Ambush test...

[Laco Zamba]

Call me crazy but I just went over to the CML website and I can't find any indication that RED was included in their last test. Did I miss something here? Did they opt not to include it or am I just not looking in the right place?

CML is at www.cinematography.net - http://ls.cinematography.net/read/all_forums/

www.cinematography.com is something else

 

[Andrew Benz]

Hi Robin,

You are not crazy. Here is the info... though two things first for all RED USERS
1. Do not download everything... please be considerate it costs Geoff alot money to operate CML.

2. Do not mirror without his permission... he may appreciate a mirror though.

Site: ftp.cinematography.net or 89.31.209.180

User: upload-8z67c2
Pass: B!ll-Brandt2

Note the exclamation mark.

Hope this helps Robin.

Cheers,

Andrew

 

[david farland]

Guys...you can't do that!......you can't run a quick and dirty test right now!!

If you want to discredit them you've gotta be EVERYTHING they aren't.

...it's not a game of tennis!!

They're playing the industry game and got lucky with some kudos from being the first external recognised test.
Wasn't hard to do. It was just sitting there saying get me!

Kodak or anyone will do these tests out of self-interest..........others will to do it for themselves and hopefully for you!

Cheers,

 

[explosive]

Guys...you can't do that!......you can't run a quick and dirty test right now!!

How about just quick?

 

[Álex Montoya]

According to their test, the camera would have roughly 8 stops of latitude. I wonder if they did develop the RAW file well.

 

[Álex Montoya]

And I don't know how to read the resolution test. Anyway, I guess the chart could have been better framed

 

[Simon Blackledge]

Anyone got a link please.

Thanks

Si

 

[Ramesh Jai]

Ambush Jambush. Forgetaboutit. Nothing is going to change my mind. And I think I speak for a lot of you here.

 

[explosive]

According to their test, the camera would have roughly 8 stops of latitude. I wonder if they did develop the RAW file well.

How do you figure?

 

[Álex Montoya]

But this test is different from the Kodak one, right?

 

[Andrew Benz]

Anyone got a link please.

Thanks

Si

The KODAK Tests are not up yet to my knowledge... though this was the cml test

Hi flameop... please look at post #162.

Great Showreel btw

 

[Álex Montoya]

How do you figure?

Take the REDONE30-20070915-T4110-Log.tif file and play with levels to disclose how many steps are in the highlights. Count them and divide by three.

 

[Andrew Benz]

But this test is different from the Kodak one, right?

Hi Concrete,

Yes, you are correct.

 

[Álex Montoya]

If I am not mistaken, the resolution test, when correctly framed, would give around 2800*1400 pixels

 

[Karl H]

yeh i count around 22 steps (7-8 stops?), depending on how forgiving you want to be at the noisy end.

This one is not the ambush test though, right?

 

[Graeme Nattress]

1st stouffers that I've seen have the numbers printed on them. Makes life much easier.

2nd they're calibrated in optical density. You need the calibration numbers to get an accurate reading.

3rd - easiest way to see what's going on is to measure what level black is, which is easy in photoshop, just look at the un-exposed region to the right. Now drag over to the left, until you reach that same number. In photoshop, counting squares is hard. Measure the width of a square with the ruler tool. Measure the length from the end of the fully exposed square to the point where you reach the black level again. Divide one by the other, and then by 3 as they're nominally 1/3 stop wedges.

What's nice, and what Adam should have included is a linear light export, as then you can do a log / log plot of intensity v wedge value and track sensory linearity. That's what I do when I measure stuff.

Graeme

 

[Jannard]

Are you guys taking about the posted test results done last year by David Stump that were done with the bad setting? Be very careful not to get confused with these tests results. When were they done? Who did them? What are the notes from the tests? We will post test results (as soon as we fix our firmware issue... and the note will read, "if you aren't getting results as good as these, you are doing something wrong."

Jim

 

[Jannard]

Here is the answer to one of the questions I posed to the Kodak team.

<<Why would the RED camera continue to be shot when we had informed the group that we had known firmware issues that could affect image quality under certain conditions?>> question from Jim

Answer... Well, Jim.... In the past, David Stump has been quoted as saying “You can always tell the pioneers... They’re the ones face down in the prairie with arrows in their backs”

That pretty much sounds like an ambush to me.

Jim

 

[Graeme Nattress]

Jim, the above referred tests are on the CML ftp site. They were done recently on camera 30 by Adam Wilt with James Mathers.

Graeme

 

[Martin Ludwig]

Here is the answer to one of the questions I posed to the Kodak team.

<<Why would the RED camera continue to be shot when we had informed the group that we had known firmware issues that could affect image quality under certain conditions?>> question from Jim

Answer... Well, Jim.... In the past, David Stump has been quoted as saying “You can always tell the pioneers... They’re the ones face down in the prairie with arrows in their backs”

That pretty much sounds like an ambush to me.

Jim

welcome in the reality...