Exposing + Native ISO

[David Battistella]

I don't know what is wrong with my english and my comprehension and logic is pretty good.

if we are going to treat a dragon sensor like film then let's do that.

there is no base ISO on a 500asa film can either. I can say there is a range, but that range involves compromise.

When kodak presented a new film stock all of these variables were in play, but they told you what they felt the most color accurate, technically correct, noise free image you could get from the stock. They internally tested it and presented recommendations for acquisition and post.

So that is all I'm saying RED (the manufacturer) could say for noise free, wide dr images, most accurate color representation and in optimal situations we think you should rate this digital film stock at:

1. Rate Asa/ISO xxx
2. color temperature xxx

Of course there is a range. It means deviating from the optimal image forces you to think as a cinematographer.


Is my english really that incomprehensible? Because as I read your post we are saying the exact same thing 95% of the time.


Battistella

 

[Will Keir]

I LOVE this advise.

You need to know your shit. You need to know the fundamentals. If it is confusing to you - keep asking - read books - seek out a mentor - get a shitty job under an expert and then pay attention to every single thing he or she does.

 

[Elsie N]

I don't know what is wrong with my english and my comprehension and logic is pretty good.

if we are going to treat a dragon sensor like film then let's do that.

there is no base ISO on a 500asa film can either. I can say there is a range, but that range involves compromise.

When kodak presented a new film stock all of these variables were in play, but they told you what they felt the most color accurate, technically correct, noise free image you could get from the stock. They internally tested it and presented recommendations for acquisition and post.

So that is all I'm saying RED (the manufacturer) could say for noise free, wide dr images, most accurate color representation and in optimal situations we think you should rate this digital film stock at:

1. Rate Asa/ISO xxx
2. color temperature xxx

Of course there is a range. It means deviating from the optimal image forces you to think as a cinematographer.


Is my english really that incomprehensible? Because as I read your post we are saying the exact same thing 95% of the time.


Battistella

David, they may not be able to do that yet... with the tweaking of the new OLPF and Graeme's unfinished Dragon Color symphony.

 

[Will Keir]

Yes Scott. ISO and FLUT control the same function, where middle grey is set. FLUT uses smaller increments to do this while ISO change are more significant.

The ISO control and the FLUT control are the exact same adjustment, are they not?

 

[David Battistella]

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.

But you have to understand the subtle things that move away from perfect as you move toward rating differently, colors wash out, skin tone can start to deteriorate, noise is introduced, highlights clips at a different value, the amoun of room you have in highlights an blacks varies and the general DR range shifts.

we should have an idea from the manufacturer what they consider optimal, because any digital sensor or films characteristic changes depending on how much and what kind of light hits it and how each individual controls that light.

the red M Loved daylight and a lot of it.
The Mx loves daylight but got better with tungsten.

this is probably why there were always skin tone problems, because you can't just fly around the scale and expect the perfect output. The correct/optimal amount of light on the sensor matters and that should not be entirely up to users to determine.

Battistella

 

[Scott Crawley]

David, they may not be able to do that yet... with the tweaking of the new OLPF and Graeme's unfinished Dragon Color symphony.

That is true of Dragon but not the MX, or M, but Red resisted labeling them too.

Perhaps it was because up to this point digital imaging was not equal to film and Red wanted to avoid the direct comparisons that the labels David is suggesting would have promoted.

It's just a brain fart of a theory, but it's a theory.

 

[David Battistella]

Thanks Scott,

you have interpreted my posts well.

Battistella

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.

 

[D Fuller]

But you have to understand the subtle things that move away from perfect as you move toward rating differently, ...

Or toward perfect, depending on your intent.

 

[Elsie N]

That is true of Dragon but not the MX, or M, but Red resisted labeling them too.

Perhaps it was because up to this point digital imaging was not equal to film and Red wanted to avoid the direct comparisons that the labels David is suggesting would have promoted.

It's just a brain fart of a theory, but it's a theory.

