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 :)

Skin Tone Highlight OLPF with DEB and/or Neat video good enough for low light?

Sergio Perez said:
That-s what was feeling odd. I think lens characteristics really came into play here. I'm not getting that sort of tint/skin tones with my lenses in similar conditions...
Click to expand...

Yep. But I can say with confidence that both images are very clean at ISO 2,000.
 
MichaelJQuill said:
Yep. But I can say with confidence that both images are very clean at ISO 2,000.
Click to expand...


yup. even with the old sodium vapor lighting. One is slightly truer. The one you didn't have to correct as much. :)

One thing this test shows is that you can intercut them.

Battistella
 
MichaelJQuill said:
Who can guess which OLPF is which? Both shot at ISO 2,000 @ T2.8 w/ a 35mm and 50mm Lomo Square Fronts.
Click to expand...

First low light, second skintone. First has more gradual falloff into blacks, second more accurate color response.
Plus the file naming helps confirming the deduction.

Did you use NR ? I see some artifacts.
Those burned blobs with sharp edges on STH are disturbing.


Matching is typically not a problem (rough example, different route), but that depends on direction and range in which one wants to go and on how much data is there to work with.



bgbqdx.jpg
 
Christoffer Glans said:
Also, if you shoot something with a lot of practicals or you are in a location without lighting rigs, then you might want to push the ISO to be able to get a good image out of it.
Click to expand...

Oh boy, here we go again. You do know, that changing ISO on camera is just changing the metadata, right? On the other hand, if you change the ISO setting in order to affect the RAW reading on camera, then it's different story, but by now you'd know, that the difference is critical and it would help, if you were clear about that in your statement.
Choosing the exposure, based on the ISO, that you determined best suits the image and the story and then lighting for it is a classic DP approach. That still hasn't changed. In the old days there was no noise reduction and somehow DPs still managed to get great images on film. Yes, sometimes they pushed and pulled film, but only a couple of stops at most. In my opinion, going into a shoot with an idea of "will fix it in post" rather than "let's expose it correctly on set" or at least "let's do our best to expose it correctly on set" is a mistake. But don't let me stop you, if that's satisfies your creative needs. After all, who cares, if it looks good, right?
 
Skin Tone Highlight OLPF... Not to start any problems but...

Skin Tone Highlight OLPF... Not to start any problems but...

What skin tones is this for? Or rather what skin tones was the Dragon having problems with, all or some?
 
There is no problem. It's just optimised for highlight and has a bit better color rendition than other OLPF.
Skin tones are slight variation in hue, saturation and lightness of one color.

Pat
 
Beom Koh said:
Hello,

I was wondering if Skin Tone Highlight OLPF with DEB and or Neat video plug-in is good enough for low light work.
Click to expand...

Somehow Red seems to be chased by low light lovers.

The Dragon is a very good camera. But it wants to be feed with light, like any other very good camera wants. So get some lights and do it properly.

---

There are many alternatives out there which do "low light" much better than the Dragon. The LLO OLPF is a crutch to help when you might get into "low-light" environments, you will gain some headroom regarding noise. However, the STH is the real thing. Much, much better for anything else, meaning for 99% of that what usually DPs do.



Hans
 
Hans von Sonntag said:
Somehow Red seems to be chased by low light lovers.

The LLO OLPF is a crutch to help when you might get into "low-light" environments, you will gain some headroom regarding noise. However, the STH is the real thing. Much, much better for anything else, meaning for 99% of that what usually DPs do.
Click to expand...

I think that the bar for low light was set with the MX. To take a step back is still a step back. I don't know how many situations I've been in when low light really saved shots, but there has been a lot. As for what DP's do, it all depends on the type of shoot and where you are. I mean, Sweden gets pretty dark during winter time, shooting exteriors where you actually want to see something in the background is quite hard if you don't have the lights to light it. If you work on higher budget projects all the time and have enough lights for any situation then it's natural that you don't need the STH.
For independent filmmakers it's another story all together.

So, I'm still quite undecided on which OLPF I would use. Does anyone have any motion material from the low light? Set at ISO800?
 
jake blackstone said:
I'd like to point out, that ANY noise reduction is destructive. Some do it better, some less successfully. I'm particularly disturbed, when someone goes into the shoot planning to use some kind of noise reduction as a tool to overcome some hardware shortcomings. Noise reduction should never be used as a matter of standard workflow. In my book, if noise reduction needs to be used, then someone screwed up, sorry...
Click to expand...
YUP!!!!!!
 
I ordered the LLO just before reading this thread and it makes me wonder if I should've ordered it all. I have been in some situations shooting docs where the light was fleeting and it was the last shot of the day...I figured it would nice to know that I can confidently push the ISO to 2000 and finish shooting. But most of that shooting is done in the day where having that nice highlight roll off is so beautiful... Decisions!
 
Aria Khosravi said:
I must say that after replying to this thread in favor of the LLO, I got curious and put the STH back in my camera for the first time since getting my LLO, and I think I am back on the STH train now. The colors and the "feel" are so different from the LLO. I didn't realize what I had with that OLPF. STH really does want light though, DEB definitely a must, and NR above ISO 500. But the color is worth it. Especially in tungsten and mixed light. As soon as you hit 3200K there is some really special stuff going on. But even in daylight, really nice feel to the footage, gorgeous (dare I say "Alexa-like?" ) roll off, and it handles color casts from filters better than LLO.
Click to expand...

I feel the same except for the need to use DEB. If exposed properly the footage with STH is very clean. Since getting my Dragon upgrade at the end of Jan 2014, i've only used the LLO until recently. First it was v.1 LLO that came with the upgrade then I got the swappable LLO and got the STH in December I think it was but I didn't use it as i was happy with the LLO and a little paranoid about noise with the STH.

I had a 2 Dragon greenscreen shoot a couple weeks ago and couldn't get a LLO for the other cam in time for the shoot. I didn't want to mix OLPF's so I used the STH on both. I was a little worried about noise since it was greenscreen but I'm so glad I went with the STH. I'm blown away by the color rendition, significantly better than the LLO IMO. And no noise at all. Keyed out perfectly with one click. And I committed the unspeakable sin of shooting greenscreen at 10:1 compression due to drive space limitations. The result of the STH on greenscreen at 10:1 - no noise with zero need for DEB, beautiful skin tones and a perfect key.

After that, I used the STH on another shoot and again had absolutely no noise and no need for DEB and beautiful color rendition. My thinking before these 2 jobs was the LLO would live all the time on the cam except for exteriors and when in the studio with plenty of lights. But now the STH will live on the cam with the LLO only being used for those times when you truly are in a low light situation and can't get a proper exposure.

Here's the big secret to using the STH: expose properly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top