Komodo 12.2 stops of dynamic range in CineD test.

[Mike P.]

So as I expected scientific approach coming to reading online manual of 3 pages and make assumptions.
Can we check 2 stops under For Komodo against two stops over for Alexa? Maybe the noise floor is comparable? And the highlight retention will be favourable over way around. Those test are not one plus one.
Which transforms they were using for those 60%?
How they decide to expose for grey card and which method they choose to check exposure, some inbuilt tool?
Why not to hit sensors with the same amount of light? And move accordingly exposure wise.

Maybe Gunther can answer that (I presume they used a light meter or scopes, as that'd be camera independent). The problem with changing the parameters to better suit one camera over the other is that it would be even harder to maintain consistency/objectivity. Also if you need to jump through hoops just to get to par, what's the point?

Does anyone have Xylas of Dragon, Helium, Gemini, Monstro? I would love to see the RGB scopes of those sensors (hoping their highlight recovery isn't as aggressive as Komodo's and the IPP2 highlight recovery is limited to the first/top stop.)

[Alex Stolpakov]

Maybe Gunther can answer that (I presume they used a light meter or scopes, as that'd be camera independent). The problem with changing the parameters to better suit one camera over the other is that it would be even harder to maintain consistency/objectivity. Also if you need to jump through hoops just to get to par, what's the point?

Does anyone have Xylas of Dragon, Helium, Gemini, Monstro? I would love to see the RGB scopes of those sensors (hoping their highlight recovery isn't as aggressive as Komodo's and the IPP2 highlight recovery is limited to the first/top stop.)

Point is not to injure Gunther or dismiss him of his work.
Consistency I find in all the ISOs shoot with a lot of under and over exposure for each one. It's nothing unobjective in it.
For myself I shoot normal tests with a person, some coloured light, some black, light bulb - nothing fancy, except a lot of exposure pairs.

PS Scopes are coming through camera track? Or how else?

[Gunther Machu]

Maybe Gunther can answer that (I presume they used a light meter or scopes, as that'd be camera independent). The problem with changing the parameters to better suit one camera over the other is that it would be even harder to maintain consistency/objectivity. Also if you need to jump through hoops just to get to par, what's the point?

Does anyone have Xylas of Dragon, Helium, Gemini, Monstro? I would love to see the RGB scopes of those sensors (hoping their highlight recovery isn't as aggressive as Komodo's and the IPP2 highlight recovery is limited to the first/top stop.)

The 60% luma is with Log3G10. But that is just a point of reference to not confuse our readers. Of course different cameras distribute the stops differently. It does not really matter where you start over / under. Another point of reference could be 18% gray (33 IRE). That would have been close to the stop labelled as "5" in our waveform. From this reference you could overexpose skin by 4 stops and underexpose 3 stops - gving you the same 7 stops of latitude.

[Christoffer Glans]

Judging by those scopes, it looks like you'd have to expose Komodo at ~ISO3200 to have a more even over/under. But in the French footage, it looked like green-shift and noise were too much at 3200 (without NR, anyway). That said, Nick mentioned Komodo's mids being much cleaner than other REDs, which would certainly help when pushing those ISO limits to capture more/accurate high-end stops.

Here's the scopes after supersampling down to 4K at ISO3200 and using high-quality NR and WB at 3200K.

[Mike P.]

The 60% luma is with Log3G10. But that is just a point of reference to not confuse our readers. Of course different cameras distribute the stops differently. It does not really matter where you start over / under. Another point of reference could be 18% gray (33 IRE). That would have been close to the stop labelled as "5" in our waveform. From this reference you could overexpose skin by 4 stops and underexpose 3 stops - gving you the same 7 stops of latitude.

Thanks, Gunther. And yeah, I understand. The question was how you were measuring the 60% luma (external scopes [if so, by the file or a video feed], light meter)? End of the day, I don't think it would really impact the findings enough to be a concern.

There are pros/cons to exposing the skin at mid-grey, though that's certainly something you could do to protect a bit more of the highs (by exposing at a pushed ISO... 1600 or 3200), but it runs the risk of noise/exaggerated green-tint in the lower-mids... Speaking of which:

Here's the scopes after supersampling down to 4K at ISO3200 and using high-quality NR and WB at 3200K.

That looks a lot better from a DR distribution standpoint, but having to apply NR isn't what I'd consider a solution so much as a workaround (as it's one of the slower things to render at 4k+). Applying an S-curve and/or (most) generic LUTs to that kind of over/under should have decent heel and shoulder roll-off (contrast overall usually sits better too, imo). And you obviously have more push/pull room to play with in the mids/meat of the image (presuming noise isn't bad or noise reduction isn't that destructive).

[Björn Benckert]

Thanks, Gunther. And yeah, I understand. The question was how you were measuring the 60% luma (external scopes [if so, by the file or a video feed], light meter)? End of the day, I don't think it would really impact the findings enough to be a concern.

There are pros/cons to exposing the skin at mid-grey, though that's certainly something you could do to protect a bit more of the highs (by exposing at a pushed ISO... 1600 or 3200), but it runs the risk of noise/exaggerated green-tint in the lower-mids... Speaking of which:



That looks a lot better from a DR distribution standpoint, but having to apply NR isn't what I'd consider a solution so much as a workaround (as it's one of the slower things to render at 4k+). Applying an S-curve and/or (most) generic LUTs to that kind of over/under should have decent heel and shoulder roll-off (contrast overall usually sits better too, imo). And you obviously have more push/pull room to play with in the mids/meat of the image (presuming noise isn't bad or noise reduction isn't that destructive).

If capturing a raw image then that does not mean nothing should be done to the image in post, it's quite the opposite. Downsampling helps latitude, so does noise reduction, explain why such tools should not be used? Or what parameters do you consider such that can be used to improve the image, only those that are added destructively in camera?

[Brian Roberts]

Interesting discussion going on here.

So, if it is true that Komodo has the upper two highlight stops reconstructed to grayscale, can we also assume that these stops are included in the goal post readings?

If so, when exposing should we not be backing off a bit from that upper goal post to ensure our highlights retain all color information vs going into that "recovery" region?

[Tomasz Nizielski]

I think we need a comparison of cameras in a real-world scenario, some high-contrast scene, e.g. an actress in a room with a window. Cameras that I would like to see: Alexa Mini, Red Helium, Red Komodo, Pocket 6K, Ursa Pro G2, C70/C300. For me it will be better than DR chart interpretation.

[Alex Lubensky]

I suppose rating a camera to a 60% in LOG is wrong as a starting point. It’s 60% in REC 709 profiles, be it RG RC4, IPP2 BT1886 etc.

[Bill Ravens]

https://youtu.be/Xo17maQkAXI