It ain't the camera: It's YOU !

[Matt Ryan]

Hey David,

Thanks for the discussion. We all love and believe in RED, that's why were here and why we use the cameras. Recently it's seemed as if you speak out against something RED (as in a quirk or a problem) you are jumped on like crazy or called an idiot or some other names and things get personal really quick. Discussions like these benefit everyone and only make our cameras and the technology better while educating the masses. I think we need to have more open conversations so we all improve and all have a better understanding of the cameras and their limitations in given situations. Of course a ton of issues are user related, but thats what were here for, to help educate. We were all beginners once.

I do think the compression will get better. If Graeme just created a .RED codec at 2.5mb/s thats crystal clear and holds all the detail, than there is definitely improvement for REDCODE.

 

[Paul Russell]

But it's about perspective. Was watching "Heavens Gate" last night. Shot on film in 1980. It's full of film grain, the equivalent of noise, you get used to it, it's part of the beautify and gives the piece an aged quality and I can appreciate it.

One of my favourite epics. Cimino filmed almost every exterior scene at the Golden Hour, and filled the air with tons of Fuller's Earth to get that grainy antique look 'in camera'.

 

[Elan Gunos]

I secretly smile when someone can't get a good image out of any camera, especially with the Red Epic or Scarlet. It's like really, wow, I guess more clients and business my way.

They err on the side of whining than trying.

Hi,

I don't know how many times I see a post on REDUSER blaming the camera for lack of performance, poor low light ability, BLAH BLAH BLAH.

It really gets tiring.

There are a few rules of thumb for the current EPIC X sensor that I follow. They are basic rules of photography/cinematography

1. In low light, use faster glass
2. Use the light to your advantage
3. Do not deprive the sensor of light (especially in low light situations where I am always at 320 ISO or checking the RAW histogram)

There are two things basic folks should understand about RED.

-The camera is not going to do it all for you (it's actually designed that way in that they do not sharpen images for example).
-Learn how to capture an image, understand what a histogram is, (the histogram is your friend!)
-Use the many tools that RED provides to help you get great images.

Most importantly,

Learn how to process your footage!

I'm posting a very common example here of why RAW is great and why, when you use it correctly you have a lot of options.

THis is an image from last winter. It's the dead of night in the mountains (when we know they aren't using the brightest lights, etc) This is an available light image that shows what the sensor sees and then two examples of how you can grade it to your taste to set a mood or tone you want.

The key here was to get as much light on the sensor as possible. For you "doc shooters out there" who want to capture images in available light the first consideration should be to get the fastest glass you can afford. There is a massive difference between a F2.8, F2.0, F1.8 and F1.4 lens (talking stills glass) as the amount of light they allow onto the sensor is mathematically exponential.

Before really posting and complaining about RED footage ask these three questions.

1. Did I use a fast lens?
2. Have I experimented/do I know how to properly expose my footage AFTER CAPTURE?
3. Is it really the camera or is it me?

Notice how the aperture does not change in these three images because all of the sweetening was done AFTER the image was captured.

Same shot, same frame, same lens, different takes, tone, taste.

This is why RAW rocks.

 

[Will Keir]

Really good question for those looking to learn. One I'm still educating myself on.

So why then, if the the goalposts are empty, would an image be underexposed anywhere?

 

[Will Keir]

Yeah I feel ya.

Same here, with rental clients wanting to shoot their own stuff. I know they are going in the dark without a flashlight. That's why this education and discussion are so important. A few changes need to be made in addition to acquiring the necessary skills to shoot this camera.

Some people can afford to "test, test, test."

it's a little embarrassing when you talk the camera up then play back the footage on a 2K display and see compression blocking in perfectly exposed footage.

 

[Philipe Ratton]

Great Thread.
I also feel confused about the goal posts showing nothing and noise still showing in the dark grey areas.
It's accurate on the highlight side though.

 

[Will Keir]

I am hoping the Dragon sensor solves this issue, I don't mind being patient as long as the problem is addressed.

Regardless of if you ETTR or not, the signals should reflect accurate data. I have ran into this issue before shooting at 320 ISO and neither goal post is lit up, yet when I bring it into RCX, theres dancing noise....

This shouldn't be happening at all. If the RAW sensor isn't crushed or lacking info, there should be no noise...

 

[Will Keir]

I invited Graeme into the discussion, glad we have brought this issue to the forefront.

That's why I said earlier that REDCODE needs to be tweaked a bit to handle high detail scenes better. It's a miraculous thing but it has it quirks. It's just frustrating when your shooting at 5:1 and seeing compression break down in scenes like this. Even shot on a busy street during the day with trees and people and buildings breaks down every once in a while. It's unfortunate that you expose properly and still have issues. I shot a well exposed green screen shot at 100fps and could see the blocky compression in the actors faces even though they were properly exposed at 320ISO & 5600K. So theoreticall that isn't user error. It's situations where compression breaks down that the operator can't really be blamed.

