Thread: Desaturated shadows?

Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 95
  1. #21  
    Downloaded the files.

    Not sure what you are looking for but your image is exposed for about 24000ISO these cameras do best below something like 6000 ISO. Here is the image developed at 12800 ISO and still the histogram does not reach even half to clip. When at such low exposure levels then sure komodo and many cameras like it will not capture colors so accurately.

    And I think the chroma noise cancellation feature Was enabled, that is processing the data in a way that could look appealing but its also destructive in a way, could cause blockyness and other things.

    PastedGraphic-3 by Björn Benckert, on Flickr


    Below is the image developed at 2000ISO 5500K and resolve color picker balanced on the gray card. Not sure I see what you are talking about. A lot if not most cinema cameras does not do this well in 2000 ISO, a few earlier iterations of red cameras fall in that category.

    2000ISO 5500K resovle colorblance on gray. by Björn Benckert, on Flickr

    Also on this other picture, Not sure what to look for? The exposure is almost a flat line, when Brough up to 12800 iso there is as I see it plenty of color, no?


    PastedGraphic-4 by Björn Benckert, on Flickr

    When looking at it in 800ISO you see that you used just of a fraction of the cameras DR capacity, only 1/8 of the DR is in use when capture this image. In other words the image is 8 times as noisy as it would need to be if the strive was to get a perfect capture.

    PastedGraphic-6 by Björn Benckert, on Flickr
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member Christoffer Glans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    4,755
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    Downloaded the files.

    Not sure what you are looking for but your image is exposed for about 24000ISO these cameras do best below something like 6000 ISO. Here is the image developed at 12800 ISO and still the histogram does not reach even half to clip. When at such low exposure levels then sure komodo and many cameras like it will not capture colors so accurately.

    And I think the chroma noise cancellation feature Was enabled, that is processing the data in a way that could look appealing but its also destructive in a way, could cause blockyness and other things.
    No, these R3Ds are shot at ISO400 to reduce noise. It's just a trim of the last part when at ISO400 they start to break down in the shadows.

    Here's the full video



    This is about how the camera or conversion behaves at the lowest DR range, so keep the R3D sources at ISO400 where they're shot and check when the aperture gets the image to the low end.
    "Using any digital cinema camera today is like sending your 35mm rolls to a standard lab. -Using a Red is like owning a dark room."
    Red Weapon 6K #00600 Red Komodo #002397
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    What iso you shoot at is irrelevant. What I'm saying is your actual exposure level on these uploaded images is extremely low. Here is your brightest image in the sequence developed at 400 ISO... Now when at such low light levels you don't have much color accuracy, but who cares, if you exposed it for 400ISO then that means you wanted your image as pretty much back, the closer to black you get the less colors. That's natural, at 100% black you obviously got zero color. Your exposure on these uploaded images are very close to the zero point. Your histogram is basically a flatt line at 400ISO. when trying to turn that into a nice rich histogram then you need to multiply the numbers and then you naturally also scale up the inaccuracies that are luring close to the noise floor of the sensor, as for any sensor.


    PastedGraphic-7 by Björn Benckert, on Flickr
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Senior Member Christoffer Glans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    4,755
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    What iso you shoot at is irrelevant. What I'm saying is your actual exposure level on these uploaded images is extremely low. Here is your brightest image in the sequence developed at 400 ISO... Now when at such low light levels you don't have much color accuracy, but who cares, if you exposed it for 400ISO then that means you wanted your image as pretty much back, the close to black you get the less colors you got, that's natural as at 100% black you obviously got zero color, your exposure here is very close to that point.
    But I think you're missing the point I'm making here. You got a R3D trim of the last part of a normal to underexposed clip (check the youtube video, it's longer, starting at T1.8 to T22). The normal exposure at ISO400 is not part of the R3D you have because that's a trim of the original R3D and the normal exposure is not what this is about, it's about shadows. It's about how Komodo and the IPP2 conversion behaves at the low range of the DR. Imagine that this underexposed image is the shadow areas of a normally exposed low-key scene where you have highlights in range. The problem that occurs is that the shadow areas of the image start to behave overly desaturated and become a grey splotchy "mush". While low-key shots of someone's face makes the shadow areas of that person's face look grey and without any shadow rolloff. Hair details look grey and their dark areas look crushed, not rolling off into each other.

    So you miss the point of this entire thing. I'm aiming at the low range of the DR, how it behaves down there and the example R3D is about how it behaves there. See the entire thing as a representation of shadow areas in a low-key shot. How shadows in such shot behaves.

