Thread: Gemini not capturing blacks. Help.

Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35
  1. #21  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by Šabović Adis View Post

    Damn...she hot!
    Who is she?

    IG is @camille.sofia super cool too!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Sarajevo
    Posts
    884
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason beaumont View Post
    IG is @camille.sofia super cool too!
    Thanks, Jason!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,179
    Looks good Jason (even if Low-Light mode would have been better for that shot), glad it worked out.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    10,832
    I've only worked with Gemini a handful of times, but my general way of working was using the Low Light Mode most of the time and Standard for Daylight or extremely well lit situations, like tabletop or talking head.
    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  
     

  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason beaumont View Post
    Can someone tell me what I did wrong, or has this happened to them. My camera just started doing this.
    Of the four shots in the link:

    First is underexposed + 8:1 bites off a chunk of what is left = unusable
    Second is okay
    Third is okay
    Fourth is underexposed = unusable

    There is nothing wrong with the camera.
    You just didn't capture sufficient light to quantize into data. Your signal chain for monitoring may have been misleading so make sure you check that and stick with what is reliable and tested, and on that base test all the preview transformations in specific shooting conditions.






    Your images with proper transformation applied to get a sense of realistic exposure levels:











    http://i68.tinypic.com/drcb4y.jpg


    Analog > Camera feel optimization http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Camera performance optimization http://omeneo.com/primers

    imdb


    "Como delfines en el fondo del oceano
    volamos por el universo incentivados por la esperanza"

    "L'esperanza", Sven Väth
    "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards"
    Jung/ Carol
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Senior Member Jens Jakob Thorsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    759
    You could hire a DOP?
    Jens Jakob Thorsen DFF
    Director of photography
    Denmark
    www.jensjakob.com
    mail@jensjakob.com
    Monstro VV
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Toronto & Vancouver
    Posts
    3,663
    May I ask why you didn't you use LL mode when you're more or less going natural/ambient light? The beauty of LL mode isn't just that it "gives you clean ISO2500", but that it actually shifts the dynamic range to open up more stops in the low-end (it actually empties out the shadow goalpost.)

    And why only 4k WS? 5k (or even 4.5k) WS will net you substantially more image, which only serves to look better/cleaner when downscaled to 4k or 1080p. Also the shot of the girl (the most useable in my opinion) was still f4!!? You could've shot wide open, ETTR, and brought the ISO down in post for a fatter histogram/image.

    Try looking at your left (shadow) goalpost. If you can, keep it empty, but if its not, toggle to gio/video/raw view to see what's actually purple and that'll tell you what is actually black. In terms of underexposure, again, use the video view for false colour (Caucasian skin tones should ideally be green/pink, unless it's actually in shadow). Beyond that, you're dealing with underexposure, so tread lightly (or do more tests until you know what you can recover in post).

    EDIT: I realize others may have already said this, I just read the OP. So ignore if its redundant.
    Last edited by Mike P.; 07-16-2019 at 01:18 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Senior Member rand thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,424
    Here are the only two recoverable out of the 4.




    Last edited by rand thompson; 07-16-2019 at 10:59 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    I've only worked with Gemini a handful of times, but my general way of working was using the Low Light Mode most of the time and Standard for Daylight or extremely well lit situations, like tabletop or talking head.
    Yeah I was doing it the opposite, I didn't use low light mode very much, but since this thread and experience im incorporating it much more.


    =Hrvoje Simic;1861531]Of the four shots in the link:

    First is underexposed + 8:1 bites off a chunk of what is left = unusable
    Second is okay
    Third is okay
    Fourth is underexposed = unusable

    There is nothing wrong with the camera.
    You just didn't capture sufficient light to quantize into data. Your signal chain for monitoring may have been misleading so make sure you check that and stick with what is reliable and tested, and on that base test all the preview transformations in specific shooting conditions.



    Yeah I see that now, thank you. I really wanted that 4th shot, I might just have to reshoot it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jens Jakob Thorsen View Post
    You could hire a DOP?
    Nah , give me a fish feed me for a day, teach me to fish, and feed me for a lifetime. Besides this was just a small passion project. It was just me and a friend and another friend holding my boom. For lighting we had 1 sky panel, and a arri 650 lol. Its not enough for a man to climb mount Everest. He has to do it with the least amount of tools possible! Nah but really, I just wanted to see how well I could bring my little script to life with limited resources.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike P. View Post
    May I ask why you didn't you use LL mode when you're more or less going natural/ambient light? The beauty of LL mode isn't just that it "gives you clean ISO2500", but that it actually shifts the dynamic range to open up more stops in the low-end (it actually empties out the shadow goalpost.)

    And why only 4k WS? 5k (or even 4.5k) WS will net you substantially more image, which only serves to look better/cleaner when downscaled to 4k or 1080p. Also the shot of the girl (the most useable in my opinion) was still f4!!? You could've shot wide open, ETTR, and brought the ISO down in post for a fatter histogram/image.

    Try looking at your left (shadow) goalpost. If you can, keep it empty, but if its not, toggle to gio/video/raw view to see what's actually purple and that'll tell you what is actually black. In terms of underexposure, again, use the video view for false colour (Caucasian skin tones should ideally be green/pink, unless it's actually in shadow). Beyond that, you're dealing with underexposure, so tread lightly (or do more tests until you know what you can recover in post).

    EDIT: I realize others may have already said this, I just read the OP. So ignore if its redundant.
    My friend who I was shooting with didn't understand low light mode. He felt like because we had lights we shouldn't use it, which I told him is not the case, but for the sake of not wasting time arguing, and since he was operating I let him have his way (never again lol). 4k WS was because my Cooke s4i mini vignette at 5k on the gemini. atleast one of them does. I don't know, I hardly ever shoot lenses wide open. I am def using my tools more often thanks.
    Last edited by Jason beaumont; 07-18-2019 at 09:19 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,179
    Imo those two underexposed shots are unuseable because they don't intercut with the rest of the scene/footage, but you could still shoot that dark (like in Hrvoje's grades) if the surrounding shots matched and if the individual shots didn't need to convey more information to the audience than what they still manage to do.

    It's definitely a particular kind of look that wouldn't suit most kinds of scenes, but with the right subject matter they don't look so dark to me that you couldn't still figure out what's going on.

    Just saying/asking.
    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