Exposing + Native ISO

[Will Keir]

A variable film stock.

I have had and seen the best results when people treat RED as a FILM STOCK and light accordingly.

If Dragon actually can be rated 250-2500ISO with no penalty then we have the digital equivellent of every film stock ever made and that would be a minor miracle.

Battistella

 

[Robert Horwell]

You should lower the ISO to allow more light into the sensor. More light = cleaner image. I like 640-800 as a "base" ISO on Dragon for interiors, etc. - 1280 for night ext. - 320 for bright daylight - really depends on what you are trying to do. Shooting 320 on Dragon is TOTALLY different than shooting 320 on MX.

Mark can you please expand your reasoning and methodology of dropping the iso in ext daylight on dragon.? On MX i would push the iso in order to push my middle grey further up the EI and grab a couple more stops at the top end.

many thanks.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

And the EPIC is not DSLR camera.

Ouch...

 

[Elsie N]

Well ... set the Dragon at 640 ISO and have a great time. You will shoot great images. Done.

But these cameras are not "point and shoot" cameras - they are very high end tools.
...

True these cameras are high end tools but... by your own words setting the Dragon to an assigned native ISO and using that as your exposure method, shooting doesn't have to be a complicated headache. That's the beauty of RED cameras... you can do precision or you can do a full choke scattergun. And sometimes an audience cannot tell the difference. '-)

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Ouch...

Because it's much MORE and it ain't no single lens reflex camera.

 

[D Fuller]

Agreed.

The answers, IMO, are ALL in the roots of shooting film.

Still or Motion - but FILM.

RAW is digital FILM.

If you understand the fundamentals of shooting and exposing FILM you are all good with RAW.

RED cameras are digital motion picture cameras. They do not actually shoot "video". And the EPIC is not DSLR camera.

That's all true. But an awful lot of people don't understand that at all, and many have no experience of film to draw on. And for me, with a lot of years of experience of film, it took a while to realize that. I thought digital cinema was "something different". And I suppose it is. But it's a lot less different that it is the same when it comes to the craft of photography.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Because it's much MORE and it ain't no single lens reflex camera.

Hahahaha

I know. Just had to!

And this was Dragon...

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

True these cameras are high end tools but... by your own words setting the Dragon to an assigned native ISO and using that as your exposure method, shooting doesn't have to be a complicated headache when shooting. That's the beauty of RED cameras... you can do precision or you can do a full choke scattergun. And sometimes an audience cannot tell the difference. '-)

Yes. Yes. Yes.

You certainly can use it without leveraging all the power. And it's NOT hard. And YES that is the beauty of RED cameras.

But - since we have a REDUSER forum - why not push for the advanced class.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

That's all true. But an awful lot of people don't understand that at all, and many have no experience of film to draw on. And for me, with a lot of years of experience of film, it took a while to realize that. I thought digital cinema was "something different". And I suppose it is. But it's a lot less different that it is the same when it comes to the craft of photography.

POST OF THE DECADE.

It's so much about the craft of photography and the fundamentals of film.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

That's all true. But an awful lot of people don't understand that at all, and many have no experience of film to draw on. And for me, with a lot of years of experience of film, it took a while to realize that. I thought digital cinema was "something different". And I suppose it is. But it's a lot less different that it is the same when it comes to the craft of photography.

And that is exactly what I have seen a number of times... Experienced cinematographers throwing out their decades of knowledge, because there is no OVF... simply put.

And then having to "guide them back home".

Which is kinda ironical, as I am a digital dude...

 

[Elsie N]

Yes. Yes. Yes.

You certainly can use it without leveraging all the power. And it's NOT hard. And YES that is the beauty of RED cameras.

But - since we have a REDUSER forum - why not push for the advanced class.

You're right... advanced class is what this is and a very informative one at that. But I just want to mention to those who may be overwhelmed by the different styles and viewpoints expressed here that there is a backup plan called post. '-)

 

[Gunleik Groven]

One thing that I think may get "lost" in this advanced class, is that Mark, David Fuller and I pretty much advocate simplicity.

The "advanced" thing lays in understanding simplicity...

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Are you saying ISO 640 is a base rating or is Red saying that ?


Battistella

I'm saying ...

THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING THERE IS NO BASE RATING

There's a RANGE.

If you forced me to choose one ISO to shoot everything on a Dragon - I would choose 640. RED doesn't say there is a "base rating". They have to choose one ISO to have the camera default to something. They choose 800. I do not know what their exact logic and path is to choosing that - and Dragon at ISO 1280 is equal to - or better than MX at 800 with respect to noise when scaling to 2K for sure - but - I love Dragon images that are super clean - I like lower ISOs more and more. But ... it's a subjective thing.

