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 :)

HDR results from a single RED Raw Clip

Not to be difficult but how do you have a raw shot with no processing?

By definition the "raw" with no processing would be greyscale.
 
Michael Hastings said:
Not to be difficult but how do you have a raw shot with no processing?

By definition the "raw" with no processing would be greyscale.
Click to expand...

"Raw" being that the frame tiffs were generated out of RED ALERT as shot with no setting adjustments with the exception of exposure (EV -2, EV O and EV +2).

I am posting the clip at 1080P and it should be available soon to look at on our YouTube channel.

Cheers!
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
HDR results from a single RED RAW clip.
Click to expand...

Like you've said before... (how many times), it's just tonemapping. You aren't finding new values, just changing how we see them. The +2/-2 doesn't actually get you any more exposure, just more workflow complexity.
 
Yep, its tonemapping without HDR. The reason this is very often used in conjuncture with HDR is because there are very few displays that can display a high DR - so tonemapping is used to trade global for local contrast.

Regards, Matt
 
The bottom line is that the example looks good. The clouds are not blown out and the shadows are not too crushed. Of course it's tone mapping. Every time we use a power window to protect or enhance a detail in the image we engage in a similar manipulation.
 
This is fairly standard. I saw this a couple of years ago at Plaster City. Certain scenes have a set dynamic range. Skew one layer towards a shadow setting and add a luminance key, with a highlight scene. Albeit this was in a Quantel Pablo suite, fairly pricey equipment. You can't get it all in one setting, but doing layers of grading, it looked amazing - just like we always did in film.

In RAW there is a range you can show in RGB (or broadcast color space) based on middle gray. Make layers and skew the middle point with luminance keys in post before you make the final grade, and it behaves just like many film transfers I have done. It was beautiful. As the Colorist said "All of the information is there if it is exposed right". Just like film, it was exactly what I would have done 10 years earlier in a film transfer. It is similar to HDR, we just did in post and it was no big deal. So I always wonder when people give film these huge dynamic ranges because we were always using digital tech to push it around. just the way we did before RED existed. My commercials didn't have as much range as they did after I spent $600 an hour in the DaVinci Telecine suite making power windows, and making multiple layers from my film to tape transfer.

My belief is we cheated film negative to fit the RGB video limitations for years with Telecine. But anything that is "NOT FILM" has to come out of the gate perfect, like tape with its narrow dynamic range. Because of years of film vs. video comparisons. If we just said there is no film or processing expense and proceeded along the previous mindset we would be way ahead.

Film to tape transfers especially with commercials were dealt with enormous Telecine hours until everything was perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top