Web Analytics

locked What’s the difference?


Geoff Boyle
 

A couple of pics as a taster.

 

Grade applied is from the Kodak Gray Scale corrected to the values on the back of the chart, i.e. grey neutralised and level set to 488.

 

This grade was applied to both stills as this was the “neutral” grade.

 

Actually almost no correction.

 

This is from a camera chosen at random, there are smaller and much bigger differences with other cameras.

 

I’m going to take my time with the results as I don’t want to give anyone any ammunition 😊

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Netherlands

www.gboyle.nl

 


Colin Elves
 

Oh! Cool. 

The top could be the EVA1 as the WB presets skew yellow. The bottom Venice maybe?

Colin Elves
Director of Photography
Currently Yorkshire

On 15 Jul 2018, at 08:00, Geoff Boyle <geoff.cml@...> wrote:

A couple of pics as a taster.

 

Grade applied is from the Kodak Gray Scale corrected to the values on the back of the chart, i.e. grey neutralised and level set to 488.

 

This grade was applied to both stills as this was the “neutral” grade.

 

Actually almost no correction.

 

This is from a camera chosen at random, there are smaller and much bigger differences with other cameras.

 

I’m going to take my time with the results as I don’t want to give anyone any ammunition 😊

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Netherlands

www.gboyle.nl

 

<LED.png>
<Tungsten.png>


 

Different light possibly.  Shape in the eyes looks subtly different and there’s less wrap on the top shot as the shadow feels marginally harsher.

Michael

Michael J Sanders: Director of Photography 
  

Mobile: +44 (0) 7976 269818   
Linkline Diary: +44 (0)20 8426 2200

On 15 Jul 2018, at 08:00, Geoff Boyle <geoff.cml@...> wrote:

A couple of pics as a taster.

 

Grade applied is from the Kodak Gray Scale corrected to the values on the back of the chart, i.e. grey neutralised and level set to 488.

 

This grade was applied to both stills as this was the “neutral” grade.

 

Actually almost no correction.

 

This is from a camera chosen at random, there are smaller and much bigger differences with other cameras.

 

I’m going to take my time with the results as I don’t want to give anyone any ammunition 😊

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Netherlands

www.gboyle.nl

 

<LED.png>
<Tungsten.png>


Alex Metcalfe DoP
 

Different light possibly

One is labeled as LED and one as tungsten so my assumption was that these 2 stills are from the same camera and show how they represent the 2 sources that we are led to believe are the same Kelvin rating. If my assumption is right then the results are much more extreme than I would have expected. LED technology has grown so quickly and due to the enormous benefits of energy saving and physical tempreture is becoming dominant in the smaller output section of lighting. More productions are rightly adopting Albert which means we will all need to use more LED than ever so seeing the results of tests like this is fantastic and should be a start point to launch from. 

Alex Metcalfe
DoP
Sent from my LG Mobile

------ Original message------


Jad Beyrouthy
 

The difference shows automatically the lack of colors in the spectral range of LED lights compared to full spectrum lights in tungsten. I have yet to see a good LED light that can cover the spectrum needed to represent skintones accurately. 


Great test Geoff and thank you and the team for the effort put into it. 

Looking forward to more images.

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018, 10:05 Geoff Boyle <geoff.cml@...> wrote:

A couple of pics as a taster.

 

Grade applied is from the Kodak Gray Scale corrected to the values on the back of the chart, i.e. grey neutralised and level set to 488.

 

This grade was applied to both stills as this was the “neutral” grade.

 

Actually almost no correction.

 

This is from a camera chosen at random, there are smaller and much bigger differences with other cameras.

 

I’m going to take my time with the results as I don’t want to give anyone any ammunition 😊

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Netherlands

www.gboyle.nl

 


Jad Beyrouthy
 

Sorry I forgot to sign
Cheers,

Jad Beyrouthy
Cinematographer | Colorist
www.jadbeyrouthy.com
jad@...
Green Beans Productions
Beirut, Lebanon


On Sun, Jul 15, 2018, 11:54 Jad Beyrouthy <jadbeyrouthy@...> wrote:
The difference shows automatically the lack of colors in the spectral range of LED lights compared to full spectrum lights in tungsten. I have yet to see a good LED light that can cover the spectrum needed to represent skintones accurately. 


Great test Geoff and thank you and the team for the effort put into it. 

Looking forward to more images.

