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 :)

Scarlet sharpness workflow question

Jonas Klittmark said:
Agree. Although cheap, that lens is supposed to be sharp in the center at f/2.8, see:
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/155-canon-ef-28mm-f18-usm-test-report--review?start=1

But I guess quality control of those lenses is not what it should be so you could have gotten a lemon. I'm curious to see what you find if you shoot some stills in RAW to compare with.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind this test was also done on an 8MP Eos 350D which has a sensor size of 22.2mm x 14.8mm vs. the Scarlet's 14MP 27.7mm x 14.6mm. The Scarlet will show more lens flaws than what the test found. The review gave the lens a 2 star out of 5 rating overall.

But your right that QC most likely plays a huge role.
 
Matt,
Yes, you have to consider the sensor size, to insure you are comparing things 'apples to apples'.
A reality check is when you open both images in an editor and set the zoom to 100% ( 1 to 1 , or actual size in Photoshop ) , the objects will appear to be the same size on screen.
My old Canon XTi is a 10 MP camera, and it is almost the same pixel pitch as the Scarlet so it makes a good test bed for reality checking things.
 
Okay, here comes the "Les lens Test"

http://www.filemail.com/dl.aspx?id=AIKLATCWFBSCLOO

password: scarlet

Just a few notes....

I was out of the office, so again I had to pull my poor daughter into this. And of course I forgot to grab any kind of light. So we ended up with a mix of the exterior daylight and incandescent practicals.

The DSLR was a 7D. I looked to see if I had anything smaller in MP but no luck. I uploaded two raw files, one with the same settings as the Scarlet (iso800 f8 shutter 50) and another with a higher shutter (80) to compensate for the exposure differences.

If these shots don't work I can try to stop by the office later and try something new. Just let me know.

Again, thanks for the help.
 
Miles Heckendorn said:
Okay, here comes the "Les lens Test"

http://www.filemail.com/dl.aspx?id=AIKLATCWFBSCLOO

password: scarlet

Just a few notes....

I was out of the office, so again I had to pull my poor daughter into this. And of course I forgot to grab any kind of light. So we ended up with a mix of the exterior daylight and incandescent practicals.

The DSLR was a 7D. I looked to see if I had anything smaller in MP but no luck. I uploaded two raw files, one with the same settings as the Scarlet (iso800 f8 shutter 50) and another with a higher shutter (80) to compensate for the exposure differences.

If these shots don't work I can try to stop by the office later and try something new. Just let me know.

Again, thanks for the help.
Click to expand...

No sharpness was added, just took similar sections from the 3 shots. Nothing scientific but the Scarlet is definitely soft. Scarlet has much better resolution and dynamic range but to me this doesn't look like the typical RED shot. Even though I don't use sharpening on my footage it is still much sharper than this. You might want to have it checked out.

sharpness3.jpg


This is assuming your focus was set to your daughters face and not the paper or charts.

Also, I did add sharpness is RCX Pro just to see and I also used the clarity slider and the eyes were still soft...(the grab above has no sharpness or clarity added)
 
Matt Ryan said:
No sharpness was added, just took similar sections from the 3 shots. Nothing scientific but the Scarlet is definitely soft. Scarlet has much better resolution and dynamic range but to me this doesn't look like the typical RED shot. Even though I don't use sharpening on my footage it is still much sharper than this. You might want to have it checked out.
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking a look and posting the results. You're right the focus was set to her eyes.

Damn......

So I guess contact with a Red rep is my next move?
 
Miles Heckendorn said:
Thanks for taking a look and posting the results. You're right the focus was set to her eyes.

Damn......

So I guess contact with a Red rep is my next move?
Click to expand...

I would say put in a support ticket and have RED see if theres an issue with the camera. From other Scarlet R3D posts on Reduser I havent seen any as soft as your examples.
 
Matt Ryan said:
I would say put in a support ticket and have RED see if theres an issue with the camera. From other Scarlet R3D posts on Reduser I havent seen any as soft as your examples.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice. I'll do that.

Of course I'll keep the thread updated with the results.
 
I've been following this thread from my dirigible fortress in the sky.

Not having been there, inspecting the lens, or shooting these tests I personally have no real idea what's going on. However, I thought I'd show a 100% crop from a 4k motion frame for some comparison. This is a processed image.

phfx_scarletX4kRes.jpg



I can get sharper results shooting subjects that don't move (like cactus, trees, etc.), but this is a good target to shoot for in my opinion.
 
Phil Holland said:
I've been following this thread from my dirigible fortress in the sky.

Not having been there, inspecting the lens, or shooting these tests I personally have no real idea what's going on. However, I thought I'd show a 100% crop from a 4k motion frame for some comparison. This is a processed image.

phfx_scarletX4kRes.jpg


I can get sharper results shooting subjects that don't move (like cactus, trees, etc.), but this is a good target to shoot for in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Thanks Phil! This is exactly how it should look sharpness (detail) wise. I think something may be up with his Scarlet cause he said hes had the same results with several lenses.
 
