-
Film Rec vs Video Rec
Alright, so Video Rec is a wysiwyg setting for staying on tape. Film Rec produces a flatter image with more latitude for printing to film. So far so good. But I’ve heard a number of you are using Film Rec whilst staying on tape, altering the settings on camera to get a more linear, wysiwyg image on the monitor.
What are the advantages to working this way, and what settings to you use to achieve it?
Many Thanks,
John
-
5 Replies
-
John,
The advantage is having predictable steps of highlight compression, from 200-500 setting of Dynamic range. Crushing the Gamma from the default .45 to .55 or even .65 restores the blacks for a wysiwug look. This is not necessarily what the cameras designers had in mind, but it’s a very powerful feature. The alternative is to make knee point and slope adjustments in the field, which is not really practical in an ENG environment.
JS
-
[john sharaf] “John,
The advantage is having predictable steps of highlight compression, from 200-500 setting of Dynamic range. Crushing the Gamma from the default .45 to .55 or even .65 restores the blacks for a wysiwug look”
It should be noted that when “crushing the gamma” to .55 that the slope of the brightest half of the image becomes normalized in contrast. The darkest half becomes lower in contrast than normal. Unfortunately crushing the blacks using the pedistal does not fix this in a way that normalizes contrast evenly either. The result from my experience is that I use much less “fill” light in the shadows as one can see very deeply into them. The final result is that the photograph may lack “punch” in the shadows in a way that is hard to explain in words, but that is different than film, but more film like than standard video.
The best fix for this would be a software update that allowed a highlight gamma correction menu and a shadow gamma correction menu item that work in Film Rec mode.
For the original John, the poster: The advantage of using Film Rec mode is that the image looks more “photographic” and one can clip the highlights in a more natural looking way. It’s not perfect for the reasons mentioned above,
The second reason to use Film Rec mode is to obtain a much, much cleaner, less noisey image. The trade off is that you will have less light sensitivity at a given master gain setting. For example Vid Rec at -3db gain = EI 640. Film Rec at 0db gain and 300% dynamic range and gamma =.55 gives an EI (exposure index) of EI 400. I would suggest setting dyamic range to 200% unless the situattion demands one go higher.
Please note, from my testing there is a highlight abnormality when using -3db gain in Film Rec mode at 300% dynamic range or higher so remember to avoid that.
That’s about it, and I can only recomend testing your approach before shooting as always…
-bruce
Varicam/Steadicam Owner
Los Angeles, CA
http://www.brucealangreene.com -
Hello from Greece
The last three months out of 3 years of using our Varicam we found out how to expose correctly with Varicam and get a 10 stops range for cinema and for TV. After all my tests I haven
-
[Evangelos] “We are working with MG at .35 DL at 500% and EI at 640 all this in -3db. Off coarse nothing in the menus left without tweaking but with measurements taken with http://www.imatest.com, http://www.babelcolor.com and McBeth Colorcheker to measure noise and latitude and after all this, we using Silicon Colour FT to do reverse Telecine.”
From my tests, and the tests of others, setting the Dynamic Level at 500% and -3db can set the camera beyond the light sensing ablilties of one or more of the chips. Depending upon your white balance settings and filtration, you may well see a color shift in the highlights as one or more chips is no longer able to register changes in light level. I have seen this clearly on the waveform. The solution is to shoot at 0db while at 500% dynamic level.
-bruce
Varicam/Steadicam Owner
Los Angeles, CA
http://www.brucealangreene.com -
I understand but I haven
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up