Low Light

[Rick Darge]

Hey guys,

How does the footage look under low light? Specifically natural low light, like candlelight or a street lamp - I always hated how on my HVX, under low light, I would have to open the iris all the way up, lower my shutter and raise the gain, at which point the footage looked like quasi-better SD

The bubble-popping, cigar smoking girls looked great, I'm just wondering if you guys shot in a variety of low light conditions that you plan to show off at NAB

[Alexander Nikishin]

Just imagine Red boosted to 800 asa with some super speeds!

I hope they still include the ability to boost asa, I remember them saying that they can cleanly boost it to 800.

[tj williams]

Alexander I think that is exactly rgdfilms question. Will it be grainy. how will color rendition stand up. how far can it be pushed, can it even get increased gain to operate at EI800?

Since it is a large sensor the results should be pretty good. Interesting if some RED team has results from tests yet?

[Billy Summers]

Just imagine Red boosted to 800 asa with some super speeds!

I hope they still include the ability to boost asa, I remember them saying that they can cleanly boost it to 800.

THAT, sounds good!:blush:

[Steve Tammi]

I really hope David Stump, or someone, will re-run the camera tests with the production ready camera.

Steve

[Poi Boy]

I think that red one shot at 800 to 1200 asa is going to look really great, certainly better than film stock. I can hardly wait to do my own test!
-A

[Ralph Oshiro]

I just lit a big show shooting with a Sony HDW-F900R. Its published sensitivity rating is only f/10 @ 2,000 lux, but, damn! That thing is way faster than the old F900/3! I keyed my talent at about 20fc to reach 70-75% IRE, and still had stops to spare (at least in 1080i). Does anyone at RED know how RED ONE's sensitivity will compare with the 900R at 0dB?

[Tom Lowe]

BTW, did you guys read the article about Apocalypto in AC where Semler said they were shooting 1500ASA+!!?? for their night scenes without too much image damage?!?

[Finner]

Take a look at Apocalypto, there is dammage.

[Ace]

Its good damage though! It lends itself to the narrative and overall art direction.

[Finner]

The inconsistant look pulled me out of the story. I find a rough degraded image to work well for some story's but it needs to hold for the movie and not jump all over the place from shot to shot.

[Ace]

Oliver stone would like to have a word with you!

[Finner]

tell him i'm all booked up this week but i will try and call him next week.

[Tom Lowe]

Take a look at Apocalypto, there is damage.

Dude, no offense, you don't know if the damaged shots you are referring to might have come from the 16mm camera they filmed some scenes with.

[Finner]

I've shot with 16mm a bunch and the rough shots I saw look nothing like 16mm unless you are pushing it at least 2 stops. The poor quality shots were in the deep jungle and when the day was dark and close to the end by the shadows. It would take a very inexperienced DP (which Dean Semler is not) to decide "hey its getting dark and were in deep jungle so lets pull out the 16mm". Except for the quick action running camera shots I would be shocked if they used the 16mm when it got dark.

[Emanuel A.]

I didn't see any damages over the Flyboys shooting, for instance.

[Tom Lowe]

I've shot with 16mm a bunch and the rough shots I saw look nothing like 16mm unless you are pushing it at least 2 stops. The poor quality shots were in the deep jungle and when the day was dark and close to the end by the shadows. It would take a very inexperienced DP (which Dean Semler is not) to decide "hey its getting dark and were in deep jungle so lets pull out the 16mm". Except for the quick action running camera shots I would be shocked if they used the 16mm when it got dark.

i thought the running shots might be included in your dislikes of the film. my bad.

[Chris Gearhart]

tell him i'm all booked up this week but i will try and call him next week.

heh heh heh. That was funny.

[Billy Summers]

Some of the running shots looked video-ish to me, they pulled me out of the film.:pinch:

[Emanuel A.]

I saw Apocalypto yesterday but only since the attack to the village. :innocent:

I didn't feel the same. Nor any damages regarding what I watched. :huh:

Otherwise, I liked the Flyboys lowlighting.

But not the Flyboys' overexposed-look setup regarding the exteriors scenes or the color-grainy rendering when there's the saturation option route (not present @Apocalypto nor even @Superman_Returns -- I wouldn't say the same about Click but what bothers me it's the Adam Sandler's skin tones, not the Walken's for example).
:cold:

[Alexander Nikishin]

I'd definitely say that Flyboys is the Genesis' visually crowning achievement thus far. In my opinion, it looks like really clean, really crisp film.