To make sure you are seeing Phil's JPG 1:1, make sure to load it in a new window/tab or in another program. For me it shows up resized as a smaller image when viewed in the forum, which could increase the appearance of pixel level sharpness/contrast
 
I seem to get mixed results. Some shots I am "Wow". Some I am "Meh".

This is a grab from 2k. 8:1 on a Nikon 105 2.5. This 2k is perfect for me. My wife would be so mad if she knew I posted these. Just a little s curve in REDCine-x, a little alchemy and clarity. I think it looks great. Highlight rolloff is wonderful. So nice compared to the absolute death of the 7d rolloff.

2k!
Full size jpg: http://mattjohnstonsfp.com/pics/A002_C020_020807.jpg
A002_C020_020807.jpg


R3D grab if you'd like:
http://mattjohnstonsfp.com/pics/A002_C020_020807.0000200F.R3D

But I can't always seem to replicate this. Especially the Scarlet's noise.
 
Noah's right about that. Reduser employs a resize function that I believe limits images to 900px, the image itself is 1200px wide. Load the url in a new window/tab or just save it and open in any program.
 
Noah Yuan-Vogel said:
To make sure you are seeing Phil's JPG 1:1, make sure to load it in a new window/tab or in another program. For me it shows up resized as a smaller image when viewed in the forum, which could increase the appearance of pixel level sharpness/contrast
Click to expand...

Yeah it is still sharper than what Miles has been getting.
 
Telling you guys, Nikon has some cinematic Cooke mojo that Canon does not. Just sayin'.

Matt Johnston said:
I seem to get mixed results. Some shots I am "Wow". Some I am "Meh".

This is a grab from 2k. 8:1 on a Nikon 105 2.5. This 2k is perfect for me. My wife would be so mad if she knew I posted these. Just a little s curve in REDCine-x, a little alchemy and clarity. I think it looks great. Highlight rolloff is wonderful. So nice compared to the absolute death of the 7d rolloff.

2k!
Full size jpg: http://mattjohnstonsfp.com/pics/A002_C020_020807.jpg
A002_C020_020807.jpg


R3D grab if you'd like:
http://mattjohnstonsfp.com/pics/A002_C020_020807.0000200F.R3D

But I can't always seem to replicate this. Especially the Scarlet's noise.
Click to expand...
 
You guys are missing the point of his test.
Sure, everyone can post a great looking still from the Scarlet. But on it's own with nothing to compare to, it all looks great...

Now if you grab your DSLR and shoot the same frame being careful about the size/ISO/post .... now you have a 'control' as scientists like to say.
Motion picture imaging is a science as well as an art. Science improves and makes the art possible.
So go get your DSLR, ( I recommend about 10 MP for a ballpark similar pixel pitch ) and shoot RAW ( like a Red Camera does ) and crop out a section of each image to post here as 1:1 pixels.
I used a Canon XTi, considered a low grade camera by today's metrics.

It almost seems like people shy away from this direct comparo ... afraid of the results? I have no idea.
 
Another thing I did when I did this type of test is to rack focus all the way through the focus sweet spot, just to make damned sure that I had the sharpest frame.
Just use RCX to find the sharpest frame by single stepping the shot. Be careful to not vibrate the tripod as well while touching the lens.

Thanks for the tests!




Matt Ryan said:
No sharpness was added, just took similar sections from the 3 shots. Nothing scientific but the Scarlet is definitely soft. Scarlet has much better resolution and dynamic range but to me this doesn't look like the typical RED shot. Even though I don't use sharpening on my footage it is still much sharper than this. You might want to have it checked out.

sharpness3.jpg


This is assuming your focus was set to your daughters face and not the paper or charts.

Also, I did add sharpness is RCX Pro just to see and I also used the clarity slider and the eyes were still soft...(the grab above has no sharpness or clarity added)
Click to expand...
 
Les Dittert said:
Now if you grab your DSLR and shoot the same frame being careful about the size/ISO/post .... now you have a 'control' as scientists like to say.
Motion picture imaging is a science as well as an art. Science improves and makes the art possible.
Click to expand...

Hi Les, thanks again for checking in to the thread. After seeing the results (even though it was from a higher MP 7D) what is your opinion of the results?

And by the way, thanks to everyone getting involved. It not only helps me with my understanding, but anyone that searches for this in the future. Thanks!
 
Les Dittert said:
Another thing I did when I did this type of test is to rack focus all the way through the focus sweet spot, just to make damned sure that I had the sharpest frame.
Just use RCX to find the sharpest frame by single stepping the shot. Be careful to not vibrate the tripod as well while touching the lens.
Click to expand...

No problem, I'm a firm believer in adopting the "ski jumpers approach". Hands off the the sticks.

I did try to use the focus confirm... the red/yellow/green boxes. I found this very strange. I've focused on various objects and only gotten the yellow box. I've seen the green box, but it's only shown itself for a millisecond. every time I try to recreate it, it doesn't show. Is this normal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top