Does RED only and always shoot RAW?

[Will Keir]

Does the RED always shoot raw? Or can you shoot in the Rec709 or RedSpace? Are these just looks for the view finder and they don't matter in post?

Thanks for any advice you might have to offer,

Best,

 

[jimhare]

It always shoots RAW.

You can assign metadata for Redspace/Rec709 but it doesn't affect the recorded image in any way other than giving you a starting point in post.

You could shoot in broad daylight using settings for 2000ASA tungston in black and white and still come back to the studio and process a beautiful color 320ASA image.

One of the beauties of Red.

 

[Will Keir]

It always shoots RAW.

You can assign metadata for Redspace/Rec709 but it doesn't affect the recorded image in any way other than giving you a starting point in post.

You could shoot in broad daylight using settings for 2000ASA tungston in black and white and still come back to the studio and process a beautiful color 320ASA image.

One of the beauties of Red.

Wouldn't 2000ASA completely wash out the images and clip a major amount of highlights? Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you overexpose, meta data or not, you can't bring it back with post?

 

[Joel Kaye]

Wouldn't 2000ASA completely wash out the images and clip a major amount of highlights? Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you overexpose, meta data or not, you can't bring it back with post?

Setting ISO at 2000 would make you tend to underexpose. Setting ISO at 100 would make you tend to overexpose - especially outdoors.

Yes, once something has clipped it's gone forever. If you underexpose you can dig data out of the shadows but noise will come with it. Basically you want to get it right. My suggestion is set the camera at 320 and make your histogram look good.

 

[jimhare]

The point is that nothing is baked in, the camera is really shooting at 320ASA daylight balance no matter what you do to the settings.

Yes, of course if you were monitoring 2000ASA it would make you want to stop the lens down to nothing.

Bad example, but I sometimes demonstrate this to hammer home the point. I will shoot at 2000ASA, looking at a completely white monitor, and then bring the shot into post where I show a beautiful image at 320.

You are always shooting RAW and there is no such thing as ASA (gain) adjustment in the camera.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

The point is that nothing is baked in, the camera is really shooting at 320ASA daylight balance no matter what you do to the settings.

Wouldn't it solve a hell of a lot of fuzz if people really sat down and contemplated this sentence before shooting and/or going into post...

 

[Will Keir]

Setting ISO at 2000 would make you tend to underexpose. Setting ISO at 100 would make you tend to overexpose - especially outdoors.

Joel,

I get it, and what's a good way to calibrate the Red LCD 7" for the field? It seems to me like it can't be trusted the way I was shooting, and only the histogram and stop lights give me a true sense of my light. The Red LCD also has it's own gain controls, any advice here?

Thanks for the advice, much appreciated my friend.

 

[Felix K.]

There is a difference between what you see in the EVF or the LCD and what is recorded. The Sensor is set to 320. If you let the camera interpret the data as "1000" you will see a brighter pic on your EVF and then adjust the iris or shutter so that you think it looks ok. So it will be underexposes because although the camera shows you what the pic looks like at 1000 it's still shooting at 320.
If you set it to 100 it displays a darker picture which you will compensate by opening up the iris and therefore overexpose.

In Postpro you can interpret the recorded RAW-Data. If you tell it to be set to 1000 it will brighten because you let it interpret the data as if it was recorded with 1000ASA sensor sensitivity.
Confusing?

 

[Will Keir]

The point is that nothing is baked in, the camera is really shooting at 320ASA daylight balance no matter what you do to the settings.

So setting my R1 at 125 ISO or 1000 ISO, the meta data will be exactly the same for each shot? So my only way of controlling light is in my optics and my shutter speed?

I had this problem in the field, it was a forest in daylight but I couldn't get a nice full histogram, all the info was at the tail with little or no highlights even with my lens open full. Any suggestions here? I was using the Red 18-55mm

 

[Gunleik Groven]

So setting my R1 at 125 ISO or 1000 ISO, the meta data will be exactly the same for each shot? So my only way of controlling light is in my optics and my shutter speed?

Nope.

Your metadata will change, but the videodata will not.

You make it simpler if you start to think of the sensor as a 320 ASA daylight ballanced filmstock and use filters and exposure/lightcontroll rather than metadata to get the right exposure. Images will look better, too...

 

[Will Keir]

There is a difference between what you see in the EVF or the LCD and what is recorded. The Sensor is set to 320. If you let the camera interpret the data as "1000" you will see a brighter pic on your EVF and then adjust the iris or shutter so that you think it looks ok. So it will be underexposes because although the camera shows you what the pic looks like at 1000 it's still shooting at 320.
If you set it to 100 it displays a darker picture which you will compensate by opening up the iris and therefore overexpose.

Confusing?

No, great explanation. Of course it also takes a little thinking on my part, thanks for all the advice, much appreciated. I got from you guys in a days post what I couldn't learn myself since June. Sometimes it just takes asking a few questions to finish the lesson.

Now I got some footage, that I thought I unexposed, to go back and play with. New LIFE to old footage!!!

Thanks

 

[Will Keir]

Nope.

Your metadata will change, but the videodata will not.

You make it simpler if you start to think of the sensor as a 320 ASA daylight ballanced filmstock and use filters and exposure/lightcontroll rather than metadata to get the right exposure. Images will look better, too...

I understand. So in bright conditions I must rely on filters if I wish to keep the shutter rather low, say 1/48th. But what about when I want more light and I can't get a good histogram? Lens choice?

How much of a difference does each lens make? Are there lenses specifically designed to allow more light and with more range in the iris? For example these people that shoot at night, like you G, how are you getting such a crisp image with so little noise?

 

[Pietro Impagliazzo]

Will, if they have a crisp image at night with no noise that means the image was well exposed, either because they used low f-stop lenses (good primes), added more light artificially or both.

When you don't have to dig shadow info out of the RAW file you end up with a clean image.

The goal would be to have the shadows crushed so you hide even more the noise and get the cleanest image possible.

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

So setting my R1 at 125 ISO or 1000 ISO, the meta data will be exactly the same for each shot? So my only way of controlling light is in my optics and my shutter speed?

I had this problem in the field, it was a forest in daylight but I couldn't get a nice full histogram, all the info was at the tail with little or no highlights even with my lens open full.

even in daylight you will sometimes need to bring in your own light, reflectors, bounce board or whatever to fill in the space that isnt happening naturally.
RED aint a handycam. still need to do basic cinematography.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Will, not to sound like a spokesman for Noah Kadner's book, but it really does give you a primer in how RED works, and I think is very useful as you explore the format both production and post. Click on the link below to have a look.

Noah's Ultimate Guide to using the RED Camera

 

[Cail Young]

it was a forest in daylight but I couldn't get a nice full histogram

There's a lot of dark in forests, and as a histogram is a frequency distribution graph you may struggle to get a "thick negative" without a vast amount of fill light, which ruins the point of shooting in a forest. I suggest you read up on the false colour meter and see where your bright and dark areas are in the image.