Komodo is Officially On Sale

[James0b57]

Was thinking about contrast and the appearance of "sharpness", so I took a screen shot from some Komodo footage on YouTube, one that had a little bit of a hard edge look to it, but otherwise good lighting on a person with generally good skin.

I don't know that is worth trying to fix the lighting in post, but this is less about the grade and more about how contrast and light film grain can improve the smoothness of skin. These are from the same screen shot, one had a little contrast added, and the other had the midtone contrast altered towards smooth. However both maintain similar exposure and have similar black points, I hope. All adjustments were made with contrast curves, saturation/hue, and film grain, there was nothing else used. No power windows, and no blur or noise reduction or anything like that. .

Top image is a little more similar to the original image. The lower one is the one I effected:


Only problem, is to get the midtones like that, the camera has to have a bit more DR, otherwise going to clipping is awkward. Or have to dig into the shadows and possibly chroma noise, which also kind of changes the exposure. But ETTL can help, just doesn't always provide the best exposure.

Lower DR cameras always have somewhat compromised or "video" midtones, or ugly highlights. Shoot within the DR of the camera and all is good. A lower DR camera with a soft highlight roll off is stealing contrast from somewhere.

Anyway, this was just a technical exercise, and isn't so much about what looks better. Just how midtone contrast effects "sharpness" and looking too revealing. These were screenshot from a 1080p YouTube video.


EDIT - just want to reiterate, this is not a grading tutorial, but simply showing how the blunt use of contrast and noise can smooth out roughness, sharpness, ...or... add sharpness and roughness, and texture. There are many more specialized tools for grading that can be utilized to get good results, and my example image above is not to showcase grading technique specific to Davinci Resolve or any other program. It is purely an exercise to highlight the effect of contrast on the appearance of texture and sharpness.

[James0b57]

Anyways, will be cool to see how people use the Komodo. Already some incredible things like FPV drone shots etc, and a lot of good stuff. And to be honest, Jason Momoa shot some of the best looking Komodo footage so far.

[Grug]

Here we are seeing, that the Fx6 and C300III (and therefor perhaps the Canon C70) are keeping up with the Komodo in DR, and not far behind in colour.
-4 stops (under exposed)
Attachment 141452
+4 stops (over exposed)
Attachment 141453
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z-xB5dnIfk

From this test, it could be argued that the Fx6 and C70 have more dynamic range than the Komodo.... and that means they are up there with the Dragon and Helium as well.

Of course, the web streaming hides a lot of the nuance in cameras, so it may be that there is more going on there, and to me it shows that the Komodo is at least doing really well where it matters most to cinema shooters. ...But it isn't the giant gap in image quality that gave Red its reputation back in the day.

So, Red has to tighten up their over all quality to stay relevant in the High end, especially with Sony now being a serious contender. And Red has no lower end to go to, because as of 2020, the low end is starting to look very good and very competitive. Is that nebulas owner op, music video world big enough? It might be. They better hurry up before Chinese cameras catch up.

I wouldn't read too much into those tests, as half of the cameras haven't been exposed correctly. Both the Canon and the Komodo appear to be pretty much a full stop underexposed (according to 18% grey on that colour chart). So you need to give the Canon and the Red both a stop less in the highlights, and a stop more in the shadows, than the Sony's are showing at each comparison point.

[James0b57]

I wouldn't read too much into those tests, as half of the cameras haven't been exposed correctly. Both the Canon and the Komodo appear to be pretty much a full stop underexposed (according to 18% grey on that colour chart). So you need to give the Canon and the Red both a stop less in the highlights, and a stop more in the shadows, than the Sony's are showing at each comparison point.

Interesting. Which chart of the cameras is showing a stop difference in exposure? I'm seeing them as fairly similar.

8A05D9B8-A724-43FB-93E1-DE402D4C9E94.jpg


On the recovered frames, things are likely to get wonky, as there is no certainty what standards they are using to pull back the exposure. So, I wouldn't look at the charts too hard on the 4 or 5 stops under over, except to see noise and colour shift.

[combatentropy]

Top image is a little more similar to the original image. The lower one is the one I effected

Yeah, I like the bottom one more. Less harsh, and I guess I still like a little film grain ;)

[James0b57]

Yeah, I like the bottom one more. Less harsh, and I guess I still like a little film grain ;)

Appreciate you saying that! I wasn't going for the best grad in the world (with an YouTube screenshot), but I wasn't going for the worst grade either. =)

Reducing shine on a forehead with curves is not the most natural looking grade, hence the crop. Digital cameras tend to have a steep angle in contrast, and that can generally be seen in the shadows under the eyes and possibly brow, depending on the bone structure. One of the things a liked about the F35, was that I didn't really have to adjust that aspect of its tone curve. Just had it right out the gate. Alexa does too. Red has improved with its contrast and roll off settings, but those sill feel a little generic and not as purpose built.

[Grug]

EDIT: Ignore all this below, youtube's shading of the frame when paused has skewed the results (debunk posted below)

Interesting. Which chart of the cameras is showing a stop difference in exposure? I'm seeing them as fairly similar.

