Truth or .... False Color

[Zeb B]

That's pretty much what we do do though..... We map sensor data to linear floating point data, we put that through the RLF curve so as to map 0.18f to mid grey cineon code value which linearizes back to floating point linear light with mid grey at 0.18f via the standard cineon formula (or Nuke log2lin node, or Shake log2lin node).

In other words, the RLF maps perfectly back to linear light, and after compositing you can get right back to the RLF via a lin2log node.

Graeme

Sounds like dialog from Star Trek ;-)

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

In other words, the RLF maps perfectly back to linear light, and after compositing you can get right back to the RLF via a lin2log node.

Graeme

RLF is awesome.

Now, what we need added ... is a CDL/LUT MODE checkbox in the Color/Gamma menu when you select RLF - that locks out all meta-data changes EXCEPT white balance and ISO.

That is the very first step to CDL & 3D LUT implementation

 

[Nick Shaw]

I think a LUT for RLF/RG3 would be a good place to start.

Please excuse the self promotion, but you can buy a LUT for REDlogFilm to REDgamma (1, 2 and 3) from my website.

 

[Adrian Jebef]

A hand held meter does not speak to such inter-related subtleties, but a calibrated monitor does… as does, to a lesser extent, an experienced eye viewing the scene.

Of course with raw you can get it in the ball park and fine tune it in post, but this is a destructive process in respect to data and one that can't easily add or subtract localised fill not to mention tweaking the position of the subject.

Here is the well known example of where the meter sees one thing but the monitor reveals another….. (A and B are the same luminance).

Optical illusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thats my rationale on the subject of exposure…. lighten or darken to your taste



Mike Brennan

This, this is the THING, man! You still gotta light. You still have to have intent. You still need to expose for what you find important. Light meters are good, but as Mike has pointed out, a properly calibrated display is infinitely better. As camera tech keeps getting better the important things in the frame like faces begin to exhibit so much more tonal subtlety in both greyscale and color. A light meter struggles with properly displaying this tonal relationship. A calibrated display does not.

I really like that graphic.

 

[Björn Benckert]

I use "raw mode" 90% of the time and flip over to redgamma3 once in a while.. looking at "RAW" ( I can agree it's not a really good name for it) is for me the best way to see what's really captured. True / false color on the other hand I just find confusing... Flipping between "RAW and a looks setup is for me the easiest way to see what I capture and what is possible to make out of it.

 

[Scott Crawley]

It's funny I think of false color as important, so important that it is assigned to two different buttons on my camera, but I never actually use it. It must be time to reprogram a button or two.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

It's funny I think of false color as important, so important that it is assigned to two different buttons on my camera, but I never actually use it. It must be time to reprogram a button or two.

Just FYI - as mentioned in this thread - the "false color" you get from EXPOSURE tool in RAW view is accurate - but when in RFL or RC3 it is current broken in the 5.0 firmware builds. So - right now - to work correctly - you need to switch over to RAW view when you want to use EXPOSURE meter to be accurate.

VIDEO tool presents "false colors" that are tied to ISO and meta data (white balance, etc.) - this tool should NOT be confused with the EXPOSURE tool.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Just FYI - as mentioned in this thread - the "false color" you get from EXPOSURE tool in RAW view is accurate - but when in RFL or RC3 it is current broken in the 5.0 firmware builds. So - right now - to work correctly - you need to switch over to RAW view when you want to use EXPOSURE meter to be accurate.

VIDEO tool presents "false colors" that are tied to ISO and meta data (white balance, etc.) - this tool should NOT be confused with the EXPOSURE tool.

I only recently moved up from v 3.x of the software, so this discussion has been extra useful for me in spite of the fact that I rarely use the tool.

Thanks again guys. I had all but stopped reading RedUser due to lack of interest. Recent quality threads like this one have reinvigorated me. You guys rock.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

I only recently moved up from v 3.x of the software, so this discussion has been extra useful for me in spite of the fact that I rarely use the tool.

Thanks again guys. I had all but stopped reading RedUser due to lack of interest. Recent quality threads like this one have reinvigorated me. You guys rock.

It works correctly in 4.0 builds - WTF were you doing back in 3.0 for so long

 

[ericyoung]

I use "raw mode" 90% of the time and flip over to redgamma3 once in a while.. looking at "RAW" ( I can agree it's not a really good name for it) is for me the best way to see what's really captured. True / false color on the other hand I just find confusing... Flipping between "RAW and a looks setup is for me the easiest way to see what I capture and what is possible to make out of it.

Aha Björn! I knew I remembered someone who used the RAW view mode. So I guess you will be against removing the RAW view option! :smile:

I personally don't use it often, BUT it has been useful occasionally to bypass any metadata settings in one go when troubleshooting a fault or a display issue.

 

[Zeb B]

if someone can't drive in F1 they move to F2 or F3. If you can't drive you hit the wall. If you don't know the car, that is not reds problem. It's a professional tool, not a handy cam. Some want it basic, some want all the tools.

