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?

G

Gregory Sheffer

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
232
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Been shooting outside a lot lately and 800 iso makes it tough. ND is also a pain. What happens to image quality when you shoot in 320 (or any other lower ISO) on in the epic?
 
Nothing different... kind of...

The cam is calibrated at 320, which means that you have 1,25 stop underexposure/headroom (depending on who you ask) when shooting daylight material at 800.
That can come in handy when working with uncontrollable light, but there is nothing wrong with shooting at 320, just takes a bit more attention to avoid overexposure.

In practical terms: Watch your goalposts, and the differnce in shooting will be negotiable at best, except you lower your blacks in the preview.
 
Yeah, I hear you about ND's. They are a necessity that we have gotten used to working with. I would rather have the extra headroom to work with in post.

Phil
 
Shooting at ISO 800 on the Epic means more stops/tones between middle gray and white clip, compared to ISO 320.

If you meter a scene for say ISO 400, and then stop down one additional stop to protect your highlights, then you
are in fact shooting at ISO 800. This is a major point that seems to be misunderstood by many.

I have seen dozens, if not more, posts on Reduser that say go ahead and shoot at 320, but then go ahead and ALSO stop down
until clipping is gone. If you stop down beyond what your light meter says then you are not really shooting at the
setting your meter suggests.

To protect your highlights ISO 800 is suggested as a good setting.
 
Michael Notar said:
i was under the impression that its best to stay at iso 800 (sensor native) and ND the light down for best dynamic range. iso's lower than 800 result in less tones near absolute white.
Click to expand...


LOL

Problem is that there are many ways to get the "right" exposure.

800 is def safer for highlights! But if you use the RAW meters, you'll get there anyway. Biggest diference will be how you light your lowlights at 320 vs 800. And if you make the lows look "right" at 320, they probably will be less noisy than if you light them for 800, while the highlights probably will stay more or less the same, if you use the RAW meters and controll with RedLogFilm.

So, this is more about learning to know what you do and get a comfortable way to expose, than anything else.

That said:
800 is my standard advice. It is safe and looks good.

AND:
What Martin and Phil says!
 
Martin Stevens said:
Shooting at ISO 800 on the Epic means more stops/tones between middle gray and white clip, compared to ISO 320.

If you meter a scene for say ISO 400, and then stop down one additional stop to protect your highlights, then you
are in fact shooting at ISO 800. This is a major point that seems to be misunderstood by many.

I have seen dozens, if not more, posts on Reduser that say go ahead and shoot at 320, but then go ahead and ALSO stop down
until clipping is gone. If you stop down beyond what your light meter says then you are not really shooting at the
setting your meter suggests.

To protect your highlights ISO 800 is suggested as a good setting.
Click to expand...

again watch your goal posts as gunleik wrote.
 
The main point to remember is lower the ISO, the more careful you need to be about protecting highlights in your exposure. So be careful, watch your meters, use the exposure overlay. And be careful.

Graeme
 
Many times I exposed what looked right at 800 ISO on location, then got in front of a monitor and found it looked more pleasing at 400 or 500. If needed, I lift the highlights with levels. The effect is much more pleasing than forcing 800 to work. Just my experience.

Regardless, if I had shot at 320 there would be no where to go in post.

Phil
 
Agreed. 800 gives you the safezone, especially for bad monitoring conditions and tungsten, both are situation where you may find that you need it...
 
Yes, go above 800 and you are putting more of your code values above mid grey, hence more highlight protection. Don't over-do it though. You must balance the needs of the highlights with the needs of the shadows and that is the art of the cinematographer.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Yes, go above 800 and you are putting more of your code values above mid grey, hence more highlight protection. Don't over-do it though. You must balance the needs of the highlights with the needs of the shadows and that is the art of the cinematographer.

Graeme
Click to expand...

A Graeme moment of Zen:
Translation:
Just do it "right", whatever is "right" for your exposure...
 
"You must balance the needs of the highlights with the needs of the shadows and that is the art of the cinematographer" - I'll say it again then!

Graeme
 
800 is safer, but 320 is actually the native.

I often do 320 if I need to.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
The main point to remember is lower the ISO, the more careful you need to be about protecting highlights in your exposure. So be careful, watch your meters, use the exposure overlay. And be careful.

Graeme
Click to expand...


Dito.....
 
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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top