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 :)

view=raw and false color

Blair S. Paulsen said:
IMHO false color has the makings of the greatest exposure tool I have ever seen, by a wide margin. Please calibrate it to every possible view mode and let me select as needed.

Perhaps my working style is unusual but just to put it out there:

I select RedSPACE (or 709 if appropriate) and do most of the normal set up procedures in a human visual system friendly environment. As I go along I would like WITH ONE BUTTON PUSH to toggle the monitor image, all (or most) of the metering, the false color, etc over to RAW view to check for clipping or other specific issues then toggle back. (Perhaps an on screen prompt with the word RAW in large type so anyone on set with a monitor is informed of the status.)

Cheers
Click to expand...

Blair, I totally agree. I was initially grumpy about False Color. Why did I have to learn a "new tool". But it was (for a time) worth it. Basically the zone system in color. Very cool. I hope it gets perfected.

Your working style is exactly what I used to do, except with two button pushes
-false color
-view raw

Now I realize that this is not cool - not accurate - and I really am glad I have not gotten any nasty phone calls from post on the last few shoots.

I don't know, am I making more out of this than I should?

I have just been told my meter hasn't been working!

Ouch!
 
dmacleod said:
Blair, I totally agree. I was initially grumpy about False Color. Why did I have to learn a "new tool". But it was (for a time) worth it. Basically the zone system in color. Very cool. I hope it gets perfected.

Your working style is exactly what I used to do, except with two button pushes
-false color
-view raw

Now I realize that this is not cool - not accurate - and I really am glad I have not gotten any nasty phone calls from post on the last few shoots.

I don't know, am I making more out of this than I should?

I have just been told my meter hasn't been working!

Ouch!
Click to expand...
But, to a certain extent it is working though, right? At some point the RAW is going to be converted to a colorspace. If HD, most likely REC709, maybe Redspace. So, doesn't false color give you an idea of what your final product will look like given those parameters? And the RAW meter allows you to quickly check that the RAW image isn't getting clipped so you know that if you do get into trouble when working in REC709, that you'll be able to pull back the data some. I agree with you that it would be very cool if the metering was also tuned for RAW, so that you can always have a reference point for what the actual image is doing. Maybe there could be mappable keys for a grouped setting of Raw metering and you could map another group for REC709 or Redspace.

It's a tricky scenario for sure, as you don't necessarily want so many metering options that it gets confusing, but at the same time, you do want to have accuracy in whatever view you are in.
 
stevesherrick said:
But, to a certain extent it is working though, right? At some point the RAW is going to be converted to a colorspace. If HD, most likely REC709, maybe Redspace. So, doesn't false color give you an idea of what your final product will look like given those parameters? And the RAW meter allows you to quickly check that the RAW image isn't getting clipped so you know that if you do get into trouble when working in REC709, that you'll be able to pull back the data some. I agree with you that it would be very cool if the metering was also tuned for RAW, so that you can always have a reference point for what the actual image is doing. Maybe there could be mappable keys for a grouped setting of Raw metering and you could map another group for REC709 or Redspace.

It's a tricky scenario for sure, as you don't necessarily want so many metering options that it gets confusing, but at the same time, you do want to have accuracy in whatever view you are in.
Click to expand...

Yes, there are ways to "check the raw". Histogram, Stop lights and Color Bars.

But not false color in RAW. That I had to find this out through tidbits buried in various threads is what p's me off.

As I said earlier...this should be boldly stated in the manual.

"FALSE COLOR IS NOT ACCURATE WHEN VIEW=RAW".

If I had known this before I would not have chosen this method of "checking my neg".

Another pitfall narrowly missed...
 
RAW and False Color

RAW and False Color

When talking about 'tuning' the false colour view for RAW, does that mean it needs calibrating such that each colour band represents one stop, as it does normally, but that clipping is already accurately indicated?
Click to expand...

Correct. The upper bands / colors are pretty much O.K.
 
RAW view and False Color Mode

RAW view and False Color Mode

dmacleod said:
Hmmm. Some clarification please.

Now you are saying I can use View=False Color to accurately judge highlight clipping?

"Pretty much" doesn't give a DP too much confidence.
Click to expand...

Well to avoid going round in circles on this, lets just say this then - NO, its not calibrated, and YES I agree it should be.

Meanwhile its accurate enough that you probably haven't had any footage come back from post because of clipping.
 
Wow - this is annoying...I just demoed the camera today to a big production company without knowing this :angry01:. It kind of makes us look like we don't know what we're doing when we communicate bad information to potential clients (which isn't the case - this is just a poorly publicized shortcoming most people are unaware of). I would seriously do one of three things:

1. Automatically disable false colour mode when you toggle to view RAW mode with the user buttons (until it's possible to accurately reflect exposure in both modes). FWIW at the end of the day I'm much more interested in what's happening in the RAW world.

2. Or quantify how far out it is (1/2 a stop, 1 stop?)...it's a little bit like p***ing in the wind otherwise...

3. Make it very widely known in the Red community about this shortcoming (a Sticky or something??) I only happened to stumble across this thread (and I look at RedUser a lot)

In the meantime when I check clipping in RAW I'm going to continue doing what I usually do which is to go by the histogram and traffic lights but the fact that false colour is not accurate in RAW view is seriously not widely enough known...needs addressing somehow (apart from this little thread obviously). Even though I usually use the histogram and traffic lights to check clipping in RAW view, once in a while false colour is really essential to analyse specific parts of the frame (the traffic lights are obviously a kind of overall, blanket thing - it's hard to quickly ascertain from them exactly what it is in frame that's clipping and may need your attention, which is what false colour comes in handy for).
 
Is this information published anywhere in the manual? This is a pretty important piece of information regarding metering. Users shouldn't have to sift through thousands of posts to discover that a tool that they have come to rely on is not accurate.
Click to expand...

I don't mean to sound ingrateful for offering options - i have found false color incredibly useful - until i realised - from this thread - that it in fact is not doing what I thought it was...

It is scary as a DP to find out that your meter hasn't been working accurately!
Click to expand...

I'm 100% with Dylan on this one, and this could be said of a LOT of things on the camera. When you re-write the rulebook it's generally a good idea to publish it so those in the game know how to adapt. Most of us have been using film for so long most of this (in the photo-chemical world) is instinct, but there seems to be some feeling in Red-Land that we should all just get this without any documentation.

I'm not saying everything is poorly documented, but Kodak puts a lot more useful information about each of it's stocks than we have on the sensor vs. various output paths right now and it would be really useful for someone to close the loop on some of this stuff, metering included.

I am a big boy now and can handle the reality of working within the parameters of a particular medium.
Click to expand...

Here here.. as long as someone goes to the trouble to properly document them (and we do mean technical documentation). I can't tell you how many times I've told an AC to RTFM over the years, but I can't even do that in some of these cases.

Dylan's comment on metering is dead on here.
 
So what happened to this thread? Mass confusion caused everyone's brains to explode?
 
Stuart told Dylan his Falsecolor isn't calibrated. Dylan imploded. Group Votes 33-0 View=RAW for False Color. Break.

Too many meter options says I. Histogram is my prefered method of exposure;) I would like to see zebra's in RAW on future builds.

No need for additional postings thanks you.

Goodluck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top