Next problem becomes, "well I had it in basic mode and my picture still look like shit" well, the pictures look like shit because you have been using cameras that compensate for a lazy lack of talent. Red is not a complicated camera, it's actually an honest camera. Many students blew a few hundred feet of film because of lack of knowledge, not because the film was no good. That's good, that's a learning process.

Red should not not be holding peoples hands so that everyone loves them. I think it's laid out pretty well now, based on a lot of user input from the start.

battistella

Wow . . . that's some misguided elitist ass stuff there Mate! As a business person let me explain the error of your analogy:

Formula One has 22 drivers who are financed by Manufacturers who mass market easy to use products to common dull users like me
RED needs more than 22 amazing customers like you to survive

RED has to be easy to use and quickly understood to penetrate a wide market. Much, much more can be done in online education and ease of use. Those geeky folks on this forum maybe don't understand that most pro cameras are still rented by those who haven't spent 1000's hours camping on RU looking for clues or have attended an expensive RE session. They have limited time and finances so the product that fits their reality wins the sale.

RED needs to cast the widest possible mass marketing net since, in manufacturing, it is all about economies of scale. The first Dragon sensor cost them $2M, the second $1M and so on.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

Wow . . . that's some misguided elitist ass stuff there Mate! As a business person let me explain the error of your analogy:

Formula One has 22 drivers who are financed by Manufacturers who mass market easy to use products to common dull users like me
RED needs more than 22 amazing customers like you to survive

RED has to be easy to use and quickly understood to penetrate a wide market. Much, much more can be done in online education and ease of use. Those geeky folks on this forum maybe don't understand that most pro cameras are still rented by those who haven't spent 1000's hours camping on RU looking for clues or have attended an expensive RE session. They have limited time and finances so the product that fits their reality wins the sale.

RED needs to cast the widest possible mass marketing net since, in manufacturing, it is all about economies of scale. The first Dragon sensor cost them $2M, the second $1M and so on.

Hahaha - ten or twenty thousand users does not a mass market make. Never will. This is a niche market and the business realities must reflect that. Marketing to the masses would be a waste of RED's money.

 

[David Battistella]

Whatever.

Wow . . . that's some misguided elitist ass stuff there Mate! As a business person let me explain the error of your analogy:

Formula One has 22 drivers who are financed by Manufacturers who mass market easy to use products to common dull users like me
RED needs more than 22 amazing customers like you to survive

RED has to be easy to use and quickly understood to penetrate a wide market. Much, much more can be done in online education and ease of use. Those geeky folks on this forum maybe don't understand that most pro cameras are still rented by those who haven't spent 1000's hours camping on RU looking for clues or have attended an expensive RE session. They have limited time and finances so the product that fits their reality wins the sale.

RED needs to cast the widest possible mass marketing net since, in manufacturing, it is all about economies of scale. The first Dragon sensor cost them $2M, the second $1M and so on.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Hahaha - ten or twenty thousand users does not a mass market make. Never will. This is a niche market and the business realities must reflect that. Marketing to the masses would be a waste of RED's money.

To me, the market for Red cameras is pretty clear.

1. Cinematographers working on high budget fare. In almost all cases, cameras are rented from a camera rental company. Tests are conducted for hair, makeup, lighting, etc. ACs work with camera operators to make sure all of the accessories and support gear is working for everyone's needs.
2. To go along with the first, camera rental companies. They are the ones investing in not only the cameras but all the support that goes along with it. They have a huge stake in the decisions made by the camera manufacturers.
3. DP/Owner Ops who have invested in the Red camera system or are considering investing in Red camera system. They work on a variety of projects and can get rental income from their gear.
4. Production companies. In some cases, it makes sense for a production company to purchase their own camera packages. Financially it may be more beneficial for them to do it and also it may allow them to have the tools at their disposal for things that come up spontaneously. Red fits nicely here as a high quality, yet affordable solution.
5. Everyone else. This could be hobbyist, low budget filmmaker, etc. This number is probably hard to quantify.

So, when you have these various markets that may be using Red cameras, education and support does play a critical role. Whether it's an ASC cinematographer shooting their first Red project or a rental company looking to build a reliable camera package for their clients, the necessity for solid, accurate information becomes apparent. I believe this is a two way street. Red needs to put out as much information as resources allow them to and the endusers need to keep up as best they can with technology as it evolves. Neither side has it easy. Red is busy trying to get cameras out the door as well as do R&D for future products and a lot of us endusers are busy trying to make a living, so things fall through the cracks. But ultimately if there is to be success, there needs to be a give and take. I feel Red has done a better job in recent years about trying to get more information out there. There will always be opportunities to improve that end of things.

As for the topic at hand, I think the things Mark is asking for are very reasonable and could help quite a bit.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Once again I humbly suggest that The Schilowitz Void needs to be filled.

