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 :)

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

Thanks for the heads up G.

How is there gain, I put it on Default Meta. Am I missing something? I want to see the RAW image as shot in RC3/RG3.

Gunleik Groven said:
Will. There is gain in your 1st example. Gain adds noise...
Click to expand...
 
Your right Gunleik, it's a bit of ETTR with trying to get a tick negative. Call it "leaning" to the right. I've been burned following the ETTR advise blindly.

Gunleik Groven said:
Technically it is not ettr exposure
Click to expand...
 
Etter is not allways a good advice.

On your screenshot the settings are iso 800 + 0,5 FLIT, guess you adjusted flut in camera. That is not a very tood advice for controlling exposure...


All in all, that gives you close to 2 stops digital hain,.

Look at that image in 320/0flut, and you are closer to the actual exposure.

Exposure is "trickier" with wide gammut images like the example you show.

But that is still not the cameras fault...

R1 MX seem " cleaner in the blacks for two reasons.
1stthe default gamma is much more brutal
2nd it "falls off" in the bottom when you look at what is going on in the low end. Signal just disappears. Which gives you really black blacks...
 
Matt,

I belive you are correct. It's good to finally have an explanation for this issue. Unfortunately I shoot a lot of shots like this which means my storage demands have just doubled. Does "R3D Trim" create copies as good as the originals?

Unfortunately at 2k 300 FPS, I am using the highest settings possible which I believe is 12:1, even a BS at temp would have probably done little for this issue. Would a faster lens have helped?

Matt Ryan said:
Will,
That looks like when Redcode breaks down from an overload of detail. Seen it quite a bit in shots with a lot going on and lot's of movement (water,tree leafs, etc.) or highly detailed scenes. It's unfortunate, and unavoidable. Hope it gets an update to improve conditions like this. I crushed both examples in the blacks and could still spot the blocky compression noise. Try shooting that wide vista shot in 3:1 and see if that changes anything. The 2k shot is unavoidable because your limited to a higher compression ratio making it far worse than normal.

For example, I reset everything to default, RC3-Redlogfilm, dropped ISO to 320, and added an s curve to get proper levels. Still could see the compression noise at 100%. Not sure what your f stop was or focal distance but both shots also look soft, a symptom of compression failure again in high detail scenes. Not saying I dont like RED, I've used a RED camera for every shoot I could get it on (yes I'm a RedHead), but it does have its issues.
Click to expand...
 
I didn't do this on purpose, must have been a setting from a rental that was never changed back. Yet this is meta data, should it really matter with my exposure? Look at my histo, all should be well?

I think Matt hit the nail on the head. The image fell apart because of overload of detail. Which hopefully the Dragon sensor will solve.

Gunleik Groven said:
Etter is not allways a good advice.

On your screenshot the settings are iso 800 + 0,5 FLIT, guess you adjusted flut in camera. That is not a very tood advice for controlling exposure...


All in all, that gives you close to 2 stops digital hain,.

Look at that image in 320/0flut, and you are closer to the actual exposure.

Exposure is trickier with wide gammut images like the example you show. W
Click to expand...
 
It matters on the histogram and meta affects your exposure decissions like t-stops and ND.

Look at it at 320/no flut, and you are floser ro what you really exposed...

Metadata does not affect what the camera records, but it often affect exposure decissions... (Which are about how much light you let the sensor see...)
 
Will Keir said:
Matt,

I belive you are correct. It's good to finally have an explanation for this issue. Unfortunately I shoot a lot of shots like this which means my storage demands have just doubled. Does "R3D Trim" create copies as good as the originals?

Unfortunately at 2k 300 FPS, I am using the highest settings possible which I believe is 12:1, even a BS at temp would have probably done little for this issue. Would a faster lens have helped?
Click to expand...

R3D trim is just a section from the master R3D, but still the same full quality as the original.

Faster lenses wouldn't help, but more shallow depth of field would. That gives the compression less detail to process if it's out of focus and smeared.

If you search this site for compression test and or redcode compression test, you will see samples of trees at several compression ratios and the higher compression you go, the more jumpy the compression becomes on the bark of the tree. I'll look for it and post here.
 
