Web Analytics
   Date   

Re: HDR monitoring on set

Francesco Scazzosi
 

You wanna go for Sony BVM-X300
It’s a color critical panel but it’s so expensive and so heavy for on-set monitoring . 



Or Bvme 171 by Sony .  it’s less expensive and easy to move / carry but the image area isn’t big enough to judge contrast / focus etc . 
so at the moment we are expecting a 24.5 panel with an affordable price and a good weight/quality balance . 

Ty 



On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 at 09:39, John-Erling Holmenes Fredriksen FNF <post@...> wrote:

Doesn’t have to be inexpensive, I’m just not seeing many options at all :) BTW, thanks for a great article! I’m looking into the Canon-stuff, but I’m also looking to see if there’s anything I could have onboard or close to camera as well. I know viewing conditions will be an issue, but I’m betting many situations would allow me to control that somewhat anyway.

-- John-Erling Holmenes Fredriksen FNF Cinematographer Oslo, Norway

--
Francesco Scazzosi
-
Digital Imaging Technician
-
Mobile +393494346032
Mail francescoscazzosi@...
Skype - franzsca
Imdb: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3815841/


Re: HDR monitoring on set

John-Erling Holmenes Fredriksen FNF
 

Doesn’t have to be inexpensive, I’m just not seeing many options at all :) BTW, thanks for a great article! I’m looking into the Canon-stuff, but I’m also looking to see if there’s anything I could have onboard or close to camera as well. I know viewing conditions will be an issue, but I’m betting many situations would allow me to control that somewhat anyway.

-- John-Erling Holmenes Fredriksen FNF Cinematographer Oslo, Norway


Re: HDR monitoring on set

Art Adams <art.cml.only@...>
 

I'm not sure there's an inexpensive option right now.

I've seen the SmallHDs and so far I'm not a fan.

--
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area


HDR monitoring on set

John-Erling Holmenes Fredriksen FNF
 

Unsure if this belongs here or in general or somewhere else, it’s a question about HDR, but about hardware. I’m having a hard time finding any good information about available onset HDR monitors, large and small. I see SmallHD has a range of monitors with good NIT output and what they call HDR preview, but I’ve not had any good experiences with SmallHD monitors before, especially not the colours. Maybe they just need calibration? I’ve read Art Adams’ guide to HDR, where he talks about the Canon ones, so I’ll have a look at those. Anyone tried any other monitors and willing to share?

-- John-Erling Holmenes Fredriksen Cinematographer Oslo, Norway


Z450 S-LOG3 access in V3 firmware?

ian@...
 

Anyone have any luck recording or outputting via HD-SDI a S-LOG3 signal from the Z450 camera?

I can turn a setting "on" but I have no luck outputting or recording it and I've been unable to even enable the 4K dual-SDI output.  Yes- it's V3 firmware.

It's enough to make a man run sobbing into the arms of an Amira...  Or a nice Sony rep if they hang out here.

Thank you in advance,

Ian Kerr csc
Cinematographer
Vancouver, BC


Re: Camera evaluations C200, EVA & Ursa MP

Fahnon
 

Thanks for doing this, Geoff.  I own the C200 and am very curious about what you have to say in stage 3!

--
Fahnon Bennett
Filmmaker/Photographer
Brooklyn, New York
323.375.4332


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Rakesh Malik
 

I haven't done a direct comparison, because I've been too busy shooting. :)
That said, I have submitted some stills shot in stills mode as well as pulled from motion pictures to stock sites and art galleries, and they're getting as good a reception as what I've been capturing with my A7R... but the Red images have more dynamic range and less noise.

Not that either is a low light camera by any means. I've gotten good results at ISO 3200 with it, but I generally keep it rated at ISO 800. 

My workflow has usually been to export a frame from RCX-Pro after normalizing it, and then do everything else in my image editing software, and that includes noise reduction, though honestly I haven't needed it that often. It's not a low light camera by any means. 


-----------------------------

On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Colin Elves <colin@...> wrote:

I'm finding that when everything's executed well, I can get pretty much the same resolution and detail as with my A7R, though the Helium has nicer color before grading when using IPP2.

Ah, now that’s interesting! Have you done a direct comparison? Same lens/stop/subject (ideally a focus chart)? 

I’m not a 100% sure if having the option NR settings in the Raw control panel is quite the same as there being no other noise reduction elsewhere in the image chain. 

