Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

1st 1,2,3...

Sanjin Jukic said:
Because of that an optical viewfinder (OVF) is must have for Epic whatever it costs (USD 20.000), rentals will pay for that anyway and the most of the old school a film shooter sort of cinematographers would appreciate it.

ARRI knows that very well and they already strongly announced OVF option for the upcoming new digital camera (Blue!!!) that will compete with Epic heavily.
Click to expand...

How do you expose a sensor with an optical viewfinder?
 
Graeme Nattress said:
No the solution is not to remove the display from the loop!!!! The solution is to make it work. All I said is that it's tricky~!

Graeme
Click to expand...

Pawel Achtel said:
How do you expose a sensor with an optical viewfinder?
Click to expand...

Using Monitor out with RED LCD or HD-SDI preview connected to the best on camera monitor that you can afford like a Transvideo, Cinetal, Astro, TV Logic, FL Scientific, Panasonic, etc..

then you could toggle through all those camera display's EVF like a menu windows with REDMOTE...

Cinematographers used to shoot/operate with film cameras probably like to see with OVF always kind of BW or "natural", "naked eye", "original" digitally unprocessed IMAGE look during the work.

Display shows how the sensor see(s) the picture and how it looks recorded in RAW, REC709, REDSpace, RED-dailies preview, etc...more options.
 
Last edited:
JanneJansson said:
1 Looking at the histogram. (little mountain sitting pretty on the left side, no where near the right side)
Click to expand...

Isn't this counter the Expose To The Right (ETTR) suggestion?

Am I correct and understanding that the "data" in the histogram should be as far to the right as posible, without clipping?
 
Here is my process:

- Set Camera to REDSPACE GAMMA and REDSPACE COLOR SPACE with a preset look that I have set up which produces nice even looking QT files with a full spectrum.

Set ISO to 320 on interiors or 500 on exteriors.

Ambient light meter at 320.


1. VIEW RAW
2. STOPLIGHTS / FALSE COLOR
3. SET F-STOP based on these settings Plus or minus 1 stop depending on how far into the blacks I want to see and how much highlight I am willing to clip.

- I have found this method gives me a nice usable QT file for creating offline edit media/dvd's/web rough cuts, etc. without having to tweak each shot.
- I always to a CC pass from the original R3D files in Color for Video/tape finish
- For Filmouts I've created DPX files tweaked for maximum latitude and CC through the baselight FIlm light system (before they could read r3D files). But now I avoid DPX if at all possible (though for some CGI jobs it's the better way to go).

Gotta love the flexibility of the tools when used for any specific situation.

David
 
David Mullen ASC said:
After 24P HD hit the scene, I got a lot of the "HD is too complicated to shoot, it slows you down" from film-centric DP's and my response was "HD is as complicated or as simple as you want to make it." At its heart, the F900 was a glorified ENG camera and could be shot as simply as any news camera, handheld, run-and-gun, or it could be surrounded by tents and cables and engineers and reference monitors, etc. Some people have a tendency to let fear turn the whole affair of shooting digital into a circus, as if they were launching the Space Shuttle.
Click to expand...

I definitely understand what you're talking about. In my old Film Process class we were shown a propaganda video by Kodak. It was supposed to be a movie describing the art of film, but it came off to me as propaganda.

They were talking about how it wasn't really less expensive to shoot digital because of lack of dynamic range, how you need a tent to see your monitor and watch histograms and really blowing everything out of proportion.

Quick question.

I've been hearing a lot of people describe a "thick negative" in their histogram. Now I've never actually used a histogram before, but what exactly does that look like?
 
Jerrod, see Michael's post #60 in this thread, he posted a good example.

and - just a request - can we have less side conversations - these 1, 2, 3s are interesting. less noise, more response to the original question would be great.
 
1.iso 320 if need be bump that up or down depending on the location, lighting shot design and purpose if ND can not maintain 320. I try to treat the sensor as permanet roll of film with ISO 320 rating. never owned a light meter, coming from the broadcast side
so I also check the waveform on the monitor to see where levels generally are.
2. check histogram in both redspace and raw, try to fill historgram as much as possible without hitting the right, my mantra...expose the the left...you can always pick up but you can't bring down.
3. if in doubt test fire and take a quick look in red alert, then "fire when ready Griddley"
(old three stooges saying.)
 
1. Leave RED set at ISO 320. Set white balance depending on if shooting daylight or Tungsten.
2. Use my light meter, that is set at 25fps (PAL) and ISO 320
3. Look at both Histogram and the Stop Lights. All in RAW.
 
I always teach the following:

1. The beginning of any good exposure: Physical lense adjustment to get a good RAW histogram.

Adjust lense & lighting in RAW histogram mode to produce a good coverage ("Ayers Rock" rocks...). Depending on what is expected to happen in the scene, make sure to have enough headrom to preserve overlights (if its not explosions, this is minimal). Learning by doing. NDs usually help to get the shadows right and less noisy. The traffic lights are indicators to understand, similar to Zebra (where the heck are the RAW Zebras?). Be aware that you have THREE color components to look at, and blue is usually weak and needs special care.

2. Select a desired ISO range, color scheme and in future LUT to get the proxy live video out to match any customers (if any on set) expectations roughly. If not, forget about 2. :emote_happyhappy:

3. Press record and take care of the framing :attention9ha:


With a good histogram we can do ANYTHING in grading. As RED is a "digital film" camera, its dynamic range is big enough to allow color adjustments in post - it is what it was designed for. Like developing film and setting printer lights, the digital primary and secondary color correction of RED footage is essential to get the best output. ENG style shooting is clearly possible, but not film makers goal. Even with a camera that would receive all light at 16 bit dynamic resolution, it will only look good if adjusted with the right grading LUTs in the end.

