Dragon Noise Confirmation

[D Fuller]

Mark, you are saying that even if the exposure is in the range, it can't be made good (great?) in post?

It's not that a shot can't be made to look good in post, it's about your ability to control how they look in post, and about how a sequence of shots looks next to each other.

If you want a clean, commercial look to the image, it needs to be exposed more than if you are going for a moodier image. The moody image may want to be a bit underexposed, so it contains a bit of noise. Or not. But it ought to be your choice from the start, and consistent from shot to shot.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

What about false colour, Mark? heh.

The false colors in the EXPOSURE tool when in RAW view mode (FYI - soon to work the same what when NOT in RAW view) is actually the BEST, MOST ACCURATE way to see exactly what's going on in your exposure - and if you also use a light meter - if you check the EXPOSURE tool often - you will start to really program your brain with respect to what happens at various ISO settings. HIGHLY recommend. Soon ... RED will get it to work the same even when in RLF and RG3 - but right now - it's only correct when RAW is enabled.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

It's not that a shot can't be made to look good in post, it's about your ability to control how they look in post, and about how a sequence of shots looks next to each other.

If you want a clean, commercial look to the image, it needs to be exposed more than if you are going for a moodier image. The moody image may want to be a bit underexposed, so it contains a bit of noise. Or not. But it ought to be your choice from the start, and consistent from shot to shot.

Exactly. and it's also very much about WHAT IS IN THE FRAME.

Here's an exercise - take an quicktime of a scene from a feature film or narrative TV show - ideally one you think is shot really well - DVD or BluRay rip or download, whatever - drop it in the timeline of NLE app that displays a histogram - blade up the scene into shots - and then step through the scene - one shot at a time watching the histogram change from shot to shot.

You can learn a lot about reading histograms (and not reading histograms) doing this exercise - I know I did.

 

[Elsie N]

It's not that a shot can't be made to look good in post, it's about your ability to control how they look in post, and about how a sequence of shots looks next to each other.

If you want a clean, commercial look to the image, it needs to be exposed more than if you are going for a moodier image. The moody image may want to be a bit underexposed, so it contains a bit of noise. Or not. But it ought to be your choice from the start, and consistent from shot to shot.

David, I don't remember these kinds of conversations ever coming up in re: the Epic. So what I guess you, and especially Mark and others are saying is that Dragon has to be shot differently (like film) in order to do any footage justice. But I distinctly remember Graeme saying in another post recently that ETTR is Golden. While realizing Mark and Graeme come from two different disciplines, I don't see why the two methods are mutually exclusive.

I'm also curious if Graeme may have insider's knowledge, as he and Rob are deeply involved in the new color science.

I get that you are looking at the whole and how those parts come together seamlessly, via the camera. I don't have that ability yet, like an experienced DOP or Cinematographer would... hence my hope I can just capture as much information as possible and from that, put my scenes together in an innocuous way.

I guess what I'm looking for is confirmation that I can shoot the Dragon much like I shot the Epic and not be an embarrassment to the Dragon name. '-)

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

David, I don't remember these kinds of conversations ever coming up in re: the Epic. So what I guess you, and especially Mark and others are saying is that Dragon has to be shot differently (like film) in order to do any footage justice. But I distinctly remember Graeme saying in another post recently that ETTR is Golden. While realizing Mark and Graeme come from two different disciplines, I don't see why the two methods are mutually exclusive.

I'm also curious if Graeme may have insider's knowledge, as he and Rob are deeply involved in the new color science.

I get that you are looking at the whole and how those parts come together seamlessly, via the camera. I don't have that ability yet, like an experienced DOP or Cinematographer would... hence my hope I can just capture as much information as possible and from that, put my scenes together in an innocuous way.

I guess what I'm looking for is confirmation that I can shoot the Dragon much like I shot the Epic and not be an embarrassment to the Dragon name. '-)

If you are shooting a single shot - ETTR gets you the best exposure technically.

But, you need to add the creative element - and you need to consider what is in the frame - and when you shoot a narrative sequence you need shots to match and often you will shoot both towards and away from light sources.

This has NOTHING to do with Dragon. This applies to ANY and EVERY motion camera that displays a histogram.

Also - the histogram is downstream from ISO. So ... the SAME exposure can be to the LEFT or to the RIGHT depending on how you rate the cameras ISO

But yes Elsie - shoot the Dragon like FILM. Not like a DSLR. You will get much better results.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

I guess what I'm looking for is confirmation that I can shoot the Dragon much like I shot the Epic and not be an embarrassment to the Dragon name. '-)

You will be fine. It will look better than MX if exposed exactly the same way. BUT ... if you want to really leverage all of the range of the Dragon - shoot it like film. And learn to get away from that histgram. It's a good tool - but it's VERY limiting and it will hold you back.

 

[Webster Miller]

This thread is great. Thank you Mark and David for your creative process insights. And thank you Elsie for asking the right questions.

 

[Elsie N]

If you are shooting a single shot - ETTR gets you the best exposure technically.

