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 :)

skintone sample of rc3/rg3 compared to rc2/rg2

Andrae Palmer

Andrae Palmer

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Messages
2,480
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
52
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Website
www.facetmedia.com
This is from a clip shot in March, 2010 when the color science was REDSpace for both color and gamma. Click on the images below to get the original 3840 x 2160 size. The clips were shot at 5600k color temperature with RED Pro Primes on a RED one Mysterium. Lighting was Kino Flo with daylight lamps.

REDcolor3 & REDgamma3:


REDcolor2 & REDgamma2:


REDcolor & REDgamma2:


REDcolor & REDgamma3:


REDcolor2 & REDgamma3:



REDSpace for both color and gamma (what we were working with in March, 2010):


This is pretty amazing... THANK YOU GRAEME!!!
 
thanks andrae ,

any way you can post red gamma 2 and red color (keeping any other setting the same )

redcolor was more saturated than red color 2 and would be interesting to see the difference that shot that is perfect for skin tone ...

also , would be great have :

redgamma 3 + redcolor
redgamma 3 + redcolor 2

sorry for bothering you but that shot is pretty perfect to test this

thanks

g
 
Gabriele here's one that you asked for. I'm doing the rest now too.

REDcolor & REDgamma2:

 
great ,
thanks!

and i guess Redgamma 3 + red color will be the next comparison that will show the power of the new color matrix ..

thanks

g
 
OK I've added all the ones you requested now. Glad that you asked for a comparison between REDcolor and REDgamma3. Definitely noticing the saturation in REDcolor... I like it. I'll have to test to see what effects it also has on reds.

update:
Noticed that REDcolor3 is slightly more saturated on red colors than REDcolor.
 
Very useful - thanks Andrae! have you noticed less noise in Gamma 3? I think I may have, but maybe my imagination.
 
Rob,

I haven't noticed less noise. The gamma curve maybe giving that illusion due to pressed blacks.
 
Great comparison! .... And nobody is mentioning the great girls ;)
Thanks for doing all the variations, Andrae! This really shows what has been done.

Thanks!
 
what does everyone think of the redcode 3 gamma curve? I'm going to do some extensive testing today. I already pulled a number of clips in to red cine and tested it, and found it was much to contrasty for how I had exposed footage in redcode 2. I'm going to do some tests exposing for 3 and see what the difference is. Its interesting how a gamma curve can change the way one exposed an image (not completely, but just how one treats highlights and shadows). I feel that as of now I would use it as a LUT preview rather than actually exporting clips this way. Although i typically bring everything back to REDLOGfilm and ad a LUT from there anyway.

I've found it to be just a little too contrasty for my taste, but this very well could be me jumping the gun on my opinion based on footage that I had previously shot.

I'll let everyone know how testing goes!

That being said, under HMI lighting, I did think the skin tones were a little more realistic.
 
Logan,

I love the new REDgamma3... I don't observe it being too contrasty. What I've observed is that the highlights are more protected. On some clips it seems less contrasty than on RG2.

Update:

You are right.. it is more contrasty than REDgamma2... albeit being more contrasty it protects the highlights more.
 
I just went out and shot for a couple of hours and It's definitely growing on me. It does protect the highlights, but makes them a bit punchier(if that makes any sense at all). Which i like a lot.

I think the footage that I was previously testing was footage where I had underexposed the skin tones about a stop to a half stop in order to make them a bit more realistic. I'm always a fan of that. It was a lower key composition, with a window source within the frame that was at about 95 IRE to give the underexposed composition a bit of balance.

I'm wondering if the skin tones will look better at proper exposure than before, where I would often find myself slightly underexposing in order to make skin look better.

I went ahead and tested some higher key shots, and really liked the results. Also, in regards to the footage I was originally testing, there was a layer of fog diffusion within the frame. I think it was at a particular exposure level, that the Redcode 3 really affected the image. I'm finding now the changes to be fairly subtle.

Maybe there is a time and place for monitoring in redcode 3 vs 2? Ie Lower key compositions vs higher key?

Nothing a little testing won't solve!
 
I think the way the curve works there is more contrast in the darks, less in the highlights.
 
Rob Ruffo said:
I think the way the curve works there is more contrast in the darks, less in the highlights.
Click to expand...

Soft rolling off of the highlights which gives you more dynamic range than with RG2... more contrast in the darks and mids which is great at highlighting subtle features on faces are a little pop of the image.
 
Thanks. I soooo hated redspace gamma and it kinda hurts seeing that again and thinking of all those trying to post from that.

But the world is moving foreward in RAW!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top