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 :)

Now its confusing me....

M

Michele Gavazzeni

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
401
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
47
Maybe Mr. Jannard could directly answer to this without letting us speculating.

Here is a previous post by Graeme

Changing ISO is really changing where you place, in the range of 0-4095 code values, where mid grey goes. ISO100 will put the mid grey high up that range, and hence, there are few code values left for highlights. You are essentially trading less highlight lattitude for more shadow lattitude (ie, a noise free image). However, if there are shadows in that scene, you'll be able to dig further into them.

If you go to a higher ISO, you start adding highlight lattitude for noise / shadow lattitude. Say you now go up two stops to ISO400. Now you've gained two stops more highlight lattitude, but you've lost two stops on how deep you can dig into the shadows.

Graeme
Click to expand...



Here is a the post by Jannard (build 16...taste)
Build 16 now lets you use slower ISOs with no penalty.
Click to expand...

Now its confusing me....
 
Hi Michele

I've puzzled over the 'no penalty' comment...

What makes a certain sense to me is that since the chips output seems to ( with b16) be encoded and then displayed differenly?? We, when shooting at all iso settings, have greater monitoring abilty to understand what we have. No penalty = less guess work?

For example at the moment when shoting at 500asa it is very tempting to back off the exposure due to the way the picture is displayed. Truth is those slighly painfull higlight sections are probably fine. The way I double check is to replay with 200/250asa selected. There is the inverse problem when shooting at 100/200.

maybe we will get a little more info out of JJ? (Although if writting posts here slows development down in the slightest :biggrin: feel free to ignore us all)

regards

Michael Lindsay
 
I believe Build 16 is capable of pullng out much more details from the shadows, with far lesser noise. We hope we get more on this from JJ .
 
It'll be easier to talk about this once we get B16 out. Both what Jim and I said are correct however.

Graeme
 
We don't need no Artifacts in Build 16. NR is not right to apply to the RAW File !!!

ASA 320 is a standard which was approved by Mr. Peter Jackson back in the early stage with his great help on CTL in NZ.

SS was using the RED in correct though !!!

We just leave this noise issue to some experts in handling Noise reduction like :

SNELL and Wilcocx or Digital Vision or DaVinChi or Diamant software etc.

Cheers,

STEWART
Alchemist and Founder
REDHKSC
HKG
 
Setting the right ISO is important.

Say you've got controlled studio lighting. Say there's a small dynamic range to capture. Setting a low ISO here will help, as then you'll put mid grey at a high number, and you'll record a totally noise free image. You'll see the histogram such that you're filling it, without clipping, and the image in the LCD will look good too.

But if you're in low light... Setting a higher ISO will allow you to see what you're shooting. If you can't see it, you can't shoot it. Or set a low ISO and add more light.

And if you're outdoors, with wild highlights / sky, setting a high ISO will allow you to have a nice looking image, but with mid grey recorded lower, giving ample highlight protection for a great post grade.

Graeme
 
From posts on this forum, I was beginning to think ISO was metadata as well... not the traditional light sensitivity rating. Was the Red ISO = Red Metadata thinking always wrong or was that recently changed in B16?
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Setting the right ISO is important.

Say you've got controlled studio lighting. Say there's a small dynamic range to capture. Setting a low ISO here will help, as then you'll put mid grey at a high number, and you'll record a totally noise free image. You'll see the histogram such that you're filling it, without clipping, and the image in the LCD will look good too.

But if you're in low light... Setting a higher ISO will allow you to see what you're shooting. If you can't see it, you can't shoot it. Or set a low ISO and add more light.

And if you're outdoors, with wild highlights / sky, setting a high ISO will allow you to have a nice looking image, but with mid grey recorded lower, giving ample highlight protection for a great post grade.

Graeme
Click to expand...

This stand true with Build 15 too right ?
I am testing RED in the coming week for a feature in India. I guess by the time we go on floors, build 16 would be out and I would love to work with B16

How would the working style change (if it does) with Build 16 ? are there thngs that were being done when on Build 15 and that should not be done (or done differently) on Build 16.

