Learning proper exposure!!!

[Alexander Alexandrov]

Here is an example of when you might want to expose to the right to pul what you can out of that face. You can always make it darker, but it's harder to pull out of the blacks if it is not there.

David

so the approach here should be so to expose for the face, although the highlights would be clipping (when the goal is to get the face right in post)

 

[David Battistella]

From my experience, the RED handles much like RAW on a DSLR rather than film. If you want to overexpose for a specific look (music vids, etc) you can. And with careful direction, you can get it to look fantastic. In other situations, a blown highlight can ruin your day. Depends on the look you're going for, and careful preparation.

It would be a mistake to think you can treat the RED like film. Sure it offers more flexibility compared to video...but that doesn't mean you can get sloppy.

To me, it's like saying a Porsche Boxster is more Ferrari-like than a station wagon. Sure... but it's still not a Ferrari.

Yeah,

I like to think of it more like shooting Positive film instead of negative. There is a sweet spot and you don't want to be to far over or under that spot.

Negative film has much more latitude of course.

David

 

[David Battistella]

so the approach here should be so to expose for the face, although the highlights would be clipping (when the goal is to get the face right in post)

Yes,

And this is a big BUT.. as long as you are OK with blowing out those pixels and you know that you will not recover them.

I have been surprised at what is there when I have thought I was blowing stuff out (in the sky or something like that) and realized that there was still a bit of data there.

Let's say the face was exposed one stop under than what "looks good on the monitor or histogram" in this scenario. You might then have some latitude to play with in the skin tone and still get a bit more out of your background.

And you'd still be safely exposed and not "under". It's a bigger problem when you ride the very floor of exposure because the RED is not that fast.

David

 

[Alexander Alexandrov]

thank u;
yep in this example, the BUTs will have to be taken care of with more light or NDs

wanted to make sure there's no magic to pull greatly exposed faces out of the dark

 

[Tehben Dean]

Is there a good thread or tutorial that covers learning/tips for proper exposure on RED one that anyone would recommend... other then this one

From my limited experience it seems like avoiding underexposure is just as critical as over exposure, unless there are tricks to remove grain. I am always trying to expose as much as possible even if it clips some in the sky for example.
The stuff Ted was shooting in the video was very high contrast and he was trying to avoid clipping... what if you are shooting something that has much more uniform lighting?

Tehben

 

[Liam Hall]

what if you are shooting something that has much more uniform lighting?

Tehben

It sounds like you're doing it right.

In a low contrast situation, you can expose for mid-tone. It's only when you have too much dynamic range in a scene for the camera to capture that you need to underexpose mid-tone to protect highlights and then bring those mid tones back in post. But if you don't want/need detail in the highlights - edge of a cloud, light filament etc - then just let them blow.

It's a touch misleading to say exposing for RED is like exposing for film since film has more dynamic range. But, with RAW you do have latitude for grading in post and that is where it behaves more like film than regular video. It is also fair to say that more film DoPs have experience with grading and so know how to expose with post-production in mind. That's also true of many younger film makers brought up wringing every possible detail out of crappy DV cameras, but for the majority of broadcast camera ops who shoot and hand over the tape there's a small but significant learning curve.

A little practice and a passing knowledge of both the zone method and histograms should be enough to get most people on the right track.

 

[Alexander Alexandrov]

Is there a good thread or tutorial that covers learning/tips for proper exposure on RED one that anyone would recommend... other then this one

i think this is a good one, from the founder: http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=30055

 

[alexx_hg]

very interesting discussion.

When I´m exposing the way how Ted is doing, then I for sure get noise in my blacks/greys with a simple offset-gamma-gain correction to bring up some darker parts to the midtones.
For me under such uncontrollable conditions the only way to expose the darker areas satisfactorily against the highlights is using one or two graded NDs to bring down the peaks.
The other way around in controlled enviroment exposing for the highlights I need a lot of fills to reduce the noisefloor in the darker areas. (crushing the blacks is not always the solution)

Maybe I `m doing something wrong with my camera or in post, than please show a third part of Ted´s video with a simple offset-gamma-gain correction with different especially raw-based tools.
Maybe others are doing wrong too, reading GeoffBoyles examination in Hannover.
Other question is, looking at my old footage from build 15 or 16 the highlight rolloff looked much more pleasantly, was there a change in the new builds?

bg
alex

(...and yes I still love my RED...)

 

[Andy Taplin]

I've discovered a great piece of software for reducing noise in underexposed footage:

http://www.innobits.com/purifier.html

I had some really badly underexposed DV to edit and had to crank it up with terrible noise in the dark areas. Video Purifier really saved the day. If the noise is only moderate VP would eliminate it completely, it's a really great tool and fast rendering too.