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-W footage and what I learned about the camera

Jonesy Jones said:
Thank you guys. You are restoring my faith in this camera. I am relieved. When you say "MX to Dragon to Weapon", as I understand it even though Dragon and Weapon use the same sensor, the processing in Weapon is improved. Is this correct? Is that where some of the noise issues are improved?

Jason, I think your product is solid. The grain looked like noise to me, that's all. Especially because I only see it where I'd see noise, and because you said there was noise in it. But if its grain that's been added that's a relief.
Not ready to pull the trigger, but it's a shame they're so back ordered.
Click to expand...


well if you havent pulled the trigger yet then you have 6-12 months to think about it! the deposit is refundable too.
 
Looks great Jason. I have been amazed at how far I can push my scarlet-w compared to scarlet mx. It's a bit weird for me, coming from mx for 4 years, where I would basically max out at 800, and low light I would lower my iso below 500 or I would have quite a bit of noise. Now I can bump my iso to 1600-2000. Also, which grain is everyones favourite these days? I have been using holy grain dirty lately. Cheers.

Edit, curious on opinions about aperture vs iso. I should do some testing myself, perhaps tomorrow. Do you think you are better off say shooting with sigma 18-35 at 1.8 and iso 1000, or 2.0 and iso 800 etc etc? I guess it depends on the lens etc, I will have to test what I have as I'm interested. Sharpness vs noise I guess. Obviously there is a sweet spot, say iso 320-560 for cleanliness of a shot, and f4-8 for sharpness on a lens. but If you have to shoot wide open, are you better off stopping down, and bumping the iso a stop maybe?
 
Last edited:
Jason Han said:
This is the first time someone thought that this was actual noise - maybe I added a little too much grain for you, but I personally like the grain... FYI, it was DEB'ed and ISO 320-800 for the whole shoot, except the grand central. I think my post talking about noise got a little confusing, but I find it kind of weird that you would assume someone would improperly expose in bright day light to have that much noise? What would I possibly do to create this much noise? Not black shade, shoot 3200 ISO with ND? There is a big difference between noise and film grain, you can usually tell by the chroma noise.
Here is a frame without grain added.... too sterile for my tastes

KvcfWCQ.jpg
Click to expand...

I have to be honest, I first saw this video the day it hit vimeo and the first thing I thought was... Wow look at all that noise!! Then after reading some comments it turned out that you added some grain. Everything is personal preference and there's no right or wrong, but to me the noise/grain took over. I had to watch it a second time to really appreciate the filming.
 
Kurtis Imel said:
I have to be honest, I first saw this video the day it hit vimeo and the first thing I thought was... Wow look at all that noise!! Then after reading some comments it turned out that you added some grain. Everything is personal preference and there's no right or wrong, but to me the noise/grain took over. I had to watch it a second time to really appreciate the filming.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was actually like this a while back when I was not used to watching film. Then I got into real film and fell in love with the little tingle of grain on their skin and I never enjoyed the sterile digital look anymore. It's all preference, but I'm thinking most people won't appreciate the grain anymore as time passes as digital has taken over film. This made me think about perhaps reducing the grain in the future due to this mindset
 
Jason Han said:
Yeah I was actually like this a while back when I was not used to watching film. Then I got into real film and fell in love with the little tingle of grain on their skin and I never enjoyed the sterile digital look anymore. It's all preference, but I'm thinking most people won't appreciate the grain anymore as time passes as digital has taken over film. This made me think about perhaps reducing the grain in the future due to this mindset
Click to expand...

Grain is nice, it adds something organic, I totally agree. I think the issue is more about vimeo/youtube. You can see some gorgeous grain on blurays, it's thin and nice. But Vimeo compresses too much, grain becomes random sporadic splotches of noise most of the time. For online viewing I think I would even denoise my footage if it was shot on film with apparent grain.
Edit: I downloaded the 3.7Go version, and there is no comparison obviously, the grain you added is really nice there.
 
Last edited:
There's a Facebook thread about this video in the Scarlet-W group. Comments about noise kept coming back and I assured them that it was grain added in post. That was the only criticism. The footage looks great.
 
