Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

Komodo Low-Light / ISO range

W

Woodruff Laputka

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Fairbanks, Alaska
Curious what the general experience with the komodo in low light has been, and what preferred ISOs folks have been working with. Thanks, Woodruff
 
preferred ISO? the sensor is stuck on a fixed gain that's close to 800 iso no matter what iso you setup, if you chose a different value does not change the gain on the sensor
 
While it's true that you don't actually add gain to the sensor by changing the ISO, you can make different choices about how you expose the sensor relative your tolerance for noise. (Some people actually like the look you get by setting the ISO higher-- DP Brandon Trost, for example, talks about his preference for shooting at ISO 3200 on Red for the films like THE DISASTER ARTIST.)

You might find this piece interesting-- it describes the way ISO works for all Red cameras:
https://www.red.com/red-101/iso-speed-revisited

In practice, I typically expose for ISO 800, but have no problem bumping it up to 1000 or 1280 in decent light. (That is, when there's some contrast, and it's not simply about shooting in general darkness. For example, when shooting slow motion.) But it's quite different than turning up the ISO on a Sony camera with built-in noise reduction.
 
Best balance is ISO800 because that's closest to the RAW range that is fixed before any ISO gain is applied. So ISO800 correlates closest to what the camera "sees". Use the stop lights to be extra sure. But then you have the option to either go higher if you want better highlight protection or lower for less noise in low key scenes.
 
Question about this. Using Resolve I can set the ISO in post thanks to Red Raw. So if I set the camera to ISO 12800 on location and get a shot, than set it back to ISO 800 and get another shot, but now in post bump that up to 12800, will the results look identical?
 
Lars Wikstrom said:
Question about this. Using Resolve I can set the ISO in post thanks to Red Raw. So if I set the camera to ISO 12800 on location and get a shot, than set it back to ISO 800 and get another shot, but now in post bump that up to 12800, will the results look identical?
Click to expand...

If you have changed none of the settings (iris, ND< shutter speed, etc) for that ISO 800 shot between the ISO 12800 one they will look idential.
 
Lars Wikstrom said:
Question about this. Using Resolve I can set the ISO in post thanks to Red Raw. So if I set the camera to ISO 12800 on location and get a shot, than set it back to ISO 800 and get another shot, but now in post bump that up to 12800, will the results look identical?
Click to expand...

It should, but I’ve also seen tests that show a minor difference when exposing for a certain ISO, so generally get a good exposure on set and don’t stray too far from the chosen ISO in post. I’m not sure why this is, maybe there’s more balancing done in-camera based chosen ISO. I mean, shots tint twords green a lot when trying adjust something many stops off the mark, but not when exposing correctly in the first place. I generally recommend that you expose not more than 1-2 steps of ISO off a good balance so not to risk any bad tint.
 
Phil Holland said:
If you have changed none of the settings (iris, ND< shutter speed, etc) for that ISO 800 shot between the ISO 12800 one they will look idential.
Click to expand...

True! But also a pedantic dodge of the subject of this thread. Yes, ISO is technically just metadata for RAW, but if you show up on set and everybody's dialed in to the idea that you're shooting at ISO 12800, you are going to get a wildly different amount of light hitting the sensor than if everybody's dialed in to ISO 800. The DoP who walks into the set proudly declaring "ISO doesn't matter because it's just metadata!" is a fool.

A felicitous answer is 320-640 for STH and/or < 4000K lighting, 500-1600 for STD/LLO and >= 4000K lighting, informed by the helpful charts you have posted on phfx.com about mid-tone gray exposure, shadow details, highlight clipping, etc.

Of course RAW makes it very easy to fine-tune ISO and WB metadata to balance clips for grading, which is wonderful. But if the question is "How should I set the ISO of a RED so that it meters what my f-ing meter says at ISO 800" the answer is "Use IPP2 and ISO 800". If the question is "what's the best starting point for both my camera, my meter, and my crew?" the answer is 800, but test and adjust to taste.
 
Last edited:
Michael Tiemann said:
True! But also a pedantic dodge of the subject of this thread. Yes, ISO is technically just metadata for RAW, but if you show up on set and everybody's dialed in to the idea that you're shooting at ISO 12800, you are going to get a wildly different amount of light hitting the sensor than if everybody's dialed in to ISO 800. The DoP who walks into the set proudly declaring "ISO doesn't matter because it's just metadata!" is a fool.

A felicitous answer is 320-640 for STH and/or < 4000K lighting, 500-1600 for STD/LLO and >= 4000K lighting, informed by the helpful charts you have posted about mid-tine gray exposure, shadow details, highlight clipping, etc.

Of course RAW makes it very easy to fine-tune ISO and WB metadata to balance clips for grading, which is wonderful. But if the question is "How should I set the ISO of a RED so that it meters what my f-ing meter says at ISO 800" the answer is "Use IPP2 and ISO 800". If the question is "what's the best starting point for both my camera, my meter, and my crew?" the answer is 800, but test and adjust to taste.
Click to expand...
I understand that you are trying being helpful, but over simplification of matter of rating the camera to just 800 ISO is bit tiering.
Sorry to hear that you being a DP don't have control over lights and exposure.
Charts not made by you can be helpful just as starting point to know new camera before tests you will make for your self.
Just an example -- you are shooting on stage some night stuff and have windows with green screen. Why have high ISO, then you can benefit from low one as you are controlling all the light levels, from darks to specular highlights.

"If the question is "what's the best starting point for both my camera, my meter, and my crew?" the answer is 800, but test and adjust to taste.
"
But I really-really like that part.
 
When I was purchasing my Monstro a knowledgeable friend told me to simply consider the shooting future as though I had a truckload of ISO800 film. The film effective ISO can be altered during chemical processing (to become lighter/darker) but the range of alteration is pretty small before the chemical footprints become noticeable.
My takeaway was to use ISO800 for almost everything except low light where I know I will run out of light at ISO800. When that happens I will have to ALTER THE DISPLAY of the captured images by using a higher ISO. When raising ISO, the images brighten and the noise becomes more apparent.
I suggest trying an experiment regarding noise. Shoot a sequence with no lens, just a tight cap - no light. View the image at low ISO and things will be nice and black. Then step the ISO up and watch the noise become visible. You may be surprised regarding how fast the noise becomes a serious component of the image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top