Hello,
can soemone help me with the TLCS settings for ex1r?
Thanks

It's the Total Level Control System! Just a silly name for the Full Auto mode. It will show up on your LCD regardless of Full Auto being on or off, because it shows what type of Auto mode you will enter if you turn it on. You can have a Standard auto mode, backlight, or spotlight... but honestly if you aren't using full auto you can just remove it from the display with no worries.

Andy

Actually, it's Total LEVEL Control System. Avoid using it.

That's what I meant :)

I knew that's what you meant, but I couldn't resist correcting it anyway. :-)
It's a stupid name for a lazy function.

TLCS can be useful for long period timelapse sequences where you may be going from a brightly lit day shot to a dark night shot. It is a full auto function but you can program it to restrict how far it goes. So for a day to night timelapse shot where you don't want to start switching in and out ND filters or messing with gain settings during the sequence you can use TLCS to control the shutter to compensate for too much light with no ND and then to limit the gain for the night part of the shot. At the same time you can restrict the minimum iris setting to avoid diffraction limiting.

It is better than a plain vanilla full auto mode as you can control the way it works, restricting gain etc. I often hand off an EX1 to a flight crew on military flights. I don't expect them to manually expose etc, so I set up TLCS to limit gain etc to useable limits and let them use that.

Long timelapse is probably the best example of TLCS usefulness.

If only some limits its built-in "intelligence" can use were more flexible (like e.g. the fastest shutter speed only being 1/250th; sometimes too restricting when you would rather keep gain and/or iris on manual, and cover all the light changes with auto shutter)...

I don't recommend TLCS for long timelapse sequences. You're better off to lock down the the exposure from the very first frame. I've seen examples where people claimed auto-exposure (programmed to change very slowly) during an timelapse looked good -- but it rarely does. Any change in exposure changes the look of the timelapse effect. Period. In some shooting situations the lighting may vary quite a bit during the timelapse, but that's partly what the timelapse is all about. Those changes are natural and you don't want to articifually compensate for lighting changes. Once in awhile you might get lucky and TLCS will pay off, but I think you're much more likely to ruin your shot.

Okay, if you're going to hand the camera off to a total non-professional shooter who isn't willing to spend 5 minutes to learn how to adjust the exposure, maybe TLCS is a a good idea. But for the rest of us, it's almost always a bad idea.

I receommend thinking twice before using TLCS.
Just another point of view.

In some shooting situations the lighting may vary quite a bit during the timelapse, but that's partly what the timelapse is all about. Those changes are natural and you don't want to articifually compensate for lighting changes.

As an artistic tool, timelapse may be "about" movement and light, or the movement alone. The latter may require constant DoF (thus requiring fixed aperture), or allow some changes (or even be "about" such changes, as well) - etc., etc. Possible combinations are endless.

Not to mention those spanning full daylight and dusk...

Piotr,
I agree with you. You are helping make my case for not using auto . . . unelss you WANT to record abnormal exposure fluctuations as an "artistic" choice. In those rare cases, by all means, let everything change as much you can. The rest of the time, lock everything down.

Piotr,
I agree with you. You are helping make my case for not using auto . . . unelss you WANT to record abnormal exposure fluctuations as an "artistic" choice. In those rare cases, by all means, let everything change as much you can. The rest of the time, lock everything down.

Doug,

I agree with you about the auto-iris fluctuations - they can be minimized by changing the speed to the max setting.

I'm also for all manual in most cases, Doug - one thing you seem not to take into consideration though: in threads like these, we're trying to help those new users understand what auto iris, or TLCS, are all about - so that they can understand those tools better, and make their own decisions. Therefore, giving examples of when they might by used and how, is not the same as advocating using them all the time!

Piotr,

Just the opposite!!
I DO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHO READS THESE THREADS and that is why I have to disagree with you and Alister so strongly. I disagree with your approach of giving people training wheels.

I think it s counter productive to explain to inexperienced shooters techniques or camera funtions that you and I wouldn't use. Why get them started off on the wrong foot? Why encourage them to struggle with inferior shooting modes that will never take them to the next level? Why not suggest the best, most professional techniques right out of the box? It is much easier to learn to do things properly right from the start that it is to correct bad habits or toss asisde the crutches later.

This isn't rocket science. Nothing in this business is beyond the ablities of your average person with an IQ over 100. Give me someone that has never used a video camera in their life (if there is such a person) and I will have them shooting in manual iris mode within the first hour.

