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 :)

WARNING for rookies...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Latte-tude

Latte-tude

Brook Willard said:
I get the first two, but is the third any different than those who are used to 35mm should expect? Or are you directing that at the auto-exposure _VX and below crowds?
Click to expand...

The issue is just how critical proper exposure is, let me clarify:

The greener shooters have many issues to contend with in understanding exposure and from what I've seen auto-exposure is often their worst enemy. I would advise them to start by learning the basic theory of "place and fall" which is discussed in several books they should find the time to read, but I digress.

The oblique point of my post was more in terms of how the brave new world of post-acquisition image manipulation combined with a data based workflow has changed the rules. Sure, modern 35mm film stocks run through proper TK and DI (assuming the budget allows for it) can offer latitude similar to what we are being told we can expect from the RedOne with its low noise sensor, RAW color space and RedCine software.

My post was aimed at the "rookies" Jim was warning, most of whom are used to 6 to 8 useable stops, and, depending on what they are used to shooing with, plenty of noise even at 0db. For them the ability to miss by a couple stops and save it in post without anybody but their hairdresser knowing for sure seems to me like the RedOne is making their lives easier. Perhaps I am so used to proper methods of setting exposure I underestimate how lost some noobs might be, if so I stand corrected.
 
Sumptin' on top?

Sumptin' on top?

mdo said:
You can dig them out of the floor, but if they blow out the top, they're gone.
Click to expand...

I have always followed that dictum myself but lately I am wondering if maybe there is more to the story. I had the good fortune to attend a seminar at NAB that Jason Rodriguez (who is working with SI these days I think) gave on working in RAW color space. (I am going to paraphrase his comments here, if my memory is off my apologies in advance.) The short version is that the extra bits of info that cameras like SI and RedOne intake (largely to push down the noise floor from what I gathered) include actual image information that can be recovered from the blown out portions of highlights.

I will leave it to more technically proficient folks to explain how this is possible but from the images that Jason showed at the seminar it sure looked like you could extract details from pretty blown areas.

In any case, I plan to shoot to the left at first just to cover my arse.
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
The short version is that the extra bits of info that cameras like SI and RedOne intake (largely to push down the noise floor from what I gathered) include actual image information that can be recovered from the blown out portions of highlights.

I will leave it to more technically proficient folks to explain how this is possible but from the images that Jason showed at the seminar it sure looked like you could extract details from pretty blown areas.
Click to expand...

Can't imagine how. If all bits are set to 1 for all values over a certain level, doesn't seem like there would be any way to work back from that.
 
mdo said:
Can't imagine how. If all bits are set to 1 for all values over a certain level, doesn't seem like there would be any way to work back from that.
Click to expand...

Until that seminar at NAB I would have agreed with you. I wish I had the technical chops to explain it better but unless Jason falsified the images, which I am certain he would not do, I know what I saw.
 
Evin. What do you mean by different ISO for different contrast situations? Can you get more latitude out of one rating than you could out of the other?
 
SF Geek said:
Evin. What do you mean by different ISO for different contrast situations? Can you get more latitude out of one rating than you could out of the other?
Click to expand...

It's about tailoring your exposire to the available DR. Sort of like a digital zone system.
 
I'm ready for the challenge. I'm ready for the work it'll take for me NEVER to have to film (that should be video ED) with crappy cameras that make our beautiful world look like.. well.. cheap video.
I saw David Lynch's new film. I thought it was lesson in how a great director can make a virtue out whatever crap he or she has to film with. But some of the shots were totally out of focus; I mean long medium shot on our lead actress as she delivers her lines.. out of focus.. I'm squirming in the back row trying not to shout out.. thirty seconds later.. still out of focus. Doubtless the DP walked straight out and shot himself there and then. What else could he do?
I'm sure David Lynch will avail himself of RED for his next crazy feature. I'm also sure that there are many people on this forum who would do it for cost for the chance to work with him.. Am I wrong??:biggrin:
What do we think of Lynch's work? It's LA-Dystopia right? Is there a "deeper meaning" wooooo? :shiftyph34r:
 
Very happy to get my DP to sort out the Exposure and ND issues. That's his job. In fact, all this talk about insane ISO ratings is making me think we can drop our Zeiss Master Primes and do everything with the Red Zooms and push a stop if ever we need to. Seriously. Not least because I like to use a 65mm, and well, they're hard to come by as primes.

FOCUS is more of a team effort, and my big question to Red Team is, what was that gear we saw at NAB? Are we getting a Red Follow Focus, is there a Wireless system/grip for focus? I ask, because I'd hate to spend a fortune on good gear that I don't need (if Red end up creating something better), or to get all that Redrock follow focus stuff and find out Red has better follow focus.

