Jump to content

Lensmonkey

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lensmonkey

  1. nevermind, just re-read rawshooter's remarks. Damn. such an irritation for a camera with such possibility!
  2. Does this monitoring/level mismatch occur in the screen/evf or only when externally monitored? Thank you for your informative posts regarding this phenomenon, and the sharing of knowledge!
  3. In the interest of clarification I'd like to see if a few observations are correct. I am talking about DNG forward. It has been my understanding that "base ISO" is determined by the least noise vs the highest dynamic range. Sigma has proscribed that the base ISO is 100. I think we have established that the FP uses a linear curve. There are +/_ 12.5 stops of range. If shot at base ISO then neutral grey should be at the middle of this. The camera's waveform and zebras are correct with this. In my understanding, changing the ISO on camera or in post results in changing the amount of information available above or below that grey exposing properly-AKA grey is grey. If we choose, or "pretend" that the ISO is 800, we say "I choose grey will be here", whites will still clip at the same amount of light with this much light reaching the lens. We will have less information to convert the above grey-to-blown-out to the +/_ 6 stops of rec 709, but more in the below-grey-to black, which will still go black with the same lack of light amount reaching the sensor. When changing ISO on camera The FP changes the waveform and clipping point zebras when you change the ISO! As if it is looking at an initial transform at 100, and then you are boosting that image thus indicating clipping where there is none. This makes on the fly protection of highlights and checking of black levels problematic! I thought maybe, use 100 ISO to check clipping, set exposure, then switch to what ISO you might choose to monitor and eventually use as the working ISO to expose grey properly. When shooting, then remember, (or make a sticker for the camera!) how many stops above or below your chosen ISO there is to that blown point or black. A spot meter is a pretty good tool to have at this point. Not great for moving fast. Or start to develop your eye. faster, but more accurate than you might think! This business of 3200 is a real conundrum though. If I read Rawshooter's generous contributions right, the very metering is wrong, and math with a base ISO check or a spot-meter is the only way through. And all monitoring in camera is going to be off by two stops at proper exposure. Damn. So to move quickly, dial in 3200 + look at recommended exposure, then open up two stops, deal with a blown out monitor image use it as a framing reference. Spot meter the highlights (or gage with your eye haha) to know where the image will blow out. There is a fundamental question that is kind of pivotal to this and my understanding as a question though. If I have a camera that has a base ISO of 100, and it has a 5 stop dynamic range (for ease of math), If I choose (shooting raw) to set the ISO at 1600 (one stop of information before blow out), when choosing a rec 709 transform, will the remaining stop of information above middle grey be parsed into the 3 stops rec 709 sees as above grey to white? Here is where I am sure I sound stupid because a stop is a stop, double the light. Here's a bit for thought... or telling me to shut up and that's your last glass of wine Mr. I have gotten used to looking at a good monitor and knowing what I see is what will be delivered. It is a pretty seductive thing. I shot film though for 20+ years and I see a lot of parallel with shooting RAW. When shooting film you used a meter and knew the filmstock, what it could handle, how and when it would blow out, how it would handle underexposure (black pixels matter yo! haha) You did not see the printed image for a couple of days (quicker if you were shooting for the studio!)I used a meter and knew the sensitometry of any given film stock, knew what it would matriculate to when graded. Raw seems like this. We look at a proxy image awaiting development. That sounds like knowing the sensor. I got to work with some greats, they could tell an exposure without a meter by eye. We used to play a game when I was a camera assistant on big pictures, and try to guess the shooting stop. After a while, we nearly always got it. Practical experience of the sensor, no matter whether it's film or digital is key. Knowing the tools is the mark of a cinematographer. I'd like us to have a clear idea of how this camera deals with light, put it in in the back of our minds and then go shoot wicked cool stuff with it.
  4. Though you are looking for information, I found that that you provided useful! I just spoke to Sony (on line) and got the brush off/re-direct about the liveview grading not working with xavcs codec issue, as well as the if-face-tracking-is-on skin-smoothing-is-on issue. I wonder about the reduction of color too. I guess we will just have to keep experimenting... Have you tried any LUT's?
×
×
  • Create New...