IR Problem Costs Thousands

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

asafb

Active member
Hello All,
As most of you I love the EX series of Sony cameras. Their quality is outstanding. However, before I rented them out I had no idea they had a defect when it comes to filming indoors, where the horrible IR known issue comes about, producing brown maroon images on my subject's tuxedo.

Now I am faced with over 90 minutes of footage to color correct it, using an excellent 8/4-point color corrector from CGM, which eliminates the problem beautifully; however, it is a painful process and will probably take me over 50 hours to complete.

The client is in no way going to pay for this as his position is that this is a camera defect and why should he pay me to fix it. The video rental company was not aware of this defect either.

I have forwarded my images to Sony and the engineers are working on it. I understand there is a new Tiffen IR absoprtion filter which works on 4x4 matteboxes to solve it. But this is already too late as my footage is unusable for a commercial DVd release product unless I fix it.

The bottom line? Who is goign to pay for my 50 hours? So far no one, and this is an issue Sony knew and did nothing to fix. As a videographer who makes money from filming concerts in concert halls, this problem wil always happen to me.

I really would love to know all your thoughts about this. The fact that I have to eat 50 hours is just insane just because o a manufacture problem.

And I would love to konw your suggestions; again Sony is now "aware" of this issue :)
 
nobody is going to pay you for those 50 hours that you are going to put in, its not the clients foult, its not your foult and well its sony's foult, good luck trying to tell sony to pay you for hours of color correction, myself, I would cut my losses, color correct the footage and use a different camera to make sure it never ever happens again, everytime I shoot a new camera say a redone or the first time I shot with the hmc150, I did plenty of tests to avoid the problem that you are having now, its always better to know beforehand what the camera strenghts are and where its weak, just my thoughts
 
lol yeah..

lol yeah..

..tell me about it, i know :) ... maybe they'll give me a $1,000 credit towards an ex1 haha :)
 
If I understand correctly, it's not really just an EX1 problem, but many cameras have this issue. A test with various cameras, and how filters work to help, is right here: http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/schneider_ir_filter_tests/ The EX1 seems to be especially bad with the IR problem, but it's not alone.

Since you are just renting, and not buying, I can see why you didn't realize the problem existed. I wouldn't research a camera as much for merely renting it either. It would've been nice if the rental house asked what you were filming and let you know of any weaknesses to watch for, or also rent the IR filter that easily corrects the problem. But I'm not sure it's a "defect" as much as a characteristic, like rolling shutter with flashes, so I can see your difficulty in finding someone to take the responsibility for the expense to color correct. Best of luck to you.
 
I still see it as a defect. Under a number of standard shooting environments the camera does not capture accurate colours within the standard colour range, the cause is not really relevant. It is meant to have 3 sensors to provide accurate colour rendition. I have seen this problem have serious results in:

1: Stage lighting such as dance concerts
2: Indoor under both mixed and incandecent lighting
3: Full Sun outdoors.

I just put my camera in for a service while still in warranty to address battery drain, letters wearing off etc but I also provided a sample of printed stills from frames showing the problem and requesting it be 'fixed'! I am not holding my breath for some majical fix but the more we shout out about this issue the more likely they are to faddress it in future models which at least helps us in the long term.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Guy.

I don't expect a fix from Sony. Pretty sure they would have known this all along, but they are giving us the prevelidge of buying this camera, so they have a way out in their minds.

The hope comes from third party vendors who will create a filter that address' the camera's unqiue limitation, which can take a lot of time.

I see this as one of the many tradeoffs with the HD cameras released over the last five years.

What makes me mad is that the manufacturers will break through barriers that have been solid through the years like proper color, noise levels and the ablilty to have a camera for all purposes.

Some areas are better while other areas get worse.

The three areas mentioned by Guy are pretty much where we all shoot.

Now why would you knowingly release a pro camera that can not render black properly under tungsten light?

Do you think nobody would notice?
 