I don't buy the argument that you need to understand TLCS before you decide not to use it. That is a total waste of time. Whenever I'm trying to learn somthing new from an expert, and that expert says, don't bother with that function or this other setting, I am quite happy not to waste my time. I say thank you! Time wasted learning something I won't ever use after I understand it better, would be better spent mastering the right technique in the first place.

I don't believe in training wheels water wings.

I don't buy the argument that you need to understand TLCS before you decide not to use it. That is a total waste of time. Whenever I'm trying to learn somthing new from an expert, and that expert says, don't bother with that function or this other setting, I am quite happy not to waste my time. I say thank you! Time wasted learning something I won't ever use after I understand it better, would be better spent mastering the right technique in the first place.


Doug,

I guess the above quote best describes the difference between the attitudes each of us represents (and is fully entitled to).

Personally, whenever I'm learning anything new, I just need to understand it fully before I can feel comfortable about adopting, or rejecting it.

Doug,
I agree with you about the auto-iris fluctuations - they can be minimized by changing the speed to the max setting.
!


One more thing, and then I'll try to shut up. I have to disagree even with your satement because it is not what I said earlier.

The slowest auto-iris speed change is too slow to react for normal shooting situations, thus resulting in shots that are incorrectly exposed while the iris slowly changes. On the other hand, if you change the speed settings to make the iris react faster, then it is likely to change unexpectedly (and visibly) in the middle of a shot.

And for timelapse, even the slowest setting can be too fast between captures if it happens to occur between two frames. You show me a timelapse that was shot with TLCS or auto-iris, and most times the expsure changes are visible. Sometimes it won't matter, but usually it does.

1) I don't trust auto-iris or TLCS to get the exposure right. There are usually too many variable for a dumb camera to determine what is best.

2) I don't trust auto-iris TLCS not to change the settings right in the middle of my shot.

The 2 of us discussing various aspects of TLCS (or auto-anything) proves my point that it's essential for a newcomer to grasp the idea of how these tools really function - don't you think, Doug?

But I'm really shutting up now :)

I remind my shooters that manual is always preferable, but if it means getting that once-in-a-lifetime shot, go Green Mode!

So how Doug would you shoot a day to night timelapse? During the daytime part of the shot you need to use either ND or the shutter to keep the iris above f11 or better still f8 to avoid diffraction effects, then at night you are likely to require a totally different setup most likely no shutter, iris wide open, maybe even a little gain depending on what you are trying to achieve. The slowest response speed of the TLCS is slow enough not to be effected by transient changes yet the camera will slowly adjust itself to suit the general lighting/exposure trend providing a smooth, seamless transition from day to night. If you lock off for daylight you are going to have to disturb the camera to switch out ND or the shutter, then change the iris and possibly gain settings. What happens if you start off overcast and the sun comes out? Sure if your locked to one exposure you'll get the most dramatic change in the scene but you can easily end up with a totally blown out shot.

There is a time and a place for both fixed exposure and variable exposure. It's like the difference between a manual and auto transmission on a car. You wouldn't want an auto transmission for a motor race, but if you are doing serious off-road driving or driving in stop-start traffic an auto is hard to beat. TLCS is a option that may produce a better result in some circumstances but not in others. I've said this elsewhere but it is knowing when to use the most appropriate tool that makes you a competent operator, as with any trade, use the right tool for the job. TLCS is not 'training wheels' it is a very useful tool that can be customised to your needs and for some applications can produce a result that is superior to a locked off or manual exposure.

I also don't believe that it takes just 5 minutes to teach someone how to expose a camera correctly, especially if they are not a camera operator or photographer. At least by using TLCS I know they will come back with something useable. It may not be perfect or ideal, but we don't live in a perfect world and on military flights the crew often have more important things to deal with than whether the camera they have been asked to take is set up correctly.

There are many people here on these forums that do need to use auto functions when they are starting out. There is a lot to learn and the use of say, auto exposure may be beneficial if it allows the learner to concentrate on manual focus. Once they have mastered focus they can then move on to manual exposure. Better to master one skill at a time than be bogged down struggling with information overload.

I love you guys! Keep talking and try to not take it Personally! We all learn from these discussions in ways we'd never have a chance to otherwise. Be civil and have fun--you obviously have great respect for one another's opinions. Thank you for sharing.

Hi Piotr,

Nope. We'll have to fundamentally disagree on this one. I think it is a waste of time to learn how to use things that you eventually won't want to use once you understand them. So how will they know they won't need it unless they understand it first? Because other people who know more about it tell them so. That's good enough for me.

If someone is as at the level where they have to ask what TLCS is, even though they have owned the camera for quite some time, it is my advice not to even waste time with it. Apply that time and effort to learning what you really need to know to use the camera in the most professional manner.