But, you need to add the creative element - and you need to consider what is in the frame - and when you shoot a narrative sequence you need shots to match and often you will shoot both towards and away from light sources.

This has NOTHING to do with Dragon. This applies to ANY and EVERY motion camera that displays a histogram.

Also - the histogram is downstream from ISO. So ... the SAME exposure can be to the LEFT or to the RIGHT depending on how you rate the cameras ISO

But yes Elsie - shoot the Dragon like FILM. Not like a DSLR. You will get much better results.

heh, heh... never shot film nor DSLR (early digital point and shoot and mini dv tape) so you can maybe appreciate my reticence. But that's my problem. Maybe years from now I will graduate from shooting what looks good in the frame to the more exact science of shooting by the numbers. '-)

At any rate, thanks for your posts on this. I'm sure the more experienced perfectly understands what you are advocating and find that useful.

 

[Elsie N]

This thread is great. Thank you Mark and David for your creative process insights. And thank you Elsie for asking the right questions.

Webster, glad I was able to contribute. We are very fortunate to have such a wide range of talent willing to engage and share.

 

[Medavoym]

BUT ... if you want to really leverage all of the range of the Dragon - shoot it like film.

Can you explain in concrete terms?

Thanks!

 

[Michael Tiemann]

Hence, rate lower indoors and rate higher outdoors and have one rating for the in betweens.

People seem to think it's the opposite, like crank the ISO when I don't have enough light. That's bad strategy.

This is an exposure range strategy. When you are I low light it's better to rate lower, open up or add more light as the noise tends to come through pixels that have been light starved.

There were two full stops to push light onto the sensor and in the process end up with "cleaner shots".

you can always leave the camera at 1 rating and control the light with iris and nd based on a lower noise rating and give yourself some room in the highlights. (Effectively moving middle grey without moving your rating) but moving it with your exposure.

battistella

I have spent the better part of the weekend discovering for myself this precise notion. David, you said it very well. And while it may not be exactly counter-intuitive, it is certainly counter-convenient. We want more ISO when shooting inside and we can tolerate less ISO when shooting outside, but this leads to very serious problems with noise (if you are pixel-peeping and not using post-processing like neat video). I began my days of testing of interior scenes trying to see where along the ISO 800-2000 spectrum I could be happy, and the answer is nowhere. I'm going to re-run my tests between ISO 250 and ISO 640.

By the way, in my testing (against a Blackmagic Cinema Camera), I have found the following with respect to my ISO 800 tests:

Dragon clearly has 3+ more headroom in the highlights (can see details in windows leading to outdoors that are almost immediately blown in BMCC)
Dragon clearly has 2.5x more horizontal resolution (6K vs. 2.5K)
Dragon clearly has less moire noise (which shows up every time a fine nearly horizontal or nearly vertical line shows up in the frame)

But...the BMCC appears to have been noise control from the dark mids on down to the near blacks. The Dragon has this very random, organic noise that is pervasive--due to ISO 800 exposure putting too little light on the sensor. When dragon gets enough light, this noise goes away and the beauty shines through. But I have to say that the BMCC acquits itself as a better ISO 800 than Dragon, as far as my own testing goes. This was a major surprise to me, especially because I was hoping to use it up to ISO 2000.

I need to learn more about controlling noise in post.

 

[Michael Tiemann]

But yes Elsie - shoot the Dragon like FILM. Not like a DSLR. You will get much better results.

Can you explain in concrete terms?

Thanks!

He did, but I'll make it a bit more concrete: think about the DRAGON as an ISO 320 filmstock, not ISO 800 nor ISO 2000. There's more to it than that, but if you start with a much lower rating for the sensor, you are apt to put a lot more light onto it, which in turn will give you a more noise-free starting point. You didn't sell all your 5Ks yet, did you?

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

I began my days of testing of interior scenes trying to see where along the ISO 800-2000 spectrum I could be happy, and the answer is nowhere. I'm going to re-run my tests between ISO 250 and ISO 640.

Michael - ISO 800 for interiors on Dragon is totally fine. Yes, I prefer ISO 640 for darker interiors - BUT - you should be getting great images at 800 inside. I've done it plenty. So has Peter Collister, ASC who just did an entire feature on ISO 800 on Dragon.

It's also very important to consider your personal "exposure method" - not just the ISO rating you choose on the camera. People's methods (approaches, logic, choice of tools) vary dramatically.

Two DPs - same set - same lighting - same creative intent - both rate camera at ISO 800. One sets aperture T4.0 - one sets aperture at T5.6. Why? Different personal "exposure methods".

For the context of an example to share - can you explain to me what your personal method is? How exactly do you personally choose the aperture setting?

 

[Michael Tiemann]

Michael - ISO 800 for interiors on Dragon is totally fine. Yes, I prefer ISO 640 for darker interiors - BUT - you should be getting great images at 800 inside. I've done it plenty. So has Peter Collister, ASC who just did an entire feature on ISO 800 on Dragon.

It's also very important to consider your personal "exposure method" - not just the ISO rating you choose on the camera. People's methods (approaches, logic, choice of tools) vary dramatically.