Then this request should have been debated years ago at the beginning rather than now when we are moving into a new realm.

(Apoligies, I think in Dragon terms now'-)

 

[David Battistella]

David, they may not be able to do that yet... with the tweaking of the new OLPF and Graeme's unfinished Dragon Color symphony.

So true, but it is precisely this vague sort of stuff that launches a wave of speculation and conjecture. When do you do it? When there 500 cameras out there? 1000? And some stuff is dynamite and other stuff is, meh?

what happened to wanting to release finished stuff? Phil Holland's new OLPF post is amazing, amazing stuff, we can really see how powerful this combo is going to be. But I think we should be hearing from red officially on this soon, probably by NAB.

battistella

 

[Scott Crawley]

Then this request should have been debated years ago at the beginning rather than now when we are moving into a new realm.

(Apoligies, I think in Dragon terms now'-)

But Dragon MAY represent a turning point, a point where Red is confident enough to assert that it is now indeed comparable to film. If these theories are correct then there may be no reasons left NOT to openly label and treat a sensor in the same manner as film stocks.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

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.

What other cameras do this?

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Then this request should have been debated years ago at the beginning rather than now when we are moving into a new realm.

(Apoligies, I think in Dragon terms now'-)

It was...

Both the raw-metering and these issues were heavily debated in the early days...

 

[Scott Crawley]

What other cameras do this?

What does it matter?

Again- Red already does it. They just are not loud or clear about it, so we end up explaining it ad nauseum and some of us get it wrong... Then people get confused, you get annoyed...

 

[David Battistella]

Or toward perfect, depending on your intent.

Absolutely. It's all subjective in the end, but kodak is an image science company as is RED, and that scientific part of cinematography is a part of the art. Like all great art (and I live in the city of the renaissance and live it every day) the masters were all formally trained apprentices who had very solid fundamentals in science. Perhaps I could have used the word beauty, ultimately perfect is...well, when it just all works and no words need to be exchanged, it can't be talked about, but has to be experienced.

Still, science drives all of this stuff and it's not geeky to include art and science, they hold hands, they are lovers.

battistella

 

[D Fuller]

POST OF THE DECADE.

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

Aw, shucks.

Mark, can i just say that you've started a string of threads lately that are some of the most useful and insightful I've seen on Reduser in a long time. It's so good to see threads that really dive into the craft.

EDIT: I don't want to fail to recognize the contributions of everyone else who has been contributing here. Thanks to all for the discussion.

 

[Elsie N]

But Dragon MAY represent a turning point, a point where Red is confident enough to assert that it is now indeed comparable to film. If these theories are correct then there may be no reasons left NOT to openly label and treat a sensor in the same manner as film stocks.

I gotta go with Mark, Gunleik, David Fuller, et al... thinking of it as a range helps one (me) understand that changing the ISO changes the way you choose to expose. If we need one to hang our hats on, do our own tests or haunt this forum for what the ones who test (at the expense of their own time) come up with for their method of shooting. I'm not sure RED can determine a "best practices" ISO because that term can apply anywhere up and down the range, depending on the individual. Not having them label "Individual" for us is a plus, now that I better understand what's going on.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Aw, shucks.

Mark, can i just say that you've started a string of threads lately that are some of the most useful and insightful I've seen on Reduser in a long time. It's so good to see threads that really dive into the craft.

+1.

Thanks Mark

 

[David Battistella]

What other cameras do this?

The question is

what other film stocks do this?

because I am saying that the digital sensor is the film (kodak, Fuji whatever) and the camera is the just the body a 435.

A dragon is the 435 and it also is the kodak film stock and that distinction needs to be made. Because red is not just a camera company, red has Graeme and that is the "kodak image science part" of RED. And make no mistake, red is an image science company.

Battistella

 

[D Fuller]

Still, science drives all of this stuff and it's not geeky to include art and science, they hold hands, they are lovers.

battistella

I love this.