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018, 10:05 Geoff Boyle <geoff.cml@...> wrote:

A couple of pics as a taster.

 

Grade applied is from the Kodak Gray Scale corrected to the values on the back of the chart, i.e. grey neutralised and level set to 488.

 

This grade was applied to both stills as this was the “neutral” grade.

 

Actually almost no correction.

 

This is from a camera chosen at random, there are smaller and much bigger differences with other cameras.

 

I’m going to take my time with the results as I don’t want to give anyone any ammunition 😊

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Netherlands

www.gboyle.nl

 


Mitch Gross
 

So is this a camera comparison or a light source comparison?

Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager 
Panasonic Systems Solutions Company of North America
New York

On Jul 15, 2018, at 3:00 AM, Geoff Boyle <geoff.cml@...> wrote:

A couple of pics as a taster.

 

Grade applied is from the Kodak Gray Scale corrected to the values on the back of the chart, i.e. grey neutralised and level set to 488.

 

This grade was applied to both stills as this was the “neutral” grade.

 

Actually almost no correction.

 

This is from a camera chosen at random, there are smaller and much bigger differences with other cameras.

 

I’m going to take my time with the results as I don’t want to give anyone any ammunition 😊

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Netherlands

www.gboyle.nl

 

<LED.png>
<Tungsten.png>


Brian Heller
 

Mitch Gross wrote:

So is this a camera comparison or a light source comparison?

An excellent question.

Brian Heller
IA 600 DP


Colin Elves
 

Ah-ha! That would make sense too. In my experience most LED ‘tungsten’ lights skew yellow as well (even to the eye). Remote phosphor tends to be a bit better. So I would guess this could the Skypanel?

Colin Elves
Director of Photography
Currently (distracted in) Yorkshire.

On 15 Jul 2018, at 12:56, Alex Metcalfe DoP <alex@...> wrote:

Different light possibly

One is labeled as LED and one as tungsten so my assumption was that these 2 stills are from the same camera and show how they represent the 2 sources that we are led to believe are the same Kelvin rating. 


Bob Kertesz
 

So is this a camera comparison or a light source comparison?

To quote Geoff: "This is from a camera chosen at random, there are smaller and much bigger differences with other cameras."

It's a light source comparison, as well as indicating how a particular camera reacts to LED vs. Tungsten light because you can't judge those things separately.

-Bob

Bob Kertesz
BlueScreen LLC
Hollywood, California

DIT, Video Controller, and live compositor extraordinaire.

High quality images for more than four decades - whether you've wanted them or not.©

* * * * * * * * * *


Mitch Gross
 

So this camera comparison test morphed into a light source comparison test, which is exactly what I cautioned against beforehand.

Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager
Panasonic Systems Solutions Company of North America
New York

On Jul 15, 2018, at 12:02 PM, Bob Kertesz <bob@...> wrote:

It's a light source comparison, as well as indicating how a particular camera reacts to LED vs. Tungsten light because you can't judge those things separately.


Geoff Boyle
 

The overall thing is a camera evaluation.

 

As we were starting to do the test we found some dramatic differences.

 

All cameras will be posted in both lighting situations.

 

One is “Real” the other is “Substitute” the reason for the second name is that I found myself singing the Who track as I looked at the images 😊

 

“The simple things you see are all complicated”

It's a genuine problem, you won't try”
“To work it out at all you just pass it by, pass it by”

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Netherlands

www.gboyle.nl

 

From: cml-raw-log-hdr@... <cml-raw-log-hdr@...> On Behalf Of Mitch Gross
Sent: 15 July 2018 18:07
To: cml-raw-log-hdr@...
Subject: Re: [cml-raw-log-hdr] What’s the difference?

 

So this camera comparison test morphed into a light source comparison test, which is exactly what I cautioned against beforehand.

Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager
Panasonic Systems Solutions Company of North America
New York

On Jul 15, 2018, at 12:02 PM, Bob Kertesz <bob@...> wrote:

It's a light source comparison, as well as indicating how a particular camera reacts to LED vs. Tungsten light because you can't judge those things separately.


Geoff Boyle
 

One more pair from the mystery camera this time and I’ll get on with the real work which I’m putting off because it’s so repetitive and boring it’s really easy to make a mistake and screw things up.

