Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Testing out LEDs / Arri Tungsten lights on the 4.6k FW 3.3

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Testing out LEDs / Arri Tungsten lights on the 4.6k FW 3.3

    I've had a few people pester me about trying the Came high CRI LEDs alongside regular ARRI fresnels, so I did a little test, nothing scientific, but just trying to see what each was doing.
    https://vimeo.com/172165623
    Test footage Vimeo page: https://vimeo.com/romanalaivi

  • #2
    Aside from the differing shape of the lights - the Came LEDs seem to have pretty darn good color.
    LEDs have come a long way.
    Cameras: Blackmagic Cinema Camera, Blackmagic Pocket Camera (x2), Panasonic GH2 (x2), Sony RX100 ii, Canon 6D, Canon T2i,
    Mics: Sennheiser, AKG, Shure, Sanken, Audio-Technica, Audix
    Lights: Every Chinese clone you can imagine

    Comment


    • #3
      Tungsten does have the edge I agree. But dang even with how portable the Lowel stuff is, it's so much more of a pain. The heat is what I hate the most.

      Comment


      • #4
        Not bad, but I prefer the tungsten lights as well.

        I am just waiting for someone to key that hat and put something else in there.
        Queen-Green-575ec88ecb449__700.jpg
        Haavard Helle

        Comment


        • #5
          I watched the footage to see the difference in lighting.

          I came away from this with seeing a huge difference in the way Raw and ProRes renders her hair. I'm not sure if it's the way the camera is processing the ProRes or what, but the difference is huge. Kind of like when you take a raw photo and compare it with a jpeg. Her hair looks crushed and muddy in the ProRes clips compared to the Raw. Especially on my 30" monitor. Really curious to see why this camera is having such a hard time with the ProRes codec. The higher flavors of ProRes should be indistinguishable if not very close to the Raw. At least that's been my experience with the arri cameras.

          Comment


          • #6
            Mancave!

            That was supposed to be all caps, apparently yelling is not allowed on this forum.

            Comment


            • #7
              Any fault in the ProRes codec not matching up to Raw for hair detail, is probably down to grading. Those clips don't match very well in general. I probably could have spent more time in really trying to match them better.
              Test footage Vimeo page: https://vimeo.com/romanalaivi

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Roman View Post
                Any fault in the ProRes codec not matching up to Raw for hair detail, is probably down to grading. Those clips don't match very well in general. I probably could have spent more time in really trying to match them better.
                Well let's hope that that's the case. If you happen to upload a downloadable ProRes file of her, I'd love to check it out and see what's going on.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Roman, how unusual to see a test like this that can include sunlight in the same scene. That's a terrific comparison. The best artificial lighting example was at 2:07-2:11 and the second best to my eye was the girl dancing after that. Sun looked very good, and with a bit of strategic help from artificial lights, it's not to be overlooked. I've been thinking about sunlight more lately while I still don't have any purchased lights, so your comparison isxinspirational. It's not that I'm turning my nose up at artificial lights, it's just running out of budget!

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X