Another Grade my R3D thread

[Naim Sutherland]

Thank you Paul, Hurcan and Derek! Some interesting ideas, and certainly shows that I have more room to push things around than I thought.

 

[jan meric]

 

[Naim Sutherland]

Jan, unfortunately I can't see those images, it just says it's unavailable. Pasting the URL doesn't help. How can I check them out?

 

[jan meric]

I don't know why my flicker won't show images, it does for a day and then pfffff its gone, i get the stupid message.

 

[jan meric]

Here is my go on the Butcher

RAW

Corrected

 

[Brian Bradley]

I really like this Grade are there any tutoirals online that cover creating this Orange and Teal look?

 

[Eric Santiago]

I really like this Grade are there any tutoirals online that cover creating this Orange and Teal look?

There is actually a huge topic on this.

Kinda comical now since every blockbuster e.g. Nonstop with Liam Neeson has this look.

There is a tutorial, have to dig it up.

 

[Eric Santiago]

Just finished a test shoot for a short film.

Here is the Dropbox link for the R3D.

Its the DPs first time using a RED (Scarlet) and I mentioned numerous times to feed it more light.

As you can see I failed to force that issue.

Can anyone take a crack at it please.

Thanks!

 

[Marc Wielage]

I'd say it's underexposed by about 3-4 stops and looks like it's underwater. Grain the size of canned hams. Did he ever check the histograms while lighting?

 

[Paul Russell]

I'm glad for you that it was only a test, because that DP severely messed up. Not even a bracketed shot?

 

[Eric Santiago]

I'd say it's underexposed by about 3-4 stops and looks like it's underwater. Grain the size of canned hams. Did he ever check the histograms while lighting?

Yep I showed him but he insisted. I should have been more stern or ask for a chance to prove that it needed more light.

I'm glad for you that it was only a test, because that DP severely messed up. Not even a bracketed shot?

I would have still like it to be better results.

Thanks for the tips, its exactly what I wanted to hear.

I would rather fail and learn that fly on the seat of my pants in this field.

I have way too much respect for this craft to just wing it.

 

[Brad Allen]

Managed too eek a bit more out of it without noise going too crazy - but yeah - not ideal exposure to be working with . Just a redcine look - nothing complex.

On a microbudget feature I've been helping with we've been doing any low light work (75%) of the film at 320ISO. Because we aren't worried about highlight clipping and shadow detail in these scenes has been more important, this has worked pretty well so far. It also has the side benefit of everyone looking at the monitor is getting a good idea of what the sensor is actually seeing exposure wise. I know a DP shouldn't be relying on a monitor for exposure, but having a histogram right there next to a super dark image might help give you a point to press the issue of exposure. Especially if your DP is unfamiliar with shooting RED and raw in general. Shooting at 800ISO in low light and only looking back at a 5" or even a 1080P feed in video village, can often give a false idea of how much light there is because it helps mask how bad the underlying noise actually is.

 

[Eric Santiago]

Managed too eek a bit more out of it without noise going too crazy - but yeah - not ideal exposure to be working with . Just a redcine look - nothing complex.

Looks great Brad.

I manage to get that look as well in REDCINE, but would require a ton of denoise.

Live and learn and now at least I have true professionals to back me up on the actual shoot.

We did stick an green gel LED behind/low the center character and it helped but I didnt feel it to be a natural look.

 

[Derek Morrison]

Graded in Resolve, barely any NR.

 

[Brad Allen]

Looks awesome Derek, nice work.

I've gotta start pulling in Resolve for these "grade my r3D threads" so I don't look like a dope when the person after me posts an image 100x better! Ha

 

[Marc Wielage]

Managed too eek a bit more out of it without noise going too crazy - but yeah - not ideal exposure to be working with...

That does actually look pretty good. My preference would've been to see more of the walls, and from the looks of the histograms there's very, very little there from the middle of the scale up. I think Eric's DP needs to do some tests and bracket the exposures to know what he or she is getting. Three more stops opened up, a lot more fill and backlight, plus a power window around the center actor, and it'd look perfectly acceptable. Otherwise, to me it just looks like mud.

I don't dispute there are broadcast shows out there that go for an extremely dense look, but the trick is to suggest​ darkness without just killing all the lights.

 

[Ben Scott]

The really short version is the dude needs to know to shoot for the edit and not for the monitor.

ie if he wants stuff falling away into lovely shadows he needs to it to be exposed above the noise floor and then brought down in post.

Expose to the right of the histogram but use the goalposts to avoid clipping.

 

[Eric Santiago]

Derek that was nice of you.

Resolve would have been the last resort.

I really shouldnt be the one dealing with all this but they used my camera and I feel obligated to prove end users what results will happen when not properly lit.

Ben your bang on that they wanted the main character to hide in the shadows then lean in ever so slightly and reveal himself.

That is what the Director/DP wanted so that was the result of it.

Brad thanks again for the RCX looks. It just enforced my theory (my settings).

We were almost on the same page.

In the end RCX is not the final frame maker.

Resolve as Derek proved it, should be the last stop to fix such ridiculous projects.

Thanks folks for all your help.


P.s. Derek, no noise reduction at all? damn!!

 

[Derek Morrison]

Eric, I have a secret sauce. I did use the old NR in resolve, at 9.4; If I had 2 frames after, I could use the new Temporal NR which would do a much better job. I used ISO 500 for this shot. On my 4K monitor, looks great. Moving noise and still noise is different. There are some serious noise issues in the lower mid tones/upper shadow areas that I could see being a problem, especially on the girls faces. Definitely glad this was a test. Always use the goal post (histogram), only use the image on the monitor to make sure your lighting the areas you want to light and that they are to the luminance you want them to be at. While its true what you see is what you get, these monitors don't accurately represent everything that can be achieved or isn't being achieved. You're using one of the best cameras on the market. These don't behave like a DSLR. Don't slack off just because you think you can. You really CAN'T. I've seen a lot of Red projects come through and I know what each end of these cameras can do. You have to treat it like film. Definitely make sure that you use all of the features that are there to help you.

 

[Eric Santiago]

...You're using one of the best cameras on the market. Don't slack off just because you think you can. You really CAN'T. I've seen a lot of Red projects come through and I know what each end of these cameras can do. Definitely make sure that you use all of the features that are there to help you...

Thanks Derek for the encouraging words

I have to be more firm with these folks

And thanks for the tips!