ISO and light meters are cool if you want to match special skin tones. They reduce work "afterwards" in color grading, but they are not really required. With neutral colored light and a good histogram NOTHING can go wrong ever. Its so much simpler than most poeple think out of the box, IMHO.

Cheers,
Axel
 
Nice Found Dean
 
dean merrill said:
Found this:
http://www.siliconimaging.com/DigitalCinema/Files/CameraRawWorkflows.pdf
Click to expand...

A good "thick" histogram will look like Australias impressive "Ayers Rock":

No to few "clipping" in the blacks, raising up the hill, being up all way through short before white, then fall down just early enough to not clip, but not too early to prevent underexposure.

Think of Ayers Rock and that is all you need to know :iagree:

Cheers,
Axel

PS: Jim, why not include a free ticket to Ayers Rock with every sold EPIC camera, just to make people life really easier - exposure wise? Votes welcome :party:
 
Me and my crews usually shoot hybrid style run 'n gun in natural light environments. We expose RED One quickly in Redspace and 320 ISO, using Raw histogram and zebras. The camera is the meter. Results have been excellent...
 
I actually just use the histogram and false color.

1. Looking at the histogram, mess around with the aperture and NDs till little to nothing is getting clipped and leave myself a little headroom. (edit: forgot to mention, if the dynamic range is compressed, try to stretch it out, with the idea of compressing it back down in post)

2. Check false color to make sure I'm alright with whatever's getting clipped (just specular highlights, usually).

3. Hit record, knowing as much data as possible is being captured, and I'll have maximum flexibility in Color.

Now of course, if it's a dark scene, I make sure the mountains are all the way to the left, and vice-versa in the case of say, a snow scene, but I'll definitely overexpose a dark scene and bring it back down to the properly-exposed darkness in Color (more shadow detail that way), and underexpose a bright scene and bring it up to the right exposure in Color to get the most highlight detail; but everyone does that, I think.

Really, every shot is different and cookie-cutter solutions never work all the time, but I guess that's what I do most of the time.

I want to use light meters, cause they're really cool, but I know that if one told me to expose a scene at say, 4, but the false color said stuff was getting clipped unless I moved it to 5.6, I'd move it to 5.6, and bring it down in post to the brightness I would've gotten at 4. So I don't really see the point of metering, unless of course you're in a controlled situation and you have DoF requirements for the actors, but even then, the histogram and false colors tell you what's actually getting captured, and that's the most important thing, in my mind.

It's worked out pretty well so far:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/csehak/

(credit where it's due: a few of those shots were taken with Dave Kruta as DP (great DP) and/or Jeff Melanson as AC (great camera op, and steadicam owner/operator too!))
 
Back when I was shooting 35mm and 2.25 stills, I would shoot underexpose, and then over develop. This really worked well for me, and I am really excited with the ability to push and pull footage. The processes listed in here are very similar to the way I would work with stills. Thanks everyone for sharing your info!
 
Depends on the situation but I always leave camera ISO at 320, and leave color temp at 5600K.

Bright sunlight/uncontrolled highlights:
1. Set Light meter to 320 - 400
2. Spot meter parts of the frame I'm familiar with like skin tones on white folk. Add hot mirrors or set aperture based on spot meter reading. Looking for most spot meter reading on items I'm interested in to be above or below by about two stops.
3. View false color, toggle between Raw and whatever look I have set to determine if any highlights lost are aesthetically pleasing and if I'm loosing to much detail in the blacks.

Interiors/ low contrast
1. Set light meter to 160 - 200
2. Incident around the scene. Set lights/grip aperture accordingly. Looking for two stops above and below maybe a tad less above with the spot.
3. Do the false color thing.

If I'm doing a full movie and mixing it up alot, I usually stick with one or the other metering method just so I have a consistent noise level.

Most important thing is to replace tungsten bulbs with daylight as much as possible or allow tungsten to stay warm. That's why leaving the color temp set to 5600K is very important, not just because it leads to more accurate metering, but because the quicktimes they end up cutting with will be warm and they'll get used to that and insist on sticking with it during CC ;) Nothing worse than dancing blue junk all over the screen when the champaign scene starts.

IBloom
 
This is all great stuff for getting an exposure that protects and captures the largest range of data possible. Leaves a lot of room for post. Often this is a good practice - though I think its important to stress that its not the only way, or even often a desirable way to shoot. Establish what look you are going for. If you want a dim, underexposed image, I have no fear in underexposing. If I want the feel of a hot, scorching desert day, or blinding streaks of sunlight breaking into a room, I have no fear in overexposing past the clipping point. Its important to still make choices. Thats a cinematographers job, after all. Not just capturing as much data as humanly possible to allow colorist to make choices.

Of course, I more often than not blend the two. I will let the highlights go just shy of where I want them to go, and push the rest in post. Or I will underexpose just shy of where I finally want the image, and bring it down in post. I guess the real step one is knowing what you want the image to look like. Before I break out the meter, I will ask myself, how do I want this part of the image to look? Do I want this face a stop under? And this Table two stops over? And this face at my shooting stop? I think some people forget to do this and instead focus on ETTR and then maybe applying fill to bring up the shadows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top