PDA

View Full Version : footage request/re: another thread


zak forrest
10-09-2007, 05:37 AM
in this thread:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=2748&page=34

david mullen answered a question about shooting in moonlight.

it occurred to me that we havent really seen anything shot at night with ONLY natural light, at ASA 8000 or higher. any takers to this challenge?
Spike Baumann
10-09-2007, 02:56 PM
Heh, if I only had a camera to play with... :)
Tom Lowe
10-09-2007, 04:47 PM
More low-light tests, please.

I would love to see tests of:

Actors lit only by campfires, bonfires, tiki torches or camping lanterns.

Sunset/Sunrise shots with a lot of clouds in them.

thanks!!!
zak forrest
10-09-2007, 06:23 PM
8000 ASA and above, exterior night time stuff. not lit by city lights or hollywood blvd, etc...
dvpixl
10-09-2007, 06:54 PM
does the RED blur the image when shooting in high ISO's? or would that only be an issue with shutter speed?
Häakon
10-09-2007, 06:58 PM
does the RED blur the image when shooting in high ISO's? or would that only be an issue with shutter speed?
When shooting at a higher ISO than the baseline (320ASA), the camera simply adds digital gain to boost the signal of the image. This function is not applied to the image itself, but merely to the output signal for viewing purposes and as a metadata layer saved with the footage, so when you bring it into RED Alert! / REDCINE in post, the image is automatically displayed at the ISO level you chose when you shot it. However, this process is non-destructive and completely alterable in post; the footage is essentially always recorded at 320 and just comes with "instructions" on how to handle the footage after the fact. Raising the ISO level doesn't make it any more blurry.
Steve Sherrick
10-09-2007, 07:00 PM
Didn't Shawn Nelson post some night time stuff early on?
Steve Sherrick
10-09-2007, 07:04 PM
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=4703
Steve Sherrick
10-09-2007, 07:04 PM
Granted, he shot it at ASA1000
Tom Lowe
10-09-2007, 08:39 PM
Shawn has indeed posted some nice low-light clips. I'd like to see something like "Up in Smoke" with NO artificial lights. :)
Jannard
10-09-2007, 11:55 PM
We have to be real here... ISO 8000 in the dark is going to be very noisy.

ISO 1000 is great, 2000 is useable with some noise reduction. More in the dark is just asking too much. High ISO's with not a lot of black will work. But no light with black objects= noise.

Jim
Shawn Nelson
10-10-2007, 01:01 AM
Shawn has indeed posted some nice low-light clips. I'd like to see something like "Up in Smoke" with NO artificial lights. :)

The first part of 'Up In Smoke', where the match is struck, features no lights except the match itself.
Mark L. Pederson
10-10-2007, 05:23 AM
We are shooting tonight, EXT - using candles for key light and the light from Empire State building as fill -


Also, a studio asked us for Time Square at night - existing light only - so, we'll bang that off too (even though, like a true New Yorker I HATE Times Square)

Offhollywood is soon to unleash a "footage assault" - shooting over the next few weeks with a cool assortment of DP's -

Mike Curtis (hdforindies) will help post when he's back from Spain -

End of next week I expect - we are doing a full-court press for a 35mm film out - so, DEEP in the weeds for the next 10-14 days -I'll maybe slam up some behind the scenes stills over the next few days if I can -
Rob Lohman
10-10-2007, 07:57 AM
Granted, he shot it at ASA1000

Just to be very clear, he displayed and probably processed the image at ASA 1000. He did not record it at ASA 1000 since we don't change the data coming from the sensor.

The ISO/ASA change is all done after the data has been captured. It's a digital 'gain' (exposure change).
Steve Sherrick
10-10-2007, 08:06 AM
Just to be very clear, he displayed and probably processed the image at ASA 1000. He did not record it at ASA 1000 since we don't change the data coming from the sensor.

The ISO/ASA change is all done after the data has been captured. It's a digital 'gain' (exposure change).

That's what I was referring to. I forget sometimes that it might be confusing for people who don't know too much about the camera. We'll have to come up with another way to phrase it when referring to ASA.

Steve
vanguy
10-10-2007, 08:39 AM
I got an idea.

How about "processed at ISO 1000"?
MikeCurtis
10-11-2007, 10:38 AM
Mark - for your Times Square stuff, are you going to shoot 180 or 360 shutter? Or have you shot it already? Crazy Spanish time zone difference...

BTW, I did some interesting frame accumulation noise averaging stuff on some of our earlier footage...
zak forrest
10-11-2007, 10:47 AM
We have to be real here... ISO 8000 in the dark is going to be very noisy.

ISO 1000 is great, 2000 is useable with some noise reduction. More in the dark is just asking too much. High ISO's with not a lot of black will work. But no light with black objects= noise.

Jim

so something like david's shot (a 4 sec long exposure at f3.5, asa800):
http://www.davidmullenasc.com/moonlit1.jpg
flmguy
10-11-2007, 01:35 PM
Does anyone have footage I can use for a DI and transfer to 35 test. looking for 1 minute of footage in full rez.
Tom Lowe
10-12-2007, 08:53 PM
The first part of 'Up In Smoke', where the match is struck, features no lights except the match itself.

I know, but I want to see no artificial light. The spark of the bowl was awesome, but artificial light kicked on just after.

Shawn can you shoot me your phone # via PM and I'll rattle off some of the low-light test ideas I have. Your stuff has been the best on this forum, so far, IMO. We don't get RED #400 for a few more weeks.

One thing I am really curious about is low-light photography of sunset clouds. DLSRs have massive pattern noise for these types of shots, so I am curious if Red is different. Your early morning shot with that bird was very encouraging, IMO.
I Bloom
10-13-2007, 10:15 AM
so something like david's shot (a 4 sec long exposure at f3.5, asa800):
http://www.davidmullenasc.com/moonlit1.jpg

isn't possible at 24 fps then?

i mean, i know that with no light you get lots of noise, but with moonlight like this it wouldn't be usable? im sure it owuld be noisier than this but...

Hey Zak, you might not get this shot at 24fps, but if it's just establishing then with fast lenses you might choose to undercrank and get close. I've even done a shot like this on film and purposely had a car move slowly through the frame. Once sound is added, it's very hard to tell.

But I don't think they will ever make a camera that can shoot a shot like this, unless maybe the sensor is super-cooled or something. In a situation like this you will even notice the noise in your own eyes.

IBloom
zak forrest
10-27-2007, 06:25 PM
Hey Zak, you might not get this shot at 24fps, but if it's just establishing then with fast lenses you might choose to undercrank and get close. I've even done a shot like this on film and purposely had a car move slowly through the frame. Once sound is added, it's very hard to tell.

But I don't think they will ever make a camera that can shoot a shot like this, unless maybe the sensor is super-cooled or something. In a situation like this you will even notice the noise in your own eyes.

IBloom

i love the noise in my own eyes