RED SHUTTER QUESTIONS (PICS and VIDEO EXAMPLES PLEASE)

[PJ Porter]

I will finally receive my Red Touch this upcoming week, which will complete my Scarlet Package.

I understand that the most common ISO used is 800, but my question to my fellow RED users is What shutter speeds do most of you use? 1/64? 1/120? 1/130? or higher? Send me some video and picture examples of your work if you can! This would help out a lot!

Thanks!

 

[Tyler Dreher]

I will finally receive my Red Touch this upcoming week, which will complete my Scarlet Package.

I understand that the most common ISO used is 800, but my question to my fellow RED users is What shutter speeds do most of you use? 1/64? 1/120? 1/130? or higher? Send me some video and picture examples of your work if you can! This would help out a lot!

Thanks!

Dont have any pictures but I usually do it at 1/48 or 180 degree shutter. Frame rate is 24 so twice that. More speed is going to give you more motion blur (personally makes me sick) and less is going to make it look choppy.

 

[Phil Holland]

Motion pictures are commonly filmed with 180 degree shutter speeds. So for a 24fps project you are looking at 1/48th. This is primarily due to the pleasing nature of the motion blur in reference to the following frames while balancing a reasonably sharp image.

However, once you get further up in higher frame rates you may desire to "open up" a bit for the exposure gains by having a slightly slower shutter speed than the standard 180 degree shutter as once the shutter speed becomes fast enough you are minimizing the pleasing effect that motion blur provides.

It's also common in countries with 50 or 60Hz power to shoot at 1/50th or 1/60th to avoid strobing with standard light sources and monitors.

 

[PJ Porter]

Frame rate is 24 so twice that.

Tyler I Didn't quite get the "twice that" line, did you mean that you use 1/48 at 24f?

 

[PJ Porter]

However, once you get further up in higher frame rates you may desire to "open up" a bit for the exposure gains by having a slightly slower shutter speed than the standard 180 degree shutter as once the shutter speed becomes fast enough you are minimizing the pleasing effect that motion blur provides.

It's also common in countries with 50 or 60Hz power to shoot at 1/50th or 1/60th to avoid strobing with standard light sources and monitors.

Ok, so Phil, what exposure and shutter would you suggest for a 60fps production?

 

[Phil Holland]

Ok, so Phil, what exposure and shutter would you suggest for a 60fps production?

Smooth effect: 1/60th.
Traditional method: 1/120th
More jagged staccato look: 1/250th and faster

Remember to make sure your Black Shading Calibration is green when shooting with different shutter speeds.

 

[PJ Porter]

Smooth effect: 1/60th.
Traditional method: 1/120th
More jagged staccato look: 1/250th and faster

Remember to make sure your Black Shading Calibration is green when shooting with different shutter speeds.

Ok, great! Thanks Phil!

 

[Lakis Amarantithis]

>>Motion pictures are commonly filmed with 180 degree shutter speeds. So for a 24fps project you are looking at 1/48th. This is primarily due to the pleasing nature of the motion blur in reference to the following frames while balancing a reasonably sharp image.

So Phil, how much is acceptable to deviate (in time) from filming at 180 degree before it'll be annoying? How annoying can it be? I don't like to be told by rules how to shoot in general but don't want to cause an unpleasant experience either.

 

[D Fuller]

So Phil, how much is acceptable to deviate (in time) from filming at 180 degree before it'll be annoying? How annoying can it be? I don't like to be told by rules how to shoot in general but don't want to cause an unpleasant experience either.

You've got to test it, man. Try some different shutter angles (speeds) and see what works for what you're shooting. Saving Private Ryan famously used narrower-than-normal shutter angles (shorter shutter speeds) for the opening D-Day sequence, both because it was typical of the hand-held cameras that military photogs used in those days, but also because the more staccato motion rendering enhanced the scene.

I've used shutter speeds as high as 1/1000th to shoot whitewater rafting, because the sharpness of the individual frames makes the water sparkle. As long as you know what "normal" looks like, there's no reason not to do whatever makes the scene play like you want it to.

 

[Maik Müller]

+1, you really should play and test. Shutter-speed is a tool to get creative, break the rules if you like what you are seeing. Today 1/48th is just a starting point, you can easily go up and down a bit from this common base without destroying the "film-look". I tend to go higher for run&gun/handheld stuff, to 1/72th for example. And i wouldn't fear to go down a bit for static shots with not enough light available.

It all depends on what look you want, how much motion and camera-movement is in the scene and what your lighting allows you to do.

 

[todd k]

Saving private Ryan actually did more than just shutter speed. They printed it by running every other frame twice to add more jerkiness than just a fast shutter.

