abrupt highlights clipping

[Piotr Wozniacki]

I have shifted the STD1 knee 95 slightly towards red in Vegas, to get rid of the bluish tint in shadows. It's better now, I think.

The conclusion is: each preset needs its individual colour balancing!

[Wayne Zebzda]

Hi Piotr,
A little off topic but...
How close can you get your V1 to match up with the EX1 as a B cam ?
Aloha,
Wayne

[Piotr Wozniacki]

Unfortunately, I sold my V1E - one of the silly things I've done lately :) So, no B camera!

But of course I do have plenty of HDV stuff, shot with it - and it actually intercuts quite well, especially with the SP mode material from the EX1.

But even in SP mode, the EX1 codec is cleaner - especially in low-light and with fine detail. To me, the difference is quite obvious; colours you can grade to match, but the increased mosquito noise in the V1E can be noticed.

That said, to the casual viewer the combined renders look great.

[Sebastien Thomas]

Don't know if you've been through this article, but have a look there : http://prolost.blogspot.com/2008/02/...mic-range.html

[Benjamin Eckstein]

Originally Posted by Sebastien Thomas

Don't know if you've been through this article, but have a look there : http://prolost.blogspot.com/2008/02/...mic-range.html

Whoa! Stick that under my pillow and hope it makes more sense in the morning. Very interesting though.

[Bob Grant]

Originally Posted by Sebastien Thomas

Don't know if you've been through this article, but have a look there : http://prolost.blogspot.com/2008/02/...mic-range.html

Mandatory reading. The reply (way down the page) from Jason Rodriquez explains the issue very well. Keep in mind that the discussion relates to cameras recording 10bitLog and beyond. Even then they don't come close to 35mm neg.
My thanks to Sebastian for posting the link. What a breath of fresh air in this thread to read something by people who do the hard yards required to understand what they are working with. And my hat goes off to Stu for his work modelling the issue in AE.

[Michael H. Stevens]

I just had to comment on this. Did you read what Piotr said regarding the blue-clipping? He said Adam Wilt confirmed what I said! That made my day.

[Bill Ravens]

Irrelevant.....Red is RAW, the EX1 is not.

[Piotr Wozniacki]

Originally Posted by Sebastien Thomas

Don't know if you've been through this article, but have a look there : http://prolost.blogspot.com/2008/02/...mic-range.html

Thanks Sebastien for the link - great reading!

[Michael H. Stevens]

Originally Posted by Benjamin Eckstein

Whoa! Stick that under my pillow and hope it makes more sense in the morning. Very interesting though.

This article reinforces a lot of my observations as spoke of in the "under-exposing" post. Even with the EX1 roll-off curves more highlight detail is obtained with about a stop underexposure with the middle brought up in post. This article is very relevant as long as you realise the difference in the Panalog and Red curves vis a vie the EX1's hyper gammas.

[Piotr Wozniacki]

Originally Posted by Michael H. Stevens

This article reinforces a lot of my observations as spoke of in the "under-exposing" post.

As I see it, this hasn't been the unambiguous conclusion at all. Jason Rodriguez, whom Bob is referring to, says in his comment to the article:

"Hi Elliot, you're right, you want to expose "to the right" to maximize signal to noise ratio".

Your "under-exposing" theory is good for getting more headroom for highlits, but brings in the danger of getting too close to the "noise floor".

So frankly, no definite conclusion from this article to me...

[Michael H. Stevens]

Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki

As I see it, this hasn't been the unambiguous conclusion at all. Jason Rodriguez, whom Bob is referring to, says in his comment to the article:

"Hi Elliot, you're right, you want to expose "to the right" to maximize signal to noise ratio".

Your "under-exposing" theory is good for getting more headroom for highlits, but brings about the danger of getting to close to the "noise floor".

So frankly, no definite conclusion from this article to me...

Actually, the article says 1.25 stops down will give the headroom with little noise. Anyway, to is Sunday, another test day and now Cineform NEO-HD is fixed for me I'll be testing this along with my HiStat test to day. I'm also ASKING here. To exposure at this level where should the Zebras be? IE how many Zebra percents is one and a half stops? Is this Doug Jensen's 95?

[Bill Ravens]

Mike...

Keep an eye on your shadows. I think you'll see some pretty bad noise, even at 1 stop under. As I've been saying all along, expose to the right.

[Piotr Wozniacki]

It's my opinion that the zebra should still be at 100% (as this is the only setting possible with Zebra 2; Zebra 1 is adjustable, but will span a +/- range thus cluttering your view).

[Michael H. Stevens]

Originally Posted by Piotr Wozniacki

It's my opinion that the zebra should still be at 100% (as this is the only setting possible with Zebra 2; Zebra 1 is adjustable, but will span a +/- range thus cluttering your view).

Very good point Piort. I knew this and totally forgot the problem of the Zebra #1 95 being 90-100. I'm mystyfied how a cut-off point (as a Zebra setting is) can have a range?

Maybe, if you set Zebra #1 to 100, then when zebras FIRST appear you are at 95?????????