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 :)

Hannover Hands On comparisons of RED F35 & D21

Status
Not open for further replies.
geoffboyle

geoffboyle

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
266
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
76
Location
It varies daily
Website
www.gboyle.co.uk
I've put up some pages with links to high res images that are based on the tests we did in Hannover.

We weren't trying to make any camera look good or bad, just to establish what the limits actually were so that when we use the cameras we can take it in to account.

Just the same way we test different film stocks to find their characteristics, good in different areas.

http://www.cinematography.net/hannover/index.htm

I've got one more page top do and it'll be a little while as it's difficult to pick the right frames for comparison.
 
Thanks for posting this. I must say that the tests don't seem to tell me much. I think you would need more data about what you did, and more variation of over and under exposure in these tests. However, perhaps I don't know what you are looking for.
 
I think this is quite interesting as I have never seen a direct comparison between the F35 and RED. It's a shame the overexposed RED dpx files won't open on my computer after downloading though.
 
Martin Stevens said:
Thanks for posting this. I must say that the tests don't seem to tell me much. I think you would need more data about what you did, and more variation of over and under exposure in these tests. However, perhaps I don't know what you are looking for.
Click to expand...


We were simply trying to find what happened in the various areas of the picture, more range isn't needed if you look at the specific highlight and lowlight tests they contain more than enough range to see where the images start to lose detail.
 
sander kamp said:
I think this is quite interesting as I have never seen a direct comparison between the F35 and RED. It's a shame the overexposed RED dpx files won't open on my computer after downloading though.
Click to expand...

What software are you using to open them?

I tested with Xnview as it's a free multi-platfrom piece of software.

They also open in SpeedGrade.
 
Thanks Geoff, good to have an unbiased test again. There is a problem with the links to the lowlight tests, they don't work. As it looks no manipulation of any kind was done to the files ?

Cheers

Mick van Rossum
 
Mick van Rossum said:
Thanks Geoff, good to have an unbiased test again. There is a problem with the links to the lowlight tests, they don't work. As it looks no manipulation of any kind was done to the files ?

Cheers

Mick van Rossum
Click to expand...

I'm fixing the links, I appear to have broken them all when I updated the navigation of the whole system.

The files are indeed totally untouched log files.

The only exception is the makeup tests.

I will upload some graded files later.
 
How were the RED files processed to make the log-files? What were the settings - software? screendump settings? Do you still have acces to the RAW files? With the D21 and F35, the camera generates directly a log-space image, not so with the RED... The way the debayer and generating of the log images for lineair space, can really alter the information retained.
 
just a test methodoligy question.

The questions are not F35 related, as I have no knowledge of that cam, but very happy to see this comparison

What was the cam settings on the filtered/unfiltered shots?
320/5000/rec709?

What was the development settings?
320/5000/-0.4 exposure/camRGB/redlog?

Or?

Just to be able to read more info out of the images, this would be usefull to know.

Thanks again for a great test!

Gunleik
 
Filip Vandoorne said:
How were the RED files processed to make the log-files? What were the settings - software? screendump settings? Do you still have acces to the RAW files?
Click to expand...


Red files were processed in SpeedGrade DI and all settings set to "neutral" ie CT 5000 ISO 320 Camera RGB Redlog full res generated 1920 * 1080
 
Gunleik Groven said:
just a test methodoligy question.

The questions are not F35 related, as I have no knowledge of that cam, but very happy to see this comparison

What was the cam settings on the filtered/unfiltered shots?
320/5000/rec709?

What was the development settings?
320/5000/-0.4 exposure/camRGB/redlog?

Or?

Just to be able to read more info out of the images, this would be usefull to know.

Thanks again for a great test!

Gunleik
Click to expand...


320/5000/camRGB/redlog were indeed the settings, I had to remove a -14 tint that kept appearing in our settings and that we couldn't get out!

Filtered and unfiltered camera settings were not changed


Sony was rated at 500/3200 and slog and sgamut used


All lenses were master Primes.
 
I haven't tested recently so it may have changed but I believe that unless you process at 250asa there will be highlight range reduction. It isn't quite a full stop (it changes with colour temperature) but it is noticeable..

We always process Red footage at 250asa with one of 3 custom curves (depending on the shoot) for max latitude.

thanks for the results!

Michael L
 
geoffboyle said:
320/5000/camRGB/redlog were indeed the settings, I had to remove a -14 tint that kept appearing in our settings and that we couldn't get out!

Filtered and unfiltered camera settings were not changed


Sony was rated at 500/3200 and slog and sgamut used


All lenses were master Primes.
Click to expand...

Great. Thanks a ton for that info!

Could you (if you could...) lower the exposure by -0.4 on the highest exposure?
(That is in the developing settings...)

I'd just love to see the result of that.
The tint thingy is interesting.

I'd love to see a comment from Graeme on that...

What would it look like @ 5600... Just a thought.

Thanks again!
This is really usefull!

Gunleik
 
Aaaagh!

Aaaagh!

So let me get this clear, you'd all like me to re-render at 250 ISO and 5600K

Is that correct?

Don't the minus a half give you pretty much that in terms of exposure?

And the difference between 5000 and 5600 is pretty small.
 
Also, if you could post JPEGS as well as DPX it would make life easier for a lot of us.
 
Hey Geoff

I don't think you need to re-render. You did a straight forward test and published the results for the benefit of the broader community. You can't be expected to exhaust every opportunity.

The fact that a undocumented tweak might allow another 1/2 stop in the highlights of the Red is interesting (and important to my shoots) but not game changing.

thanks again

Michael L



geoffboyle said:
So let me get this clear, you'd all like me to re-render at 250 ISO and 5600K

Is that correct?

Don't the minus a half give you pretty much that in terms of exposure?

And the difference between 5000 and 5600 is pretty small.
Click to expand...
 
Michael Lindsay said:
The fact that a undocumented tweak might allow another 1/2 stop in the highlights of the Red is interesting (and important to my shoots) but not game changing.
Michael L
Click to expand...

Hi,

If as much as 1/2 stop can be found, thats quite significant IMHO.

Stephen
 
Maybe I'm misreading Geoff's test but a 1/2 stop (and that is Colour Temp dependant) would not change the relative positions of the 3 cameras.

Also if he re-renders based on a undocumented tip what happens when some Sony guy turns around and suggests a re-shoot so they can find another 1/2 stop through a custom curve (for example)??

Michael L

PS I do feel that 1/2 stop is relevant to my Red shoots and I nearly always make sure that I have access to it in the grade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top