Ugo Del said:
Grain is nice, it adds something organic, I totally agree. I think the issue is more about vimeo/youtube. You can see some gorgeous grain on blurays, it's thin and nice. But Vimeo compresses too much, grain becomes random sporadic splotches of noise most of the time. For online viewing I think I would even denoise my footage if it was shot on film with apparent grain.
Edit: I downloaded the 3.7Go version, and there is no comparison obviously, the grain you added is really nice there.
Click to expand...

Its very important to remember that internet compression HATES film grain. All that tiny little information causes a ton of problems for the compression schemes, which often leaves you with subpar results. I'd suggest making two copies of each master, one without grain for online, and one with grain for offline.
 
Marcus Friedlander said:
Its very important to remember that internet compression HATES film grain. All that tiny little information causes a ton of problems for the compression schemes, which often leaves you with subpar results. I'd suggest making two copies of each master, one without grain for online, and one with grain for offline.
Click to expand...

Oh boy does it. For online use I typically create a different timeline and manipulate the grain on a more subtle scale because of the compressed results. So many of us find our content ultimately being viewed that way (compressed web players) that sometimes I question if I even need to make the backend master....but I always do anyway.
 
Good clean work. However, unnecessary slow motion effects applied. Why? Just to show that you could do this on camera?

To me, when people go for these slow-mo shots which does NOT augment the story or NOT in the script/screenplay, they are either trying to show-off what they could do or trying to hide some flaws of their work.

We see this on virtually every Youtube video of Scarlet-W posts. It is reminiscence of the days when DSLRs first came into the hands of movie makers. Everyone was using the shallow depth of field excessively whether there was a reason or not.

I also agree, in not adding grain (unless it is a requisite, mandated and/or requested in the script), in this day and age. Like Jason stated, digital has taken over film and camera manufactures go to great extents to create extremely clean looking images coming out of their products.

In real life those who wear glasses would clean their eyeglasses if and when they become dirty. We blink our eyes to clear them to see a cleaner image.

So, why not keep your captures clean until they go on to editorial, fx or color correction process? And then use flares, grain or other effects ONLY if it augments what the end result should be perceived by your audience.
 
Last edited:
In the case of Cieni, the client asked for slow-mo and gave me pages of voiceover to fill with B-roll. If you'd like a technical reason why I used it, you can watch the full version: https://vimeo.com/178410101/e2465472df
Now imagine the video without any slow-mo, how else would you fill that script in a 1 day shoot?

I believe there should be a reason why to do something as well, but if the artist doesn't literally tell you why they did or didn't do something, is that a good reason to assume there was absolutely no point in doing it? I also believe a DP has their own artistic freedom and choice. Whether I use slow-mo or add grain is my artistic choice. I find so many people here complaining that every kid on the block is doing this and that now a days, well instead of complaining about what other people are all doing, why don't you just go shoot something better and more "correct"? :)

I don't have time to complain about other people, I just keep shooting and learning the best I can from others' work. If i see a technique that seems overused, I don't go "oh that's so overused, no one should use slow-mo or shoot shallow unless there is an absolute reason to", that seems a little silly.
 
Last edited:
Jason Han said:
In the case of Cieni, the client asked for slow-mo and gave me pages of voiceover to fill with B-roll. If you'd like a technical reason why I used it, you can watch the full version: https://vimeo.com/178410101/e2465472df
Now imagine the video without any slow-mo, how else would you fill that script in a 1 day shoot?

I believe there should be a reason why to do something as well, but if the artist doesn't literally tell you why they did or didn't do something, is that a good reason to assume there was absolutely no point in doing it? I also believe a DP has their own artistic freedom and choice. Whether I use slow-mo or add grain is my artistic choice. I find so many people here complaining that every kid on the block is doing this and that now a days, well instead of complaining about what other people are all doing, why don't you just go shoot something better and more "correct"? :)

I don't have time to complain about other people, I just keep shooting and learning the best I can from others' work. If i see a technique that seems overused, I don't go "oh that's so overused, no one should use slow-mo or shoot shallow unless there is an absolute reason to", that seems a little silly.
Click to expand...

Right on Jason. Keep doing what you're doing, it's great work. I personally love grain and hate this pursuit of cleaner and cleaner images.
 
Derek Carlson said:
Right on Jason. Keep doing what you're doing, it's great work. I personally love grain and hate this pursuit of cleaner and cleaner images.
Click to expand...

Especially DRAGON grain!
 
Can you, please, also post a R3D short clip (or a frame) from that shot in the train station?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top