 

 

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Netherlands

www.gboyle.nl

 


Bob Kertesz
 

In my experience most LED ‘tungsten’ lights skew yellow as well (even
to the eye).
In my experience, they tend to skew green. The cheaper they are, the
greener they get.

When you get down to those $79 (or less) on-camera lights, their lack of
red spectrum is so bad people look as if they just rolled off the
embalmer's table.

Bob Kertesz
BlueScreen LLC
Hollywood, California

DIT, Video Controller, and live compositor extraordinaire.

High quality images for more than four decades - whether you've wanted
them or not.©

* * * * * * * * * *


Bob Kertesz
 

So this camera comparison test morphed into a light source comparison
test, which is exactly what I cautioned against beforehand.
Problem is, once you move to LED instruments, there's little choice.

Go to any major lighting house, pull three random tungsten lights from
three manufacturers, and except for subtle differences - say, when the
interior of a soft light has yellowed, and it's dropped 100-200 degrees
K, or the bulb is on its last 20 hours of life - the spectrum/quality
and K temperature and any camera's reaction to them will be pretty much
identical.

Do the same thing with three LED instruments from three different
manufacturers, and be amazed at the differences between the sources.

With more and more LEDs flooding the market from many manufacturers, and
more and more DPs using them exclusively, how can you not at least
attempt to compare sources, even if it's a Sisyphean task? As far as I
know, Geoff had LEDs from a single manufacturer (ARRI). Imagine if he
had gotten three different manufacturer's LED lights.

Current pro LED technology is small, light, relatively cheap, uses
little power, and is the classic example of "Be careful what you wish for."

-Bob

Bob Kertesz
BlueScreen LLC
Hollywood, California

DIT, Video Controller, and live compositor extraordinaire.

High quality images for more than four decades - whether you've wanted
them or not.©

* * * * * * * * * *


Colin Elves
 

Urgh. That one’s kinda ugly under the tungsten. The LED only makes it worse.

Colin Elves
Director of Photography
Back in Bucks.




On 15 Jul 2018, at 17:40, Geoff Boyle <geoff.cml@...> wrote:

One more pair from the mystery camera this time and I’ll get on with the real work which I’m putting off because it’s so repetitive and boring it’s really easy to make a mistake and screw things up.

 

 

 

Cheers

 

Geoff Boyle NSC FBKS

Cinematographer

Netherlands

www.gboyle.nl


Colin Elves
 

I’m talking about supposedly high CRI film lights. Of the top of my head I remember the Dedo DLEDs, Felloni Panels, Litepanel Astras  and the Blind Spot scorpions all being noticeably yellow in their ‘tungsten’ settings (or versions in the case of blind spot). 

My very limited experience with even cheaper units is that they are even worse in multiple ways - but often skew green as well.

LED daylight seems to feel a bit more ‘real’ (or less wrong anyway).

Colin Elves
Director of Photography
Back in Bucks

On 15 Jul 2018, at 17:41, Bob Kertesz <bob@...> wrote:

In my experience most LED ‘tungsten’ lights skew yellow as well (even
to the eye).
In my experience, they tend to skew green. The cheaper they are, the
greener they get.

When you get down to those $79 (or less) on-camera lights, their lack of
red spectrum is so bad people look as if they just rolled off the
embalmer's table.

Bob Kertesz
BlueScreen LLC
Hollywood, California


Bob Kertesz
 

Urgh. That one’s kinda ugly under the tungsten. The LED only makes it
worse.
Geoff didn't say which is which on the second set of pictures posted.


Bob Kertesz
BlueScreen LLC
Hollywood, California

DIT, Video Controller, and live compositor extraordinaire.

High quality images for more than four decades - whether you've wanted
them or not.©

* * * * * * * * * *


Art Adams <art.cml.only@...>
 

Add me to that list.


On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 9:07 AM Mitch Gross <mitchgrosscml@...> wrote:
So this camera comparison test morphed into a light source comparison test, which is exactly what I cautioned against beforehand.

Mitch Gross
Cinema Product Manager
Panasonic Systems Solutions Company of North America
New York

On Jul 15, 2018, at 12:02 PM, Bob Kertesz <bob@...> wrote:

It's a light source comparison, as well as indicating how a particular camera reacts to LED vs. Tungsten light because you can't judge those things separately.



--
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area


Art Adams <art.cml.only@...>
 

Wow. Bad and worse.

--
Art Adams
Director of Photography
San Francisco Bay Area