Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

still, not satisfied

S

Simon Lok

Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2014
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Pun intended. :)

I shot a few clips using my Weapon Helium. I went and setup specifically looking to extract stills.

Excellent amounts of continuous lighting was provided by the location. This enabled me to shoot at 60 FPS and high speed shutter.

Normally I use motion mount but I changed it out to the regular mount in case the LCD in the motion mount hurts sharpness.

I used a Canon EF 85mm L 1.4 lens.

I spent a lot of time digging through the clips to find good frames. I found this one which is decent, photoshopped it a bit ...

https://www.facebook.com/Lok.Aidan/...3.1073741828.551239911688877/1138507882962074

... and it's okay ... it's better than what I would get out of a Canon camera. However, per the subject, I'm "still, not satisfied" pun intended.

I happen to also own a Phase One camera system and in my opinion the results I get are tremendously better.

Examples:

https://www.facebook.com/simonlok78/media_set?set=a.10152939758633380.1073741879.581298379&type=3

https://www.facebook.com/simonlok78/media_set?set=a.10152488877413380.1073741870.581298379&type=3

I know the Weapon Helium has the highest dxo mark, etc., etc., and that this is all suppose to work great, but I'm "still, not satisfied."

Am I crazy?
 
you talk about sharpness and show a link to fb uploads?
FB highly compresses photos, so there it doesn't really make sense to judge the photos regarding sharpness
 
Bob Gundu said:
Post R3D snapshots please.
Click to expand...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/b7wmz61i25tzng9/C005_C066_0127I1.0003634F.R3D?dl=0

Thank you in advance for any assistance you may be able to provide.

I have been trying to figure this out with whatever time I have but I have failed.

I had an Epic Dragon before the Weapon Helium and just figured well, just not enough pixels and not quite there yet. With the Weapon Helium, highest dxo mark, etc., I figured... gotta be something I'm doing wrong but I cannot figure it out.
 
Last edited:
You got quite a bit of motion blur in that frame you posted. You're also not going to have the same level of pixel level detail in general because of the heavier olpf than most stills bodies. (though I find this to be a good thing for shooting people)
 
60 FPS and 180 degree shutter is nice for motion but still not sharp enough for stills. Motion blur is still going to be an issue. F1.4 is also not ideal for sharp photos. Shot F5.6 at least with higher shutter and who'll see a big improvement.
 
Just had a look at the .R3D, Bob is dead on.

If you want a higher quality still image for this particular subject matter, 120th-250th (or higher) on the shutter. Also, stopping the lens down would be a good idea or using something higher quality could be an option.
 
Simon Lok said:
Thank you for the help. Trying some side by sides now to see how close I can come.

https://www.instagram.com/p/BWfK_gbFRa0/
Click to expand...

If your end goal is a still frame, remember to sharpen your exported tiff from the RED. RED has zero sharpening "under the hood". The same can't be said for some of the image processing engines within the other cameras.
 
Phil Holland said:
If your end goal is a still frame, remember to sharpen your exported tiff from the RED. RED has zero sharpening "under the hood". The same can't be said for some of the image processing engines within the other cameras.
Click to expand...
Do Canon or Nikon still cameras have sharpening for RAW output?
 
Jacek Zakowicz said:
Do Canon or Nikon still cameras have sharpening for RAW output?
Click to expand...

Yes. It's under the hood and part of what things like Digic processors do. Everybody has their own "special sauce". Despite what you can turn on and off in camera, you can't get to those image processors in reality.

Additionally you commonly sharpen the camera raw output for print as it's still relatively soft out of camera.
 
Building the image

Building the image

The amount of sharpening added to the vast majority of images generated by virtually all cameras, motion and still, is far greater than most people realize. Some sharpening tools inflict what I consider "blunt force trauma", but if used properly, they can do great things.

I've sung this song before on RU, but I'll repeat it here: inside of RedCineX-Pro (and a few other tools) one can choose a scaling filter from a list of options and then compare the results. For some footy I love the Mitchell, for other shots bi-cubic and I've had great results with Lanczos for a lot of RED material. By selecting the optimum scaling filter I can often avoid sharpening altogether, or at least get by with much gentler pass. YMMV.

Cheers - #19
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
The amount of sharpening added to the vast majority of images generated by virtually all cameras, motion and still, is far greater than most people realize. Some sharpening tools inflict what I consider "blunt force trauma", but if used properly, they can do great things.

I've sung this song before on RU, but I'll repeat it here: inside of RedCineX-Pro (and a few other tools) one can choose a scaling filter from a list of options and then compare the results. For some footy I love the Mitchell, for other shots bi-cubic and I've had great results with Lanczos for a lot of RED material. By selecting the optimum scaling filter I can often avoid sharpening altogether, or at least get by with much gentler pass. YMMV.

Cheers - #19
Click to expand...

Great point and many are unaware of the scaling algorithms.
 
Bob Gundu said:
Great point and many are unaware of the scaling algorithms.
Click to expand...

I know the absolute best way to get acquainted with something like this is to do lots of testing, but any jumping off tips/tricks/guides you might be able to share?
 
I don't think it's a good position to be in to call native raw files from DSLRs as 'sharpened'. Obviously there is a whole signal chain and pipeline that generates images from cameras' sensors, but the basic product that comes out of a Canon or Nikon as a .cr2 or .nef is a result of some careful considerations on how to get the best IQ out of those cameras.

If you take one of those images, totally unsharpened in "post" and compare it to an unsharpened .r3d frame and you find the RED footage soft, I suggest this:

Own up to the fact that RED was primarily made to shoot moving images and that video and stills have completely different needs in terms of anti aliasing. RED images are soft for a reason. But sort of kind of trying to position oneself as if that is the "ideal" even for stills and that "those other guys" really "oversharpen" their images... Objectively, it doesn't fly.

I have looked at .r3d frames for years trying to like those frames compared to my stills from my DSLRs but I don't feel it's close. I did load some Helium frames from RED's homepage that I found very flexible and nice, but so far I'm not really on board.

I imagine 8k Vista Vision to be nice, though. But I'm thinking Canon's 5Dsr mkII will be nice as well. <--- hopefully with next gen sensor tech.
 
AndreeMarkefors said:
I don't think it's a good position to be in to call native raw files from DSLRs as 'sharpened'. Obviously there is a whole signal chain and pipeline that generates images from cameras' sensors, but the basic product that comes out of a Canon or Nikon as a .cr2 or .nef is a result of some careful considerations on how to get the best IQ out of those cameras. (snip)
Click to expand...

Valuable post Andree, the "recipe" for optimum IQ varies based on many considerations unique to the signal chain of a particular device. In some cases, that may include a fair bit of sharpening - others not so much. In any case, the RGB image you see from a Bayer pattern mask imager is constructed from the captured data set based on algorithms that can have a significant influence on the look. As you mentioned, RED cameras are biased toward best results with motion vs stills. Typically that means a more aggressive OLPF and an algorithm that sacrifices some acutance (sharpness) to keep aliasing to a minimum. Like all engineering, there's no free lunch.

IAC, this thread includes some valuable notes about ways to get sharper stills - especially if there is NOT a motion deliverable that needs to look it's best. FWIW, when I am asked to get tight stills and normal looking motion characteristics, and there's enough lighting, I go for a fast shutter (45° or less based on angle, 1/250th or greater based on time) and use reverse optical flow to add some motion blur back into the motion content in post. As a rule, it's much easier to add blur than to get rid of it. YMMV.

Cheers - #19
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top