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 :)

RED 65mm

Status
Not open for further replies.
I say stick with a s35mm size sensor! but use 2 and a prism. I want more latitude god damn it, to hell with 8k, more latitude, higher bit rate. 32bit with 32 stops of latitude. That would be awesomely radiculas. Great fun for the colorist. The only thing that could be a sticky wicket would be focus.
 
Lachlan Ward said:
I say stick with a s35mm size sensor! but use 2 and a prism. I want more latitude god damn it, to hell with 8k, more latitude, higher bit rate. 32bit with 32 stops of latitude. That would be awesomely radiculas.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you'll ever see 32 stops of latitude. Even film can't do that, and even if there were a format out there that could, you would need a much better monitor (which doesn't exist yet) in order to view that stuff. Add on top the need for a good understanding of viewing LUTs etc... HDR cinema would certainly be cool to play with though, assuming anyone ever makes it. I've messed around a little HDR photography.

I can certainly understand a desire for more latitude, but I think many people mistakingly believe more latitude = automatically better images with less effort. Not quite the case, really good film lighting can be pretty hyper realistic looking. Latitude simply makes the capture stage more flexible, but it wouldn't make a hard lit old womans face look any nicer.

Sorry if I busted your bubble! :bleh:
 
Im sure that some readers of this list think that recording 16bit RAW improves dynamic range.
Once the photo site has had its fill of electrons and is saturated that's it.

CMOS is not the best of sensors when it comes to dynamic range.

One thing electronic sensors do promise in the future is increased resolution.

We need a apple to fall on someone's head to radically improve CMOS or CCD dynamic range....



Mike Brennan
 
I dont know much about the Mysterium sensor, but if they are able to crop it down to a s16mm sized sensor, would it be really hard to just make it bigger to a 65mm sensor, or set 2 inside a camera, like one side by side. I am probably really really really REALLY off, but i know is more complicated that that, or maybe they could use mirrors or soemthign to collect the data from the lens reflect it into the prossesor. Maybe like in LOTR when they had pippen or i dont know what hobbit saving the kings son from being burned and they set up a mirror reflecting the fire so he can jump in an not get burned...
 
I was trying to think of a way to give a more of a dynamic range and more latitude. Like a 65mm sensor, or a way to give the equivalent to a 65mm sensor without making a whole new sensor.
 
If you go for a two-sensor approach to increasing dynamic range, they have to be taking exactly the same image at the same time, just one exposed darker than the other, so side-by-side doesn't work. You'd either have to go with a prism block to split the light in two directions, or create a pattern in a single sensor that had 50% of the photosites filtered darker.

Yes, you could also try some sort of partial mirror trick to reflect some of the light to a second sensor at a right angle to the first, but again, you have the same problem as the prism block method -- you need more space and you'd have limitations on the flange depth of the lenses.

As for making a 65mm-sized sensor, that's not so hard... but then you need 65mm / medium-format optics to cover the sensor area.
 
I've been thinking again (go figure!).

This probably isn't the "ideal" solution to getting more range, but one worth playing around with at least.

Many people are creating these little 35mm adapters using ground glass as a sort of rear projection screen. Might it not be possible to somehow split the image on the reverse side of the screen (the side the camera is on) and then have two cameras shooting the same scene?

I know its kinda clumsy and "guerrilla" style, but for lower budget shows shooting exteriors (heck, even naturalist cinematographers), this might be a cool solution. You can get the 35mm DOF, and at the same time, have a somewhat HDR image.

The only cons I can think of right off the bat are...

- Gen Locking, not all lower end HD cameras can do this.

- Editing could be a pain if you want to make use of dual exposures, and combining them together into a seamless image requires a mixture of compositing and colorist work (I could do this, but I'm sure not everyone else out there knows how).

- Light loss could be high due to the extra splitting optics.

- Twice as heavy rig (and all the complications that brings).

- CA issues with the two different cameras. The lenses need to be pretty darn close to perfect, or at least exhibit the same CA issues to the same degree.

On second thought, unless you do landscapes and super telephoto daytime shots of wildlife, this might not be the best idea out there. However, I'd be willing to play with one if I had the resources to make it.
 
Cardmaverick said:
Many people are creating these little 35mm adapters using ground glass as a sort of rear projection screen. Might it not be possible to somehow split the image on the reverse side of the screen (the side the camera is on) and then have two cameras shooting the same scene?
Click to expand...

Chris,
I don't think this would work in practice because of the image alignment. To get usable HDR footage you need to have EXACTLY the same image photographed twice. The parallax between your two cameras would probably be enough to throw every pixel out of place just enough to ruin your image.

I think if we want a system with a bigger sensor and less DOF, but still want RED ergonomics and compatibility with existing gear, we should be asking for the vistavision sensor with nikon lenses.

As for increasing dynamic range, what about what the fuji DSLRs do? They have photosites coupled with "micro" photosites that let in less light, and combined the data for a more accurate exposure with better highlights. It works really well, I've always been happy with the DR out of my s5
 
Radoslav Karapetkov said:
For Scarlet? Unlikely.

Probably for a future RED II or III.

I wonder if the current RED One body could house a 65mm-sized sensor?

Giving us the possibility to take advantage of the modular design and easier\cheaper upgrades in the future?
Click to expand...

Wow we have come a long way :D
 
RED did mention way back a 645 sensor and had concept renders of it. I personally have been waiting for it eagerly as I shoot a lot still photography with medium format digital back. Not sure why anybody would be asking about it in the Scarlet section of the RED forum. It's like asking about aircrafts in the bicycle section.
 
OMG.. ZOMBIE THREAD!!!

Die! Die, die!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top