Click here to go to the first RED TEAM post in this thread.   Thread: still, not satisfied

Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54
  1. #11  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    10,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Simon Lok View Post
    Thank you for the help. Trying some side by sides now to see how close I can come.

    https://www.instagram.com/p/BWfK_gbFRa0/
    If your end goal is a still frame, remember to sharpen your exported tiff from the RED. RED has zero sharpening "under the hood". The same can't be said for some of the image processing engines within the other cameras.
    Phil Holland - Cinematographer - Los Angeles
    ________________________________
    phfx.com IMDB
    PHFX | tools

    2X RED Weapon 8K VV Monstro Bodies and a lot of things to use with them.

    Data Sheets and Notes:
    Red Weapon/DSMC2
    Red Dragon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member Jacek Zakowicz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    If your end goal is a still frame, remember to sharpen your exported tiff from the RED. RED has zero sharpening "under the hood". The same can't be said for some of the image processing engines within the other cameras.
    Do Canon or Nikon still cameras have sharpening for RAW output?
    Jacek Zakowicz, Optitek-dot-org, jacek2@optitek.org
    Professional Broadcast and Digital Cinema Equipment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    10,987
    Quote Originally Posted by Jacek Zakowicz View Post
    Do Canon or Nikon still cameras have sharpening for RAW output?
    Yes. It's under the hood and part of what things like Digic processors do. Everybody has their own "special sauce". Despite what you can turn on and off in camera, you can't get to those image processors in reality.

    Additionally you commonly sharpen the camera raw output for print as it's still relatively soft out of camera.
    Phil Holland - Cinematographer - Los Angeles
    ________________________________
    phfx.com IMDB
    PHFX | tools

    2X RED Weapon 8K VV Monstro Bodies and a lot of things to use with them.

    Data Sheets and Notes:
    Red Weapon/DSMC2
    Red Dragon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member Jacek Zakowicz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Simon Lok View Post
    Thank you for the help. Trying some side by sides now to see how close I can come.

    https://www.instagram.com/p/BWfK_gbFRa0/
    Definitely turn off the in camera (Canon or Nikon) RAW sharpening before comparing. According to Canon it can be turned off in camera.
    Jacek Zakowicz, Optitek-dot-org, jacek2@optitek.org
    Professional Broadcast and Digital Cinema Equipment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15 Building the image 
    Senior Member Blair S. Paulsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    5,054
    The amount of sharpening added to the vast majority of images generated by virtually all cameras, motion and still, is far greater than most people realize. Some sharpening tools inflict what I consider "blunt force trauma", but if used properly, they can do great things.

    I've sung this song before on RU, but I'll repeat it here: inside of RedCineX-Pro (and a few other tools) one can choose a scaling filter from a list of options and then compare the results. For some footy I love the Mitchell, for other shots bi-cubic and I've had great results with Lanczos for a lot of RED material. By selecting the optimum scaling filter I can often avoid sharpening altogether, or at least get by with much gentler pass. YMMV.

    Cheers - #19
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member Bob Gundu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Toronto, ON Canada
    Posts
    9,789
    Quote Originally Posted by Blair S. Paulsen View Post
    The amount of sharpening added to the vast majority of images generated by virtually all cameras, motion and still, is far greater than most people realize. Some sharpening tools inflict what I consider "blunt force trauma", but if used properly, they can do great things.

    I've sung this song before on RU, but I'll repeat it here: inside of RedCineX-Pro (and a few other tools) one can choose a scaling filter from a list of options and then compare the results. For some footy I love the Mitchell, for other shots bi-cubic and I've had great results with Lanczos for a lot of RED material. By selecting the optimum scaling filter I can often avoid sharpening altogether, or at least get by with much gentler pass. YMMV.

    Cheers - #19
    Great point and many are unaware of the scaling algorithms.
    ___________________________

    VFX, Cinematographer, Photographer
    10 frame handles
    Vimeo
    Instagram
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Senior Member Brendan H. Banks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Gundu View Post
    Great point and many are unaware of the scaling algorithms.
    I know the absolute best way to get acquainted with something like this is to do lots of testing, but any jumping off tips/tricks/guides you might be able to share?
    Brendan H. Banks
    DP
    Epic-W Helium #796
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member AndreeMarkefors's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    789
    I don't think it's a good position to be in to call native raw files from DSLRs as 'sharpened'. Obviously there is a whole signal chain and pipeline that generates images from cameras' sensors, but the basic product that comes out of a Canon or Nikon as a .cr2 or .nef is a result of some careful considerations on how to get the best IQ out of those cameras.

    If you take one of those images, totally unsharpened in "post" and compare it to an unsharpened .r3d frame and you find the RED footage soft, I suggest this:

    Own up to the fact that RED was primarily made to shoot moving images and that video and stills have completely different needs in terms of anti aliasing. RED images are soft for a reason. But sort of kind of trying to position oneself as if that is the "ideal" even for stills and that "those other guys" really "oversharpen" their images... Objectively, it doesn't fly.

    I have looked at .r3d frames for years trying to like those frames compared to my stills from my DSLRs but I don't feel it's close. I did load some Helium frames from RED's homepage that I found very flexible and nice, but so far I'm not really on board.

    I imagine 8k Vista Vision to be nice, though. But I'm thinking Canon's 5Dsr mkII will be nice as well. <--- hopefully with next gen sensor tech.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Senior Member Blair S. Paulsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    5,054
    Quote Originally Posted by AndreeMarkefors View Post
    I don't think it's a good position to be in to call native raw files from DSLRs as 'sharpened'. Obviously there is a whole signal chain and pipeline that generates images from cameras' sensors, but the basic product that comes out of a Canon or Nikon as a .cr2 or .nef is a result of some careful considerations on how to get the best IQ out of those cameras. (snip)
    Valuable post Andree, the "recipe" for optimum IQ varies based on many considerations unique to the signal chain of a particular device. In some cases, that may include a fair bit of sharpening - others not so much. In any case, the RGB image you see from a Bayer pattern mask imager is constructed from the captured data set based on algorithms that can have a significant influence on the look. As you mentioned, RED cameras are biased toward best results with motion vs stills. Typically that means a more aggressive OLPF and an algorithm that sacrifices some acutance (sharpness) to keep aliasing to a minimum. Like all engineering, there's no free lunch.

    IAC, this thread includes some valuable notes about ways to get sharper stills - especially if there is NOT a motion deliverable that needs to look it's best. FWIW, when I am asked to get tight stills and normal looking motion characteristics, and there's enough lighting, I go for a fast shutter (45 or less based on angle, 1/250th or greater based on time) and use reverse optical flow to add some motion blur back into the motion content in post. As a rule, it's much easier to add blur than to get rid of it. YMMV.

    Cheers - #19
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Costa Mesa, CA
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by Bastian Meier View Post
    you talk about sharpness and show a link to fb uploads?
    FB highly compresses photos, so there it doesn't really make sense to judge the photos regarding sharpness


    HAHA. so good. FB is garbage.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts