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 :)

GemiZ

Second Test



Second Test

Format: Sony X-OCN
Color Space: S.Gamut3.Cine
Gamma: S-Log3

Set to Match Low Light Settings

Temperature:3200K
Exposure: 4950

"Standard Mode"


Conversion


S-Log3-S.Gamut3.Cine_To_S709_V200( No additional Grading was done)


Image


Sony_none_low_light_1.3.1.jpg



Red Channel


Screenshot_413.png



Green Channel

Screenshot_414.png



Blue Channel

Screenshot_415.png




For the Third Test, I will grade the "Low Light Footage" to see what happens the "Standard " Footage is already too noisy in the "Blue" Channel

 
Last edited:
Third Test

Format: Sony X-OCN
Color Space: S.Gamut3.Cine
Gamma: S-Log3

Changed Grading Settings to RAW

Temperature:from 3200K to 2850K
Exposure: 4950(didn't want to increase exposure due to possible noise increase)
Saturation:-32.50


Gamma Wheel Shift: from Orange toward Blue for better Skin Tone

"Low Light Mode"


Conversion


S-Log3-S.Gamut3.Cine_To_S709_V200


Image


test_sony_grade_1.1.5.jpg



Red Channel

Screenshot_416.png



Green Channel

Screenshot_417.png



Blue Channel

Screenshot_418.png




I didn't see any significant increase in noise from pushing the skin tone form orange toward more blue.


Non Graded Low Light Blue Channel

Screenshot_412.png



Graded Low Light Blue Channel

Screenshot_418.png
 
Last edited:
Arri Alexa LF Raw


Here are the Raw Settings I chose.
File: ARRi .ari Raw 4448X1856 Resolution
Temperature: 3200K
Exposure:1600
Saturation: 20.50


Conversion


Arri LogC to Rec709 (no other grading was done or really needed)


Image

arri_raw_1.7.1.jpg



Red Channel

Screenshot_419.png




Green Channel

Screenshot_420.png




Blue Channel

Screenshot_421.png
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Šabović Adis;1824181 said:
...Les, what's your output range set to? "16-235"?
If so, make sure you have "0-255" selected, cuz browsers don't automatically expand images to "full" as they do with video. :smile5:
Click to expand...

Had my monitor set to 16-235 to match another one, should probably switch it back and re-calibrate it, thanks for the reminder.
 
The mantra I use is "feed the blue beast". I've even gone so far as to use a 1/4 CTB glass filter in the matte box for some situations. Another tactic, if you are actually able to add light, is to put a full CTB gel on shadow fill lighting.

Cheers - #19
 
Blair,

I would have never thought to use CTB filtration for this, thanks for the knowledge!
 
Damn fine work there Rand! Going to drill into this hopefully today after my Honey Dues ;-)
 
Zeb B said:
Damn fine work there Rand! Going to drill into this hopefully today after my Honey Dues ;-)
Click to expand...

Zeb,


Thanks! Yeah, get those "Honey Dues" taken care of first, this Gemini thing can wait! HaHaHaHa.
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
I've even gone so far as to use a 1/4 CTB glass filter in the matte box for some situations.
Click to expand...

If you have headroom to spare on the red and green channels, doesn't it make more sense to let those channels get as much exposure as possible so they're not also starved for light like the blue channel?

It was my understanding we should treat them like an ND filter and only throw them on the camera if you're overloading a certain channel more than the others, e.g., shooting something with a ton of red saturation. I seem to remember a certain conversation with Bjorn talking about shooting a ketchup commercial and using a color filter to knock the red down and then compensating for the light loss traditionally, allowing for a "fat negative" of all three channels instead of exposing for the red and thus starving the other two channels.
 
I hear you Aaron, and there are times I use that strategy as well. That said, in other lighting conditions (particularly poor CRI and/or low Kelvin temp) the better channel balance provided by the filter in front of the lens, pays off in more natural looking color. I've speculated that whether it's in the algorithm, or in post correction, re-balancing the channels via some kind of gain will always torque the color cube at least a bit. YMMV.

Cheers - #19
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
I hear you Aaron, and there are times I use that strategy as well. That said, in other lighting conditions (particularly poor CRI and/or low Kelvin temp) the better channel balance provided by the filter in front of the lens, pays off in more natural looking color. I've speculated that whether it's in the algorithm, or in post correction, re-balancing the channels via some kind of gain will always torque the color cube at least a bit. YMMV.

Cheers - #19
Click to expand...

Ah, interesting. I'll definitely have to check that out on my own. Must be one of those cases where the theory doesn't quite line up with the practicality. Good to know!
 
In scuba you hold back the blue to let the red have a chance to expose. So Blair's technique follows and it just the opposite. Another reason you need higher ISO rating under water
 
Well here ya go . . . shot with Hexolux LED's in both 3200K and 5600K color temp, exposed at ETTR +0EV then -2EV where the left goal post is just starting to light up. The images are identified with an orange Post it in the lower left corner

https://www.dropbox.com/s/v5duch8z449v0sz/A006_C003_091630.0000014F.R3D?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4ua88mmxk2larum/A006_C002_0916EE.0000014F.R3D?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9o14we5utzr39xm/A006_C004_0916IE.0000014F.R3D?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/jecso06wlip7x68/A006_C001_0916YX.0000016F.R3D?dl=0
 
Last edited:
Full size jpg . . . go ahead, zoom
4Rkt2V.jpg
 
Last edited:
Confirms the theory.

RGB:
29795939017_d6bef93920_o.png


Red:
29795939237_486eb8cd73_o.png


Green:
29795939417_6155b6fa58_o.png


Blue:
29795939717_fb08924606_o.png


*Note: The ISO is the setting I needed to use to match all four of these grey-cards to an arbitrary brightness level with High Contrast and Very Soft Roll-Off in IPP2. This is not that scientific, especially with a glossy grey card getting contaminated by colored reflections, but does show some interesting things.
 
Nice work boyz! Off to shoot a project with the Gemi. Soon as I can I'll try and do a test of ISO1600 Standard v ISO3200 LL. Wonder if there is a real difference between being underexposed by a stop in Standard v being gained up at LL 3200. Sales literature says there's a huge diff ;-)
 
Hey Zeb, do you have a particular setting for your ISO? I get a lot of noise even at 800 ISO when I'm slightly underexposed, it's horrible. I even see the screening of the sensor and I have some hot pixels. I have done several blackshading at different temperatures and shutter speeds but it never works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top