How much do I know (or not know) about RED ONE MX

[James Mulholland]

Hi Guys,

So I bought a Red One Mx camera and am just waiting on delivery (where I will shoot loads of tests over the christmas period). In the last two weeks I have been doing my research on the camera and just wanted to know if any of what I list below is correct or not.

1. The best ISO to shoot at is 800? I have seen arguments that it is good to shoot at ISO 800, expose to the right and then develop the footage at 320?
2. 800 is the best ISO to shoot for Int and Ext?
3. When using ND filters make sure to have ND/IR filters or hot mirror on front of the ND filter?
4. This is something I am not sure of but think I read it somewhere, Is shooting at Daylight balance always better for image quality? Then if I want it tungsten do that in RED Cine in the first light pass? I don't think this is true but just want to make sure?
5. REDCODE 36 seems the most popular setting to shoot at?
6. A good workflow is doing a first light in RED cine, then editing the Raw files natively in Premiere pro then grading (in whatever software you grade in) then export the film through AE?
7. I'm not sure on this one, is it better to shoot 4.5K and open in a 4.5k preset and then export at 1080p (if delivering on Dvd), this basically squashes the image to fit does it? or is their another way?

Is their any other important information I need to know? I'm really sorry if this is wrong its just stuff I have seen wrote on other threads and wanted to confirm if I'm understanding it properly. I know I'm not a professional DOP but I aspire to hopefully be one so I want to make sure I know the camera as best as possible (even before I receive it).

Thanks to anyone who responds in advance, appreciate it.

James

 

[Terry VerHaar]

If I recall, ISO 320 is the "better" setting to shoot on RECONE MX. The Epics and Scarlets are pushed to 800. Of course, there are all sorts of opinions.

 

[Dan Frenkel]

James,

There is no "best" all time ISO to keep it at!! Every time you take out the camera to a set or outside your available sunlight and the way you light will dictate the best settings for ISO and pretty much all other settings as well. There are some classes available out there from reputable instructors and DPs that know the camera out there. This forum may help you but there also may be some good youtube tutorials too. I have been a DP for a long time and have films released by major distributors and every time I set camera on a new shot I always have had to set and adjust the camera for the best exposure to the light that you are given or produce. Get out there with your camera and monitor the settings as well as look at your peak references on the monitor, they will help you know if you are peaking the shot etc.

 

[Clovis Ong]

i was wondering why 4k 16:9 uses up more SSD space than 4.5k. is it due to a higher overall resolution?

 

[Adam Johnson]

RED Recommends exposing for 800 ISO on the MX sensor across the lineup to achieve the most dynamic range. Just expose in RAW mode at all times, keep it between the goal posts and you will be fine.

 

[Scott Miller]

IIRC, IRND above about 1.8..... I seem to recall some post a long while ago that at 6 stops you may start to get problems. Of course I could be recalling incorrectly.... And yes, IR should be first filter, outermost as I recall.

Please correct any errors as I am going off of potentially faulty memory

 

[Mike 'Fireman' Ross]

IIRC, IRND above about 1.8..... I seem to recall some post a long while ago that at 6 stops you may start to get problems. Of course I could be recalling incorrectly.... And yes, IR should be first filter, outermost as I recall.

Please correct any errors as I am going off of potentially faulty memory

I would *never* use ND without a hot mirror, period. Made that mistake once and once only.

Mike

 

[Samir Patel]

Please excuse my ignorance. What is a hot mirror and is that something I need to stack on top of an ND filter? or do ND filters come with some type of coating which you are mentioning? I typically do not ever shoot directly into a light source so I am unaware.

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

A hot mirror is a filter that blocks InfraRed (IR), which can pollute your image by introducing halos and fringing or even color-casts that tend toward pink/purple. The filtration on the sensor package does block some IR, it's much better on the MX than on the original M sensor, but this is an issue that affects ALL cameras to some degree. ND filters block visible light, but typically do nothing to block IR, so under heavy ND use, you can get proportionally larger doses of IR that register on the sensor. Generally speaking, I feel pretty confident most of the time at ND.9 and lower that I don't have to use an IR filter on the MX sensor, but there are times that it's still needed.

