Thread: MINILF-MONSTRO thoughts ;)

Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 789101112 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 115
  1. #101  
    Senior Member Patrick Tresch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Switzerland, Lausanne
    Posts
    5,070
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    Those closed iris and look right at the sun orbs are different from the early dragon red blobs in lowlight. The closed iris stuff comes with a pattern and only when stoping down the first dragon stuff has more of red blobs following the lightsources and comes also when wide open.

    Then yes DEB was another thing. Im only guessing it was due to filtering away quite a bit of red and then boosting with digital gain.

    Not hundred procent sure but I think original dragon and LLOLPF is/was the same. No?
    It's what I said ;-)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #102  
    Senior Member Patrick Tresch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Switzerland, Lausanne
    Posts
    5,070
    Quote Originally Posted by rand thompson View Post
    Patrick,


    Truth in Advertising below is how it actually looks. I assumed Luigi asked me to try the Examples in post #32 because he knew I would potentially try using my additional highlight recovery methods I sometime use.
    I'm speaking about the noise not the clipping. Monstro has considerably cleaner shadows than LF.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #103  
    Senior Member Audy Erel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Jakarta-Bandung, Indonesia (Bali)
    Posts
    246
    We mere mortals can't measure (in voltage) how much exactly are those 2 different sensors capturing the amount of light can we? The Monstro with ND 0.3 could be equal to LF with no ND down in the electrical values! The more sensitive RED Monstro only needed half the time to capture the exact same photons as the ARRI Mini LF does. So, the ND 0.3 are needed with Monstro to equalize the thickness of the negative between the 2 sensors. LF is already a "thinner negative" to begin with, that can be witnessed from the amount of noise in the shadow.
    SCARLET-W #004760
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #104  
    Senior Member David J. Buchanan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    361
    There's no doubt the Monstro is better in low light than the Alexa, but boy oh boy does that Alexa sing in the day.

    Also, I would be super scared to buy a MiniLF considering there new gear is coming out next year -- Unless it's somehow worse.
    BLACK - Now on Amazon!
    Corporate G&E Package
    Monstro, Zeiss Otus 28, 55, 85
    davidjbuchanan.com | wecofilms.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #105  
    Quote Originally Posted by Audy Erel View Post
    We mere mortals can't measure (in voltage) how much exactly are those 2 different sensors capturing the amount of light can we? The Monstro with ND 0.3 could be equal to LF with no ND down in the electrical values! The more sensitive RED Monstro only needed half the time to capture the exact same photons as the ARRI Mini LF does. So, the ND 0.3 are needed with Monstro to equalize the thickness of the negative between the 2 sensors. LF is already a "thinner negative" to begin with, that can be witnessed from the amount of noise in the shadow.

    Yes thats how I see it aswell.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #106  
    Quote Originally Posted by Audy Erel View Post
    We mere mortals can't measure (in voltage) how much exactly are those 2 different sensors capturing the amount of light can we?
    The Monstro with ND 0.3 could be equal to LF with no ND down in the electrical values!
    The more sensitive RED Monstro only needed half the time to capture the exact same photons as the ARRI Mini LF does. So, the ND 0.3 are needed with Monstro to equalize the thickness of the negative between the 2 sensors. LF is already a "thinner negative" to begin with, that can be witnessed from the amount of noise in the shadow.
    This is not an accurate interpretation.

    Also, camera material can be thicker with noisier shadows.
    Monstro pushed + 1 is thinner. Plus, there is compression.

    "Thickness of the negative" = how much light is quantized into how much data.
    So - primarily affected by exposure, bit depth and compression.
    Analog > Apollo wooden handgrip http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Primers - professional image transformation tools 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  
     

  7. #107  
    Moderator Phil Holland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    11,321
    As this is getting gloriously heady in dizzying ways, I'll just say simply that no matter what you are doing the camera is always capturing the maximum amount of total dynamic range a scene presents itself for.

    We were using NDs on film and pushing a stop too to make stuff like this happen. Thin or Thicc, it's about capturing what you want. In the realm of digital you can actually really see and know that before hand.

    Expose accordingly.
    Phil Holland - Cinematographer - Los Angeles
    ________________________________
    phfx.com IMDB
    PHFX | tools

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

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

  8. #108  
    Quote Originally Posted by Phil Holland View Post
    As this is getting gloriously heady in dizzying ways, I'll just say simply that no matter what you are doing the camera is always capturing the maximum amount of total dynamic range a scene presents itself for.
    Let's make it less dizzy.

