HDRx Overview...

[Jannard]

Is it technically possible to have an one stop mode for HDRx™™™?

I could see that being useful, with closer to normal motion blur with one extra stop of latitude.

Also, in this mode, we could shoot with 360 degree shutter, treat the extra HDRx™™™ track as our normal exposure with normal 180 degree motion blur, and treat the base exposure with 360 degree as an extra (which could be i.e. keyed to affect only shadow areas of the image). I could see this being very useful for reducing shadow noise in low light shoots, without losing the feel of normal motion blur altogether.

Oh, and congrats for putting HDRx™™™ in the new cameras - it's pretty close to what i suggested two years or so ago - maybe some of my ideas inspired you along the way (wishful thinking, i know) :redface:

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=31683&highlight=timeslice&page=3#24

Some interesting stuff... but we started development of HDRx™ in 2007 when we were designing the M-X sensor and ASIC.

And yes... one stop is possible. We just weren't convinced that the amount was worth the extra data rate.

Jim

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

I like the terminology of primary exposure track = the “A” track - as opposed to "normal exposure".

The reason I say this is that I think many of you will find, depending on how you want to use it, you will want to open up the exposure of the "A" track a bit to reveal more details in the shadows because the X track is going to restore your highlights.

You can 100% expose "normally" - but the more I started to play with it - the more I wanted to open up my "primary exposure" - shooting "hotter" than "normal". But yeah, depends on what you are shooting - and what you want to achieve.

Just saying - I like "primary exposure track" as terminology.

 

[John Burnley]

This is terrific information, Jim. Thanks for posting. Can't wait to have my own Epic or Scarlet (and hopefully in time, both).

John

 

[johannperry]

Great Post, very clear and exciting information.

 

[Francesco Bonomo]

The reason I say this is that I think many of you will find, depending on how you want to use it, you will want to open up the exposure of the "A" track a bit to reveal more details in the shadows because the X track is going to restore your highlights.

Yeah, that's what I thought when I read the update Jim posted yesterday.
A lot of cinematographers who are used to shoot on film will find this quite familiar, aiming at a slightly richer, slightly overexposed "negative", and then "print down" thanks to the X track, knowing that the details in the highlights are safely there. Again, based on the current information and the few pictures we've seen, I think that for a great number of people +1 or +2 will be more than enough for most situations.

 

[Eki Halkka]

Some interesting stuff... but we started development of HDRx™™™ in 2007 when we were designing the M-X sensor and ASIC.

Okay - well, often ideas like this are "in the air", when the technology progresses to a level that soon makes them possible...

And yes... one stop is possible. We just weren't convinced that the amount was worth the extra data rate.

I'd say there definitely are situations where it is. If it's as simple as just enabling that option, my vote goes for enabling it.

PS: the thing in my suggestion about still images applies perfectly for HDRx™: when one shoots HDRx™ with i.e. 2 stop protection, 24 fps, 1/48 s. exposed for ISO 320 for the regular stream, you also get a stream of images with 1/192 s. shutter, exposed correctly for ISO 1280: these should be plenty good enough quality for many, if not most still image usages. One more way to get best of the both worlds!

 

[jake blackstone]

You guys can test everything yourselves, but before you get too lost... re-read my post.

And before you get too carried away... the A-track will always be the longer (normal) exposure. You cannot set it up the other way.

Jim

I just read your last statement and I though this. HDRx™ used strictly for highlight protection. But what about the other way around- exposure for low lights? What I mean is this, use X-track as regular exposure, because it is always shorter and A-track as longer exposure to dig in into dark and what normally would be underexposed areas. Yes, I understand, that shutter speed may become be too slow to be sharp, but what about using the X-track as a kind of a key, limiting the smear and using just portions of A-track? If it is possible to implement even just a little bit, you may be able to gain a stop or two of exposure index without any significant increase in noise. Just thinking out-loud...
Ahhh, just saw, that someone just beat me to it

 

[Karl H]

I think I get it now, there is no delay between the two exposures (which I thought there would be some noticeable offset), just one is sharp and one has normal motion blur. Combined, gives a new look which is pleasant for most scenes, but looks odd in others.

The way I see it, and I havent used it yet.... I'd be happy to commit to shooting my A track a bit overexposed and use the x-track to restore highlights on most shots where there is normal movement.

