IMPORTANT: False Color POLL

[Brian D. Goff]

As RED always listens to it's customers, I think creating a poll might help RED understand our needs as DP's. And if there really is a need to do some improvements/changes to the way FC should work.
FC has changed with the new build and I also did some wrong exposures using it for the first time, because I was expecting it to work the same way it always did. It seems many are not happy the way it is working now and most important it seems to have lost the intuitive approach it use to have.

Here is my suggestions for a poll. Please add your suggestions and I will open the poll in a day or two. Let's talk to RED and help them understand our needs and not get emotional when we don't agree with something

POLL suggestions:

-The new FC in Build 30.5 is great and needs NO improvments

-The way OLD FC worked was better for me

-I need FC RAW view with ALL colors and Zebra displayed while rolling

 

[sander kamp]

If anything I think RED should be careful when suddenly changing functions of the camera that always used to work in a certain way - whether it supposedly makes more sense or not. The RED One is a few years old now and people get used to a certain way of working.

It's a bit like you send your car to the garage and it comes back with the brake pedal replaced by a button on the dashboard.

 

[Mike Gross]

It's up to you to upgrade or downgrade though.

 

[sander kamp]

It's up to you to upgrade or downgrade though.

Not if you get a MX sensor. We got ours back from the upgrade in the middle of a shoot.

 

[Brian D. Goff]

It's up to you to upgrade or downgrade though.

sure, but hasn't RED always claimed that it listens to it's costumers - not like the other company with the big A... and the other one with a C..... Apparently a lot of us were very happy with the old FC and the new one is - for now - causing confusion. We are the people in the field, working with the cameras for a living - we have some important experience when it comes to ergonomics and handling of a camera.

I will get used to the new FC, like getting used to a new car. but even if it is an improvement technically, it is not an ergonomic improvement. With the new build I am spending more time getting exposure right than I did be for.....

 

[Steve Freebairn]

If I could vote a million times, it'd be Exposure Check all the way. False color means so much less now that you can place middle gray in so many different locations and still have amazing images.

I used to be a View Raw/Histogram person, but exposure check gives you the same information with one button push.

Just as it's recommended not to switch builds during a shoot, I'd say the same applies for switching the sensor, it's like switching film stocks without adjusting how you're exposing.

 

[sander kamp]

What about waveform display? That one has been crippled a loooong time ago. It used to be (build 13?) clear green with red for white areas and blue for black areas. Great as an alternative to zebra to see what areas are overexposed. Then somehow it became just all faint green with no clear indication of top and bottom. Useless as a exposure tool.

 

[Nick Shaw]

I would argue that false colour has not actually changed. The issue is surely that Rec709 and REDspace have been removed as monitoring options, and replaced with REDcolor. Since REDcolor does not go above 100% IRE, the colours that represent those higher IRE values never appear.

People are complaining that the interpretation they used to put on RGB false colour with respect to what that meant for the RAW signal no longer works the same way. But since REDcolor is a new output LUT, it is not surprising that assumptions based on the old LUTs will no longer hold true.

What you are really asking for is for REDspace and Rec709 to be reinstated as monitoring options. Then you would have the option to monitor as you did before, and see false colour the same as you did before.

I'm not arguing that monitoring REDspace or Rec709 would be a good thing. I personally prefer REDcolor. But I think that having the option is no bad thing, as it gives those who liked the way it was before the option to work that way.

 

[Matthew Rogers]

What you are really asking for is for REDspace and Rec709 to be reinstated as monitoring options. Then you would have the option to monitor as you did before, and see false colour the same as you did before.

Not quite Nick. Before, you could put on FC and switch into RAW. It would tell you everything that's sitting in it's respective places (IE: Clipping, skintone, under exposed.) Flip back to your colorspace and you know what will happen in post with those colorspaces (although, knowing that your RAW has more information.)

Now, because because of how FLUT works (at least to my understanding) you don't get the above 100% IRE colors in Video FC. But it doesn't mean you aren't still clipping. All it's doing is taking over 100% IRE/clipped stuff and mapping it down to 100 IRE. Basically, taking super white and just making it white. If you shoot blue sky that's over exposed, FLUT isn't going to help because there is no information. Clipped is clipped. Can't fix that in post. You can take it to regular white, but that doesn't give you any more information.

It's like taking your ISO from 320 down to 100 outside in the hot sun. If it's too bright, no matter how low you go, the image is still going to be over exposed. This is why we have to use ND's with the RED instead of just changing the ISO. Maybe I am using the FLUT tool wrong, but in my tests it seems all it does is make sure nothing pushes past 100 IRE. So if your blue sky is at 90 IRE and you push it past 100 IRE with the FLUT slider, all it does is push that to be regular white, it doesn't save any of the blue.

Matthew

 

[Nick Shaw]

Not quite Nick. Before, you could put on FC and switch into RAW. It would tell you everything that's sitting in it's respective places (IE: Clipping, skintone, under exposed.) Flip back to your colorspace and you know what will happen in post with those colorspaces (although, knowing that your RAW has more information.)