I just bought a new custom mountain bike this week. There were some components that I knew exactly what I wanted. But in other areas, I relied on the advice of my mechanic at the bike shop who knows a hell of a lot more about the various parts than I want to. I didn't need to compare every aspect of brand X component vs. brand Y to make a decision about what to buy. I relied on the advice of an expert and did not waste my time studying all the options myself. Okay, maybe not the greatest analogy, but I think it fits. When someone who has given me good advice in the past, and clearly knows more about it than I do tells me something, I listen.

Here's what a friend, who has been reading this thread (but isn't a DVi member), emailed me this morning:

"Up until last semester, I was teaching film-making at the University of ______. Like you, when the kids asked about certain gizmos on the cameras that I knew would trip them up, I told them, "Ignore it, that's for amateurs. You won't be using it. And if you do, you'll get a failing grade on this project. Of course, I would explain why I didn't want them wasting time with X function, much like you explain in your post. It's a matter of mind-set (professional approach). Again, you and I are in total agreement."


I think that sums up my attitude perfectly.

Better to master one skill at a time than be bogged down struggling with information overload.

I disagree. it is because there is so much to learn that it is better to master the proper skills in the first place than to waste time with training wheels and other techniques that are going to have be unlearned. Maybe you won't agree, but I know that the average person can learn more than one function at a time. This isn't brain surgery. Someone doesn't really have to master focusing before they can move on to the next level and learn how to expose. It can, and should be be learned all at once. Good video needs to be exposed, focused, white balanced, and composed properly. Leave out any of those elements, and you might as well have stayed home and practiced until you could handle them all at once.

I could say more, but I stand by what I've posted previoulsy.

I don't have the time to explain how to shoot a tricky timelapse, but I would, however, love to see a link to a timelapse you have shot where using TLCS the way you have decribed it really made the difference.

I LOVE this thread. It hits on so many pet peeves of mine, especially re: teaching people about video or any type of image creation. When I was teaching college classes in Basic and Advanced Photography, it was always my dream to hand every new student a basic 4x5 view camera and have them leave their auto-exposure SLR's at home. That way, I could teach them how photography works from the ground up. Then, the only way I'd let them touch the Auto-anything functions in their own camera would be when they could demonstrate to me that they understood how an image is properly created. Back then, my students were all using film-based cameras, but the techniques are basically the same.

I have a possible long-term timelapse project coming up so this thread is very timely <pardon the pun>. However, instead of my EX1, I'll probably be doing it with a small digital camera and drop all the .jpg's into an image sequence in Quicktime. Where we are talking about exposure variations across seconds or minutes, I might have to figure out how to properly expose my shots when each of them are separated by hours. Any ideas on how to make this type of sequence smooth when the shots are so far apart?

Keep these ideas coming guys.

I don't have the time to explain how to shoot a tricky timelapse, but I would, however, love to see a link to a timelapse you have shot where using TLCS the way you have decribed it really made the difference.

But that's the point, a day to night timelapse shot using TLCS is not tricky or hard to do, it's really very simple one you have set up TLCS to limit the cameras adjustments to the range you are happy with. I guess you pro's just like to make life difficult for yourselves.

YouTube - Norway and the northern lights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUjsEaCIaSA&fmt=18) At 02.06 you will se a day to night sunset shot using TLCS. Even thought the camera is shooting in to the sun and the sky goes from cloudy to clear and eventually you see the moon and even rare noctilucent clouds the exposure is not un-natural or unrealistic. A single fixed exposure would have just gone from day to dark.

Then, the only way I'd let them touch the Auto-anything functions in their own camera would be when they could demonstrate to me that they understood how an image is properly created.

Great approach, Dave! Don't let the Auto do things instead of yourself, but FOR yourself - doesn't it prove my point that even the "silly TLCS function" (as described in one of the first comments to the OP's question here) should be fully understood BEFORE dismissing it *definitely* can be justified?

Ouch, - I promised to shut up :)

At 02.06 you will se a day to night sunset shot using TLCS. Even thought the camera is shooting in to the sun and the sky goes from cloudy to clear and eventually you see the moon and even rare noctilucent clouds the exposure is not un-natural or unrealistic. A single fixed exposure would have just gone from day to dark.

Am I missing something? It just looks like a regular sunset timelapse to me. That's you're best justification for people learning to use TLCS? I stand by my previous posts and my own timelapse procdures where exposure does not change. Maybe it's just Youtube, but the red sky at abnout 2:10 looks totally blown out with banding in the clouds. I assume it's a Youtube shortcoming and not the TLCS?

BTW, the northern lights stuff after that point is fantastic. Nice stuff.