I’m assuming there’s already a separate process for dealing with Fixed Pattern Noise. So there’s no reason why there might not be others. 

Colin Elves
DP/contrarian
Germany



Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Adam Wilt
 

Though the images of the gh5, likely the same 150mbit codec, carries more sharpness also very artifact-free.

I’ve seen the same thing in my tests, too.

While it may be the same codec as the one used in the EVA1, it’s likely the upstream processing is different; the GH5 comes from the Lumix division and what they do seems to be very distinct from what the video / cine divisions do. The in-camera softening in the EVA1 and VaricamLT appear to be quite similar.

It may be the case that the video / cine people are more conservative about compression artifacts than the Lumix people are. With any luck I can do some side-by-side recording of difficult subjects on both cameras later this week, and see if I find any more artifacts on the GH5 footage—artifacts that might not bother typical GH5 shooters but might be more of a problem for quality-conscious EVA1/LT shooters looking to feed VFX and/or critical grading workflows.

Adam Wilt
technical services: consulting / coding / camerawork
Vancouver WA USA (no, not that Vancouver, the other one)


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

 

Felix Trolldenier / Trollfilm wrote:

Another great comparison test. 

Interesting to see what different sensors, dynamic range & compression does to the color of her hair. 
Mostly on the light side of her face.  I didn’t expect such differences. 

Not the first time I’ve seen darker / auburn hair turn slightly too warm / red. 
I kept suspecting LED lighting, which may have contributed the time I ran across it - but this definitely shows major differences in these less expensive cameras. 

Her shirt also comes out quite differently on certain cameras, like the C200.  
h.264 150mb/s really wants to fall apart in the shadows - about the only thing I did expect.   

Thanks for sharing this. 

mdp 


Mark Doering-Powell, ASC
Los Angeles based DP 




Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Felix Trolldenier / Trollfilm
 

Though the images of the gh5, likely the same 150mbit codec, carries
more sharpness also very artifact-free. See our latest test:

https://agdok.de/de_DE/kameratest20172

We also didn't see more detail in Helium. (debayered in Scratch in full
premium, scaled with lanczos to 4k and 2k in the videos, no NR or
sharpness, detail:high)


Felix Trolldenier AG DOK
colorist, online editor
Berlin


On 25.12.2017 09:24, Geoff Boyle wrote:
This isn’t surprising as the EVA records H264 at 150mbps this is a lot
lower data rate than the other cameras.


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Felix Trolldenier / Trollfilm
 

Though the images of the gh5, likely the same 150mbit codec, carries more sharpeness also very artifact-free. See our latest test:

https://agdok.de/de_DE/kameratest20172

Felix Trolldenier AG DOK
colorist, online editor
Berlin
Sent from my BlackBerry®

From: "Adam Wilt" <adam@...>
Sender: cml-raw-log-hdr@groups.io
Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2017 13:51:26 -0800
To: <cml-raw-log-hdr@groups.io>
ReplyTo: cml-raw-log-hdr@groups.io
Subject: Re: [cml-raw-log-hdr] Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Speaking of which. The EVA is soft on the latest tests as well I think. 

I’ve noticed that internally-recorded files on EVA1 are a bit softer than externally-recorded files (using a PIX-E capturing to ProRes). I also saw this on VaricamLT (ProRes or raw, using Odyssey7Q). My guess is that Panasonic is pre-filtering high frequencies prior to recording to avoid giving the codec a conniption fit, trading off a bit of crispness for greatly reduced compression artifacts.

Adam Wilt
technical services: consulting / coding / camerawork
Vancouver WA USA (no, not that Vancouver, the other one)


Re: Camera evaluations C200, EVA & Ursa MP

Colin Elves
 

It’s just my fat face with an old Gretamacbeth chart
<More Stuff Removed>

I thought Elves were tall and skinny.

:-)
I’m a very unusual elf.

Colin Elves
Short, fat, bald Elf/DP
Berlin, testing after a busy night...


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Colin Elves
 

Ah, that’s interesting. I’ve only ever recorded 4K to the Odyssey. But I’ll take a look at some of the Dual recorded clips to see if there is indeed a difference!

Colin Elves
Director of Photography/short fat elf.
Berlin until NYE


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Geoff Boyle
 

This isn’t surprising as the EVA records H264 at 150mbps this is a lot lower data rate than the other cameras.

