HD latitude vs. film ??

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:43:54 -0500, "scottamerica"
<scottamerica.RemoveThis@ixpres.com> wrote:

>"Robert Morein" <nowhere.RemoveThis@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:jNKdnb0q1KNTo8DdRVn2iQ@giganews.com...
>> How many stops of range do current HD systems have?
>> Since people quote different numbers for film, it would be interesting to
>> have a comparison with film.
>>
>> For the purpose of HD projection, how rescuable is improperly exposed HD
>in
>> post?
>>
>>
>Who asked you? Nobody cares. Go away, you're just an aged Retarded Boy.
>
The message is on topic to both groups. It desreves an answer.

If you have some personal grudge against the poster, keep it out of
here. Please.

Robert Vervoordt, MFA
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

"Robert Vervoordt" <rlv1 DeleteThis @ptd.net> wrote in message
news:gs0s501fc1sc0f46rsp658k96b2j5en3hf@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:43:54 -0500, "scottamerica"
> <scottamerica DeleteThis @ixpres.com> wrote:
>
> >"Robert Morein" <nowhere DeleteThis @nowhere.com> wrote in message
> >news:jNKdnb0q1KNTo8DdRVn2iQ@giganews.com...
> >> How many stops of range do current HD systems have?
> >> Since people quote different numbers for film, it would be interesting
to
> >> have a comparison with film.
> >>
> >> For the purpose of HD projection, how rescuable is improperly exposed
HD
> >in
> >> post?
> >>
> >>
> >Who asked you? Nobody cares. Go away, you're just an aged Retarded Boy.
> >
> The message is on topic to both groups. It desreves an answer.
>
> If you have some personal grudge against the poster, keep it out of
> here. Please.
>
> Robert Vervoordt, MFA


Background: Scott Lifshine is a mental case with a "saviour complex". He
believes it is his mission to exterminate all world culture. He created an
interesting little VHS performance piece, and apparently has some rock
concert tapes, to which he does not own the copyright, which he believes
have magical qualities. He has resided in Queens, and been in and out of a
halfway house for the mentally ill.

Lifshine is very, very ill. He was picked up in Canada for a near-physical
altercation, and has a history of altercations in NYC. He has intermittently
haunted this newsgroup with a one-note message: all culture is to be
replaced with his own. Lifshine is a deep psychotic, with whom persuasion
has no effect. He has now contracted prostate cancer.
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

"LaoFuZhi" <the.real.address .is.TakeThisOut@mattATtfgtvDOTcoDOTyewkay.itsaspam
thing.not.too.hard.to.work.out> wrote in message
news:c3l9so$rl2$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
>
> > The message is on topic to both groups. It desreves an answer.
> >
> > If you have some personal grudge against the poster, keep it out of
> > here. Please.
> >
> > Robert Vervoordt, MFA
>
> Quite so, Well said Robert.
>
Let's just work around it.
If I'm guilty of provoking this guy, I apologize. It is my observation that
he can be kept bottled up in his own thread. If not, he'll append his
malarkey to every thread.

Back to the topic:
In the past, I've heard that with HD, you have to shoot it right, because
there is no latitude that can be exploited in the telecine room.

A friend of mine who has some professional involvment has made the following
claim: that for the purpose of DIGITAL projection, he can salvage
incorrectly exposed HD footage. His argument is similar to what is said
about film for TV: since film has an 11 stop range, and TV a 5 stop range,
it is possible to make good TV footage out of film that is unacceptable for
a film print.

