Exposure 101...

[King Cheung]

Very interesting Antoine.

REC709 should be banned!

It's wothless for proxies and for monitoring on set. The colors are awfull!

If we have to decide on exposure with the LCD, like Jim suggested, we should have a "close to reality" color space wich is usable for reference with the director, make-up artist and crew...

USE REDSPACE or build another tool that could fine tune the look in camera to use the same contrast/color rendition from shooting to the editing room.

Thanks.

Pat

by the way, in what occasion will we need to care of 709 space, for TV? I am not familiar about it. Please advise me.
Then the following question for me is what is the difference between REDSPACE and seeing Red Raw. Of course, I can see the visual difference. I think my question why REDSPACE is created. What is the intension for REDSPACE?
Thanks a lot.

 

[nigelsmith]

Can anyone tell me why the false colour exposure tool in build 21.4.1 doesn't match up with my Sekonic L608 meter?
I metered for a 18% grey card [both spot and incident] with camera and meter set to 320 ASA. Both meter readings gave me 1/3 closed from T 5.6.
Rec 709 view false colour view needs T 4 closed 1/3 to get the grey card green.
That's a whole stop difference!

Choosing RAW view was even worse - false colour needs T 4 open 1/3 to get the grey card green.
That's 1 + 2/3 stops over what my meter says, and 2/3 over rec 709 view!

Test was done with tungsten light and 3200K setting on camera.
Any advice or explanations would be much appreciated

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I found that the new M-X sensor image viewed in RedColor lines up pretty well with my metering.

Trouble with RawView is that it's supposed to be a bit dimmer than "normal" in order to protect the highlights. In other words, you have to use a lower ASA rating to get RawView to match your metering, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you're supposed to use that slower rating unless you don't want any overexposure protection / range.

For example, I found when testing the new M-X sensor that the RedColor and RawView levels matched at around 320 to 400 ASA, but that 800 ASA was optimal for getting good latitude in the bright highlights while still getting a decent noise level (i.e. low) and good shadow detail. So whether that means the M-X sensor is "really" only 320 to 400 ASA is sort of an academic debate because it's not an optimal rating for general shooting purposes.

Now that there is RedColor (sort of an improved version of RedSpace I believe), I don't see the need to use Rec709 for viewing. Switching to RawView now & then is still useful of course.

 

[Jannard]

The best friends you have happen on Build 30 (for both M & M-X sensors)... which are the tri-check buttons. Default is top left button on LCD. 1st click is RAW Check and shows you exactly what is clipping and potentially in the noise floor in RAW. 2nd- click in focus check and 3rd click is False color in RGB, including where mid-grey is at the ISO you have set. They happen quick and show you quite a lot of useful info.

See newly posted Build 30.4.1.

Jim

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

Multi button rocks

Multi button rocks

I agree with Jim and wish to thank the Red Team for the new "Multi" button. I also love the new histogram with the goal posts - I feel like it gives me a quick cross reference between the viewing space (color/gamma/ISO selections) and where the absolute levels on the sensor are.

Cheers - #19

 

[nigelsmith]

Well I just carried out a similar test on Build v30.4.1, and I'm still getting around a stop difference between my L608 and the RAW level meter. To get the green bar lit up when filling the frame with an 18% grey card I need T4, while my light meter tells me I need T5.6. Both incident and reflected readings on the Sekonic agree.
This test was using Arri studio cools with daylight tubes, camera set to 5600k and EI 320. Red was in 2K 16:9 mode, using a Canon T2.4 8-64mm lens.
I'm really hoping there's something I'm missing or doing wrong, so any advice is appreciated.