Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
I’m assuming the aperture was the same for all gammas right.
|
Of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
Because to my eyes, Cine4 doesn’t really look as bright as std3 in those pictures.
|
Yes. The shadows are very similar. But the hightlights are brighter. Actually clipping-bright. ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
Also, looking at your samples, I don’t see why Adam Wilt called cine3 “brighter cine” since cine3 seem to have darker shadows than cine1.
|
The shadows of cine3 are darker, but the mids and highlights are brighter. So integrated over the whole range cine3 is brighter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
But yes, it doesn’t “produce” noise which is not there, but what I obviously meant was which gamma produces the cleanest image with the least visible noise?
|
Cine3 is the best for low shadow-noise, because it has the darkest shadows of all gammas.
But when I'm talking about that the SNR doesn't change, I try to explain, that
the actually captured information is the same. So
you can change the gamma in post without (significant) loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
That would only mean that when exposing to high lights using the stds without knee you would capture less info in the shadows because they would be underexposed. It would not necessarily mean the shadows would be noisy.
|
In terms of SNR the shadows will be more noisy. You can think about std3 without knee is similar to cine1 with 3db extra-gain.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
If using for example std2 which crushes the blacks you shouldn’t see much noise.
|
Yes, but you're not only
loosing noise but also
picture-information. I don't want to loose picture-information, because that's irreversible.
You can't undo that in post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
I’m talking about dynamic range and or latitude or how many stops of info can be recorded and you are talking about something else ;)
|
I'm talking about SNR, because
dynamic-range/lattitude deduces straight from maximal SNR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
How does that explain why you recommend Cine4 for high contrast but use Cine1?
|
Because the SNR is the same for all cine-gammas, you're capturing almost the same information with each of them. So it's just a matter of taste, whether you want to approximate the final look in the camera or to shoot more linearly done with cine1.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
So what you meant by “and take noise” is that the cine gammas show less noise?
|
If you switch from a cine-gamma to a std-gamma without changing the exposure, then the shadow-signal-to-noise-ratio doesn't change (because the amount of light falling onto the sensor stays the same).
-But the clipping point gets lower (because of the std-without-knee-3db-extra-gain-thing), so you're
loosing highlight-information.
-When compensating for that by lowering the exposure,
the SNR drops.
Choose your favourite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Maier
(Post 969968)
By the way, you totally bypassed my reply about gamma having an effect on low light and the F900R having a hypergamma preset for low light while you said it wasn’t related to gamma. Mind commenting on that?
|
I commented on that. Look for the word "heuristic" in my last post. ;)
Yes, it makes sense to say that low-light-situations often are low-contrast-situations. So it makes sense to use cine1 on that, because cine1 the has strongest overall-contrast of all cine-gammas.