Robert Hart said:
Yes. It's all my fault.
Click to expand...

Hahahahahahaha

Feel guilty!

Lol

There isma bit of confusion on the "but it is only raw" vs tweaking of settings in-camera.

I allways feel more comfortable when I feel I have an understanding of what the cam sees, vs what I want it to see. Those adjustments are more for post.

Shoot for the camera and the image you want, adjust in post...
 
As to highspeed, matt is right.

High com pression + highspeed + 2k + tons of detail + low contrast + green gradients, is the hardest test for the Epic.

Works lovely with black ink in water and hard backlight, though...
 
So how do I get my RCX to display the RAW image without adjustments?
 
Here's a couple examples and tests: Some obviously are subjective and not technically accurate tests, but they give you an idea. RED cameras are an amazing modern marvel, but they have a couple quirks that can be fixed (thats a good thing. Most companies wouldn't offer free firware updates with constant fixes and improvements). Threads like this which start healthy discussions help to improve everyones cameras. So keep it constructive, nothing is perfect. REDCODE to me is amazing, but situations like this cause a hitch for some reason. I'm sure Graeme could eventually tweak it and come up with a fix.
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?73876-Heavy-Compression-Artefacts&highlight=scarlet+compression
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?77402-Quick-RED-Compression-Ratio-Comparison&highlight=scarlet+compressionhttp://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?78418-Epic-Compression-Test&highlight=scarlet+compression
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?80118-Epic-Compression-Test-2&highlight=scarlet+compression
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?86350-R3D-Compression-test-examples-DSLR-images-thrown-in-as-well&highlight=scarlet+compression
 
Will Keir said:
So how do I get my RCX to display the RAW image without adjustments?
Click to expand...



You cannot really in any sensible way, as it is linear. (And that is part of the equation to wrap tour head around to understand noise generation)

But if you follow my suggestion (and this suggestion is true for a daylight image only) to lower your Iso to 320 (in post), and play with the gammas, look at it at

5600/no tint adjustment/no flut

"Linear"
"Redgamma3"
"Redlogfilm"
"Redlog"

You should get a pretty good idea of what is in the image.

The "linear" will be the closest representation to what the camera/raw file actually records. Butit looks a bit scary if you're not prepared to dive into new sides of imagecreation... Hahahaha

My guess is that either linear or redlog would be a good start for post for this particular image, but what do I know?
 
Ah! You got me, you have a keen eye Mr. Groven! However that was my error in POST, not on the shoot or in camera rental mixups. When viewed at 320 ISO the image is too dark and the Pine trees on the other side of the lake still fall apart.

Here is a correct screen shot with all the sliders at default. Here is a more accurate representation of my shot in RCX.

NoiseExposureLAKE.png


Gunleik Groven said:
Will... And to paraphrase David...

It's not the cameras fault that you didn't go over the settings, even on a rntal...

:-)
Click to expand...
 
Yup, i get that image is too dark, my point is that you nderexposed and thus get noise...

What stop/lense was that shot with.

The lake adds a lot of diffusion to the trees in the background.

And did you look at it at 320/linear?

That is the closest you'll see to what the cam saw...

Hahahaha
 
At 320 ISO, playing around with similar results. The pines are in trouble!

Gunleik Groven said:
But if you follow my suggestion (and this suggestion is true for a daylight image only) to lower your Iso to 320 (in post), and play with the gammas
Click to expand...
 
Will Keir said:
At 320 ISO, playing around with similar results. The pines are in trouble!
Click to expand...

Sure.

They are underexposed...

Look at it at linear, and you'll get an idea of how badly underexposed they are.

My best hunch is tomstart with either linear or redlog.

But if you want to understand how the camera sees images, startbwith following my above advice...
 
Will linear always look that dark? Do you have a screen shots you could take of a "linear" shot that is not dark?

Gunleik Groven said:
Look at it at linear, and you'll get an idea of how badly underexposed they are.
Click to expand...

Thanks for working with me on this G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top