HDRx optimization

[Christoffer Glans]

I'm trying to figure out the best possible way to get HDRx footage to look good, reducing the sharp edges on the X-track. How would you work with heavy HDRx to reduce the artifacts created by the method?
I'm looking into using pixel blur to smooth out the edges of the X-track, but maybe there's more we could work out to get it nicer looking?

[Elsie N]

Someone in another thread suggested using DEB in REDcine to dampen minor aliasing on footage. Just wondering if you can apply DEB to HDRx single tracks?

Haven't used HDRx yet so no experience with it. I've shot some footage just a few days ago but haven't offloaded it yet.

[Michael Tiemann]

I'm trying to figure out the best possible way to get HDRx footage to look good, reducing the sharp edges on the X-track. How would you work with heavy HDRx to reduce the artifacts created by the method?
I'm looking into using pixel blur to smooth out the edges of the X-track, but maybe there's more we could work out to get it nicer looking?

Well, you already found the method I was going to suggest. Is there something about the footage that makes that not work very well?

[Christoffer Glans]

Well, you already found the method I was going to suggest. Is there something about the footage that makes that not work very well?

Well, there's easily some artifacts that happen with pixel motion blur when it won't find the exact pixels to map between, then there's the issue that because it's a "frame in between frames" there will always be a ghost. in movements.

[Marc Wielage]

I think you're better off not using HDRx and just shooting conventionally. To me, there's enough dynamic range in the camera right now to handle damn nearly anything. The additional trouble caused by HDRx is not worth the time and expense, at least in my experience. I think it's a great theoretical concept, but in actual execution, there's a lot of issues with it. Just protect the highlights and fill more, and it will work about 98% of the time.

[Filip Orlandic]

Use SGO Mamba or Mistika.

[Christoffer Glans]

I think you're better off not using HDRx and just shooting conventionally. To me, there's enough dynamic range in the camera right now to handle damn nearly anything. The additional trouble caused by HDRx is not worth the time and expense, at least in my experience. I think it's a great theoretical concept, but in actual execution, there's a lot of issues with it. Just protect the highlights and fill more, and it will work about 98% of the time.

Of course, but then you have those occations where you film an interior and want to see the exterior without it being blown out. There's a lot of potential in HDRx but you of course have to plan for it both for the location and post. If you plan your shoot you don't have to get headaches because of it.

This is why I want to look at how to improve it in order to be able to get these kinds of images. When you are inside a room and look out, your eyes have a dynamic range that can handle both the interior and exterior at the same time. Using HDRx let's you come close to this vision and that is a kind of look that is unique. Better Call Saul has that look in many of the office scenes and it looks very different than other stuff.

Use SGO Mamba or Mistika.

What do they do for HDRx improvements?

[Michael Tiemann]

Of course, but then you have those occations where you film an interior and want to see the exterior without it being blown out. There's a lot of potential in HDRx but you of course have to plan for it both for the location and post. If you plan your shoot you don't have to get headaches because of it.

This is why I want to look at how to improve it in order to be able to get these kinds of images. When you are inside a room and look out, your eyes have a dynamic range that can handle both the interior and exterior at the same time. Using HDRx let's you come close to this vision and that is a kind of look that is unique. Better Call Saul has that look in many of the office scenes and it looks very different than other stuff.

That gets to the heart of the "what's the special problem you are trying to fix?" I would aver that if you power-window your window you can use the HDRx info and it can have its own world of motion blur and not look too jarring. To me, the problems come when you really need to blend to things, which is totally different than compositing two things. HDRx gives you a crack at compositing the light and dark in your scene, not blending. Does that make sense? Is it correct?

[Filip Orlandic]

What do they do for HDRx improvements?

They use complex optical flow to add motion blur to X frame.

[Christoffer Glans]

That gets to the heart of the "what's the special problem you are trying to fix?" I would aver that if you power-window your window you can use the HDRx info and it can have its own world of motion blur and not look too jarring. To me, the problems come when you really need to blend to things, which is totally different than compositing two things. HDRx gives you a crack at compositing the light and dark in your scene, not blending. Does that make sense? Is it correct?

That only works with a few kind of shots. What if someone is sitting in front of the window? Who will pay for animating a power curve around that person frame by frame?.

They use complex optical flow to add motion blur to X frame.

I still don't have the full version of Resolve, but it has optical flow motion blur as well, shouldn't that also be able to do it? I can divide a HDRx R3D source point into the different tracks so a motion blur on the first node of the X-Track should work.

How about frame averaging? Has anyone tested out that with HDRx? (If it works). You would probably need more light, but if you shoot a higher framerate for HDRx, wouldn't the X and A-track come closer to eachother and blend better when converting down to the real framerate? Like, shooting HDRx at 50fps and then after blending and motion blur convert it down to 25fps.