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 :)

Macgregor and crew, Salt Flats Utah

Aram Bauman said:
Nice clip and pictures. Who ever is taking the BTS pictures has a good eye for framing.
Click to expand...

The photos you've been seeing are the work of Mike Hedge... the guy who started this thread and yes, he's doing a fantastic job and we all appreciate him very much. As a photography enthusiast I can say there's nobody else I'd rather have taking pictures out here.

I'm not sure if they have plans to post clips with location audio... but right now I'm trying to sort dialog from wind, nylon jackets, and crunchy salt. To say mic'ing this location has been a challenge would be a bit of an understatement... also of note about the RED, is that it cycles a cooling fan... which usually throttles down while it's actually recording... The camera is quieter then a lot of other cams, but it's nothing like the prosumer HD cams. Of course the images out of the RED are stunning, and in the right hands the images are beyond hypnotic. It's been an honor to be on board for this one.
 
Wow. Great images and production quality all around. Outstanding work guys.

I've been working a lot and haven't been able to post as much as I would like... but it's great to come back and find these images here.

What a great location. I suppose it didn't hurt the shots to have such a scenic area to shoot in. ;)

nice work.
 
jbeale said:
So far from what we've heard, Red has no selectable analog gain (or attenuation). Yes, you can rate the sensor for ISO 100 but you expose any normal scene that way at your peril. You probably would see quite a bit of clipping if there's any white clothing in the sun, salt flats, and stuff like that in the frame :-)
Click to expand...

jbeale, can you explain or point me to a thread explaining this? How is it that Jim was posting all those ISO tests if the camera doesn't have an ISO adjustment (like most digital SLRs, for example)?
 
eclaire said:
jbeale, can you explain or point me to a thread explaining this? How is it that Jim was posting all those ISO tests if the camera doesn't have an ISO adjustment (like most digital SLRs, for example)?
Click to expand...

I think the jist was we could underexpose by several stops and "push" to an exceptable level of noise and still find detail--in effect, assigning it a higher ISO. Going the other direction, overexposure, assigning a lower ISO would cause highlights to clip and the detail isn't there to find.

We can apparently take advantage of the sensitivity of the sensor in the dark but we can't turn down the sensitivity safely below its 320 rating for brighter scenes.
 
eclaire said:
jbeale, can you explain or point me to a thread explaining this? How is it that Jim was posting all those ISO tests if the camera doesn't have an ISO adjustment (like most digital SLRs, for example)?
Click to expand...

My understanding agrees with what Cardmaverick and wshultz have posted. In the "Dynamic Range" thread, Jim said the very high ISO-equivalent tests did not use different analog gain:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=90360&postcount=15

It is confusing for people coming from DSLRs because those work differently (at least I have always assumed they do. I don't know if Canon, Nikon et. al. actually publish those details).
 
Cardmaverick said:
It's simply a matter of underexposing and then compensating in post, if I remember right...
Click to expand...

That is how it works. And as soon as there is clipping you cant recover detail.
As far as i have tried, going from 320 to 250 is ok, but anything lower than that would give you a clipped image.

BUT more important than that. RIght now i dont remember what brand of ND filters we are using but i any trained eye can spot the difference between shooting with a ND filter on and off. Without ND (and exposing correctly) the image looks better. THis means, the ND is removing contrast, and making the image dirty. Why? We don´t know yet. ;D
 
"We are using Zeiss superspeeds T1.3. Very soft lenses. I dont like them too much, but they are light and cheap."

cheap ??? have you priced these lately ?
perhaps you have a set of SS MK1 's that are old and out of wack ??
i have never found zeiss SS to be soft ( except when AC didn't hit focus)
infact i always have to put a dirty filter in front of them to cut contrast a little - i find em toooo sharp ...
 
macgregor said:
Master primes are VERY expensive.
Cooke S4 or ultraprimes are expensive.
Superspeeds are very cheap. ;D
Click to expand...

they used to be cheap...lately sets are getting $35k, which is still cheaper than Ultra primes but not cheap.

btw- excellent work!
 
macgregor said:
...any trained eye can spot the difference between shooting with a ND filter on and off. Without ND (and exposing correctly) the image looks better. THis means, the ND is removing contrast, and making the image dirty. Why? We don´t know yet. ;D
Click to expand...

It would make sense to me that ND removes some contrast in addition to changing exposure. Any time you have more glass surfaces, you reduce image contrast. Prime lenses usually have more contrast than zooms for this reason: zooms have more lens elements -> more surfaces -> more scattering -> more veiling glare.

It's surprising that the difference is so noticable though, if the ND filter is really clean. You did mention using two stacked filters, that of course gives you four more surfaces than you had and the light scattering problem goes up from that. Are your ND filter surfaces coated, multicoated, or uncoated?
 
Today we were not on the Salt Flats, so we decided to shoot a
quick Nike commercial.... I think a clip might be posted soon...

I got to be the actor for a few hours. very neat. We threw on the
300mm as well, and got some really great looking shots. We were
all hand held today, and Brook was out with us as well. What a day.

1461390847_c5f92176a4.jpg

1461392375_e74cee5711.jpg


http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikehedge/sets/72157602144698100/
 
Finner said:
I could set up a RED main event celebrity boxing match between the 2 of you. Any one want to help crew it and bring their cameras to shoot the event? I am thinking some time in January. Maybe we could have the opening match be a "#6" and "burnt grandpa" tilt.
Click to expand...

Fuck boxing. MMA!
 
I really hope adjustable ISO becomes a feature if it is not already enabled. I constantly bounce back and forth between ISO 100-to even 800 on my DSLR.

Oh, btw, the footage looks amazing and thank you for taking the time to post it.
 
liquidigital said:
I really hope adjustable ISO becomes a feature if it is not already enabled. I constantly bounce back and forth between ISO 100-to even 800 on my DSLR.

Oh, btw, the footage looks amazing and thank you for taking the time to post it.
Click to expand...

Concrete said:
Yeah; i don't know if it can be done but the possibility to dial back to 50 ISO would be very welcome.
Click to expand...

Are you guys taliking about software ISO (the only possibility right now, and maybe ever) or analog ISO ?

The ISO settings as it stands will just indicate the default setting with which RedAlert, RedCine or whatever app you use, will debayer and process your footage into RGB. Therefore you cannot really go down in ISO unless as has been mentined here : http://205.234.134.160/forum/showthread.php?t=4904&page=2

Jim has stated some time ago, Redusers better get used to using ND.

Cheers,
Damien
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top