Profile: SC 4.1 250ISO

[Álex Montoya]

Great work as usual, Mac.

I will try it when I get some time alone with the camera.

 

[RED Army]

Hey Mac,

Quick question.

If as you state, you end up stopping down by 1 stop, aren't you effectively saying that the camera's rating is 640 ISO? Yet, you are calling for a setting of 250 ISO, which would have you open up your iris from 320, thus losing even more of your highlights, right?

I'm still trying to figure out how adding more light to an over-exposed sky by rating your camera slower, gets you more highlight detail? ... help?

 

[Jamon Lewis]

He's saying once you bump up the ISO you will be stoping the lens down one stop.

Nope, same shutter but different apperture, since with default 320ISO you get a real world 125-160ISO, while with the SC 4.1 preset, you are getting a real 250ISO, so it´s more sensitive to light, therefore, you´ll be closing your lense about 1 stop.

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

Nope, same shutter but different apperture, since with default 320ISO you get a real world 125-160ISO, while with the SC 4.1 preset, you are getting a real 250ISO, so it´s more sensitive to light, therefore, you´ll be closing your lense about 1 stop.

That's what I found as well. Red's metadata ISO differs from real world measures as much as Kelvins do. I find Red's real life sensitivity around 250 ASA, could be even 200. In Red's Rec709 gamma this means 400 - 500 metadata ASA.

I use only RAW view and "telecine" the client's monitor by tweaking brightness, contrast and saturation and telling them that Red is not WYSIWYG. Proxies are not important for me, as aren't metadata. I convert all footage to CineForm files. CineForm's ReMaster is metadata agnostic. They assume the SDKs metadata ASA at 250 and CT at 5000 K wich translates all recorded highlights to RGB and minimizes noise in the blue channel. Red's proposed 320 ASA and pressing WB don't do that. Here higlight can be clipped in the transcoding process.

Interesting work. Perhaps too complicated for me. I hate all this software loading, menue stepping, etc... there are soo many obstacles in this regard.

Hans

 

[Reinhold R.]

That sounds like a great tool McGregor. We're starting a shooting on Tuesday where this might come in handy. But since we're only shooting indoors and for a large part in low-light I was wondering how much that would actually help in our case or if it might even be counterproductive.

Since your profile is intended to enhance the dynamic range in the highlights how much shadow detail would one loose? 1 stop?
Or would you suggest the use of the profile anyway because it allows for more accurate metering?

Thanks in advance,
Reinhold

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

I still didn't try out that Macgregor's "look" but I heard that there is no "instant mantra"

look or profile for shooting with RED1, or any other digital or film analog camera system.

If this would be possible than you would in the case of R1 get it from RED Team for sure.

Every shooting situation is different and you should try out make always a new "look" just to accommodate to each particular condition.

Because of that already exists software like a Speedgrade on Set

or upcoming Gamma & Density 3cP that give a little help to cinematographer

using his/her specific "look" (shown at Cinetal or any other pro calibrated on-set monitor)

at on-set communication to the director, customer... or later to the colorist in postproduction grading.

 

[Miguel "Macgregor" De Olaso]

Hey Mac,

Quick question.

If as you state, you end up stopping down by 1 stop, aren't you effectively saying that the camera's rating is 640 ISO? Yet, you are calling for a setting of 250 ISO, which would have you open up your iris from 320, thus losing even more of your highlights, right?

I'm still trying to figure out how adding more light to an over-exposed sky by rating your camera slower, gets you more highlight detail? ... help?

I am rating the mid grey to the equivalent of RED´s 640ISO, BUT without the higlights clipping (this is very very important and the biggest benefit of the curve). But the Red 640ISO mid grey equals a REAL LIFE 250ISO mid grey.

 

[D Namir]

Mac, this is interesting what you come up with.
Now, between you and me, are you a secret agent of Red?

 

[Shane Betts]

slightly off the track...

slightly off the track...

Thanks for the great work Macgregor. I'll give it a try once our Red comes back from the doctors.

I found this perhaps even more interesting and, if it's true (Haven't had the chance to test this but I'll take your word for it), I have to wonder why Red haven't addressed it.

The mysterium sensor (or the software applications that read the Redcode RAW) seems to have a colour shift depending on the amount of light that hits the sensor. This means that you can set your white balance at whatever you want and from that point if you were looking at a grey chart, every stop that you go up you´ll get warmer tones and every stop that you go down you´ll get cooler colours. [/B]

Surely reducing the blue in the shadows would go a long way towards reducing the noise as well. Given the noise problem in the blue channel, I would have expected the kelvin curve to err the other way, with warmer shadows and cooler highlights. Don't you find that curious?

 

[Miguel "Macgregor" De Olaso]

Thanks for the great work Macgregor. I'll give it a try once our Red comes back from the doctors.

I found this perhaps even more interesting and, if it's true (Haven't had the chance to test this but I'll take your word for it), I have to wonder why Red haven't addressed it.