 

[Dr. Sassi]

http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/shutter-angle-tutorial

 

[PJ Porter]

+1, you really should play and test. Shutter-speed is a tool to get creative, break the rules if you like what you are seeing. Today 1/48th is just a starting point, you can easily go up and down a bit from this common base without destroying the "film-look". I tend to go higher for run&gun/handheld stuff, to 1/72th for example. And i wouldn't fear to go down a bit for static shots with not enough light available.

It all depends on what look you want, how much motion and camera-movement is in the scene and what your lighting allows you to do.

Have you ever done any sporting events Maik? If so, what shutter have you used?

 

[PJ Porter]

http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/shutter-angle-tutorial

Thanks Doc.

 

[Dr. Sassi]

Thanks Doc.

You're welcome. )

You asked about sport events. That is a wide field. Certainly an artistic and technical question. Technically I would say, go with a long shutter speed, if that is more a documentary style that you intent to target with the project. If you shoot higher frame rates that might come in handy anyway (more light). It is perhaps as well as more artistically, if you like to target one "runner" and have the background in complete motion blur for example. With a very short shutter speed, the background has (while following a fast moving object) less blur and you do not "peel" the foreground from the background. Hence the one in focus looses his foreground contrast and melts perhaps more with the background than you would like to have it.

Filmic is certainly 180º ("some" might argue here, certainly a question of memory, experience and artistic intention), but if it is indoors, and high frame rates, check what the light sources do to your "footage", will it be flicker-free?

Typically -- if in doubt -- do tests and make your own experience, If you don't mind that I give you an advice. Try to "break" the image, to know the borders and limits.
I love to read and respect what people write here on RU, but without my own trial and error, I wouldn't be where I'm now.

 

[PJ Porter]

You're welcome. )

You asked about sport events. That is a wide field. Certainly an artistic and technical question. Technically I would say, go with a long shutter speed, if that is more a documentary style that you intent to target with the project. If you shoot higher frame rates that might come in handy anyway (more light). It is perhaps as well as more artistically, if you like to target one "runner" and have the background in complete motion blur for example. With a very short shutter speed, the background has (while following a fast moving object) less blur and you do not "peel" the foreground from the background. Hence the one in focus looses his foreground contrast and melts perhaps more with the background than you would like to have it.

Filmic is certainly 180º ("some" might argue here, certainly a question of memory, experience and artistic intention), but if it is indoors, and high frame rates, check what the light sources do to your "footage", will it be flicker-free?

Typically -- if in doubt -- do tests and make your own experience, If you don't mind that I give you an advice. Try to "break" the image, to know the borders and limits.
I love to read and respect what people write here on RU, but without my own trial and error, I wouldn't be where I'm now.

I will definitely keep this in mind, especially the statement on breaking the image. I'm pretty sure that not all of the hollywood film crews follow the rules at times so that's a good point. Thanks again Doc, that helps a lot!

 

[Maik Müller]

Have you ever done any sporting events Maik? If so, what shutter have you used?

Nope, i didn't any serious sports-shooting. But sports is a wide segment anyway, what kind of sports do you have in mind?

Doc is totally right, your choice heavily depends on the look you want to achieve. Faster motion would allow you to use shorter exposure times, but camera movement plays a big part too, because the background isn't moving as fast as the race-car. Test test test... To get normal looking "filmic" footage i wouldn't go really crazy high, the trick is to find a balance between blur and sharpness and that is different in every situation.

I guess you could go crazy and do some math, based on the speed of your subject, but better run tests and let your eyes decide.

For some stuff i sometimes like the really sharp & stuttering look, jumps with a mountain-bike come in mind, not for every shot, just here and there as little "breaker".

 

[PJ Porter]

Nope, i didn't any serious sports-shooting. But sports is a wide segment anyway, what kind of sports do you have in mind?

Doc is totally right, your choice heavily depends on the look you want to achieve. Faster motion would allow you to use shorter exposure times, but camera movement plays a big part too, because the background isn't moving as fast as the race-car. Test test test... To get normal looking "filmic" footage i wouldn't go really crazy high, the trick is to find a balance between blur and sharpness and that is different in every situation.

I guess you could go crazy and do some math, based on the speed of your subject, but better run tests and let your eyes decide.

For some stuff i sometimes like the really sharp & stuttering look, jumps with a mountain-bike come in mind, not for every shot, just here and there as little "breaker".

Maik , for me mostly outdoor events like football/futbol/disc league type of events. I was told that 1000 was good for these events before I joined RED but I felt there was no way to cover these events with the shutter that high due to the amount of light lost.

 

[Lakis Amarantithis]

Thank you for the advice and also thank you Maik Muller!