There are potentially a lot of fine points contained within the above that
could be discussed.
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

Robert Vervoordt wrote:
> If you have some personal grudge against the poster, keep it out of
> here. Please.

you're new here, right? i pretty sure it takes a whole lot more than
just a please in this case. :-)

/matt
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

"Matt Sandstrom" <usenet.DeleteThis@beauty.se> wrote in message
news:c3l58p$28ju9s$1@ID-111043.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Robert Vervoordt wrote:
> > If you have some personal grudge against the poster, keep it out of
> > here. Please.
>
> you're new here, right? i pretty sure it takes a whole lot more than
> just a please in this case. :-)
>
> /matt

Matt, you're knowledeable. I'm interested in hearing your input on the
question.
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

"Robert Morein" <nowhere RemoveThis @nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:t7KdnaxfudjOgMPdRVn2uw@giganews.com...
>
> "Robert Vervoordt" <rlv1 RemoveThis @ptd.net> wrote in message
> news:gs0s501fc1sc0f46rsp658k96b2j5en3hf@4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 15:43:54 -0500, "scottamerica"
> > <scottamerica RemoveThis @ixpres.com> wrote:
> >
> > >"Robert Morein" <nowhere RemoveThis @nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > >news:jNKdnb0q1KNTo8DdRVn2iQ@giganews.com...
> > >> How many stops of range do current HD systems have?
> > >> Since people quote different numbers for film, it would be
interesting
> to
> > >> have a comparison with film.
> > >>
> > >> For the purpose of HD projection, how rescuable is improperly exposed
> HD
> > >in
> > >> post?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >Who asked you? Nobody cares. Go away, you're just an aged Retarded Boy.
> > >
> > The message is on topic to both groups. It desreves an answer.
> >
> > If you have some personal grudge against the poster, keep it out of
> > here. Please.
> >
> > Robert Vervoordt, MFA
>
>
> Background: Scott Lifshine is a mental case with a "saviour complex". He
> believes it is his mission to exterminate all world culture. He created an
> interesting little VHS performance piece, and apparently has some rock
> concert tapes, to which he does not own the copyright, which he believes
> have magical qualities. He has resided in Queens, and been in and out of a
> halfway house for the mentally ill.
>
> Lifshine is very, very ill. He was picked up in Canada for a near-physical
> altercation, and has a history of altercations in NYC. He has
intermittently
> haunted this newsgroup with a one-note message: all culture is to be
> replaced with his own. Lifshine is a deep psychotic, with whom persuasion
> has no effect. He has now contracted prostate cancer.
>
>
>
I guess this post qualifies as a "half-asser." Half truth/Half Morein.

Scott
Your idea of film's on his way out, thank you>>>
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

Video tends to dig into the shadows pretty well, but the reason that one
can't 'fix' overexposed video is that once the video level hits 100%,
there's nothing but white information. Life as it is, often has more than
a 5 stop exposure lattitude. In film, the highlights gradually become
white, making it possible to time the highlights down.

Some of the most mundane highlights will overexpose in video. Practical
lamps, headlights, just to name a few.

--
Warren Yeager, SOC
www.warrenyeager.com
"Robert Morein" <nowhere.DeleteThis@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ta6dneiLq5wussPdRVn2iw@giganews.com...
>
> "LaoFuZhi" <the.real.address .is.DeleteThis@mattATtfgtvDOTcoDOTyewkay.itsaspam
> thing.not.too.hard.to.work.out> wrote in message
> news:c3l9so$rl2$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> >
> > > The message is on topic to both groups. It desreves an answer.
> > >
> > > If you have some personal grudge against the poster, keep it out of
> > > here. Please.
> > >
> > > Robert Vervoordt, MFA
> >
> > Quite so, Well said Robert.
> >
> Let's just work around it.
> If I'm guilty of provoking this guy, I apologize. It is my observation
that
> he can be kept bottled up in his own thread. If not, he'll append his
> malarkey to every thread.
>
> Back to the topic:
> In the past, I've heard that with HD, you have to shoot it right, because
> there is no latitude that can be exploited in the telecine room.
>
> A friend of mine who has some professional involvment has made the
following
> claim: that for the purpose of DIGITAL projection, he can salvage
> incorrectly exposed HD footage. His argument is similar to what is said
> about film for TV: since film has an 11 stop range, and TV a 5 stop
range,
> it is possible to make good TV footage out of film that is unacceptable
for
> a film print.
>
> There are potentially a lot of fine points contained within the above that
> could be discussed.
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