Here's another shot I did a couple of weeks ago from a hotel bedroom in Kuala Lumpu. Shot over 6 hours.
YouTube - Kuala Lumpur Day to Night Timelapse using TLCS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6q-Kw9sHs_4) Very simple day to night shot where the exposure range went from 1/250th shutter, 0db, f8 to +3db, f2.8, no shutter. Shots like this are just so easy and simple to do with TLCS. One single exposure would not have worked as starting at 1/250th or 1/4ND at f8 would have led to nothing but an almost totally black image after sunset. TLCS handles this with ease.

Dave: If you shots are separated by hours then exposure changes are inevitable as in one frame you might have a beautiful clear sky, the next cloudy, then back to clear sky. This will make the sequence flicker, especially if you use a fixed exposure as each frame will have a different average brightness level. One way to do it is to use a much shorter interval and then use frame blending between frames for the first pass and then speed the clip up to the desired speed in a second pass. I would strongly recommend auto iris, but probably fixed white balance. Gain settings will depend on what it is you are shooting.

Thanks Alister. That sounds like a very good approach to use. BTW, this timelapse will be for a developer and will show a large building during the entire construction period. I'm already designing a weatherproof box, power source, etc. etc. to make this thing work. I might have to include some sort of USB port so I can pull the images out of the camera without having to touch it and risk knocking it off position. I've done similar timelapse shots with digital still cameras before, but never anything stretching over months and months.

Also, those aurora borealis shots were stunning. That phenomenon is one of the things I want to see before I die!! ;-)

Different ways to achieve the same or at least similar results. The versatility of the EX cameras.

The other day I was shooting a big construction. It was a building an it had a huge crane and I used it hanging a basket under it. The crane took me around as a helicopter and the light was very different between the houses and also very different from one side of the house to the other. My goal was to make it steady in Motion an speed it up and use it as a long "flying" sequence. I used TLCS to make the camera control the changing of light in a smooth way.
I am a rookie and I read your comments about if TLCS is right or wrong.
I read a lot of treads from both Doug and Alistair and have big respect for both of you and your work.
I am curios to hear how you would handel a situation like this. Can you really make such smooth changes in light manually at the same time as you hold the camera steady and controlling the zoom?
(sorry for my strange English, I am swedish)
Thanks for sharing!
/Anders
PS I am scared of hights so I almost peed my pants.

I'm with Allister 100%. I also want to say that as a 25 year professional with 3 1/2 years experience on this camera, until I read this thread I didn't have the foggiest idea what TLCS was. Thanks folks. No I know.

Lenny Levy

Anders. It all comes down to the end result. If the end result is better through the use of TLCS, then go for it. If on the other hand you can operate the zoom, focus and expose at the same time then that would be preferable as you will should be a better judge of the exposure than TLCS. However if trying to manage too many things at once is giving you a problem, possibly creating a safety hazzard as you are become too focussed on the camera and not on where you are, reduce the workload by making use of the tools the camera provides. Initially I would just use auto iris. If that can't cope on it's own you may need to revert to TLCS.

I love you guys! Keep talking and try to not take it Personally! We all learn from these discussions in ways we'd never have a chance to otherwise. Be civil and have fun--you obviously have great respect for one another's opinions. Thank you for sharing.

Unfortunately, the above statement of Chris is no longer valid (here and in the other thread on auto-iris), because of Doug's personal attacks and language used :(

I rest my case.

I guess I missed the "personal attacks" in this thread, Piotr. Just where did they occur?

Carroll Lam

And I always thought TLCS stood for "Tender Loving Camera System" - now where did I put my manual?

I started in this business when there were no guides or manuals other than the provided Sony book. With a background in motion film and still photography it was natural for me to have to set the iris, focus, sound levels etc manually. But then I was making programmes in studio or on location which were scripted, planned and structured so that the cameraman (and his associated sound man) had time to do their work.

But now, at the end of my career, I’m in weddings and events. If I didn’t have the benefit of automation, of reliable and reasonably accurate automated functions, I’d need an army of technicians working with me.

Doug Jensen's comments in this thread are probably perfectly valid if the work you’re doing allows you time. But if you’re shooting weddings or events (which can be characterised as programmes when you have amateur talent and no control over the environment), having a backlight option at the touch of a button can be a lifesaver, much as he and I might disdain it in other, more controlled situations.

It seems to me that this whole thread misses out one element - the sort of programmes we're making.

It’s a pity opinions are presented so vociferously and opposing views dissed so readily. I would have thought that in an age when so much technology has interfaces which offer multiple access paths, we can accept that there are reasons for having them all.