And to keep this on topic, I'm asking this because if there is a big NOOB WARNING about focus, it would be lovely to know the bag of tricks that Red will give us for focus. We know we'll have the magic focus assist, but what else?
 
There are limits to just changing the ISO ratings scene to scene (and certainly shot to shot) in terms of how much variation in noise level do you want. A certain level of variation from scene to scene is OK (it's like shooting slow film outside and fast film inside and that diffference in grain) but it's harder to get away with that shot to shot in the same sequence.
 
David,

In many respects it depends on what you are mastering to. 1080p for broadcast would have, for instance, more latitude for push/pull than 4k projection. Likewise mixing s16mm and 35 can work well enough for broadcast...but theatrical release?

...no thank you.
 
Blair S. Paulsen said:
I have always followed that dictum myself but lately I am wondering if maybe there is more to the story. I had the good fortune to attend a seminar at NAB that Jason Rodriguez (who is working with SI these days I think) gave on working in RAW color space. (I am going to paraphrase his comments here, if my memory is off my apologies in advance.) The short version is that the extra bits of info that cameras like SI and RedOne intake (largely to push down the noise floor from what I gathered) include actual image information that can be recovered from the blown out portions of highlights.

I will leave it to more technically proficient folks to explain how this is possible but from the images that Jason showed at the seminar it sure looked like you could extract details from pretty blown areas.

In any case, I plan to shoot to the left at first just to cover my arse.
Click to expand...

I heard this as well. The difference now is that we can over expose without clipping. That means there's still detail that can be pulled back. Once you clip though, it's gone as always. I think part of the confusion is because both these cameras are recording more dynamic range than any LCD has got a prayer of displaying.
 
Tools that push the limits and versatility further are capable of the BEST and the WORST.

This is probably why Mr Jannard insists on these topics.

Be prepared to test, test and test. Exiting times...really !

I think there will be many different ways we can use the dynamic range.

I am more than impressed by the 8000 ISO performance.
 
fergus said:
I saw David Lynch's new film. I thought it was lesson in how a great director can make a virtue out whatever crap he or she has to film with. But some of the shots were totally out of focus; I mean long medium shot on our lead actress as she delivers her lines.. out of focus.. I'm squirming in the back row trying not to shout out.. thirty seconds later.. still out of focus. Doubtless the DP walked straight out and shot himself there and then.
Click to expand...

I didn't care about the soft focus in Inland Empire for a single moment. I was just riveted by the film. A lot of Redusers are trained to demand certain things that ordinary (and even far more discerning than ordinary) audiences just don't think about. The reviewers across the board, who raved about Inland Empire, never once mentioned focus issues. I never saw a review that mentioned it disparagingly anyhow. And even the most experienced film critics often have no clue about the technical aspects of film creation: one very experienced film critic in a major paper described Inland Empire as having been shot in "low-register HD"...whatever that is.

I'm sure Jim has various motives for warning about the challenge of focusing. Paranoia? ;-) Obviously there's a huge range in experience of Red purchasers (unlike users of a Viper who were invariably expertly trained DPs), and as such Jim might be concerned about people getting a nasty surprise when faced with the difficulty of shooting with such high resolution and shallow depth of field (e.g., "I hate my new camera--I can't even focus on my dog when he runs away from me."). But the beauty of democratized filmmaking (where Red is leading the way) is how so many more people of all walks of life can tell a story with the potential to deliver quality to a wider audience. And even then, I'm betting that most purchasers of Red, even when they're upgrading from a DVX100, will be very aware of the new challenges they're facing. It's still a $20,000+ investment. You don't just pick one up at Best Buy.
 
Curran Giddens said:
Thanks for the warning, Jim.

I've never even used a regular video camera before (only been in the post-production side of the biz). It will be interesting to see how easy it is for a NooB to just pick up a RED and start shooting.
Click to expand...

WOW!!! How exciting for your first car to be a Ferrari! That's amazing. I call myself a noob and even I started out on an SVHS video camera 10 years ago...
 
I am not the least bit concerned about users that have experience with 35mm film, or even a Viper or Genesis. My concern is for the shooter stepping up from an HVX200 or Z1. It certainly is going to be an eye-opener and a challenge to learn some new stuff. As long as they understand what they are getting into, I am sure it will be an incredibly satisfying experience. If these issues come as surpires, it might be a bit disconcerting. I just want all RED customers to be informed and happy.

Jim
 
I know most professional cameraman do not use auto-focus. However, it looks like Canon might be breaking that trend. I still do not see the stigma of good auto-focus like 35mm still cameras or stabilization.

http://www.canon.com/bctv/faq/aft.html

I'm curious if Red's focus assist will be similar to Canon's where the operator with a joystick or mouse positions the focus box where he/she wants focus and then the assist tells him which way to rack (forward or back).

Any news or RED's focus assist?
Would Canon's auto focus work with their PL super lense?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top