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 :)

OLPFS NIGHT TEST

Thanks Matt Ryan, those pics look good. Would love to see some higher rez versions to analyse the noise floor a bit more :-)
 
Adam Howden said:
Thanks Matt Ryan, those pics look good. Would love to see some higher rez versions to analyse the noise floor a bit more :-)
Click to expand...

Thanks Adam! Right click and open in a new tab. They are UHD 3840x1620 stills. Video isn't out yet so can't really post anything else.
 
Hey

So I decided to do my own LLO vs STH test.

These were both shot with the camera fully warmed up and properly blackshaded. This is under completely mixed lighting with a mix of Fluorescent (daylight and warm), incandescent and daylight. This was shot on a Nikon 50mm Ai @ f4. The scene was intentional underexposed @ 2000 ASA by 1 stop.

The below jpegs were processed at 6400ASA with DEB. Both shots were WB to the piece of paper lying in the mid ground. They are full size 5K, just open them in another tab.

Low Light OLPF
LLO.jpg


Skin Tone OLPF
STH.jpg



You can download the R3D's Here

http://clients.digitalcavemedia.com/reduser/OLPF.zip

My take away here is just how much better the color reproduction of the STH OLPF is. I can see that the LLO is a hair cleaner, but I'm not sure if the trade off in color is worth it. I wanted to test mixed lighting because that is where i would want to use the LLO, dim documentary set ups where I can not control lighting.

My other question is, is there STH OLPF a glorified 80C filter. It looks like it to me and it looses about the same amount of light.
 
Avoid using DEB on the LLO Olpf footage. It adds a slight green tint in my experience. DEB was designed for the red noise found with the skintone highlight olpf from my understanding...

Something about your test is off. The LLO Olpf has 1.3 stops more in the low end so there should be considerably less noise than the skintone olpf given equal exposure. Every other test has show this. Something is not right here...
 
All in all these tests look really good. It definitely helps that there is contrast built into the images presented. Problems seem to arise when trying to pull an image up with no light/ contrast separation built into the images
 
Hey Matt

Did not know that about DEB on the LLO OLPF. It still does a good job of cleaning up colored noise though.

I can assure you that these were done within the time it took me to switch the OLPF and metered with a light meter both times. Again this is under very mixed lighting, and outside today is is extremely overcast, so the outside exposure could not have changed dramatically.

I am seeing slightly cleaner blacks, about a stop in my opinion, but the difference in color reproduction is astounding. The STH under mixed lighting just out performs the LLO.
 
Matt Ryan said:
Something about your test is off. The LLO Olpf has 1.3 stops more in the low end so there should be considerably less noise than the skintone olpf given equal exposure. Every other test has show this. Something is not right here...
Click to expand...

i think it is about a threshold. Let me explain.

when this sensor has enough light (either OLPF) the STH will outperform

when the sensor is at the edge of low light (either OLPF) the STH will outperform

when there is virtually no light (either OLPF) then you will have one more stop to dig out of the darks if you have the LLO

by using this logic, where the Sensor light low threshold was not reached, when there was enough light and you don't go below a certain threshold, either OLPF installed, then the STH will tend to win.

Its when there really is not enough or any light and that is the Its in the 1 stop low threshold in the shadows where you will start to see the advantages of the LLO clearly. As it should be as it is made expressly for that purpose.

When the sensor goes below its low light threshold, or breaking point, in the darks and shadows, you will have a stop more "recovery range in the darks with the LLO (much like the MX performs) with the LLO.

but I feel, if you stay above the threshold the STH gives a more distinct image. Love having them both though. :)

Battistella
 
Even if the LLO with DEB adds a slight green tint, can't you just grade it out? (I played with it a bit, and DEB definitely removes colored noise, so it's worth it imo)
 
Adam Montville said:
Even if the LLO with DEB adds a slight green tint, can't you just grade it out? (I played with it a bit, and DEB definitely removes colored noise, so it's worth it imo)
Click to expand...

If you just want to removed coloured noise, try the Denoise instead of DEB.
 
Kemalettin Sert said:
this is the test we did
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B867uZQzS_OlSHJiSXZZb1lxSEE/view

difference is huge! So happy that i got Lowlight olpf :)
Click to expand...

Thanks Kemalettin, this is what is expected and the reason I use the LLO Olpf... The LLO OLPF has more info in the low end, retains better color down there whereas the Skintone olpf goes greenish on the low end, and smaller grain size/ no red noise. The close up is a good example of the green tint that happens if you look at his hair. Also notice you can't tell what color his shirt is in the skintone olpf.
VS.jpg
 
looking good, glad my kit has both!! i wonder if one day they could make a system that had swappable OLPFs and NDs in the camera though? seems like if they ever redo the body that could be a nifty feature... i love that the low light one seems to be much better images now that the reflection issue was crushed...its always amazing how big a freak out there is when the problems disappear so rapidly here like the LLO looks great in this thread, and for run and gun looks friggin awesome!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top