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 :)

Exposing + Native ISO

Elsie N said:
... Not having them label "Individual" for us is a plus, now that I better understand what's going on.
Click to expand...

That is to your credit. :-) keep learning.

And BTW I don't disagree with any of those folks either.
 
Elsie N said:
. 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.
Click to expand...

Not true. There will be a sweet spot and many people will default to that. It will be discovered, I just think red should be leading that race.


Battistella
 
There are a few issues with "recommended ISO"

On the MX, it could have been 320 for daylight balanced situations. But that already gets confusing, because very few have any idea of how white-balanced occurs, so 800 was a good general advice to leave headroom for WB operations to be not too destructive.
Still you could get excellent results, depending on where you wanted to go, lighting for 320 or 1600. It would look different. Noise would be different. But generally "if it looked good at 800, you would have a pretty safe image under most WB situations".

Now... If Fincher shoots a wonderful piece at 3200... :) Would that be a good advice? :)

The Dragon has a wider "generally acceptable range".

My philosophy has been to stick to one camera-setting (but I do not really advocate that).
Reason for that being that I learn to pick up image-cues in that image as to what will become post-issues or not. Probably I will land on pretty much the same approach on Dragon, I am just not done yet in deciding. I think Marks 640 sounds like a likely sweetspot.

That fits well with what I saw that the RAW view was calibrated as earlier today.

IMHO, post on Epic is pretty simple.

Start off from a 640 RLF/5600 image and you are good for 90% of the shots I have seen. (probably even for that Fincher piece I described)

it is possibly not IDEAL for all those shots, but it is pretty close.

The last bit is the hard bit.

But it is really simple to get a really good result, with good colorists involved. :)

Dragon will be even more allowing.

Problem with discussions like these, it that they make some people think easy things are hard, while as I said, as I understand it, we really advocate simplicity in very intricate ways...

Advocating a more specific "sweet spot" would pretty much be advocating a "look".

I like that they do not do that!
But that is just me I guess.

One could also determine a spot with what gives x+/x- as a technical midpoint from something like the CML test I was just involved with.

I am not saying that is wrong. It is after all possible.

But it depends a bit on tolerance where you would put that spot.

I have a hunch David B and I might have chosen a different spot. And I think that is good... :)
 
Last edited:
Elsie N said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yes. Yes. Yes.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
You are all gonna start to get sick of me soon enough when I blow up a new CDL / 3D LUT thread I'm gonna drop this weekend :)
Click to expand...



LOOOOOL


I am soooooooooooo glad to have you back here Mark, you cannot imagine! :)

But THAT thread, I guess I will just watch! :)
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Advocating a more specific "sweet spot" would pretty much be advocating a "look".
Click to expand...

BOOM. Thank you Gunleik - I was trying so damn hard to figure out how to say this - and you nailed it.

But for anyone who just can't wrap their heads around the reason and advantages to shoot different ISOs - well ... put that Dragon on ISO 640 and go tear it up :)
 
David Battistella said:
Not true. There will be a sweet spot and many people will default to that. It will be discovered, I just think red should be leading that race.


Battistella
Click to expand...
While I generally like the idea of a default sweet spot, setting one becomes an "average" setting. But if they reveal that setting, I think it should be accompanied by disclaimers as to lighting, aperture setting... maybe even brand of lens used. Talk about your slippery slopes.
 
D Fuller said:
That'll draw a whole different crowd. LOL!

But it ll be interesting, I'm sure.
Click to expand...

Well ... RED needs to implement ASAP - and I want to try to cheer them on and try to demonstrate that it will NOT be hard for them to do it - and try to prove that it will be a massive benefit.
 
This has been a good conversation. We've created some good information to fly around...

I for one, need to spend some quality time around those that came before me, with light meters and variable situations, to appreciate the tools we have now, and how far we've come.

While some consider film old history, it's principals for exposing photography are longer lasting and before you break the rules, learn em.
 
Dragon, the nihilistic exposure experience.

Treat it however you want, it doesn't matter! LOL. :)


battistella
 
Elsie N said:
While I generally like the idea of a default sweet spot, setting one becomes an "average" setting. But if they reveal that setting, I think it should be accompanied by disclaimers as to lighting, aperture setting... maybe even brand of lens used. Talk about your slippery slopes.
Click to expand...
Nonsense. (No offense intended.) How many times did Red say (And I am paraphrasing) We recommend shooting the MX @800 ISO. Hell that was practically the first thing they said about it when it was released.Edit: and nobody fell off of that slope. ;-)

They really drove the 800 point home with videos like this one:

http://www.red.com/learn/interviews/greg-st-johns-epic-transition

We need another Schilowitz, if that is possible.
 
Last edited:
Mark L. Pederson said:
Well ... RED needs to implement ASAP - and I want to try to cheer them on and try to demonstrate that it will NOT be hard for them to do it - and try to prove that it will be a massive benefit.
Click to expand...

It's something I know nothing about. And for my work, i'm not sure whether I need it or not, but knowing more is always better.
 
I'm going to start calling Gunleik, Mark and Phil

THE MOD SQUAD

very tight knit group with a mission.

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