    No matter what you are doing, with RAW acquisition you are always capturing total dynamic range of the sensor,
    where exposure choice effects how you "present" the scene to the sensor,
    which affects how much you are saturating the sensor,
    which affects bit depth used per tonal range,
    which affects the "density" of the negative,
    which affects the image quality and post manipulation.
    Analog > Apollo wooden handgrip http://omeneo.com
    Digital > Primers - professional image transformation tools 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  
     

  9. #109  
    Senior Member luigivaltulini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Switzerland- LUGANO
    Posts
    2,482
    Quote Originally Posted by David J. Buchanan View Post
    There's no doubt the Monstro is better in low light than the Alexa, but boy oh boy does that Alexa sing in the day.
    Also, I would be super scared to buy a MiniLF considering there new gear is coming out next year -- Unless it's somehow worse.
    David,
    I would be worried about not having it;)
    Alexa mini s35 will still last several years, difficult to remove certain productions from this camera even if the market offers better and less noisy cameras and with more detail.
    Even though I am seeing rental prices drop dramatically in recent months, just for the Mini Lf entry.
    Alexa mini Lf will take even more foot when there are larger productions in large format.
    As a camera it is much better than the s35, larger and faster warehouses, spectacular viewfinder, denoise out of the box for those who run in pro, you have a sensor that allows you 2 formats and likely a firmware will arrive for the crop s35 soon, and many other very useful little things.
    Anyway, Arri will have to overcome herself with the next sensor, not easy.





    Ok this for thread:

    This discussion of this thread is interesting, everyone has a good word from the technical side and excellent knowledge from Phil to Hvroje to Björn to Rand to PAt and so for the rest of those present, reduser is known for this and is admirable.
    I feel like saying that sometimes we are like white flies, we understand each other but the rest of the world is not.
    What happens to me personally is sometimes frustrating, especially discussing with people who prefer only a brand because it is more used in cinema, without reason to replicate and sometimes even replicating in front of the facts they remain undeterred about their decision.
    There are many variables today as today, if you take ALexa it is true to be noisier than most cameras now on the market but it is also true that if the product ends up on the media for mobile phones or broadcast transcoded in Xdcam or h265 or h264 all that noise goes for the most part to disappear or better to say no one pays much attention, those who make films probably help themselves with a denoise in color.
    Therefore?!? So ALexa still wins for most of the workflows using proRes, excellent color without too much effort in color or even in lumeters, all gaining time and money and all models use ALev III, that you take an AMira or an Xt or other all the same ..
    For REd, you can do it with Monstro and a gemini or Helium but you must necessarily go in color if you want to try to make them look like.

    *Still difficult to find post production houses that have updated their systems with the latest generation PC or MAc and when you talk about RAw at 8k or 6k they get alarmed because they know that it involves more time and expense. And the 4k prores is blocked at 25fps .. above you have to turn in rAw and then transcode ...
    For me Monstro is a spectacular sensor and I prefer it, but I feel as if it was not taken into account precisely for his heavy workflow or perhaps all these constant changes of sensors and camera bodies and color science in recent years for many to have become a reason for confusion, indeed I would say for almost all those who have not known RED since the beginning.
    For me no, I see it as a step forward every holy day, but hey people out there still don't understand.

    Maybe I'm drastic, but for me RED should block a sensor, maybe Monstro, and make different cuts from s35 to vv with different resolutions but use it in all their models, this for a fairly long time at least 5 years. Doing so would have time to focus on better color science and good worflow.
    I know, someone would tell me that now there is the possibility of having different sensors and colorimetry as it was for the film, but as I see it now out here there is only confusion among people.
    Let's be honest, Monstro as a sensor right now will remain good on the market for at least 5 years with this dynamic resolution, why not put it in all models at different resolutions?
    A camera body called DMsc3 Weapon modular a Ranger a Komodo, all with Monstro with different cuts and all with a sensor with the same dynamics and colorimetry.
    One you can buy Komodo to use it in small spaces or gopro-like drones (without having your heart in your throat that if it falls you lose a lot of money), then you have a Weapon or a Ranger to use as a movie camera A etc. etc.
    But all with the same color and dynamics ..
    It would be a dream for me right now.
    I hope I made myself understood eheheh

    So why not do it? what reasons to stay like now?
    Grading Suite Davinci Resolve, Rental RED Digital camera.
    MONSTRO 8k CF #831 "BLACK PEARL" , EPIC-W GEMINI # "DAFNE".
    ARRI ALEXA EV , ALEXA MINI LF "ROZI"


    SITE
    www.cine5k.ch
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #110  
    Senior Member Patrick Tresch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Switzerland, Lausanne
    Posts
    5,070
    Very good point Luigi.
    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