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 :)

Epic at 320?

Graeme Nattress said:
Native? There is no native that has any real meaning I'm afraid. All there is is a point that balances the needs of the shadows and the needs of the highlights and that is scene dependent.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Another quote for the books.

In essence, it is quite simple. If it looks good (at 800), then it most likely is.
If it looks like crap, then it is a good chance it isn't ecellent.
In that case: Start to adjust.

And "Native" is kinda moot. Calibrationpoint, isn't that mute, though - as that is where everything is calculated from as a reference in camera. Which is kinda daylightish @ 320 (or thereby), if memory serves me at this time of the night...
But there are a ton of good reasons to choose to shoot at 800 despite a calibrationpoint of 320. Most of all "comfort when exposing in not totally controlled light".

Marks quote about:
Don't overexpose
Don't underexpose

Kind of also holds a lot of practical wisdom in it...

Cheers!

G
 
charles lim yi yong said:
what's this about lighting meter at 400 and setting camera at 800?
Click to expand...


Why?
You don't change the level at which the sensor will clip or the level where the camera is just basically recording noise by altering ISO or setting your lightmeter at "whatever"...

It's raw... kinda.
 
A lot of people on this forum have told me that I don't expose correctly... becuase I never ever look at my histogram.
I just look at the monitors... If the whites look blown out, I pull back... if the blacks have no info i lift up.... I find a nice happy average by eye... and press the button.
I know this sounds ridiculous... But it's really that simple.
 
I think a lot of people hope for even distribution of tonal range between shadows and highlights. If you come from a film background you are used to a bit more even distribution. Higher ISOs on the Epic give you a more even distribution. 800 still even favors the shadows a little but is a good compromise for distribution of tones and very little noise. If you want more even distribution of tones, rate 800. If you want more range in shadows go down to 320. It definitely IS scene dependent. If you have a night scene with values one over key and below then rating 320 will yield better results. If you have a bright scene with intended values 3 stops over key 800 is going to yield better results. I have shot some darker material at 320 that benefited from this lower rating in terms of less noise, but again the values in the scene were at key or below.
 
Eric Haase said:
I think a lot of people hope for even distribution of tonal range between shadows and highlights. If you come from a film background you are used to a bit more even distribution. Higher ISOs on the Epic give you a more even distribution. 800 still even favors the shadows a little but is a good compromise for distribution of tones and very little noise. If you want more even distribution of tones, rate 800. If you want more range in shadows go down to 320. It definitely IS scene dependent. If you have a night scene with values one over key and below then rating 320 will yield better results. If you have a bright scene with intended values 3 stops over key 800 is going to yield better results. I have shot some darker material at 320 that benefited from this lower rating in terms of less noise, but again the values in the scene were at key or below.
Click to expand...


Bingo
That won't happen, though.
What will happen, is that you have more overhead so that you can assign higher precission to lower exposure, you 'll still have the linear relation, but that makes everything just so much more fun
 
Sorry for my verbiage, I guess I should say "iso 320 matches the RAW view"
 
That you think 320 is a calibration point is just a historical accident, rather than a fact of calibration. Indeed all calibration is done over a wide variety of colour temperatures and the exposure done on an "ETTR" basis avoiding clipping so as to provide a low noise image to the custom calibration software and algorithms. Can I tell you I have the M-X and Epic/Scarlet cameras set at ISO800 when that occurs, but really, as you know, that means nothing.... :-)

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
That you think 320 is a calibration point is just a historical accident, rather than a fact of calibration. Indeed all calibration is done over a wide variety of colour temperatures and the exposure done on an "ETTR" basis avoiding clipping so as to provide a low noise image to the custom calibration software and algorithms. Can I tell you I have the M-X and Epic/Scarlet cameras set at ISO800 when that occurs, but really, as you know, that means nothing.... :-)

Graeme
Click to expand...

But when I toggle to 'RAW View', it matches the 320iso setting, which makes me think 320 is "sensor neutral".
 
Shawn Nelson said:
But when I toggle to 'RAW View', it matches the 320iso setting, which makes me think 320 is "sensor neutral".
Click to expand...

RAW view hasn't changed since the original M Sensor. Which was native 320
 
A lot of people on this forum have told me that I don't expose correctly... becuase I never ever look at my histogram.
I just look at the monitors... If the whites look blown out, I pull back... if the blacks have no info i lift up.... I find a nice happy average by eye... and press the button.
I know this sounds ridiculous... But it's really that simple.
Click to expand...

I expose the same way. I don't get why some people have such are hard time with exposure. I think they are trying to overthink it and add something that doesn't exist. Expose it how you want it to look. If it doesn't look good it's probably because it's a shitty scenario that's not going to get fixed by exposing differently, like two people in a dark room against a big window with a nice sunny day out.