[Finner]

I think what may give digital cinema critics what they feel is a reason to talk smack about the red and other digital cinema cameras is that there will be a few people shooting in very low light at asa settings of 800 and up. Instead of admitting that the digital camera was able to capture images with such a high asa that would be imposible with film they will see it as a reason to cut the cameras down. I will always strive to light so I don't have a to run at such a high asa but on the other hand I will be very thankful for the option to shoot at high asa ratings if needed.

[Poi Boy]

I'm a 50 to 100 asa kind of guy but you are right Finner, 1000 asa is nice when you are out of candles.
Aloha
-A

[Evin Grant]

The data seems to point to a 200-320 ASA native sensitivity, but that's just where an 18% grey card renders as 50 IRE. In digital capture it's important to expose down to hold highlght detail so you may find yourself exposing at 500-800 EI (Eposure Index) in order to maintain the widest range of available DR. And with such a clean sensor you could possibly go even lower to 1000 or even 1600 EI and find very little to complain about.

[Poi Boy]

yes I think 1000asa is going to be very clean on this sensor but I would say the widest dr will be around 200 asa.
-A

[Poi Boy]

oops sorry, I ment to say 400asa.
-A

[Dave Cooper]

Wasn't 640 tossed around on the DVXUser boards a bit back?

[Poi Boy]

I think one stop and change is a bit too much.
-A

[Mark Pugh]

Is there any chance of a very SLOW ASA setting?? one thing l enjoy when shooting HD exteriors is being able to dial in a lot of ND very quickly so i can open up the iris, without having to put lots of glass in front of the lens. Also very good for long-exposure/ timelapse.
obviously Red One won't have the internal filters but any chance, team, of low- gain options?

[Blair S. Paulsen]

MarkP - that's one of the best ideas ever that I didn't think of :biggrin:

My Canon DLSR allows me to dial in the ASA/ISO @ 100, 200, 400, 800 or 1,600 with the push of a couple buttons - it uses a CMOS sensor that I am guessing uses very similar underlying tech as the Mysterium. This feature would be incredibly handy. It may be a little late to include it in the first run of cameras but perhaps as an upgrade... :love:

[jbeale]

As far as my limited understanding of sensor physics goes, you can increase sensitivity (and noise) as much as you want by increasing gain of the readout amplifier. However, you cannot decrease sensitivity beyond the basic sensor response (which is normally the default camera setting, because that gives you the best dynamic range). Once a full charge well accumulates in that pixel, any additional photons simply do not register.

I don't think ND filters are such a bad thing, that's what I normally use for my time-lapse shots.

[GlennChan]

Once a full charge well accumulates in that pixel, any additional photons simply do not register.

In lots of image grabs from various cameras (Dalsa Origin, DVX / Andromeda, Red etc. etc.), it looks like the highlights roll off in the individual channels / the response becomes non-linear. So it seems like additional photons do register, but they register weirdly. Whether or not that's true, all cameras I've seen seem to exhibit color shifting in the highlights. Red is nice in that it seems to correct that for you.

2- In my tests with the Panasonic HDC20 (unpopular little brother to the Varicam), you can actually turn down the gain (not sure if it's digital gain, or analog gain pre-A/D). It reduces the noise in the image, and you get color shifts in the image.

[Mark Pugh]

In lots of image grabs from various cameras (Dalsa Origin, DVX / Andromeda, Red etc. etc.), it looks like the highlights roll off in the individual channels / the response becomes non-linear. So it seems like additional photons do register, but they register weirdly. Whether or not that's true, all cameras I've seen seem to exhibit color shifting in the highlights. Red is nice in that it seems to correct that for you.

2- In my tests with the Panasonic HDC20 (unpopular little brother to the Varicam), you can actually turn down the gain (not sure if it's digital gain, or analog gain pre-A/D). It reduces the noise in the image, and you get color shifts in the image.
I guess this is why we have filter wheels in video cameras... And I suppose if you were subjecting the sensor to too much light, and then reduce sensitivity, the sensor is going to burn out, anyway.

[GlennChan]

I could be wrong here, but the purpose of the optical filters is this:

To white balance the image, you need to either:
A- Increase the gain on one/two of the channels. The problem with this is that it increases noise.
B- Decrease the gain on one/two of the channels. If you do this after the sensor, then decreasing the signal will bring the wacky highlights into the normal range, and they aren't getting clipped off.

What color filters do is to decrease the 'gain' before the light hits the sensor. Which is the same say saying it reduces the amount of red/green/blue light hitting the sensor. This puts the exposure of each channel in the sensor's sweet spot.