EPIC-ALEXA-BMC overexposure...

[Mike P.]

All the raw files are available on the site, so you can process them any way you want.

As for the test; I'm guessing he set all the cameras the same (800iSO, f2.8, 1/48) and then watched which ones clip sooner/later in the files. Sure, all the camera(s) may have more than enough DR to capture the scene, but it still holds true that the camera that clipped the least (not at all) has more highlight retention...

Conversely, I was able to recover more from the BMCC's over-exposure than Epics... (that is to say, the forehead and overexposed window portions were smaller on the BM).

 

[David Battistella]

All the raw files are available on the site, so you can process them any way you want.

but this does not really matter as if you expose the negative differently it's going to affect the processing. The other thing is that I gave up on metering with red and use histograms, goal posts and exposure tools much more.

Purposely overexposing the Epic is going to get you exactly the results Ryan got. This test tells me that three stops over the mid grey he set will blow highlights on epic. It's useful if I am using Alexa and red on the same set to see how they will react to the similar lighting setup. In that regar it is useful, but it does not tell me one is better than the other.

david

 

[Martin Stevens]

I think it's time to see some MIND BLOWING imagery from the new DRAGON SENSOR.

This is a fun thread, but it is slightly irrelevant considering the fact that the digital cinema world is
about to truly out do 35mm film in terms of Dynamic Range.......finally.

I will see no reason at all to ever shoot film again after the DRAGON is unleashed.

 

[Kemalettin Sert]

you guys think Ryan doesnt know how to use lightmeter too? LOL he s expert and he did his own test..Stop bashing him because he didnt pick Epic winner..

 

[David Battistella]

you guys think Ryan doesnt know how to use lightmeter too? LOL he s expert and he did his own test..Stop bashing him because he didnt pick Epic winner..

To be very clear. I am not bashing Ryan, his credentials or his ability to use a light meter. What I AM saying is that once you know what an EPIC can do, once you understand it's strengths and limitations, you will treat a "traditional" lighting setup differently.

If you watch the most rect Spider-Man, there are several interior lit scenes that look amazing, with great dynamic range, skin tones, and feel. Tests like this, on first look are highly technical, but do not explore what the best way to treat each tool.

Its not about Ryan, it's about RED. They have not conformed their camera to how things have been, but are changing the approach to cinematography. So they don't build with the idea of SMPTE standards, but really are putting a new tool in the marketplace that challenges you to get the best out of it.

This pisses some people off, but others like it, like when a new film stock would appear on the scene and you had to tinker with it to get the look you like or want. In that sense EPIC is a great creative tool.

This test tells me the things I stated in other posts here, but it doesn't tell me one camera is better than another, just how one behaves differently. But to me that was already obvious when I shot with Alexa. I had to think a bit less.

David

 

[Graeme Nattress]

There's two elements to comment on - 1) the presented dynamic range figures, and 2) the video.

1) Measuring dynamic range is tricky, and I don't envy anyone doing so and posting publicly their results, as no matter who does it and how they do it, criticism ensues. I've not personally tested the BMD, but I have tested the Epic and Alexa a number of times and find my results completely at odds with the figures presented. I find using the backlit charts like the DSC ones mentioned not only more accurate, but much less prone to human error. Such charts also measure the dynamic range available in one frame which also represents how dynamic range is used in real life.

2) From my reading of the text surrounding the video, the nature of the exercise was to "break" the cameras through over-exposure. That's fair enough, but you must realize that to over-expose means to clip in the raw data. If you're not clipping, you're not showing how a camera handles over-exposure. The tests are therefore utterly flawed because to say the Alexa has "have the most graceful roll-off of the three cameras" when you've hard clipped the Epic, but not hard-clipped the Alexa means you've not actually tested how the Alexa rolls into clipping because, as if I need to emphasize the fact, you've not put the Alexa into clipping.

I've examined the Epic R3D and can see that the darkest shadows are just over 3 stops below mid grey, and very noise free (as you'd expect). So if the purpose of the test is to examine how highlight go from un-clipped into clip (sounds like a reasonable idea) you have to actually test that. I'm completely aware that the Alexa biases it's highlight and shadow ranges differently to the Epic (as is the tester from their experience and experiments), but I cannot understand why that information is not taken into account.

BTW, purple highlights are removed by DRX being turned on.