Two DPs - same set - same lighting - same creative intent - both rate camera at ISO 800. One sets aperture T4.0 - one sets aperture at T5.6. Why? Different personal "exposure methods".

For the context of an example to share - can you explain to me what your personal method is? How exactly do you personally choose the aperture setting?

I put a DSC Labs Chroma Du Monde chart right where I think things are most average, and I expose to put middle tone gray right at the middle tone (i.e., green in false color). I have of course noticed that the middle of the RAW range is different than the middle of any given ISO range. But I put it in the middle of the ISO 800 range. Doing such, neither the white chip nor the black chip are nearly pure white nor pure black for any color/gamma setting I choose.

Also, btw, I have been very unhappy with RedColor3 and RedGamma3. For me, CameraRGB offers the best starting point for color, and I grade from RedLogFilm into Resolve to something I'm happy with. The colors of RC3/RG3 look flourescent to me. Not the look I am going for.

 

[David Battistella]

It's not to complicated. More light hitting the sensor means less noise. Rating at different values means moving the middle grey (sorta lie the zone system) to decide what you want your over under stop split to be. In high key lighting setups you might rate higher because the upper stops don't display as much noise as the shadows. In low key you might want to rate lower and bring in more lighting for cleaner blacks. Every setup/scene can be different, obviously.

If anyone is going for low noise, you want to hit the sensor a bit harder and then bring it back for an image with cleaner blacks. If you want a grittier look you rate higher, starve the sensor a bit and expect noisier blacks (lighting budgets come into play here as well.

So, as an example folks like myself and Mark Toia tend to run at lower ISOs to favor cleaner images, and some people like to rate higher and find the texture of the noise pattern pleasing (I've done that plenty of times too) and want to have the middle grey at a more even split.

any way you cut it we are talking about gain. With RED ISO is gain. If you are on the lower end (250/320) and you meter and expose the sensor say at T4.0 you are going to get a cleaner image. If you do that, you might have more flexibility to push up the gain to say 800-1000 in post because you are starting from an image that has had plenty of light hitting the sensor.

noise comes into the picture when you rate higher and ride the edge on exposure, let's say you meter and expose the same scene at 800 t4.0, your going to have a noisier image because less light is hitting the sensor. Now if you want to push that exposure a stop (like a film stock, your are going to get slightly more noise. (All this is of course a creative choice)

Then an there is the concept of acceptable noise, which is individual.

With MX you always have to protect the highlights because white pixels (those exposed to the point of un recoverability) hard clipped and looked nasty. What I am seeing in dragon footage is that this top end is much more recoverable, but still the key thing is getting enough light on the sensor. See link. http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...belong-to-us&p=1333313&viewfull=1#post1333313

Treating it like film would also kind mean knowing the Asa rating on the film can before exposing it

but we've already tried to have that conversation.

I'd rather see a conservative rating 640-800 (but I have not tested myself so I haven't formed an opinion on this yet) I'm sure plenty of people might want to rate at 2000iso, but where do you go from there? I think you might end up with a less flexible image to post.



Battistella

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

I put a DSC Labs Chroma Du Monde chart right where I think things are most average, and I expose to put middle tone gray right at the middle tone (i.e., green in false color). I have of course noticed that the middle of the RAW range is different than the middle of any given ISO range. But I put it in the middle of the ISO 800 range. Doing such, neither the white chip nor the black chip are nearly pure white nor pure black for any color/gamma setting I choose.

And you are using EXPOSURE tool? Or VIDEO? In the tools menu?

 

[Zeb B]

Layman's terms for clean commercial images?
"ETTR, spot meter your grey card and set exposure 1-2 stops over what meter says to do while keeping the Stoplights off."

Seems that Dragon likes mucho light and can handle it without washing out color saturation or shifting color based on a hot exposure.

 

[David Battistella]

Layman's terms for clean commercial images?
"ETTR, spot meter your grey card and set exposure 1-2 stops over what meter says to do while keeping the Stoplights off."

Seems that Dragon likes mucho light and can handle it without washing out color saturation or shifting color based on a hot exposure.

All good news and very useful. Thanks.

Battistella

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

He did, but I'll make it a bit more concrete: think about the DRAGON as an ISO 320 filmstock, not ISO 800 nor ISO 2000. There's more to it than that, but if you start with a much lower rating for the sensor, you are apt to put a lot more light onto it, which in turn will give you a more noise-free starting point. You didn't sell all your 5Ks yet, did you?

Michael - I've worked on plenty movies shot on film and I have been working with Dragons since September and I would NEVER say "think about the DRAGON as an ISO 320 filmstock". But I will say that you CAN rate it at 320 and shoot it as such. Two very different things.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Layman's terms for clean commercial images?
"ETTR, spot meter your grey card and set exposure 1-2 stops over what meter says to do while keeping the Stoplights off."

Seems that Dragon likes mucho light and can handle it without washing out color saturation or shifting color based on a hot exposure.

I always open up 1 full stop over an incident reading at subject. That's very common.

There seems to be a lot of people that want to make their subject look like middle grey