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 :)

Exposure issue with R1

J

Jørgen Storhaug

Active member
Joined
Dec 13, 2010
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Location
Oslo, Norway
Hi!

I have a question for you experienced red guys, that i hope you can help me with.

I was DIT and 1.AC on my first RED job here not long a go. Everething went quite smooth, and it looked very good on set. The thing is: It looked very good in the EVF, RED lcd and on our 17" Panasonic lcd. (We were monitoring in RAW, and shooting in RAW.) And when we import it into Avid, or redcine-x for that matter, it looks a bit overexposed. Just about a stop (-1 in redcine-x it looks good). Nothing we can´t fix, all the information is there, but we would like to expose properly.

What are we/i doing wrong?

Hope anyone can help.


Jørgen
 
Are you looking at red color in Redcine?
 
Welcome to RedUser! Your question easy in a practical sense, but complicated in theoretical sense:)

The easy answer is to monitor on set using RedColor at ISO 800 on the MX sensor (ISO 320 for original M sensor) instead of RAW. You are always recording RAW. Expose using the histogram and false color to make sure you are not clipping the highlights or the blacks. Not many people solely use RAW monitoring to expose, but rather as an occasional check for reference. Personally, I rarely switch over to RAW monitoring these days, but that might just be my preference.

From there you have a lot of options. All of which depend on your post workflow, but if you trust your histogram you will get good results. Good luck.
 
In redcine you have those 2 options, red color and red color 2 as base color
space. If you go to defaults on all parameters in redcine you should see as you were monitoring on set since that is what the camera recorded. The metadata might look brighter because redcolor applies a curve to your footage you can use this look or from your and create a totally new look, that is the beauty of raw.

If you set up your camera on a scene at iso 800 and viewed the raw you would be looking at an image that is at iso 320 so it would be darker but the look that is applied in metadata brings those levels up.

make sense? I hope I explained that right...anyone with better knowledge than I please chime in.
 
We have considered taking RAW out of the camera because so many people don't know how to read it. It is a great supplemental tool if you know how to work with it, but I don't know of anyone that uses it exclusively for monitoring.

Jim
 
Please, don't take RAW View out of the camera. I find myself using it quite a bit. :) Can't live without it or false color. The directors' wishes for a pleasing image on his monitor be damned.


Edit> I have to admit though, I don't typically shoot narrative cinema style. I rarely have a director or producer breathing down my neck wanting to see a pretty picture on a monitor.
 
Last edited:
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Please, don't take RAW View out of the camera. I find myself using it quite a bit. :) Can't live without it or false color. The directors' wishes for a pleasing image on his monitor be damned.


Edit> I have to admit though, I don't typically shoot narrative cinema style. I rarely have a director or producer breathing down my neck wanting to see a pretty picture on a monitor.
Click to expand...

+3 - its the most valuable tool for getting the best looking images from RED.We use it in the field primarily ALL CINESTYLE and ONLY switch to Redcolor for a brief peak if asked. But we have taught our clients the power of RAW, so they rarely ask

People, invest in Reducation then teach workshops to recoup the investment, pays for itself in spades and prevents all this FUD
 
+4. Raw View is super useful!
 
Jørgen Storhaug said:
Hi!

I have a question for you experienced red guys, that i hope you can help me with.

I was DIT and 1.AC on my first RED job here not long a go. Everething went quite smooth, and it looked very good on set. The thing is: It looked very good in the EVF, RED lcd and on our 17" Panasonic lcd. (We were monitoring in RAW, and shooting in RAW.) And when we import it into Avid, or redcine-x for that matter, it looks a bit overexposed. Just about a stop (-1 in redcine-x it looks good). Nothing we can´t fix, all the information is there, but we would like to expose properly.

What are we/i doing wrong?

Hope anyone can help.


Jørgen
Click to expand...

If the Red was hired, it may well have had a "Look" applied from the previous client. I always try to clear all Looks and non-standard settings at the start of a shoot.

Remember that while you are always recording Raw, there is always a Look applied even if it's a neutral one (which is what you get if you clear your Look settings back to Factory default). If you only monitor Raw exclusively you never see if there's a Look you don't want there. Not a problem if you go back to Raw, but some clients can't/don't want to start from scratch with the Raw only.
 
please leave Raw view in because whenever you are pushing it
on location and those skies are burning it is extremely useful as a reference...

Jannard said:
We have considered taking RAW out of the camera because so many people don't know how to read it. It is a great supplemental tool if you know how to work with it, but I don't know of anyone that uses it exclusively for monitoring.

Jim
Click to expand...
 
ericyoung said:
If the Red was hired, it may well have had a "Look" applied from the previous client. I always try to clear all Looks and non-standard settings at the start of a shoot.
Click to expand...

I run into that here and there. People rent a camera and don't think to reset everything. Camera owners and rental houses who rent out their gear don't take the time to reset everything and check the camera before it goes out. I've had my camera go out and come back with different firmware on it too. Or have worked on productions where the camera shows up with old firmware.

Working with a RED One is not difficult at all. Yet so many people go out of their way to make it difficult.
 
+++ on keeping RAW, its very important that access to this feature is maintained, I monitor and shoot RAW almost exclusively. Learning to 'see' in RAW is as important as learning to 'see' in film was back in the days when we had to drive our stuff down to the lab for developing. ;)
 
+++ on keeping RAW over here as well. Pretty much everyone I work with uses the RAW view on a daily basis to double-check their exposure whether it is on features, series or commercials. Sure it makes some producers/clients/tourists cringe for a few seconds, but we indulge their questions and they indulge our need to look at that mucky mess of sensor data.

We love RAW view! Throwing it out would be a step back!!!
 
+++ on keeping RAW as well. It´s a valuable tool wich i´d really miss. Please, please keep it in.
 
Exposure check is WAY better than viewing RAW. We'll leave RAW in for now but you have to start looking at EC as an alternate way to make sure you aren't clipping. EC is based on RAW. Viewing RAW is so 2008. :-)

Jim
 
I use EC almost all the time for exposure, but it doesn't replace the RAW view IMHO because View Raw is an easy way to check for image issues, not just exposure!
 
Please don't take raw view out. We have many experienced clients who both use and appreciate it. And those that don't understand it, we teach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top