9 1/2 stops...

[Joe D'Arcy]

Great thread Jim and informative contributions by Red users. As Steve Sherrick, mentioned, 'Would you (Red team) be willing to put out a 'How to' video for post production red footage?

 

[Emanuel A.]

Shutter was 1/48th (180º)
Iris was T5.6 on a Cooke 25-250 T3.9 MII
ND .6 if I recall correctly.
Here is the Red Alert Grading...

looks fine. looks good. looks professional recorded.

Looks like you are a "curve professional"!

Jim

L O L

 

[Emanuel A.]

Well done, Evin.

Thanks, again.
Most of that can be chalked up to 15 years of Photoshop. I started out in still photography. Curves and I have been close friends for quite a while now. That may be why some people seem to get it and other have a hard time understanding the grading process. Even though they are seasoned professionals they may have come from Film or HD video which both have their own completely different tool sets. Red's closest cousin is the DSLR and Adobe Camera Raw is the spitting image of Red Alert (or vice versa). I've been pushing the limits of curves and DR on DSLRs sine the Kodak DSC760c which I shot product photography with in 1998 right out of Brooks.

Here are some of the things curves can do in CS3...

As usual.

 

[Alberto Caprioglio]

let's say in any kind of atrocity against her (or by her) humans are capable of

You must know her very well to know such secrets. I didn't realized there was that much information in the shadows.
I don't know how could one tell that, from that simple smile.
Was it the first, thought that came to your mind when you saw the young lady?
I can't believe the public is so automatic to link dark pixels on a girl to monstruous atrocity. Okay, okay, I'be quiet.
The superior world of Professionals...

 

[Graeme Nattress]

In RedAlert, altering ISO is the same as altering exposure.

Graeme

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

Not being a smartass here...but there's even more stuff there. Taken from the first dark example JPEG. With the 4K RAW/tiff route results could be even better. Also NOT meant to be usable.
Sorry Jim for fiddling with your pic.

 

[Andrew M.]

I don't understand one thing the way we measure DR in terms of stops on film.
9 stops will be the highest exposure value minus the lowest or it is how far we can push the whole image frame in terms of stops and still be happy with the highlights and shadows in the whole image?

 

[Uli Plank]

I don't know how could one tell that, from that simple smile.

Isn't it kind of sardonic ? Just kiddin'

If she'd be hit by beautiful lighting, would a client selling cosmetics buy it?

Regards,

Uli

 

[Graeme Nattress]

As far as I see it, lattitude is how many stops an over-exposed image can be pulled back and still have detail (not blown out) plus how far an under-exposed image can be pulled up and still not be too noisy. Dynamic range is therefore equal to the range of tones in the image plus it's lattitude. So if you're shooting a macbeth, who's greyscale is about a 5 stop range, and you can successfully put it 2.5 over and 2.5 under, you'd have a lattitude of 5 stops and a dynamic range of 10 stops. Or at least, that's the way I look at it.

With a digital system, you can choose where you put mid grey in code values. That chooses your over-exposure lattitude and under-exposure lattitude.

If you test with not the whole chart, but the single 18% grey chip, then practically your lattitude is the same as your dynamic range as you're now testing how far above and below a single tone can still be reproduced at.

That's partly why the subject is so confusing.... If David Mullen is reading this thread, I'd be keen to hear his take on this subject.

Graeme

 

[Andrew M.]

I understand the concept of the 18% grey chip DR test.

I like your explanation of DR using 5 stop macbeth.

I think macbeth based DR estimation will be more close to the real life type of scenarios.

Thanks! Graeme.

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Thanks Andrew. In both cases, the DR is the same, but the lattitude is different as the "object under test" has a different inherent range in it's tonal values.

Graeme

 

[James Brundige]

I'll post it in a new thread in a bit...

Jim

This is essential information. Some version could be put on the support pages, so it can be found without combing the user boards. Which leads to a couple more suggestions.

When the manpower is available (I know you're crunching on Build 16), please put more people on Red Cine. Because it can't export RD3 to HD broadcast, I'm stuck with Red Alert, which is much weaker in the grading tools.

And that would be a good opportunity to upgrade the video manuals on Red Cine. They cover only the basics. It would be great to touch some of the issues you are talking about here.

Your long hours and great work are much appreciated. I'm just asking for the tools to do what you suggest.

 

[Jason Sinclair]

It really is true what they say: Images speak louder than words...

 

[George A.]

Interesting. Looks like the new DNR sceme in Build 16 is effective. Wonder how it reacts to tungsten balance. So what was the over/under on that shot? I'm guessing around a Polanski (T11/16 split), maybe a touch more open.

Mitch,

What exactly is a "Polanski"? Any relation to the director?

 

[purefilm]

I would like to see a dedicated education page for users to discuss there methods and tips using the camera.

 

[Andrew M.]

Not being a smartass here...but there's even more stuff there. Taken from the first dark example JPEG. With the 4K RAW/tiff route results could be even better. Also NOT meant to be usable.
Sorry Jim for fiddling with your pic.

For those that do not understand how you can get the extra stops from scaling down (4K->2K)
and why we are getting extra full stop scaling by 1/2 from math point of view, here is the best example.

Look on this picture as an icon (small version at the bottom of the post) and full blown verssion by clicking on this icon and opening in the next page..
In the small version the noise level is not visible.
Click on it and you see the noise.

 

[Antoine Fabi]

Interesting. I'm pleased to see 9 1/2 stops difference between background and the subject, and still details in the shadows!

Jim,

I'd be curious to see a CC of this image in RedCine, but just with a tad less luma "lift" on her face. Maybe just in between image 1 and 2. I think it would be very usable...and if we could keep only the very low shadow values and "slightly" raise the shadows WHILE keeping the absolute black value. I'm curious if we can avoid banding while streching the shadows a little this way..

anyway..., very promising. Good job guys!

 

[Michael Lindsay]

Mitch,

What exactly is a "Polanski"? Any relation to the director?

yes... look at the split he refers to and why Polanski has not set foot in the USA for a while.

 

[David Battistella]

T32 -1.7
To pull out anything like that is to my calculations 9 stops under exposed and hold that much detail while the background stays almost the same. Damn. I have been to hundreds of telecine sessions and that would be a good grade in anyones book. Obviously this is showing a more docu situation but if you have some fill you are golden. This blows my socks off. I have seen Jim grade images before and I don't think most people understand what he knows... Curves. To anyone who thinks that the second image should be deleted I wonder how many times you forgot your light meter and needed to have a colorists save your .... project. If this was a docu and not a larger project with more money for fill etc. I would be really pleased.

I am with you on this.

Also. This is a great example of the open development. I like that we are seeing some build 16 images and that it is being testing under awful conditions vs. perfect lighting that we might see from film companies or others.

It's great to see the words 2.0 Beta in the RED ALERT grabs and now we know there are a few more tools for us to use.

Jim, Graeme and Co. have improved on the image and preserved a very important feature in RED FOOTAGE and that is the AESTHETIC of the image it produces which is far more CINEMA and much less DIGITAL than other offerings. Look at how those highlights roll off!

Thanks guys.

David

PS: The naysayers will always chirp, while people will just continue to SHOOT!

 

[David Battistella]

Not being a smartass here...but there's even more stuff there. Taken from the first dark example JPEG. With the 4K RAW/tiff route results could be even better. Also NOT meant to be usable.
Sorry Jim for fiddling with your pic.

This almost looks like Vision 320 stock!

d