Відео

Wow, thanks!🙏🏻

Glad it was helpful!

Thanks @robertpokonski I will try to make a video soon about the process of creating a LUT to mimic the EL Zone System

Thxs for getting back to me. Please do make that vodeo I am looking foward to it

Glad you like it! Yes the net works great! They come in different ND level but the full stop is actually a double bet and I didn’t like using that. If it’s windy you start seeing the net so stick to a single net.

@@cnomadic Thanks for the advice!

EL Zone is awesome!!! Kind of blew my mind

I’m not an engineer but did find this chart of your camera sensor showing that at ISO 100 you get 12 stops of dynamic range. The dynamic range decline the higher the iso gets but at 800 the dynamic range goes up a couple of stops, indicating that yes 800 is native and you are better off switching to 800 than shooting at 640 for example. Here is the chart: nikonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Nikon-Z6-II-vs-Nikon-Z6.png

@@cnomadic yeah, that is how I’ve always handled it with this camera. If 100 ISO doesn’t work I switch to 800. If that doesn’t work, I break out the tripod! Lol.

😂😂

With that said… consider me subscribed.

Great question Zach. In my case I’ve always noticed grain in the high base compared to the low base. I could simply expose a shot using lights so that my settings stay the same to compare, but at the end of the day switching between low base to high base the camera processes the signal coming from the sensor differently, by amplifying it.

From what I understand the signal generated by the sensor goes through a different amplification and noise cancellation component. With dual ISO the camera has a second system of amplification and noise cancelation for the high base. So the sensor only produces 1 signal (same sensitivity) but will go through a different process depending on what base is selected

@@cnomadic Yeah, the difference has to be "hardware" vs "software" amplification. The sensor only has one "native ISO", but there are two optimized hardware amplification/noise reduction paths. The phrase "two native ISOs" is a misnomer, but is used all the time of UA-cam. Better would be something like "dual optimized hardware amplification/noise reduction paths". All the best.

Thanks!

Thank you!

I believe so. For sure some people are having great results in stepping away from the native ISO especially when shooting negative gain. But for me at this time I need to do a lot more testing before working outside of native ISO

Your native low base is 64?? I think that’s where photography and video differs. But I agree having the correct amount of levels is key. Are you using 400 ISO so you can turn down the strobe a little to get a more natural light look?

@cnomadic Yes, I have big softboxes to soften the shadows so then I can bring up the iso to raise my f-stop.

It is common practice in cinema to raise the iso when the exposure is high, because you are not introducing noise in highlight, and shifting the dynamic repartition of the picture down, meaning you get more information in very bright light.

Glad you enjoy it!

When I look at my own test using my gear, shooting 2 stops over native ISO, there is significant noise to the point where I would be reluctant to use the image on any of my projects. That’s also without applying any Denoiser in post. I’ve shot plenty of images multiple stops above native with my a7 and had some good results, it’s always a balancing act of your tolerance for noise.

Yeah so 1 sensor 2 native ISO! It is like having 2 different sensors. All the manufacturers but especially Sony are pretty quiet about how this is accomplished. Sony released the dynamic range chart for the FX6 6 only in low base ISO, they never published the high base chart!! Secrets secrets…

There's a video I think it's Dan fox he has explained technically how that's possible.

Yes you can shoot what is called negative gain (lower) than native. You will lose dynamic range in the highlights but gain more stops in the shadows. It is a good way to limit noise but the give away is the limitation in the highlight

@@cnomadic Thank you for the quick reply!

Yes totally agree with you. On the FX6 I can not go bellow native in Cine EI so I haven’t experienced shooting negative gain but yes that’s a great way to limit noise

@@cnomadic I don't own the FX6, but do have an FX9 and here's what I do with that. I tell my camera to burn in a LUT, and then make Slog3 the LUT it burns in. At that point I can change my ISO to 400, or if I need a brighter image I can go to the high base (4000 on the FX9) and reduce ISO for a super-clean 2000. I'm guessing this would be the same technique on an FX6, but I don't have one in front of me to test.

I'm not sure but looking at the Sony dual ISO chart here: www.xdcam-user.com/2022/10/chart-of-sony-dual-iso-base-levels/ it looks like the base is different depending on the codec used. I'm sure it has to do with how the signal is processed to create the file type selected.

@@cnomadic Indeed and this is for video, for photos it's completely different rules and 1600 is the equivalent of 12,800 it seems (that's when noise drops). After 1600, it continues to rise as you raise the ISO.

Thank you! ❤️ Brazil!

I have one coming up soon. Any tips or videos you have seen that give some creative spark?

@@reneirtaylorfilms890 not really, I’m just saying if you have a lot of windows like this you can use a lot of natural light in the background and maybe even for the subject. If not you need to light the background yourself

@reineirtaylorfilms890 It’s always tricky, you have to find the best based on the room you have. Sometimes you can use natural light, sometimes you can find plants or objects you can use even in the foreground. But in room that don’t offer a lot of character I tend to use darkness and shadows to try to create texture. Good luck and share the results, would love to see what you ended up doing.

Thank you! I agree too many people would simply flood the room with lights and unfortunately create more flatness! Understanding ratios and separation is critical

@@cnomadic I feel like it comes from the old video/photo run & gun world where they were driven to have lots of soft soft light rather than you authoring motivated light. And also since LED 1x1 panels were kind of first, people forgot about directional light. Whenever is ask for fresnels, people would look at me like I was some codger. 🤷‍♂️

@@cnomadic and what’s the deal with muddy lighting on faces? I understand there’s a drive for greater realism rather than spotting the viewer’s focus, but I feel like I often don’t know what I’m supposed to be looking at? I still feel like it’s okay to subtly bump your subject to establish emphasis… but again, that’s codger talk. 😁

Very true!