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 :)

CML Camera Evaluation 2015

All I can say is there is not a single reason people shouldn't be shooting more. all seem to be viable camera options if you got a good idea. Dragon and Arri look best to me, but they all are still in a very similar world.
 
Can't wait to check out some of these images when I finally get home. The BMPCC stills in particular are perplexing and seem out of sync with what I've seen in my own testing. The Dragon looks like it is holding up beautifully though!
 
Just looking at the linked Dragon footage, I've got to say, under daylight I actually prefer the LLO to the SKT and they look nearly identical. Under tungsten though the Skin Tone looks to be far better balanced with the high saturation chart coming out pretty lousy on the LL. In fact I wonder if there isn't a good bit of room for tuning on the LLOLPF in Tungsten because it is so different.
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
Just looking at the linked Dragon footage, I've got to say, under daylight I actually prefer the LLO to the SKT and they look nearly identical. Under tungsten though the Skin Tone looks to be far better balanced with the high saturation chart coming out pretty lousy on the LL. In fact I wonder if there isn't a good bit of room for tuning on the LLOLPF in Tungsten because it is so different.
Click to expand...

Couldn't that be a color science tweak? I would hope for tungsten that would be the solution with the LLO olpf. I too prefer the daylight shot with the LLO OLPF, Tungsten I prefer the Skintone olpf in these tests.
 
Matt Ryan said:
Couldn't that be a color science tweak? I would hope for tungsten that would be the solution with the LLO olpf. I too prefer the daylight shot with the LLO OLPF, Tungsten I prefer the Skintone olpf in these tests.
Click to expand...

Matt do you know why Overexposing cause red colors shift to orangr on RedLog?
 
Kemalettin Sert said:
Matt do you know why Overexposing cause red colors shift to orangr on RedLog?
Click to expand...

I don't, was wondering the same thing. My guess is the color science needs a bit of a tweak for the LLO olpf. Seems like the color matrix is off a bit. But it may just be an olpf issue.
 
Matt Ryan said:
Couldn't that be a color science tweak?
Click to expand...

I would assume so. But maybe fixing the high saturated reds from going orange would bork up something else.
 
I have to admit I'm confused. On the RAW page, where you can download each camera's RAW files, the one labeled "Dragon Skin Day" is full of EXRs and not R3Ds. Was this an oversight? Also, how do I reliably read an EXR? Photoshop imports a very dark version and Apple Preview opens a lighter version with weird colors.

All the DPX versions of the Dragon Skin Daylight files found here have the word "Daylight" on the stand, where none of the EXRs in the "Dragon-Skin" folder have that label.

It seems they were following the same labeling pattern for all the cameras, which would indicate that the EXR files in the "Dragon-Skin" folder, which is what is downloaded when you click the "Dragon Skin Day" link, are incorrect.

Am I missing something?
 
Matt Gottshalk said:
The Varicam is a beast and produces lovely images.
Click to expand...

Agreed, it handles overexposure really well and is a very clean image in low light. Seems like another great option.
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
chart coming out pretty lousy on the LL. In fact I wonder if there isn't a good bit of room for tuning on the LLOLPF in Tungsten because it is so different.
Click to expand...

The Goldilocks or standard olpf will ultimately be a fixed LLO I think.


Would be good if it was shown at Nab, but even if it was how long till it is in people's camras if current swappable are a sign? We got a Looooooooong wait.
 
Kemalettin Sert said:
check out -4 and +4 on F65 and see how its looks like an iphone next to these cinema cameras.
Click to expand...

Check out the "RAW" files of the F65 they posted, they are actually 422 AVC. Whoever did the conversions didn't know what they were doing, the F65 ia actually pretty great when you know how to use it. Its just too giant, so you really have to love it to want to use it.

Brian Boyer said:
Am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Maybe they should check their work before posting for the world to see?

Besides the errors you mentioned the red files are actually 4:1, not 5:1 as listed, and not sure its fair to compare the dragon skintone at iso 400 vs others iso 800
I dont see it listed anywhere but it looks like they used a cooke 50mm 5i from the metadata, kinda a crumby lens to use for a test.
Why shoot at 5k HD on a dragon? Why not shoot the alexa open gate? I would think you would want to test each camera to its full potential, if you were actually going to use one of them.
 
Last edited:
Christopher*Seguine said:
Why shoot at 5k HD on a dragon? Why not shoot the alexa open gate? I would think you would want to test each camera to its full potential, if you were actually going to use one of them.
Click to expand...

+1

I would have loved to see all cameras to their full potential, too. I have to imagine the 50mm would have covered at 6KHD, no? Why crop if they didn't need to? Ie why go out of their way to shoot 5KHD? I presume to keep the same FOV?
 
I screwed up on the skin zip and uploaded EXR's instead, I'm currently uploading the R3D's as a result I've added an extra link to the RAW page and you can now chose between R3D and EXR :-)
As to the daylight and tungsten differences well, that's what that chart is designed to show.
ALL single sensor cameras tend to be weak in the RED's and Yellow's.
If some cameras don't look as good as you think they should, well, they were all shot with the same lens, from the same position, in the same lighting, and the reason we shot 5K is that this is the res that gave us nearest to "standard" framing. You will notice that the image size shot varies from camera to camera, this is becasue they all say that they're S35 they almost all ignore that fact that there is an actiual measurement that is S35.
 
Christopher*Seguine said:
Check out the "RAW" files of the F65 they posted, they are actually 422 AVC. Whoever did the conversions didn't know what they were doing, .
Click to expand...


No, just somebody dealing with rushes from 12 cameras in a huge variety of formats made a mistake.

My DIT really knows his stuff but made a simple file copying error.
 
Christopher*Seguine said:
Maybe they should check their work before posting for the world to see?
Click to expand...

Maybe you should try doing a test like this and then comment.

We got the results out as fast as we could and then we correct the mistakes.

It doesn't matter what I do when I do these tests, some twat always knows better.

Interesting how none of these complainers ever do anything themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top