Now, because because of how FLUT works (at least to my understanding) you don't get the above 100% IRE colors in Video FC. But it doesn't mean you aren't still clipping. All it's doing is taking over 100% IRE/clipped stuff and mapping it down to 100 IRE. Basically, taking super white and just making it white. If you shoot blue sky that's over exposed, FLUT isn't going to help because there is no information. Clipped is clipped. Can't fix that in post. You can take it to regular white, but that doesn't give you any more information.

It's like taking your ISO from 320 down to 100 outside in the hot sun. If it's too bright, no matter how low you go, the image is still going to be over exposed. This is why we have to use ND's with the RED instead of just changing the ISO. Maybe I am using the FLUT tool wrong, but in my tests it seems all it does is make sure nothing pushes past 100 IRE. So if your blue sky is at 90 IRE and you push it past 100 IRE with the FLUT slider, all it does is push that to be regular white, it doesn't save any of the blue.

Matthew

When I suggested reinstating the option to monitor in REDspace or Rec709, I meant working the way they did previously, ie no FLUT.

Personally I think clipping at 100% IRE not 108% makes more sense. Super-white has no meaning with Red footage, as all Red post tools clip at 100%. I always thought super-white on the camera's HD-SDI output was a confusion. See my post here for more detail.

Also worth noting FLUT rolls off to 100%. It does not clip hard at 100%.

 

[John Brawley]

Also worth noting FLUT rolls off to 100%. It does not clip hard at 100%.

Which is where the confusion comes from because the exposure tools are not linear anymore. We don't just want to see clipping (and you get that with exposure check), but we want to see the slippery graduated slope to clipping.

False colour was great and I don't mind it not working the way it used to because I tend to use FC to get a quick sense of where things are sitting relative to each other....so I'm not exposing per se, but adjusting lighting ratios to sit relative to each other, where I want them...an important but subtle distinction.

jb

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

I dont remember the last time I used false color..

overtime.. you just KNOW the camera inside and out.. and tools like FC dont really add to anything...

dont get me wrong though.. its a great starter tool

Besides.. a basic histogram and im good to go

 

[paul niccolls]

I dont remember the last time I used false color..

you just KNOW the camera inside and out.. and tools like FC dont really add to anything...

dont get me wrong though.. its a great starter tool

Unfortunately, a lot of us did use false color and got quite used to it. So these comments really don't help. Personally I found it much quicker to pop into FC and see where the exposure values were falling across the range than to reach for my spot meter and meter everything (especially the times when I'm standing there with the camera on my shoulder). Now RED has pulled the rug out from under us a bit. I think the problem is that a lot of us DID "just know the camera" and now it's a slightly different camera.

I haven't used the MX sensor yet, but I'm starting a job with it next week and just found out that it's not the camera I knew. FC was quite useful and a great time saver. Coming from a film and photography background, I was used to the Zone system and FC made a lot of sense in that context.

I used all the exposure tools at my disposal and basically had a 3 legged stool approach. Incident meter, Histograms, and FC. So forgive me for feeling like somebody just kicked one of the legs out from under me.

I respect the fact that you don't choose to use FC, but there are plenty others who obviously do. There are no "starter tools", there are just tools. Use them or not as you wish, but the comments aren't adding anything to this topic.

jmho,

paul niccolls
dp/nyc

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

Unfortunately, a lot of us did use false color and got quite used to it. So these comments really don't help.
dp/nyc

My fault.. I thought the thread was a poll

 

[Rob Ruffo]

I don't use false color, but I wish the exposure check could be tweaked to my own idea of noise floor, and to go red before 100, like at 95, or any value I want.

 

[Jeremy Neish]

I like the old way. But haven't upgraded yet, so maybe I'll be able to adjust to the new.

 

[paul niccolls]

My fault.. I thought the thread was a poll

haha, obviously it is a poll, though participation isn't mandatory.

The point of the poll is for those of us "starters" who don't "know the camera", but actually use FC, to try and let RED know how we feel about the changes and make suggestions based on how we use it in the field.:rant:

thanks


paul niccolls
dp/nyc

 

[CJ Roy]

haha, obviously it is a poll, though participation isn't mandatory.

The point of the poll is for those of us "starters" who don't "know the camera", but actually use FC, to try and let RED know how we feel about the changes and make suggestions based on how we use it in the field.:rant:

thanks


paul niccolls
dp/nyc

I'd say this "poll" is not just for starters, but for professionals as well who don't use Red day in and day out, or follow RedUser religiously, but enough to be confused by the change in onboard exposure tools.

 

[paul niccolls]

I'd say this "poll" is not just for starters, but for professionals as well who don't use Red day in and day out, or follow RedUser religiously, but enough to be confused by the change in onboard exposure tools.

Agreed!

I'm not a RED owner, though I love and use it often. I also use lots of other cameras depending on the job. So when I come back to a camera or format, I usually like to it to behave the way it did when I last used it. This way I know what I'm getting. To pick up a camera (ANY camera) only to find out it's not the same as last time is a bit distressing.

My hope is RED can give us a FC that works like the previous builds. Why does it have to be either/or? Or if they can't, I at least ask that once I get used to the new system, they don't go and change it again...

 

[Martin Ubilluz]

Why not just monitor in RAW? When I shoot I monitor raw When I use false color I see the yellows where things are clipped. Are we taking about the same thing? It is just in REDcolor that you cant see the yellow of false color come out right.