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 :)

SO... How many are actually using HDRx?

The first time I have used HDRx was was when shooting the Ring of Fire Solar Eclipse back in May and it worked a miracle. Since then, I have had only spots of luck working with. I have a feeling that HDRx is only in its infancy and will only improve in time/
 

Attachments

  • Ring of Fire_CorrectedA001_C009-poster.jpg
    Ring of Fire_CorrectedA001_C009-poster.jpg
    55 KB · Views: 0
WOW! :)

I am generally not much into tonemapping, but you had me there! :)

Which software did you use? That could be something to play with, after all.

Thanks afor all the good examples. Keep'em comming. I may have to reconsider my take on this.
 
Thanks! I processed it as an image sequence through Photomatix Pro, which is great because it gives you a lot of options from the surreal HDR look down to something more usable... I think for that shot I used the 'Tone Enhancer' mode. The biggest problem with using still-image HDR software is the flickering; I used GBDeflicker plugin and that fixed most of it. Now I try to set my HDRx at 4 stops difference or less, because that's the maximum stop increment you can set manually in Photomatix. Six stops works but it has to guess the exposure, which is slower and may cause additional flicker (if it guesses wrong for a frame-pair). Someone needs to implement tone-mapping for video!
 
Although this thread is in the Epic section, HDRx on the Scarlet - with the current limitation of 24fps at 3K - is pretty much useless for shooting PAL for a 2K or 1080p finish. If we ever get the possibility to shoot 25fps HDRx at 3K or 2.5K, I can see myself starting to use it for more than the occasional timelapse or still shot.
 
I found only very few situations where I really needed HDRx. Been using it on some timelapses in order to be able to compensate for light changes or while filming landscapes, against a very bright sky or to keep reflections and highlights in water.
A few times when shooting against a bright window and trying to avoid it blowing out completely.
Usually been using HDR +2 or +3, rarely more.
I agree with what's been said about skintones when using the modes in RCX, it needs some time in grading to get them right.

But honestly, most of the time you don't even need HDR with the MX sensor. And my guess is that Dragon will probably make that feature nearly useless. Wouldn't be surprised if they decided to drop it and use the extra processing power for the 6K sensor.
 
Cüneyt Kaya said:
interior against windows. hdrx 2 or 3 never higher
Click to expand...

Were you able to get that to look good with just the simple blend/magicmotion in RCX, or did you recover the highlights differently?
 
Nils Ruinet said:
But honestly, most of the time you don't even need HDR with the MX sensor. And my guess is that Dragon will probably make that feature nearly useless. Wouldn't be surprised if they decided to drop it and use the extra processing power for the 6K sensor.
Click to expand...

Well, it might be useful for tracking, so I'm not sure HDRx is going anywhere. With 15 or 16 stops of native DR on Dragon I expect it not to be in use often, though :)
 
We did a 4x5k 98fps 360 panoramic stich work shot in kualalumpur for US citybank half a year back. Then the HDRx was a necessity. As we shot all diections, and had location some indoors with big windows and heavy sunlight etc. To me the HDRx function is the VFX plate king. we got some cool nuke setups that works with UP 8mm and epic 5k in four directions.... renders out some really prestine canvases at about 12k wide...
 
I found DaVinci Resolve very helpful in such situations, where you can treat the two tracks independently.
You can fill in the X-track with a power window where you need it and protect your skin tones from it in most scenes.
 
HDRx has a lot of promise but hasn't panned out too much in actual practice. I had high hopes for several HDRx shots we shot for our casino commercials recently, but they were difficult to make work. Even our colorist, who is one of the best in the biz, wasn't set up for HDRx in his Resolve - which means the biggest TV spots and music videos aren't using it either.

Blending in RedCineX just darkens the overall image. Using After Effects and pulling a luma key kinda works, but still makes things look weird. I ended up rotoscoping the A-track out to use the highlights from the X-track in one shot in a hotel room where the window was blowing out. I wish RedCineX was more intelligent about the blending between the two. Like a video version of the Nik software plugin HDR Efx Pro.
 
The trick is to use magic motion, then get your highlights where you want them, then use a combination of iso and curves to get where you want to be. At least ive had it work out just fine using that method.
 
I've used it on a few shots, but it's true that it's power should be worked on in redcine and other applications.

you have to treat the tracks independantly like with the power windows of Davinci or Scratch to get the most out of it.
 
Yes, I agree that a smarter tool should be incorporated into RedCine-X, I have used it only once with limited results with the blend tool, I'd love to see something more imaginative from the Red Team in this respect
 
Combining two exposures in video and making it look good is not an easy task. Even in photography taking multiple bracketed photographs and making it look great is tough enough. There is no magic solution. That said, it's reassuring to have the extra track's info just in case you blow it - literally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top