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 :)

Super clean 3K WS using 'Frame Averaging'

James Miller 72

James Miller 72

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
105
Reaction score
2
Points
18
Location
West Sussex, UK
Basically you have to set your camera up for 100fps then turn on the Frame Processing set to Frame Averaging of 4 frames and select a 360º shutter. You will see frame rate goes back down to 25fps and audio available again. If you don't set to 360º you will see the imprints of 4 frames. Of course you get a motion that is not 180º but its super clean and you can run at 2:1 compression.

Reference: 3k WS 2:1 250ISO 25fps with Frame Processing, mode 'Frame Averaging' number of frames '4'.


You don't need to shoot in 3k to use Frame Processing. This works also at 6k WS at 100fps. For some super clean plates.


Download the .R3D here:
https://we.tl/zPHccKxhXj

ProRes conversion here on Vimeo:



https://vimeo.com/160902864/3c1fe377ed

https://player.vimeo.com/external/160902864.source.mov?49a69668&profile_id=0&download=1


ProRes version has a LUT applied in REDCINE-X PRO.
 
Please excuse my lack of knowledge, but what does this achieve? (Is it to get 2:1 at 3k?)
Footage looks great by the way!
 
This is a technique Graeme recommended a while back that I've used a few times on 5K material. It does indeed produce some stunning results.
 
As long as you can light for 100fps (360º shutter) and throttle back the ISO then you will get clean images. If you are having to put additional ISO in then there is little to gain.
Also try it in 6k WS, it's lovely. You can get some nice plates from the images.
 
It sounds very much like temporal noise reduction process. In it, the computer looks at number of frames before and after and after examining pixels and their attributes, automatically decides what is a valid image pixel and what is noise, resulting in cleaner image. Obviously this is a bit different, but I'm very curious about this nevertheless. I can see this used for very high quality imagery.
Thanks for R3D!
 
Ive been usng this quite a bit for stills work and sometimes in motion as well. It takes a bit to get the shutter angles worked out but the results are pretty great. Averaging 8 or 16 frames for stills drives the usabke iso range through the roof.

Also use this mode on timelapse immagery as well with great results.

David
 
With 100 frames you get 360 average 4 you get 25p 360. With a 1/4 the sensor noise and 4 times averaging of the compression.... Simply camera takes frame1, blend it 50/50 with frame two, then lay frame 3 on top with 75% transparency and then frame 4 with 12.5% transparency. All together those blended frames even out noise sensor noise and compression noise.

Now the only little quirk here is that you get 360 shutter.... So if you do the same but shoot 3k WS 200 fps and and do average 4 you get a 50fps clip with blend/average 4 and 360 shutter... now if you in post speed that to 200% speed with no interpolation you simply loose every second frame and get 25p 180shutter frame average 4.... but doing so you also upped the compression in such setting. So if you do not worry about having 360 shutter, like if things are not really in much motion then shoot hundred frames. but if you worry about the motion blur then shoot 200 frames.

I love these features of the camera. Every time I get home from a shoot I realise, what I actually could have done better. Its a freaking bottomless pit of stuff that can be done to eak out more out of these cameras. Right now I sit and render a shot car shot we shot today in really hard light / high contrast and even though the camera did not clip and the staff looks super well I can not help think how that sky would have looked if I just went for 2 stops HDRx instead for the higher frame rate that I opted for and now realise I don't need... So if sun is right we will do it all over again tomorrow. Perfect takes a lot of practice, no doubt :)
 
James Miller 72 said:
As long as you can light for 100fps (360º shutter) and throttle back the ISO then you will get clean images. If you are having to put additional ISO in then there is little to gain.
Also try it in 6k WS, it's lovely. You can get some nice plates from the images.
Click to expand...

What's the point if you've already put up enough light for 100fps anyhow? If I have enough light to shoot highspeed at ISO320, then my image is normally pretty noiseless. This seems far more useful when you are sensor cropping (under 4k) and even light noise is far more noticeable.
 
Matthew J said:
What's the point if you've already put up enough light for 100fps anyhow? If I have enough light to shoot highspeed at ISO320, then my image is normally pretty noiseless. This seems far more useful when you are sensor cropping (under 4k) and even light noise is far more noticeable.
Click to expand...

That's a good point. I think that I have a rebuttal: if your natural ISO is 320, then you have x stops of highlight protection. But if you nominate the ISO as 640 and shoot at 100fps (or 96fps), that's x+1 stops of highlight protection, and the frame averaging will reduce noise a bit in the shadows, giving some extra genuine shadow detail.
 
A basic topic sentence explaining what the point of this technique is would be super helpful.
 
In uncontrolled shooting environments where there isn't adequate light, would frame averaging help reduce noise, or instead induce additional noise? (due to having half the exposure time per frame)
 
Nathan DuMoulin said:
In uncontrolled shooting environments where there isn't adequate light, would frame averaging help reduce noise, or instead induce additional noise? (due to having half the exposure time per frame)
Click to expand...

It´s a difficult one to answer straight. Depends on how little light etc. One could say you get a different kind of noise. :)

but then you can also turn around and say if you got enough light or more than enough light you can shoot 100fps 360 deg shutter and frame sum 4 and deal the clip length by two and get half the normal exposure time and half the noise. Kind of a super ND 3 that also reduce noise especially then in your low lights.

Jack Allred said:
This method will be fun to play with- works on MX in assuming?...
Click to expand...


yes.
 
Would it work OK in theory if the number of averaged frames was 2 or 3?

This technique would have some interesting applications - perhaps an interview of a person for which 6K detail is less desirable than a cleaner image.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top