Author Topic: Not RAW, but ML really helped us shoot this at night!  (Read 4556 times)

jackdelamare

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Not RAW, but ML really helped us shoot this at night!
« on: November 19, 2013, 07:18:18 PM »

Shot this music video a while back using 4x2000W lights as backlights for the forest scenes. Then we went underwater in a pool. The warehouse was fun too!

Since I got Magic Lantern I've never shot without it. I used a higher bitrate for this video thanks to ML as well as some other features that helped really push my 550D to get the best image possible.

Would love to know your thoughts :)

arrinkiiii

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1101
  • ML ADDICTED 7D
Re: Not RAW, but ML really helped us shoot this at night!
« Reply #1 on: November 19, 2013, 07:51:09 PM »

Very nice video  :D   Some part's of the video, like in the pool, got a lot of noise, it's not possible to clean that? Or is youtube?

What kind of light did you use? and for the slow motion, 550D have 60 fps or you use twixtor?

Keep the good work! ML are production very nice directors  :D

jackdelamare

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Not RAW, but ML really helped us shoot this at night!
« Reply #2 on: November 19, 2013, 10:45:24 PM »
Very nice video  :D   Some part's of the video, like in the pool, got a lot of noise, it's not possible to clean that? Or is youtube?

What kind of light did you use? and for the slow motion, 550D have 60 fps or you use twixtor?

Keep the good work! ML are production very nice directors  :D
Thank you! Glad you like it, the noise is partially due to the YouTube compression but also from using a high ISO on a 550D. I cleaned up some of it using NeatVideo's plugin which helped a lot. In the forest I tried to stay below 400 ISO to avoid noise, but you always get some.

We had 4x2000W blonde's and some 800w redheads for the forest, the pool was lit with one 2000w shining directly down like a spotlight onto the singer. We used 60fps and that was slow enough for me. :)

arturochu

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
  • Filmmaker based in Mexico City
Re: Not RAW, but ML really helped us shoot this at night!
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2013, 06:17:24 AM »
i think its a myth to expose with a lower iso to get less noise, actually i always expose to the right, even if its not raw, and if you want a darker shot just under expose it in post, that way you get way less noise even at high isos.
Chu

jose_ugs

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 243
  • 5DM3
Re: Not RAW, but ML really helped us shoot this at night!
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2013, 10:52:18 AM »
i think its a myth to expose with a lower iso to get less noise, actually i always expose to the right, even if its not raw, and if you want a darker shot just under expose it in post, that way you get way less noise even at high isos.

I am actually searching for a "proof" of that... Can you think of a test someone did to cover this? I've the feeling i've seen something in this regard... but where

arrinkiiii

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1101
  • ML ADDICTED 7D
Re: Not RAW, but ML really helped us shoot this at night!
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2013, 03:30:25 PM »
i think its a myth to expose with a lower iso to get less noise, actually i always expose to the right, even if its not raw, and if you want a darker shot just under expose it in post, that way you get way less noise even at high isos.

It make sence, less noise if you expose in post.

broch

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: Not RAW, but ML really helped us shoot this at night!
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2013, 04:46:48 PM »
I am actually searching for a "proof" of that... Can you think of a test someone did to cover this? I've the feeling i've seen something in this regard... but where

HAMSTTR
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8534003

arturochu

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 129
  • Filmmaker based in Mexico City
Re: Not RAW, but ML really helped us shoot this at night!
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2013, 06:56:34 AM »
I am actually searching for a "proof" of that... Can you think of a test someone did to cover this? I've the feeling i've seen something in this regard... but where

I'm not sure where can you find a test, but from my shooting experience where i constantly learn from my mistakes i'm 99% sure about my statement, just be careful with clipping stuff (the sun, the moon, lamps, windows) unless you have to do it in order to have your main subject well exposed.
Chu