Indie 2.0

Jim Jannard has an interesting post on reduser.net where he explains that it’ll get easier shoot great footage on the Red:

RED… looks great, looks not so great. Why?

---

Some of you have figured it out. Some have not. Some see RED as an ISO 160 camera, some an ISO 320 camera and some comfortable to shoot ISO 1000. Some see low dynamic range, some high. Some get noise, some do not. Why the difference?

RED needs to be rated and exposed properly. Then it needs to be sent through post properly. With many ways to do each, it can be confusing. Some have gotten it right and some have struggled.

We recognize the need to simplify the process… from exposure through post. And we are working on it. We believe that we will present a new way to look at shooting RED early next year. An exposure methodology that works and a new post workflow (color science) that makes it near impossible to screw up. Easy as 1,2,3.

These are exciting times at RED. We really appreciate our customers and those brave enough to shoot RED. We believe that everything we do (and have done) can be done better. We stay awake at nights working on new solutions to make shooting RED easier and and with better results.

Thanks for your support.

Jim

This is great news, for DPs new to the Red. (I was at a talk at CineAsia in Hong Kong last Thursday where director Mabel Cheung said she had wanted to shoot a feature she just wrote and produced (Echoes of the Rainbow) on Red, but that there didn’t seem to be enough expertise on Red, how to shoot and post-production, and her DP was against it.) So Jim’s promise to make it even easier will just increase the uptake of Red usage.

I’m explaining to people on a pretty regular basis that the RED is kind of like 2 cameras in one – one camera for low contrast, low DR photography where you can rate from 250 ASA on down as long as you don’t overexpose, and use the Raw View mode in the camera to check the levels, and have really nice imagery – learning to use the histogram on the right side (the right 3rd of the of the histogram scale) for low con imagery can be your best friend…

… and one camera for high contrast, high DR challenging photography where you have a huge range from under to over, and you can expose at 400 ASA or higher, and as long as you don’t clip the highlights, you will be amazed at how much range you have in the mids and shadows to work with… This camera is way more sensitive that people give it credit for under the proper high contrast shooting conditions… Using the histogram from 2/3’s full on down for high DR photography can be your best friend.

The biggest mistake I see people make is letting things blow out because they are worried about the shadows, those shadows can hold clean and gorgeous like crazy – I see it all the time on properly exposed high DR imagery.

If you use REDspace for your overall exposure setting, and use RAW View for checking highlights as you work and check exposures you will have effectively done what MacGregor describes in his Rec709 at 640ASA testing. REDspace for all types of photography can be your best friend, when used in tandem with checking highlight exposure in RAW.

The RED ONE has various “sweet spots” for exposure depending on the various contrast conditions, color temperature of light being used and a number of other creative factors – that’s one of the reasons it’s such a nice tool to work with. The more testing and experimentation a DP has time to do, the more they learn about how far the can push and pull the images to create the look and feel they want – the joy of RAW cinematography.

+ Ted

What’s kind of interesting to me, because we sort of live in the trenches, that’s maybe one of the things that’s a little different about Red then other companies is that we really spend a lot of time in the industry trying to figure out how these cameras are being used and maximize their use and then bring a benefit to everybody.

And what I see is that over this past year, year and a half of projects being shot now by the thousands, the really good DPs have really figured out how to use the tool and how to maximize the range. Just like them have with film and anything else. But because you’re shooting these RAW images with the Red, once you really get it and you know the difference between… Well, the example I like to give to DPs when they’re first starting out on the Red is: you really have to think about the Red as two different cameras.

You have to have to think about the Red as a camera for very controlled lighting, low dynamic range type situations. Sort of like this interview. There’s probably some specular highlights and things going around here. But you’ve exposed it for me, for my face. We have a nice big light in here and we’re shooting at just a normal exposure. A good exposure index for this would be (ASA) 250 to (ASA) 320. That’s a comfortable, logical exposure. And that’s a good way to rate the Red overall.

The flip side of that is that there’s a whole different Red that’s out there. Even though it’s the exact same camera. For shooting things with really, really strong amount of dynamic range where you have to hold really deep underneath and protect or work with very strong specular highlights. So you would theoretically have in some cases 15-20 stops of overall range. And the really good DPs have learned where to make those choices. Because the Red can hold so much into the darkness. Especially if you’re using the overall sensor dynamics to their best end. So, because the camera is daylight balanced, you get the maximum amount of dynamic range when you’re working with daylight conditions. And that, in a lot of cases, can–believe it or not–just be street lights. Because streetlights tend to be warmer than tungsten. So, as long as you activate the full range of the colors in the sensor–the blue tends to be the one that weakest mostly because we don’t allow blue light to come in, but when you do, you can shoot with massive amounts of dynamic range. I have a ton of examples of shots that you think simply could not be done on the Red, that look so scary clean, that you’re astounded. You just wouldn’t believe that you could do it.

You know, we’ve done shots with just street lights in downtown L.A. and Santa Monica where we couldn’t even get a reading on a (light) meter. You know, .6 or .7. We shoot it with very fast lenses, wide open and we do these tests. And because the street lights tend to have a full spectrum of light, we’re actually, we can pull these images up in post and see remarkably clean images. I’ve actually shown these things at some of my seminars that I do and people are just jaw dropped. They think you can only use this camera in well-lit, controlled environments. And that’s not the case.

I know you have a couple of feature films  you’ve been talking to guys [about] that are shooting with no light. Or some light. Or very little light. And getting spectacular results. So it’s all about understanding what the camera can do and then driving the success point of the camera that way….

[Discussing Build 20 and the “new color science”]
…The [Red] camera is a daylight-balanced device. So if you want the absolute cleanest possible images, you’ll want to introduce some level of daylight source to your image. It doesn’t mean you have to light your whole set in daylight. A lot of DPs get very, very savvy with it and they want to keep a tungsten look on the set. So they want everything warm. And that’s fine. And what a lot of DPs will do is they’ll drop quarter blue or half blue on a couple sources–you don’t even visually see it with your eyes, they put it on a back light or a side light or something. And now they’ve activated the blue channel in that sensor. And that works wonders.