On the recovered frames, things are likely to get wonky, as there is no certainty what standards they are using to pull back the exposure. So, I wouldn't look at the charts too hard on the 4 or 5 stops under over, except to see noise and colour shift.

The neutral (0 EV) examples are the only ones it makes sense to measure. I used the 0 EV overexposure frame as the higher contrast with the background makes things easier to judge.

If we drop Davinci's new False Colour tool on top of the frame we get this:

False Colour 0 EV_1.8.2.jpg

Middle grey on the Sonys is coming in pretty much spot on at 50 IRE (both have their 18% grey chip sitting at the top edge of pink). And middle grey on the Canon is sitting just inside the green, with Komodo just underneath it (with green being a stop under pink).

If we factor in correct exposures across all four cameras (for the sake of comparison), I think the ultimate conclusion is basically just that they're all VERY similar in overall dynamic range. With the only real standout being the C300iii's incredible handling of underexposure (thanks to it's DGO sensor).

[James0b57]

The neutral (0 EV) examples are the only ones it makes sense to measure. I used the 0 EV overexposure frame as the higher contrast with the background makes things easier to judge.

If we drop Davinci's new False Colour tool on top of the frame we get this:

False Colour 0 EV_1.8.2.jpg

Middle grey on the Sonys is coming in pretty much spot on at 50 IRE (both have their 18% grey chip sitting at the top edge of pink). And middle grey on the Canon is sitting just inside the green, with Komodo just underneath it (with green being a stop under pink).

If we factor in correct exposures across all four cameras (for the sake of comparison), I think the ultimate conclusion is basically just that they're all VERY similar in overall dynamic range. With the only real standout being the C300iii's incredible handling of underexposure (thanks to it's DGO sensor).

Appreciate the follow up.
Yeah, we're on the same page.

Don't worry, my comment about the Red's highlights was not a slight on the Sony, it was only to point out that the Komodo might not be that far behind the Fx6 in DR. (remains to be seen how well the Komodo noise cleans up).

[LochnessDigital]

The neutral (0 EV) examples are the only ones it makes sense to measure. I used the 0 EV overexposure frame as the higher contrast with the background makes things easier to judge.

If we drop Davinci's new False Colour tool on top of the frame we get this:

False Colour 0 EV_1.8.2.jpg

Middle grey on the Sonys is coming in pretty much spot on at 50 IRE (both have their 18% grey chip sitting at the top edge of pink). And middle grey on the Canon is sitting just inside the green, with Komodo just underneath it (with green being a stop under pink).

If we factor in correct exposures across all four cameras (for the sake of comparison), I think the ultimate conclusion is basically just that they're all VERY similar in overall dynamic range. With the only real standout being the C300iii's incredible handling of underexposure (thanks to it's DGO sensor).

Keep in mind that if you're grabbing a screenshot while paused, YouTube adds a grey gradient on the bottom portion of the frame.

With scrub bar and gradient:


Without scrub bar and gradient:


Komodo is still under by bit but the C300 matches up damn near perfectly now.

Grey chips isolated against 50% grey:


Scopes of isolated chips:

[James0b57]

Keep in mind that if you're grabbing a screenshot while paused, YouTube adds a grey gradient on the bottom portion of the frame.

Gosh, I hate that dimming on almost every streaming player in existence. I pause shots a lot to analyze composition and imaging, but that darkening at pause pops up everytime!



I am noticing Grug cropped off the lower portion of his screen shot, so it is possible he grabbed a paused image. Mine were not paused. But at the end of the day, Grug is not wrong, we can't read too much into images and tests from YouTube. I know a friend with a Komodo that loves the image... but once it is uploaded to YouTube, it loses all that lush quality.

.... which goes back to my original point, if we are all uploading to streaming, how different are all these cameras anymore? So, they should be looked at from a function standpoint, and less of an image quality standpoint these days. Gemini, Venice, Monstro, and our fair child Arri all are noticeably better image quality, but Komodo, Fx6, C70 are all looking really close. Getting a Komodo makes sense for me, because I have high frame rate options with the Gemini, and usable sensitivity for low light scenes (the drop in DR in LL mode still puts the Gemini and Venice in the Komodo Fx6 neighborhood of DR). -- sorry, I am meandering....

The good thing, is if no cameras are going to break the Arri Alexa DR ceiling, and they're all just huddling around that 13stops DR. Then we can choose cameras more based on Colour science and Functionality. -- don't know why I capitalized those words.

Getting 10bit log internal on the Sony and Canon is amazing. They're features are amazing! I think they make a better A-cam than the Komodo. Mainly because everything gets compressed to hell on the web, so the things like internal ND and better ISO performance, and so on and so forth feel like those cameras would "get more keepers" than the Komodo alone.

However, for me, I'd almost definitely get a Komodo. But I see it as an auxiliary camera for unique shots and angles. Maybe a bcam, if I ever get into Multicam work. ( I hope never, but understand the economics of it all).


---I started emailing in-between all of this and don't have the faintest clue what I was getting at.... posting anyway.