 

[Matt Ryan]

Great Thread.
I also feel confused about the goal posts showing nothing and noise still showing in the dark grey areas.
It's accurate on the highlight side though.

from what I've tested and shot, you are correct. The clipping indicator goal post seems more accurate than the noise goalpost. I often got confused when I had great exposure and no signal in either goalpost and had noise in the lower IRE's.

 

[Philipe Ratton]

from what I've tested and shot, you are correct. The clipping indicator goal post seems more accurate than the noise goalpost. I often got confused when I had great exposure and no signal in either goalpost and had noise in the lower IRE's.

It actually happens all the time to me, sometimes a little curve solves it, sometimes a more agressive one.
I now believe the left goal post doesn't show noise, it shows crushing like the left one shows clipping.

 

[Bob Gundu]

I always shoot to my samurai as a backup anyway. I'm astonished sometimes at how clean those proRes files are. Especially in low light.

 

[Matt Ryan]

I always shoot to my samurai as a backup anyway. I'm astonished sometimes at how clean those proRes files are. Especially in low light.

yeah thats what I've heard, which is more proof that things are introduced by REDCODE. Usually the calibrated on set monitor feed is clean in low light, then once it gets to RCX there's lots of noise.

 

[Juan Melara]

...Usually the calibrated on set monitor feed is clean in low light, then once it gets to RCX there's lots of noise.

I noticed this on the touch LCD and figured it was the smaller screen hiding the noise. I've since tested it with a 1080p feed into a 27" monitor, which looks cleaner than the same footage opened in RCX with a full debayer viewed on the same 27".

It would be great if there was an option of compressing the image after gain had been applied. Maybe an option allowing ISO settings above 1600 to get baked into the R3D. Might lessen the artifacts introduced by Redcode.

If it works well on DSLRs surely it would work well on Epics/Scarlets.

 

[Will Keir]

This isn't as simple as the size of a mag, is it?

No, not yet at least. The difference between the 256GB SSD and the 512 SSD are only a step apart, the increase ability to shoot for longer periods is the really the only major difference.

Turbo REDMAG Build 3.3 5K WS vs. Original REDMAG for 5K WS:

• 24 – 3:1 vs. 24 – 3:1
• 30 – 3:1 vs. 30 – 3:1
• 48 – 5:1 vs. 48 – 5:1
• 60 – 6:1 vs. 60 – 6:1
• 96 – 9:1 vs. 96 – 10:1
• 120 – 11:1 vs. 120 – 12:1

From the source http://news.doddleme.com/equipment/red-announces-epic-price-reduction-on-proprietary-ssds/

 

[Will Keir]

Can you post the footage? Glad to make my FTP available to you if you need it.

I haven't had a chance to see it in 4k unfortunately. Would love to. Playing back in RCX Pro with a RedRocket (Full res), on a calibrated Apple Cinema Display 30". I shot a video for MUSE on a green screen stage and the drummer was doing a jump towards camera from a trampoline, and there was compression blocking dancing on his face and body (not sensor noise or grain but that blurry macro blocking). Shot it at 100fps, and at 320 ISO, histogram perfectly centered with no clipping or crushing. Yet still had the issue. Looked great on the monitor in live view, but as soon as it's compressed it got blocky. It's not terrible, but it is definitely noticeable and wasn't visible in live view. So I'm sure REDCODE was the culprit. At 1080p it isn't that noticeable, but viewing in higher res it definitely is.

 

[Matt Ryan]

Can you post the footage? Glad to make my FTP available to you if you need it.

I can't unfortunately. It's for MUSE the band and hasn't been released officially yet. I might be able to in the future.

 

[Will Keir]

Craig, thanks for you voice. It's good to have perspective, still learning.

So the shot at the LAKE is just 5k WS, 24 FPS. T22!!!
The shot at the RIVER is 2k ws 300 FPS. T3

You are welcome to download the R3D trims so you can see yourself, specifically, what we are referring to. It seems you've slightly mixed the two examples.

So Will, creatively, in this shot, why were you shooting at the extremes of the cameras (and your lenses) capabilities? What in that shot were you trying to capture that required 300FPS motion, and what motivated you to go out in the field without an ND kit for the camera, etc, and what's so vital in the darkness off that treelike that you need to be able to see it, when the shot isn't exposed for the trees?

Shooting 300 FPS to test the feature. Trying to capture the movement of water in detailed slow motion. Why would I use NDs here? I'm shooting wide open on the lens?

Not sure what you mean by "treelike." There are no trees in this shot. I believe you have this RIVER shot and the LAKE shot confused?

 

[Will Keir]

For the LAKE shot yes.

For the RIVER shot, no need for NDs, I was wide open T[3] on a RPZ 18-50mm at 19mm focal.

In Will's case he should have used ND, and he shouldn't have been shooting at t22

 

[Will Keir]

+1

Thanks for the conversation and to all those who helped to bring it about.

Hey David,

Thanks for the discussion.

 

[Matt Ryan]

For the LAKE shot yes.

For the RIVER shot, no need for NDs, I was wide open T[3] on a RPZ 18-50mm at 19mm focal.

Yeah, I was talking about the Lake shot. The river shot is just the compression from 300fps.