Anything tricky like a fire, or fast moving objects I'd be cautious and shoot a normal exposed A-track incase it just didn't work. I can see why the caution, you don't want people ringing up and holding Red accountable for the process not working and their A-track is... f**ed too because they overexposed.

MNMB I guess is using the A-track as a reference to try and simulate that exact motion blur on the x-track. Now in the past people have said this doesnt work well, but the difference here is you have a reference of what it should look like in another stream. So it may do a better job than people think as before this it would be pure motion estimation with no reference or guide track.

People have said why make another camera after Epic?.. but I guess here's the incentive. Make one with 18 stop DR native and avoid all this workflow ;-)...lol In the meantime I'm more than happy with this technology, even with the compromises it has a lot of potential.

 

[JanneJansson]

Over exposed frames is going on the endangered species list.

 

[Michael Stanmore]

it’s twice to shutter speed to six times depending on the number setting for the “X” track.

It's exponential though right?

So the change in shutter speed is 1/(2^n) with n being the number of extra stops of exposure latitude you want to protect.

LOL That make sense?

 

[Elsie N]

does the quality of Magic Motion depend on the settings used for HDRx? That is, does the sharpness track vary from using +2 and +6?

 

[Karl H]

Oh and I can see now why you ditched easyHDR, but perhaps if it came with a warning then you'd be ok. I'm all for ease of use and I'd still like to dump a blended r3d straight into premiere without having the burden of 2 streams on the HDD throughput and cpu.

PS I'd love to see an example of where the HDR has produced odd motion results. It would give us users a greater understanding of where and when we could use it.

 

[Michael Olsen]

Thanks for posting Jim. It's great to have a straightforward, simple explanation and the ability to get further feedback from you. HDRx is a very interesting technology. Now if people would stop comparing it to iPhone HDR...

PS I'd love to see an example of where the HDR has produced odd motion results. It would give us users a greater understanding of where and when we could use it.

I'm sure that HDRx (and the rest of Epic/Scarlet) will get a very thorough torture test as soon as certain people get them in their hands.

 

[LUIS ALBERTO CABRERA]

Just groundbreaking...!

 

[David Lagos]

I like the terminology of primary exposure track = the “A” track - as opposed to "normal exposure".

The reason I say this is that I think many of you will find, depending on how you want to use it, you will want to open up the exposure of the "A" track a bit to reveal more details in the shadows because the X track is going to restore your highlights.

You can 100% expose "normally" - but the more I started to play with it - the more I wanted to open up my "primary exposure" - shooting "hotter" than "normal". But yeah, depends on what you are shooting - and what you want to achieve.

Just saying - I like "primary exposure track" as terminology.

That's what I was thinking! The post options really give you a buffer either way so you can go "hotter" without getting bit in the bum. Can't wait to try this stuff out.

PS: Just got back to Reduser today....holy cow a lot of stuff happened while I was away.

Best wishes Mark!

 

[Ketch Rossi]

The more I hear about the wonders of it, the more can't wait to use it

 

[Rudi Herbert]

does the quality of Magic Motion depend on the settings used for HDRx™? That is, does the sharpness track vary from using +2 and +6?

It would have to. If the X frame differs only on its shutter speed, then the higher the shutter speed, the sharper the resulting image. Unless some additional interpolation/estimation is done to keep the amount of Magic Motion constant, the more stops are added to the X frame the less blur you'll have on the blended track. In my case, since I very much despise the unnatural blurriness of 1/48 shutter on moving shots, I would probably use HDRx at +6, not for extended DR but for clean, sharp images. In fact, to me, Magic Motion is almost as important, if not more, than the additional stops of DR that this technology affords. A case of a very happy byproduct.

 

[Florian Stadler]

Thanks for the concise explanation on what the creative tools are that HDRx offers. Great engineering feat to open up creative possibilities.

 

[Lorenzo Straight]

Interesting technique. Looking forward to working with Scarlet on this.

 

[Dustin Cross]

I think it is funny that everyone is asking for shadow protection mode. Just expose for your shadows! You protect your shadows and then set HDRx to protect your highlights based on exposing to protect your shadows. It is possible for the camera to take faster than normal exposure times, but not longer than normal exposure times.


Dusty