Thanks .
 
Yes for B15. B16 is going to add some subtleties that should make life easier though.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Setting the right ISO is important.

Say you've got controlled studio lighting. Say there's a small dynamic range to capture. Setting a low ISO here will help, as then you'll put mid grey at a high number, and you'll record a totally noise free image. You'll see the histogram such that you're filling it, without clipping, and the image in the LCD will look good too.

But if you're in low light... Setting a higher ISO will allow you to see what you're shooting. If you can't see it, you can't shoot it. Or set a low ISO and add more light.

And if you're outdoors, with wild highlights / sky, setting a high ISO will allow you to have a nice looking image, but with mid grey recorded lower, giving ample highlight protection for a great post grade.

Graeme
Click to expand...

I work mostly outdoors. If I shoot 500 ISO, will I lose shadow detail (or gain shadow noise)?
 
Iso

Iso

Jason Ing said:
From posts on this forum, I was beginning to think ISO was metadata as well... not the traditional light sensitivity rating. Was the Red ISO = Red Metadata thinking always wrong or was that recently changed in B16?
Click to expand...

Somebody from Red!

Is ISO metadata? Yes or no? Or does it change the actual recorded file?
 
ISO is metadata.

All depends on what your scene looks like. There's no substitute for experimentation, but ISO500 should be very good for brightly lit scenes where you're interested in the mid values, but want to preserve highlights / sky.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
ISO is metadata.

All depends on what your scene looks like. There's no substitute for experimentation, but ISO500 should be very good for brightly lit scenes where you're interested in the mid values, but want to preserve highlights / sky.

Graeme
Click to expand...

One more post, and you get your big "2,000th post"!!! Congrats! :-)
 
Graeme Nattress said:
ISO is metadata.

All depends on what your scene looks like. There's no substitute for experimentation, but ISO500 should be very good for brightly lit scenes where you're interested in the mid values, but want to preserve highlights / sky.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Therefore, setting ISO is mostly about establishing your metering and monitoring parameters?

Thanks for your answers. I hope my questions are not too basic, but I'm trying to really understand this issue.
 
I think of ISO as a decision on where you want to place your exposure. Now, as ISO is metadata, it does not matter what ISO you set the camera to, but, you must think about ISO, where you want to place mid grey in the RAW data. If you set the camera to that value or not, it does not effect the recorded RAW data, but never-the-less, you must make that exposure decision.

Graeme
 
Sorry, I must be getting more stupid with each post. This thread's title is getting more appropriate for me.

Please bear with me, I'm not being argumentative or difficult. I just want to understand it.

This is my current understanding: If ISO is just metadata, and it does not matter what it's set to, then it's not affecting the actual data. It is what it is. By changing the ISO, I'm affecting how it displays on the lcd/monitor. That's it.

But then I read things like "Setting the right ISO is important. Say you've got controlled studio lighting. Say there's a small dynamic range to capture. Setting a low ISO here will help, as then you'll put mid grey at a high number, and you'll record a totally noise free image..."

I sort of understand the shifting of the mid-greys. But saying I'll get a totally noise free image makes me think that if I didn't set the important ISO, I would get a noisy image. Sort of like making the same decision with film: ISO 100 = grainless, ISO 1000 = grainy. What if I, in the previous situation, set the ISO higher? Much higher. So high, it messes up the image on the LCD viewer. But it's just metadata, right? So I bring it into post and I still get the same raw data; the exact, totally noise free image that I would have gotten if I used a low iso, right?

Maybe this scenario might help me understand it:

All things being equal, two red camera operators use the same aperture and shutter settings, no NDs, existing lighting, and don't have to worry about focusing (because Red creates a state of the art, ultra-precise and quick automatic focusing system that no one has to manually follow focus anymore). :)

Okay, so they run around and point the Mysterium sensor's range of 0-4095 code values in all lighting conditions. But one doesn't change the ISO at all and the other does change it to suit the lighting condition. Will the raw data and images be exactly the same in post? Won't both of them get exactly the same clipping or the same noiseless/noisy images?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top