a decent conversation or 20 about it.

    Almost any day of the week I would recommend the Standard for general shooting.

    But really, if you want to really enjoy what the system can do and aren't so concerned about cleanliness at higher ISOs and understand how to expose well, the STH is the way.

    Wait a second.

    That's awfully Star Wars.

    STH is the way. I have spoken. But like the other ways are totally valid too.
    Phil Holland - Cinematographer - Los Angeles
    ________________________________
    phfx.com IMDB
    PHFX | tools

    2X RED Monstro 8K VV Bodies and a lot of things to use with them.

    Data Sheets and Notes:
    Red Weapon/DSMC2
    Red Dragon
    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