Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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 :)

C300 better in lowlight?

Glen Powell said:
Never said that RED shouldn't continue improving low-light capabilities - Lighting isn't just about throwing enough onto a subject so you can see it… anyone can do that. Lighting is about artistry of setting a mood, telling a story and drawing the viewers eye where you want it to be. Shooting in the dark - even if you can see everything - is still shooting in the dark.

By the way; even with improvements in low light it doesn't mean that ISO levels or the way they are measured will change. So if you want to shoot at 300 ISO 10 years from now you'll need the same amount of light as you would 100 years ago.
Click to expand...

That's true about the ISO i'm sorry. Still, it would take a lot less light to achieve a certain look in the future.
 
I was doing some quick location shots for VFX guys today, and walked into a almost completely dark room with a canon, and noticed it also had a night vision type feel (but it was in color) ... so canon has some major high iso stuff going on ... but again ... this was a pure junk shot for some VFX guys (to get some angles) ... BUT i'd never use that shot for anything else. I love my scarlet, and with the 1.8T RPP it does awesome in low "film" light at extremely high quality. I am very happy with the low light characteristics of the Scarlet, it's in a completely different class then the "corporate" canon camera's i use for simple tasks.
 
Comparing apples and oranges. Red is predominantly intended to be - and used as such - a narrative / commercial / controlled environment camera. The C300 can do that as well, although with a "baked-in" results. Meaning its HD 422 8 bit in camera processing vs. Red's raw 4k. However, where the C300 will no doubt shine is in TV and documentary world where low light performance and its ability to shoot quickly and with a small crew is a great advantage.
 
Jiri Bakala said:
Comparing apples and oranges. Red is predominantly intended to be - and used as such - a narrative / commercial / controlled environment camera. The C300 can do that as well, although with a "baked-in" results. Meaning its HD 422 8 bit in camera processing vs. Red's raw 4k. However, where the C300 will no doubt shine is in TV and documentary world where low light performance and its ability to shoot quickly and with a small crew is a great advantage.
Click to expand...
Perfect answer.
 
Glen Powell said:
Same with the advertising I shoot - If I told an ad agency that I wanted to shoot with no lights my career would be over… Might be useful for no-budget filmaking / people who don't want to or can't light / people who are afraid of the post process.
Click to expand...

I agree.. I would argue though, that if you have the budget for a Scarlet (either bought or rented) then you have the budget for some kind of lighting... hell even if you went on to indymogul you'd find some guides on that front!
I subscribe to the theory that others have put forward as well - RAW is a digital negative, nothing baked in - so treat it as such, take the time in the computerised lab to get the best results. Or allow other camera companies to bake it in and tell you how it would look best
 
I must say, we were initially a little surprised at the noise level in the blacks from our Scarlet even at ISO 800, but quickly remembered that there is SIGNIFICANT internal noise reduction processing in most cameras like the C300 and 5D Mark II. When we applied the denoiser in AE and now even better results with the Neat Video plugin, we have an amazing overall result, but retain much greater detail and latitude in the highlights with the Scarlet.

So to say the C300 performs better in low light "out of the box" might be fair, but similar low light results are available with a post process (rather than in camera firmware.) There are definitley times when it might be nice to get low noise footage right out of the camera, but certainly not at the expense of all the other benefits of 4K and RAW!

BTW, on this topic, our early results from the Neat video plugin are fantastic. There is some slight loss in sharpness on the really noisy stuff, but in general it can salvage some really tough looking footage. A must have at $99 IMHO! There is more information about it in another post.
Cheers,
 
Carelton, off-topic I know, but did you ever get to test your T-Packs with Epic/Scarlet?
 
Oops, sorry... I will test tomorrow. It definitely fires it up, but I just have to test the duration! I will let you know....
Jared VanLeuven said:
Carelton, off-topic I know, but did you ever get to test your T-Packs with Epic/Scarlet?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top