But I do not believe in a "base ISO" - I believe that a DP should shoot tests with the camera based on all the info out there - and test with his/her exposure method - for his/her subjective choices for the project. But I do tell people it is my OPINION that 640 is the sugar.

If I shot a horror movie on Dragon - I'd choose 2 or 3 ISOs to live on - and they would be totally different that the 2 ISO's I'd choose for a romantic comedy. But that's just me. It's not right or wrong. Subjective choice.

I personally would not shoot a whole feature on one ISO. You certainly can - and MANY people do. But I wouldn't.

 

[D Fuller]

One thing that I think may get "lost" in this advanced class, is that Mark, David Fuller and I pretty much advocate simplicity.

The "advanced" thing lays in understanding simplicity...

exactly!

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

One thing that I think may get "lost" in this advanced class, is that Mark, David Fuller and I pretty much advocate simplicity.

The "advanced" thing lays in understanding simplicity...

2nd Post of Decade. This must be a good thread

 

[Will Keir]

Mark,

I'm putting the energy into this because it's something I teach people who use our camera quite often. I encourage you to teach the basics, reinforce the fundamental principals of the RED camera systems. A well presented "sticky" on the subject would help a lot of people educate themselves on some best practices when exposing the RED cameras. I know you are putting a ton of energy into teaching and this knowledge represents a significant investment on your part, so let's come together and find the best possible way we can to educate our friends, peers and colleagues. All the best to you.

I re-read the post several times, it's presented in a difficult way, misleading at best even in context. Let's let this one rest and continue to explain and educate the best we can. You have a lot to offer Mark, we appreciate your time and efforts.

Will - you are taking me out of context - when I said "You should lower the ISO to allow more light into the sensor. More light = cleaner image." I was SPECIFICALLY responding to a question a user posted where he asked if he should leave ISO at 2000 and then limit the light with NDs vs lowering the ISO. You should re-read that post. I guess I should have said "You should lower the ISO vs. keeping at 2000 and adding ND filters as to allow more light into the sensor. More light = cleaner image." - but the guys question was quoted in my response.

 

[Will Keir]

This should be part of a sticky.

35mm motion picture film - it has an ISO rating on the can. Let's say it's 500. That's a recommended ISO. That number does NOT effect how much light goes into the motion picture film camera. Only aperture, filters and shutter do (sound familiar). It's a recommendation for how a DP and/or Gaffer should set his/her light meter as to measure light to set an exposure - aka exposure method.

Now, some DPs would rate that same film stock at 640 - some at 320 - and by changing the rating - changing the ISO - no more or less light came into the camera - it's just a setting on the light meter ...

 

[D Fuller]

A variable film stock.

No. A film stock you can expose and develop variably. (But there will be differences in the image when you do.)

 

[Scott Crawley]

I don't see how what you and David are saying are at odds with one another. Everything in this quoted post is also true of film. Film manufacturers assign each stock an optimal ISO, so does Red.

The response curve of each is a slope, not a point, so both imaging methods can be used over a range of values, but each has a subjective sweet spot. Film manufacturers defined a target ISO where they feel their stocks responded best across the range, and Red does the same. Red is just not as committed to a value.

David seems to be saying, and I also suggested that Red go ahead and choose a value for the sensor and not be quite so vague about it. Doing so doesn't dumb things down or limit the educated shooter's ability to push and pull and work all around that ISO as they see fit. It does however provide a foundation for all.

I'm not sure why anyone would resist that.

Well ... like I have said over and over - there is not really a NATIVE ISO. There is RANGE. If you want to pick ONE baseline - you really need to pick that based on your exposure method and subjective preference. If you are a novice - set the Dragon at 640 ISO and have a great time. You will shoot great images. Done.

But these cameras are not "point and shoot" cameras - they are very high end tools.

I'm just unclear based on your post - and it could be a language thing - exactly what you want RED to do that they are not doing right now?

 

[Will Keir]

Yes. Even though it seems the use of light meters is fading away with the WYSIWYG generation, we are in a time of change across the board. We might see a future where the light meter is irrelevant, even archaic.

It was their job to understand ISO and rating the light meter - and how THEIR EXPOSURE METHOD (using a light meter) created results on a GIVEN FILM STOCK.

MX is a film stock.

DRAGON is a film stock.

The last Reducation class I taught I asked the class to raise their hands if they understood what Contrast Ratio meant. One person raised their hand and had the wrong answer. I believe that the DSL and digital camera movement has pushed the "point and shoot" and "WYSIWYG" thing so much ... the newer generations are sadly missing the most fundamental basics of cinematography/photography.