Nick
 
My dream is for the soon to be released DRAGON sensor to have at least 8 stops of highlight latitude
when exposed at ISO 800, or in other words, shooting at ISO 800 on the Epic with the DRAGON sensor
will yield at least 8 stops between middle gray and white clip.

So if the DRAGON sensor has 15+ stops of DR, then I would love for this distribution to be 8 stops over middle gray and
7 stops under middle gray when the sensor is exposed at ISO 800.

And since this is a dream, perhaps 8 stops over middle gray at ISO 200 would be even better.

Either way, I can't wait to have my Epic upgraded with a DRAGON.
 
Mark Toia said:
A lot of people on this forum have told me that I don't expose correctly... because I never ever look at my histogram.
I just look at the monitors... If the whites look blown out, I pull back... if the blacks have no info i lift up.... I find a nice happy average by eye... and press the button.
I know this sounds ridiculous... But it's really that simple.
Click to expand...

This method is fine if you like the results....but for continuity on a feature movie, I would EXPOSE so that all night time scenes
are at the same ISO, and all day time scenes are at the same ISO.

It sounds to me like your method would yield a different ISO per shot.

This is why I use a good old Hand-held Light Meter.
 
Martin Stevens said:
This method is fine if you like the results....but for continuity on a feature movie, I would EXPOSE so that all night time scenes
are at the same ISO, and all day time scenes are at the same ISO.

It sounds to me like your method would yield a different ISO per shot.

This is why I use a good old Hand-held Light Meter.
Click to expand...


My ISO never changes... If I could weld it solid to 320 and same with the TINT button... I would. :)

The Kelvin I only change for the onset monitors...
 
Martin Stevens said:
My dream is that the soon to be released DRAGON sensor will have at least 8 stops of highlight latitude
when exposed at ISO 800, or in other words, shooting at ISO 800 on the Epic with the DRAGON sensor
will yield at least 8 stops between middle gray and white clip.

So if the DRAGON sensor has 15+ stops of DR, then I would love for this distribution to be 8 stops over middle gray and
7 stops under middle gray when the sensor is exposed at ISO 800.

And since this is a dream, perhaps 8 stops over middle gray at ISO 200 would be even better.

Either way, I can't wait to have my Epic upgraded with a DRAGON.
Click to expand...

I won't believe it until I see it, Jim? :rolleyes:
 
Mark Toia said:
My ISO never changes... If I could weld it solid to 320 and same with the TINT button... I would. :)

The Kelvin I only change for the onset monitors...
Click to expand...

But if you change your aperture from shot to shot (assuming that your lighting has not changed), and then adjust where middle gray
is in post from shot to shot, then you are changing the effective ISO on your EPIC.

So, perhaps your method means that you leave the ISO alone in post as well???


:)
 
"As someone who's used to DSLRs that have the most DR and lowest SNR at base ISO, Red's system is very disorienting." - well, DLSRs may, but often don't. Often their lowest ISOs are faked and they've not the ones with the most DR. And some "inbetween" ISOs have less DR than their "real" ISOs. Fact is the RED system is very simple - DR remains constant, and it's the DSLRs with their undocumented ISO behaviour changes that are complex and disorienting.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
"As someone who's used to DSLRs that have the most DR and lowest SNR at base ISO, Red's system is very disorienting." - well, DLSRs may, but often don't. Often their lowest ISOs are faked and they've not the ones with the most DR. And some "inbetween" ISOs have less DR than their "real" ISOs. Fact is the RED system is very simple - DR remains constant, and it's the DSLRs with their undocumented ISO behaviour changes that are complex and disorienting.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Graeme,

Can you tell us if the DRAGON sensor or perhaps even an Epic firmware release will ever allow Analog Gain on the Epic?

I love the digital gain on the Epic, but if I had the choice I would love to have Analog gain as an option as well.

Perhaps what I am asking is, does the Epic have the ability to do Analog gain if you wish to enable it?
 
Yikes, now I'm more confused than ever. I was under the impression that 800 ISO was native too. I wish I was an owner, so I could just do a couple tests, but maybe you guys can answer for me :)

Let's say I have a scene that's properly exposed at f5.6 ISO 800. Now I shoot it six times:
1. f11 @ ISO 3200
2. f8 @ ISO 1600
3. f5.6 @ ISO 800
4. f4 @ ISO 400
5. f2.8 @ ISO 200
6. f2 @ ISO 100

Is there less noise at setting 6 vs. setting 4? Or setting 3? Where does noise start becoming an issue? Is it a non-issue up to 800?

Now, highlight protection. Logic tells me that the highlights are exposed the same at all those settings. In fact, experience with DSLR's tells me that if anything, you get less dynamic range in higher ISOs. When you talk about upping the ISOs to protect your highlights, aren't you basically saying, "trick yourself into underexposing to protect the highlights?" Which is basically like setting your watch 5 minutes fast so you're not late to stuff. Which sounds like a bunch of legerdemain and witchery to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top