The one thing I find myself telling people all the time is that just because you use a certain amount of ND, that doesn't mean you need an IR filter. Using no ND does not mean you won't encounter any IR pollution either. Some environments have a lot of IR, some do not.

And as Mike says above about not using ND without IR, I'm inclined to agree. I don't always use it, but I always have at least a hot mirror with the camera. When in doubt, I use the hot-mirror. All my ND's 1.2 and higher are IR-cut / hot-mirror filters as well.


As for the ISO debate, it's an argument that rages on. FWIW, I feel the MX sensor's native ISO is around 320 ~ 400, but is relatively noise free up to ISO 800+. I find myself shooting at 800 most of the time as it gives me better highlight protection. Exposing to the right of your histogram is one way to look at it and that's better than shooting blind. However, you get the best results with a "thick negative" or a full histogram. If you concentrate too much on pushing exposure to the right, you could be sacrificing your DR on the low end. A full histogram is your friend.

 

[Samir Patel]

Thanks for the clarification Jeff.

 

[John Stamets]

A hot mirror is a filter that blocks InfraRed (IR), which can pollute your image by introducing halos and fringing or even color-casts that tend toward pink/purple. The filtration on the sensor package does block some IR, it's much better on the MX than on the original M sensor, but this is an issue that affects ALL cameras to some degree. ND filters block visible light, but typically do nothing to block IR, so under heavy ND use, you can get proportionally larger doses of IR that register on the sensor. Generally speaking, I feel pretty confident most of the time at ND.9 and lower that I don't have to use an IR filter on the MX sensor, but there are times that it's still needed.

The one thing I find myself telling people all the time is that just because you use a certain amount of ND, that doesn't mean you need an IR filter. Using no ND does not mean you won't encounter any IR pollution either. Some environments have a lot of IR, some do not.

And as Mike says above about not using ND without IR, I'm inclined to agree. I don't always use it, but I always have at least a hot mirror with the camera. When in doubt, I use the hot-mirror. All my ND's 1.2 and higher are IR-cut / hot-mirror filters as well.


As for the ISO debate, it's an argument that rages on. FWIW, I feel the MX sensor's native ISO is around 320 ~ 400, but is relatively noise free up to ISO 800+. I find myself shooting at 800 most of the time as it gives me better highlight protection. Exposing to the right of your histogram is one way to look at it and that's better than shooting blind. However, you get the best results with a "thick negative" or a full histogram. If you concentrate too much on pushing exposure to the right, you could be sacrificing your DR on the low end. A full histogram is your friend.

A bit confused. I was under the impression that the sensor always records raw and the ISO was for monitoring purposes. IOW, the ISO is just metadata and the only real way to control exposure was through shutter speed and/or aperture. Also that the histogram always reflects what the sensor is recording (or was it just the goalposts?), but the monitor may look underexposed or blown out even if the histogram is showing a good balance because the ISO was changed. Am I misunderstanding something?

 

[Ian Webb]

A bit confused. I was under the impression that the sensor always records raw and the ISO was for monitoring purposes. IOW, the ISO is just metadata and the only real way to control exposure was through shutter speed and/or aperture. Also that the histogram always reflects what the sensor is recording (or was it just the goalposts?), but the monitor may look underexposed or blown out even if the histogram is showing a good balance because the ISO was changed. Am I misunderstanding something?

+1. As a newbie, this is how I understood the ISO section in the manual and the "Exposure Tips" appendix as well. Are we wrong?

 

[Brent w Graham]

The sensor ISO setting doesn't really adjust, no sensor really does, they have native ISO and then "digitally adjusted" ISO levels. Because the camera shoots RAW, you can change the ISO afterward. (unlike other cameras where that ISO "digital adjustment" gets baked in)

Essentially they're saying expose (via shutter speed/aperture) with your "digitally adjusted" ISO set a little higher (800) than native (320), to maintain more highlight room. It'd be the same as slightly underexposing your ISO 320 shot, protecting more of the highlights. Shooting for ISO 800 is just a trick to maintain a slight underexposure on the image, digital sensors are good at shadows and not-so-good at highlights. (the opposite of film)

They try to explain it here, but yeah, it can seem a little weird. http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/exposure-with-red-cameras

Sorry for the rambling, I should be in bed. Hope maybe it makes sense?