Surely reducing the blue in the shadows would go a long way towards reducing the noise as well. Given the noise problem in the blue channel, I would have expected the kelvin curve to err the other way, with warmer shadows and cooler highlights. Don't you find that curious?

The truth is that i have found this issue with the canon 1DsmkII, so it might be a common thing to all RAW files. I´m not an engineer so maybe some one here can tell us more about this.

 

[Tim Sutherland]

I've built a similar profile to use in Tungsten that gives you an accurate on-set picture when setting camera to REC709 and setting up the monitor to color bars, then your HDSDI waveform and monitor will read correctly. I haven't tested it yet to see what ISO it comes up at, maybe I'll find time to do it today or Monday. After that, I'll post.

Looking forward to trying out this profile.

And yes, Sanjin, I think you have to treat these profiles more as "starters" than something you always use. I love using the profile I've made in conjunction with Gamma and Density's 3cP to get myself right where I want to be. More on this soon.

Tim

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

And yes, Sanjin, I think you have to treat these profiles more as "starters" than something you always use. I love using the profile I've made in conjunction with Gamma and Density's 3cP to get myself right where I want to be. More on this soon.

Tim

I'm Gamma & Density 3cP user and just said about specific know/how that some of cinematography professionals are doing it...

also I remember that Jim repeated several times that if you go with 250 ISO that you would loose a bit in resolution...

so I use Gamma & Density as a tool, work mostly with "native" 320 ISO and know perfect how to get the best out of it on-set and in the post...

 

[Joel Kaye]

I remember that Jim repeated several times that if you go with 250 ISO that you would loose a bit in resolution

I think he later corrected that or said a firmware update corrected it. It was also assuming you're using standard RED curves. Mac's curve would change everything so it's unlikely you're losing any resolution shooting Mac's curve and ISO 250 as they are meant to work together.

 

[Tim Sutherland]

so I use Gamma & Density as a tool, work mostly with "native" 320 ISO and know perfect how to get the best out of it on-set and in the post...

I agree. I decided not to be lazy and finished putting together my profile this morning, I'll upload it here in a bit. It will make more sense then.

Tim

 

[Joe G.]

Mac,

Assume I have no idea what you are talking about. You seem to make contradictory statements, along the lines of 320 = 160, but 250 = 640, etc. I'm not sure what a "profile" in the camera can or can't do.

Someone suggested simply moving the camera's ISO setting to 640, therefore making it appear more sensitive, and closing down the aperture one stop, in order to save highlights. What's wrong with that?

Further, how is rating the camera even LOWER (250 in your suggested "profile") going to achieve the same effect as rating it HIGHER (640)? This is the counter-intuitive part.

You say this:

"I am rating the mid grey to the equivalent of RED´s 640ISO, BUT without the higlights clipping (this is very very important and the biggest benefit of the curve)."

This curve just affects what is on the LCD, and not what is captured in the RAW data, correct?

"But the Red 640ISO mid grey equals a REAL LIFE 250ISO mid grey."

What does that statement mean exactly?

Thanks for any clarifying.

 

[Charles Angus]

Real-world mid grey should have the same number of scene stops above and below it.

I think Macgregor's profile does this. This makes the camera seem like ASA 250 film (remember, ASA is pretty meaningless when talking about digital sensors).

The Red default settings put twice as much scene latitude below middle grey as above.

Is that about right Macgregor?

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Also I heard that the most problem with RED settings are still coming from so called "video" experienced and educated guys.

You can see it very clear at this forum and the most of them trying out to "promote" their settings and workflow as sort of very special achievement.

Some of them not even working with REDCODE, using another compression and telling us they found out there that something is wrong REDCODE....

But on the contrary there are the facts that RED1 had also a couple of big and successful theatrical features and no any of them pointed out here and there that sort of problems with RED1 native 320 ISO setting.

Who is right and who is wrong?

I think I know who is right here... just because I'm experiencing that daily with RED1.

 

[Shane Betts]

Yes, the video guys are used to WYSIWYG and, in my experience, snipe constantly at the Red because the pictures out the monitor spigot don't look Sony enough. They simply can't get their heads around the idea that there is so much more captured than is rendered in the video signal and that that is the power of this thing. They go on about the low chroma and 'milky' look, unaware that those are good things.

What Macgregor is, and others on this forum are, doing is setting up profiles to give video guys, directors etc. a little bit of confidence in the image on the monitor while the DoP goes about his or her business capturing a good strong "neg" for grading down the track. If it was only ever film guys looking at the monitor they would look at framing, mics in shot etc. and move on, trusting their tools and their judgement.

 

[Shane Betts]

BTW, hasn't there been something said about using real names? Just asking.

 

[Anson Fogel]

Not hijacking here, but relative to real names - I've PM'd them multiple times to change me from Afogel to Anson Fogel, no luck yet. Apparently, one cannot do this themselves. Just so ya know.