And you pick an ASA rating that suits that level and the f-stop you want to shoot at, or can shoot at.
As to how fast you can rate the original sensor... well, how much noise you can live with is a matter of taste, so you should test it and look at the results on the largest screen that the final project will be shown on. But the visibility of the noise is dependent on how lifted or crushed your shadows are, so if you are crushing the blacks a bit, that will help. It's also affected by the base color temp, the closer to daylight, the better. So if you can live with tungsten lighting going a bit orange, you'll get less noise in the blue channel.
800 ASA on the old sensor is certainly usable, but borderline -- if you can get faster lenses and live with 500 ASA, you'll be happier.
Whoa... Deep water! With that, I can approach Touch of Evil and Kane with different eyes. I've had mixed feelings about pre-Method techniques. I've managed to remain somewhat ambivilent about Heston, not understanding what it was he was doing. I wouldn't call it self conscious, but there was that artifice about him that I found distracting. It seems pretty clear that Welles didn't have a problem with it. I always felt that it prevented me from giving in and suspending disbelief, regardless of how much I desired to. Maybe with understanding I can embrace it more.
Last edited by Scott Crawley; 03-10-2010 at 08:58 PM.
Do contemporary motion picture film cameras have a Rolling Shutter issue?
The reason I ask is that there is a test for Rolling Shutter on Ryan Walters website.
Click on this link.....
It appears that the new Red MX sensor still has a slight Rolling Shutter issue.
But I am confused, because if the MX has a film like refresh rate, then does this mean that film cameras have a Rolling Shutter issue as well?
Also, do you know if the MX sensors refresh rate changes when a different Redcode rate is used?
Jim posted the refresh rates for the new sensor and what a film camera shutter's equivalent rate is. I don't recall the numbers off the top of my head.
A film shutter is mechanical but since it slides/rotates in front of the frame to cover it, a certain (small) percentage of the frame exposure happens during that movement, creating artifacts -- but it's pretty mild.
The current M-X refresh rate comes closer to film's rate.
If you were to pan an Arri movie camera back and forth
horizontally very quickly, would there be skew like the skew
depicted in the MX test footage from the link I provided?
Would there be any skew?
According to what I’ve read online, the M sensor has a
9 ms refresh rate, the MX a 5 ms rate, and film has a 4 ms rate.
I'm not looking to fault MX, I'm just trying to understand if traditional
film camera also have low Skew.
(I have also asked this in a new EPIC section post)
It depends on the Arri camera - some, like the IIC and III have shutters that wipe from top to bottom, much as the rolling shutter of the RED. Others, like the 535 and 35 BL, have shutters that wipe from side to side . . .
I have also heard, that when the shutter in a film camera wipes across the frame, due to its relation between the lens and the film plane that the shutter creates a soft wipe across the frame where as a digital sensor's "shutter" is electronic and more "exact" which also contributes to the difference in motion rendering.
Hope all is well. If you get curious, maybe take a peek at this anamorphic adapter (panasonic ag-7200) on a 5dm2:
Would this lens setup be of professional quality in your view, or just short?
The shaky-cam / bad exposure of the test wasn't great, but the anamorphic lens characteristics looked very promising -- to me anyway.
Would you avoid such a setup, or maybe give it a test drive?
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|