"Kaos" <wy DeleteThis @warrenyeager.com> wrote in message
news:FaG7c.1097$MB.966@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> Video tends to dig into the shadows pretty well, but the reason that one
> can't 'fix' overexposed video is that once the video level hits 100%,
> there's nothing but white information. Life as it is, often has more
than
> a 5 stop exposure lattitude. In film, the highlights gradually become
> white, making it possible to time the highlights down.
>
> Some of the most mundane highlights will overexpose in video. Practical
> lamps, headlights, just to name a few.
>
> --
> Warren Yeager, SOC
> www.warrenyeager.com

Warren,
I share your opinion, but my buddy is trying to sway me with what he
claims are better characteristics of HD. From what I've heard, HD does have
somewhat better dynamic range. But how much?
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

"Robert Morein" <nowhere.RemoveThis@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:9bmdnaVOx6fU1cLdRVn2hw@giganews.com...
>
> "Kaos" <wy.RemoveThis@warrenyeager.com> wrote in message
> news:FaG7c.1097$MB.966@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
> > Video tends to dig into the shadows pretty well, but the reason that one
> > can't 'fix' overexposed video is that once the video level hits 100%,
> > there's nothing but white information. Life as it is, often has more
> than
> > a 5 stop exposure lattitude. In film, the highlights gradually become
> > white, making it possible to time the highlights down.
> >
> > Some of the most mundane highlights will overexpose in video. Practical
> > lamps, headlights, just to name a few.
> >
> > --
> > Warren Yeager, SOC
> > www.warrenyeager.com
>
> Warren,
> I share your opinion, but my buddy is trying to sway me with what he
> claims are better characteristics of HD. From what I've heard, HD does
have
> somewhat better dynamic range. But how much?
>
>
Get off this board "MOREIN..."
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:13:34 -0800, Robert Morein wrote
(in message <ta6dneiLq5wussPdRVn2iw.DeleteThis@giganews.com>):

> In the past, I've heard that with HD, you have to shoot it right, because
> there is no latitude that can be exploited in the telecine room.
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

That's not exactly right. You can crank in more gamma and increase contrast
in color-correction if an image is somewhat blown-out -- or do the opposite
-- as long as the whites aren't completely clipped and the blacks aren't
completely crushed. So we can fix things *to a point* in tape-to-tape color
correction, particularly with the range of the daVinci 2K.





> A friend of mine who has some professional involvment has made the following
> claim: that for the purpose of DIGITAL projection, he can salvage
> incorrectly exposed HD footage. His argument is similar to what is said
> about film for TV: since film has an 11 stop range, and TV a 5 stop range,
> it is possible to make good TV footage out of film that is unacceptable for
> a film print.
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

The bottom line is that you have to expose for video the way you would a
REVERSAL stock: worry about getting the highlights right, and assume that
the black detail will be there later on. The mistake is trying to use video
as if it were negative, where you typically expose for the darkest areas of
the image, and let the whites blow out. Can't do that with video.

Keep in mind that if you later decide you want to blow out the whites for a
specific look, you can always do that later on in color-correction. That's
easy. But you can never get detail back, once it's clipped (or crushed).

I'm not convinced the contrast range of video is 5 stops, though I've been
told that several times before. The real-life range feels less to me, when I
color-correct the footage, but a lot depends on how much fill light is on the
set, and the nature of the scene.

Just keep the overall video level of the brightest object in the scene to no
more than 90-95 ire (assuming you have access to a waveform monitor), and
you'll be fine. If you don't have a scope, then do some tests, book some
time in a color-correction room, and have the colorist explain what clipping
is and how you can avoid it, and which tests yielded the best results.

--MFW
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

"Marc Wielage" <mfw.TakeThisOut@musictrax.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BC86915A00B103DFF05095B0@news-server.socal.rr.com...
> On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 16:13:34 -0800, Robert Morein wrote
[snip]
>
> I'm not convinced the contrast range of video is 5 stops, though I've been
> told that several times before. The real-life range feels less to me,
when I
> color-correct the footage, but a lot depends on how much fill light is on
the
> set, and the nature of the scene.
>
How could it be less :)?

