Redspace vs ISO

[Irri]

A lot of people talk about how much they like the highlight curve of redspace. A lot of people also complain about being under exposed by a stop when using it.

Here is my question:

If I exposed for raw I would be very blown in the highlights if I transferred in redspace. Guessing roughly one stop, could I switch to 160 ISO (from 320) in RA/RC and not be blown in the highlights? My thinking is that it might be better to capture higher up in the sensor's range, but drop that down in post and apply the curve. Would there be any advantage to using this method and holding on to ETTR until later in the process?

[bobbystone]

I think as long as you're not clipping in RAW, you can always pull down without any damage. Thus the "expose to the right" mantra. I really feel like my camera is rated more like 160 in RAW rather than 320 to be honest.

[Irri]

I think it depends what you are using as your basis for ISO rating. A lot of people use 18% grey as their basis (which isn't surprising). If you are using raw view that will fall a lot lower than if you are using redspace so would rate the camera more towards 160. I generally advise people to light a set for 200 ISO as it is easier to take away light than to add it and I can't remember being a on a studio shoot without seeing the lens wide open of late.