    I mean, if you increase the ISO you get those colors back, because it is not about exposure levels, it's about the behavior of the shadow rolloff.
    "Using any digital cinema camera today is like sending your 35mm rolls to a standard lab. -Using a Red is like owning a dark room."
    Red Weapon 6K #00600 Red Komodo #002397
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Senior Member William Long's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sweden & France
    Posts
    384
    Christoffer, can you do a 'side by side' comparing it with your Dragon sensor to better illustrate what you mean?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    But I think you're missing the point I'm making here. You got a R3D trim of the last part of a normal to underexposed clip (check the youtube video, it's longer, starting at T1.8 to T22). The normal exposure at ISO400 is not part of the R3D you have because that's a trim of the original R3D and the normal exposure is not what this is about, it's about shadows. It's about how Komodo and the IPP2 conversion behaves at the low range of the DR. Imagine that this underexposed image is the shadow areas of a normally exposed low-key scene where you have highlights in range. The problem that occurs is that the shadow areas of the image start to behave overly desaturated and become a grey splotchy "mush". While low-key shots of someone's face makes the shadow areas of that person's face look grey and without any shadow rolloff. Hair details look grey and their dark areas look crushed, not rolling off into each other.

    So you miss the point of this entire thing. I'm aiming at the low range of the DR, how it behaves down there and the example R3D is about how it behaves there. See the entire thing as a representation of shadow areas in a low-key shot. How shadows in such shot behaves.

    I mean, if you increase the ISO you get those colors back, because it is not about exposure levels, it's about the behavior of the shadow rolloff.

    In my screen dump above I see a black image, if its blotchy or not does not matter so much does it? Any image capture device to date is less accurate at low exposures. Simply the less photons hitting the photo site the less accuracy you get.

    what Im saying is that what is suposed to be black in an image does not really need to be blotch free or have high color accuracy... as its black and black does not have color, just as highlights / white does not have color.

    The more pixels in the image that have less exposure, the harder it also gets for the image compression processing. As the difference between exposure values between individual pixels goes up. Complete noise is super hard to compress a flat image of a single color is the easies. So naturally the compression bites harder the more noise you introduce. due to that low light levels will introduce even more noise / blotchiness as the compression gets to work harder.

    Also when altering the iris to control the light levels you also alter the depth of focus. When wide open your image is a blur, that means a lot of pixels next to each other have the same pixels color value, it's an easier image to compress than an image where the iris is all closed down and more of the scnerey is sharp, such scenario has more differences in between pixels and naturally gets harder to compress. So yes a ultra sharp image where you see the structure of the wall paper in the background and the skin texture of the foreground is more compression taxing than an image where everything is racked out of focus. So more closed iris adds to injury as well.

    But as you can see on the other screen dump and developed images I uploaded even this close to nothing exposure you uploaded still can render a better image than most cameras, Dragon falls short in comparison and so does many other cameras that's why I don't understand your complaint. You had a dragon before, it was way worse in mixed light darkness no?




    To me this image developed at 2000ISO looks more than fine. Sure if there was instead 2 or 3 stops more of light and it was developed at 400ISO it would look about the same in terms of brightness but it would have less noise and more accurate colors.



    2000ISO 5500K resovle colorblance on gray. by Björn Benckert, on Flickr
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Looked at your clip on another monitor. Think I see what you mean now, that the image goes a bit BW before fading to black.

    How are you developing the image, what IPP2 curve is applied?

    Can you mimic the same light loss with exposure time instead of if iris to see what is introduced by the iris change.

    Basically make an image that has the same exposure as your lowest Fstop by altering the exposure time to see if it also goes BW.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Senior Member Christoffer Glans's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    4,755
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    Looked at your clip on another monitor. Think I see what you mean now, that the image goes a bit BW before fading to black.

    How are you developing the image, what IPP2 curve is applied?

    Can you mimic the same light loss with exposure time instead of if iris to see what is introduced by the iris change.

    Basically make an image that has the same exposure as your lowest Fstop by altering the exposure time to see if it also goes BW.
    Yes, this what I'm referring to. I don't see it on other cameras and it's very noticeable on a good TV, especially in THX light recommendation levels. It's like the shadow areas become grey and it doesn't balance at all against the highlights and brighter areas. In a low-key situation, I've never seen any camera do this.

    Gonna try and do one and also compare it to my Canon R (will do a comparison with my Dragon as well when I have the time)
    "Using any digital cinema camera today is like sending your 35mm rolls to a standard lab. -Using a Red is like owning a dark room."
    Red Weapon 6K #00600 Red Komodo #002397
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by Christoffer Glans View Post
    Yes, this what I'm referring to. I don't see it on other cameras and it's very noticeable on a good TV, especially in THX light recommendation levels. It's like the shadow areas become grey and it doesn't balance at all against the highlights and brighter areas. In a low-key situation, I've never seen any camera do this.

    Gonna try and do one and also compare it to my Canon R (will do a comparison with my Dragon as well when I have the time)
    perhaps also test for higher lower iso. see if pushing or pulling emphasizes the issue or reduces it. at least in the meantime finding a best case scnenario.
    Ranger Gemini
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,319
    Saw the same thing as Christopher with R3D's someone posted online from a pre-release Komodo.

    I could be wrong, but it looks to me like the results of some colour-science level decisions made when trying to balance image-quality considerations with the new sensor.

    While trusting the validity of those decisions, I'd also guess it's a work in progress, and that perhaps more options might be available if the sensor was in a fully-fledged DSMC body.

    If that is the case, then as far as I can tell it's just a matter of exposing for the sensor as it is, while waiting to see what develops.

    Would be good to have an official experts opinion on it though.
    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