I guess it starts the whole argument of initial resolution V compression again. Also as Adam points out there may be pre-filtering happening to help the compression.

Cheers
Geoff Boyle
Cinematographer
EU Based
www.gboyle.co.uk
+31 (0) 637 155 076



On 24 Dec 2017, at 22:51, Adam Wilt <adam@...> wrote:

I’ve noticed that internally-recorded files on EVA1 are a bit softer than externally-recorded files 


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Geoff Boyle
 

It’s as sharp as I could get it!


Cheers
Geoff Boyle
Cinematographer
EU Based
www.gboyle.co.uk
+31 (0) 637 155 076



On 24 Dec 2017, at 22:40, Colin Elves <colin@...> wrote:

Speaking of which. The EVA is soft on the latest tests as well I think. 


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Adam Wilt
 

Speaking of which. The EVA is soft on the latest tests as well I think. 

I’ve noticed that internally-recorded files on EVA1 are a bit softer than externally-recorded files (using a PIX-E capturing to ProRes). I also saw this on VaricamLT (ProRes or raw, using Odyssey7Q). My guess is that Panasonic is pre-filtering high frequencies prior to recording to avoid giving the codec a conniption fit, trading off a bit of crispness for greatly reduced compression artifacts.

Adam Wilt
technical services: consulting / coding / camerawork
Vancouver WA USA (no, not that Vancouver, the other one)


Re: Camera evaluations C200, EVA & Ursa MP

Robert A. Ober
 

On 12/23/17 03:40, Colin Elves wrote:
<Stuff Removed>

It’s just my fat face with an old Gretamacbeth chart
<More Stuff Removed>

I thought Elves were tall and skinny.

:-)

Robert A. Ober
IT Consultant, Vidcaster, & Freelancer
www.infohou.com
Houston, TX

--
Folks,
Please be aware that I am not always watching email so text me
or go old school and call me at 281-772-3596 if you need help within a few hours.


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Colin Elves
 

Also, focus on the Alexa SXT appears soft.
Speaking of which. The EVA is soft on the latest tests as well I think.

And I’d still like to know if Red do noise reduction in their processing pipeline though...

Merry Christmas everyone!

Colin Elves
DP/Christmas Elf #4, central Europe region.


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Paul Curtis
 

On 24 Dec 2017, at 19:58, Art Adams <art.cml.only@...> wrote:
If the scaling from 7K to UHD went wrong, and resulted in a resolution loss of 50%, then we should expect to see the chart show problems in the range between 2.6K and 3K.
Depends where it was scaled. I notice in photoshop for example it doesn't offer any decent scaling in 32 bit mode. If you take the EXR and convert it to 8 bit and scale that then you get a similar resolution to the F65, maybe more.

In reality 8K acquisition is destined for 4K delivery, so a 50% scale with a decent algorithm will yield sublime results and is a fair real world test.

Merry Christmas everyone!

cheers
Paul

Paul Curtis, VFX & Post | Canterbury, UK


Re: Noise reduction in Red’s IPP2

Art Adams <art.cml.only@...>
 

Yeah, there's something not right with that Helium JPEG. Knowing that the test was shot at 7K is an important clue. Following the 80% rule, that would drop effective resolution to 5.6K. Also, if these were pulled from UHD, as Geoff says:

"These are sections of the full UHD image from each camera grabbed at 1:1 so you can clearly compare colour and resolution..."

Then:

If the Helium was recorded at 7K—higher resolution than UHD, which is what the other cameras can record at natively—then it had to be scaled somehow.

Following the 80% rule, the Helium resolution should have landed around 5.6K, which is beyond the range of a 4K chart to show (unless you frame it to fill 1/4 of the frame).

If the scaling from 7K to UHD went wrong, and resulted in a resolution loss of 50%, then we should expect to see the chart show problems in the range between 2.6K and 3K.

That's exactly what we see in the chart.

It's pretty clear there was some sort of scaling issue in bringing that frame from 7K down to UHD. The camera should have shown higher resolution than any of the others, and instead it shows exactly half of what we should expect, based on the captured resolution. That's why it's important to detail every step of these tests. (It's also why I don't do many of them anymore. It's too freakin' complicated, and a small mistake has large consequences for a product or a manufacturer.) Apparently the raw frame shows the proper resolution.

Also, focus on the Alexa SXT appears soft.

--
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area

1901 - 1920 of 1984