> Just keep the overall video level of the brightest object in the scene to
no
> more than 90-95 ire (assuming you have access to a waveform monitor), and
> you'll be fine. If you don't have a scope, then do some tests, book some
> time in a color-correction room, and have the colorist explain what
clipping
> is and how you can avoid it, and which tests yielded the best results.
>
> --MFW
>
You've reminded me that sometimes a direct comparison is not possible,
because HD is more like positive stock. However, if you would venture a
comparison, what would you estimate the usable tonal range of HD as compared
to negative stock?
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 15:45:18 -0800, Robert Morein wrote
(in message <g4WdnR36SowSgP_dRVn2jw.DeleteThis@giganews.com>):

> You've reminded me that sometimes a direct comparison is not possible,
> because HD is more like positive stock. However, if you would venture a
> comparison, what would you estimate the usable tonal range of HD as compared
> to negative stock?
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<


All things being equal, I'd say the HD range is not nearly as great,
particularly in the highlights. I've been told that the EI of digital video
is close to 320 (assuming normal gain), but my gut feeling is that you have
to change the fill-to-key ratio somewhat, and add a little more fill for
video. Judging by the scopes and the way the color-correction knobs respond,
I don't feel like HD really has the 5+ stops it claims to have.

Just watch the highlight exposures, whatever you do! I hate to shoot from
the hip with fast and loose rules, but I'd say always try to UNDEREXPOSE
video slightly (say, by 1/3 to 1/2 a stop). And if you're headed for a video
or DI finish for film, OVEREXPOSE negative slightly (by at least 1/3 to 2/3
of a stop). Just make sure you've got some decent fill, especially in dark
scenes. And do tests in case you're not sure.

Hard to go wrong with that advice under most conditions.

--MFW
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ?? 

"Robert Morein" <nowhere.TakeThisOut@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:<ta6dneiLq5wussPdRVn2iw.TakeThisOut@giganews.com>...
> "LaoFuZhi" <the.real.address .is.TakeThisOut@mattATtfgtvDOTcoDOTyewkay.itsaspam
> thing.not.too.hard.to.work.out> wrote in message
> news:c3l9so$rl2$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> >
> > > The message is on topic to both groups. It desreves an answer.
> > >
> > > If you have some personal grudge against the poster, keep it out of
> > > here. Please.
> > >
> > > Robert Vervoordt, MFA
> >
> > Quite so, Well said Robert.
> >
> Let's just work around it.
> If I'm guilty of provoking this guy, I apologize.

No doubt you are. You seem to provoke people when you're not
condescending to them or patronizing them.


It is my observation that
> he can be kept bottled up in his own thread. If not, he'll append his
> malarkey to every thread.

Sounds a bit like you. How many enemies have you made so far? Lemme
see, there's that "Sylvan Morein" guy, but like you said, he's "just
some criminal." Then there's that "scott" guy, but like you said,
he's just "mentally ill." Then there's "traveler," but like you said,
he's just "some sort of bigot" with (I guess) intellectual
pretensions. But I wonder -- where do YOU fit into all of this?
Could it possibly be that YOU are the one with the attitude problem?
Could it possibly be that YOU are the one who is mentally ill and that
YOU bring out hatred and resentment in otherwise decent and
well-meaning people? Naw, of course not. You're just a good little
boy who wouldn't hurt a flea. Is that why they flushed you out of
grad school? Is it because you were such a nice guy and such a
reasonable person? "traveler" said he has a Masters Degree and did
his undergrad work at UCLA. What do you have, Robert, and where did
you matriculate? Oh, and before I forget, could you please give us
your filmography? Pretty Please with sugar on it, let us know what
film projects you've played a decisive role in bringing to fruition.
Thanks. We'll be waiting expectantly for your answer.
 >> Stay informed about: HD latitude vs. film ??