Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Epic Test in Stockholm

Christoffer Glans

Christoffer Glans

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
4,993
Reaction score
36
Points
48
Age
42
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
Me and two friends got to borrow an Epic from the rental company Ljud & Bildmedia in Stockholm to do some tests.

Here's the result!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xef_bWp9Ydw&hd=1

We shot mainly HDRx tests at 4-6 stops to really see what the camera is capable of. We were stunned when we worked with the material after the shoot. To see so much details in the highlights both in the sky and water without loosing shadow details is truly revolutionary.

We also did some 5K slomo which is also quite remarkable.

There's alot of material to see so I hope you enjoy it. It really shows HDRx at it's best!
 
Only thing missing is Graeme's Magic sauce for combining the tracks. Next week (hopefully)...

Jim
 
Jannard said:
Only thing missing is Graeme's Magic sauce for combining the tracks. Next week (hopefully)...

Jim
Click to expand...

That sounds awesome! I might do some follow up to this video with that feature to see how it's improving everything.
But still, this camera is truly epic. You and your team have done a hell of a job creating this jewel.
 
Looks very promising. It's amazing how flat of an image you can capture in extremely high contrast situations. That stuff would be a dream to color correct. The only obvious motion artifact I noticed was when the biker rides by at 11:57. But this may be resolved with Graeme's "Magic Sauce".

Thanks for sharing.
 
I wanna smother that footage in Graeme's delicious magic sowse!

Funny, for a few of those shots, I didn't feel like HDRx was totally necessary. Just a testament to the native DR on the Epic. But the HDRx definitely adds to the film quality of the image. I really love it.
 
Thanks for sharing, Christoffer ! Much appreciated.

I love the graded part at the end. It looks so damn filmic...
 
Thank you Christopher and company. I really hope you will re-visit the video with the latest HDRx magic to see how much the hardest motion improves.
 
When turning HDRx on, does it matter if you are recording +1, +2....+6 stops in terms of storage capacity (or running times per card)? I guess what I mean is if I can get longer running times at lower HDRx stops than higher per card if I don't need the +6 stops?
If it's the same running time, wouldn't it better to just use the +6 stops to have that much more latitude "just in case"?
 
It doesn't affect file size, only the shutter on the second frame.

The shorter the shutter, the harder it will be to blend it with the regular frame and achieve proper-looking motion blur.

So better HDRx blending magic from Graeme will mean we will be able to shoot objects traveling faster across the frame, or be able to turn up the HDRx higher.

High contrast between the moving object and its background makes it easier to see the motion blur.

It is up to the user to find the threshold of what they consider proper-looking motion.
 
Roberto beat me to the punch. :)

NormLi said:
When turning HDRx on, does it matter if you are recording +1, +2....+6 stops in terms of storage capacity (or running times per card)? I guess what I mean is if I can get longer running times at lower HDRx stops than higher per card if I don't need the +6 stops?
If it's the same running time, wouldn't it better to just use the +6 stops to have that much more latitude "just in case"?
Click to expand...

You get exactly double the number of frames when shooting HDRx regardless of whether it is +2 or +6. So, once you switch HDRx on it doesn't affect file size at all no matter which setting you choose.

Adding 6 stops of latitude isn't necessarily a good idea though unless you really need it. If your 'A' track is 6 stops away from your 'B' track, it is really tough to bring them together. HDRx is kind of like salt. You want to use only as much as you need to get the right flavor, but if you add to much it starts to ruin your dinner.
 
Hey Christoffer...you wouldnt mind re-doing that WHOLE video after Graeme's Magic sauce is out? haha

(lol...that just sounds wrong :P)
Click to expand...

Actually it isn't that hard. I just need to replace the bottom track (where the HDRx footage was). But I think I'm just gonna do a short version showing the improvements.


If it's the same running time, wouldn't it better to just use the +6 stops to have that much more latitude "just in case"?
Click to expand...

Depends on the situation; sometimes the highlights in a scene might become too dark instead. I think it's better to measure the lightning and do it correctly based on it. Like the shots on the bridge with the sun down, we measured it to exactly 4 stops needed and made the HDRx follow that. As for shooting a person with the sun in the background, that's another story :smile5:
And as Westover said, track A and X become too far away from eachother.
 
Does anybody know what app they were using to slate their takes?

Thanks!
 
Thanks Bjorn. But none of the screenshots from the developer's site seem to match the video. See image below. Thanks
 

Attachments

  • pcam.jpg
    pcam.jpg
    11.3 KB · Views: 0
Don't take this the wrong way but I don't think the HDRX blended examples here look any good... Yes, the dynamic range is impressive and the examples here show that well but to me they look under exposed and flat. I'm sure with a grade they will be much nicer but then what's the point of shooting HDRX here? Give those shots a black and a white point and some moderate contrast and they'll look much more finished... But again, why use HDRX?

I shot some steadicam stuff recently where I went from full sun outdoors to a dim interior and HDRX worked a treat! But that was two different scenes with vastly different exposures. This is where HDRX is a clear choice. But with your example I don't think it was necessary or at least the final blended HDRX shots don't look right to me.

Again, I don't mean to offend... I'm just curious and am afraid I'm missing something here....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top