 

[David Battistella]

Steve,

I don't think 1,2,3,4 on you list are looking for a handy cam with night shot mode and auto iris.

#5 might be the group that needs to be the most educated. So should red put their resources toward educating the handy cam market!

They are already doing what they should do. Their tutorial and Reducation paths are excellent for bringing users up to speed so they don't drive the Ferrari into the wall.

Now.

Sharing one of my favorite idiot driver moments. I guess it was Ferraris fault this happened....hahahahahh
http://youtu.be/sHc7jfMlSl4

 

[Scott Crawley]

I don't think these guys are saying it is Red's fault that some users are ill prepared and I'm not certain anyone is even saying it is Red's responsibility to train them. What I'm hearing is that they think it is a good business practice to support their products in this way, by offering more of the quality training already available, publicizing it and making it more accessible.

I believe Ted Schilowitz was the head of that effort, and it may have languished in his absence. His energy is missed.

Steve,

I don't think 1,2,3,4 on you list are looking for a handy cam with night shot mode and auto iris.

#5 might be the group that needs to be the most educated. So should red put their resources toward educating the handy cam market!

They are doing what they should do. Their tutorial and Reducation paths are excellent for bringing users up to speed so they don't drive the Ferrari into the wall.

Now.

Sharing one of my favorite idiot driver moments. I guess it was Ferraris fault this happened....hahahahahh
http://youtu.be/sHc7jfMlSl4

 

[Terry VerHaar]

To me, the market for Red cameras is pretty clear.

1. Cinematographers working on high budget fare. In almost all cases, cameras are rented from a camera rental company. Tests are conducted for hair, makeup, lighting, etc. ACs work with camera operators to make sure all of the accessories and support gear is working for everyone's needs.
2. To go along with the first, camera rental companies. They are the ones investing in not only the cameras but all the support that goes along with it. They have a huge stake in the decisions made by the camera manufacturers.
3. DP/Owner Ops who have invested in the Red camera system or are considering investing in Red camera system. They work on a variety of projects and can get rental income from their gear.
4. Production companies. In some cases, it makes sense for a production company to purchase their own camera packages. Financially it may be more beneficial for them to do it and also it may allow them to have the tools at their disposal for things that come up spontaneously. Red fits nicely here as a high quality, yet affordable solution.
5. Everyone else. This could be hobbyist, low budget filmmaker, etc. This number is probably hard to quantify.

So, when you have these various markets that may be using Red cameras, education and support does play a critical role. Whether it's an ASC cinematographer shooting their first Red project or a rental company looking to build a reliable camera package for their clients, the necessity for solid, accurate information becomes apparent. I believe this is a two way street. Red needs to put out as much information as resources allow them to and the endusers need to keep up as best they can with technology as it evolves. Neither side has it easy. Red is busy trying to get cameras out the door as well as do R&D for future products and a lot of us endusers are busy trying to make a living, so things fall through the cracks. But ultimately if there is to be success, there needs to be a give and take. I feel Red has done a better job in recent years about trying to get more information out there. There will always be opportunities to improve that end of things.

As for the topic at hand, I think the things Mark is asking for are very reasonable and could help quite a bit.

Seems you might have read my comment out of context. I am 1000% with Mark on this and have said so several times. David has also been very persuasive, articulate, and offers some great insight here. His analogy is not altogether inappropriate because Red is not selling iPhones (mass market) but a limited amount of professional level tools, targeted at a very clear and well delineated (niche) market - as you point out.

So, to be clear, there is a need for a powerful marketing effort but speaking to a "wide market" is a waste of resources. I believe the marketing from RED can assume a certain level of knowledge and professionalism. Speaking to the lowest common denominator in the video community is not going to optimize the resources of RED.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Steve,

I don't think 1,2,3,4 on you list are looking for a handy cam with night shot mode and auto iris.

#5 might be the group that needs to be the most educated. So should red put their resources toward educating the handy cam market!

They are doing what they should do. Their tutorial and Reducation paths are excellent for bringing users up to speed so they don't drive the Ferrari into the wall.

Now.

Sharing one of my favorite idiot driver moments. I guess it was Ferraris fault this happened....hahahahahh
http://youtu.be/sHc7jfMlSl4

I agree. However, keep in mind that information is a blessing and a curse. When it's the wrong information, anyone in that list above is vulnerable. That's a very cryptic and nice way of saying that even those who are very capable can be misled.

I do agree that Red has done a very good job of improving their website as it pertains to information. I think their video series is very good and I would like to see more of that in addition to some more white papers (the less sexy kind of information but still very important).

 

[David Battistella]

I don't know. I got called elitist and I'm going to tell anyone who calls me that to FUCK RIGHT OFF.

I'm pretty good and fair to people on this forum, have been for a long time and I don't resort to name calling.

But I will defend myself when I feel it's necessary.


battistella