Am I reading this article correctly?

http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/awilt/story/schneider_ir_filter_tests/

Taken from the linked article:

"We have noticed that many cameras see that shirt as a reddish-brown, especially when ND filters are used (as they were in the outdoor shots in the three-camera comparison, to get all the lenses opened to T2.8).:

"Quick off-the-monitor shots from both the RED and a Varicam that Videofax’s Jim Rolin set up for us confirmed that (a) the RED saw Tim’s shirt as blue while the Varicam (like other video cameras) saw it as being reddish-purple, and (b) the RED’s monitor output exaggerated the green-magenta axis."


"The Varicam reacted pretty the same way as the EX1 (as did both the HVX200 and the F23 in previous tests), seeing Tim’s shirt as red/purple/brown. The 486 filter tamed the Varicam’s color, making the shirt neutral, just as effectively as it did on the EX1."
 
Barry posts an IR test on the 300 and all hell breaks loose about what was known over a year ago on the EX if you did your homework.

Cameras ten times the price have this issue. Mostly indoors under tungsten lighting for black or dark blue clothes.

Barry didn't stack nd's on the 300. Maybe it will occur then. Who knows and who cares. Its solvable with a filter and it gives crash protection for the EX lens. Most of us have a filter for lens protection on our cameras. You'd put something on the 300 to protect the lens right? Well why not an IR filter. It'll do two jobs for you.
Instead of waiting for Sony to fix it, here, get this and get over it:

http://www.adorama.com/BW77UVIRW.html

No light loss. And please don't bring up the green edged wide angle issues with this filter. Most people have been using it without issue.
 
Sorry mico but that filter nor any other currently available solves this issue because there is a green edge issue in some circumstances, I've see the images to prove it. I am not about to spend that money on a filter at the moment that could introduce other issues when I know manufactures are working on better ones that will solve the problem. If there wasn't an issue with these filters they wouldn't be working on ones without problems.

If nothing comes out by the end of the year (concert & wedding season here) I will have to compromise and get one but until then I will wait anxiously for one to come out that does the job properly.

Too bad if you want to use a wide angle lens though...
 
What amazes me is this issue is not new. Its been around longer than the EX1 has been around. What were all those other people doing with this issue?

Is this as bad as when I bought the worst camera I ever bought the HVX200? Lousy resolution, short record times, crappy lcd, noisy as hell, an insult of a lens, workarounds just to make it usable. It never ended with that cam. It took years for Panasonic to come out with a fix for just some of those issues. And it meant buying a whole new camera.

The IR issue is nowhere near those problems and yet myself and others made do with those limitations until I couldn't take it any more.

The HVX200 I had to sell.

They've been making IR filters for a longer time than the EX has been around because there are IR problems sometimes but not all times. This is a minor annoyance and only for those that see the green. Many others don't see or care about it. And if its there its removable.
 
Last edited:
Mico, it seems you are taking a minimizing approach to this.

I for one do not want to buy a camera and have to deal with improper color just as you did not like dealing with your HVX-200.

As a community we have all learned or dealt with this type of situation and we don't want any part of it.

$6,000 to "make do" is not in my DNA.

That filter you mentioned is not the filter that is recommended right now as the best solution, the 486 model is what Schneider is pointing people to.

But these filters are for for still cameras and when they do come out with a different one, that's $250 down the drain.

About filters, I don't want any type of filter in front of my camera unless I am in a high impact shooting situation. Unless you pay big bucks, a filter is going to take away some sharpness in your image. This shows up with more resolution and at 1080p, we are getting more resolution.

This reminds me of the rolling shutter issues. If you don't care about it, then don't care about it. But don't try to tell me I should not care about it...
 
Bassman you realize that the EX cameras are the only ones I've ever owned where I have to turn detail off or way down? Take away sharpness? Unbelievable.

The 486 is the filter PEOPLE have tested as the best solution so far. People ahve spent considerable time with all types of filters from different companies. At full wide it may or may not give slight green fringing. This can be removed very easily.

No one told you not to care, thats the chip on your shoulder telling you that. Just the facts of the situation as we know them today.

Bringing up the rolling shutter issue to prove to yourself about my "minimizing approach" shows you're reaching and not the right person for this this cam. You should look elsewhere for something that fits your needs. But I imagine that for a person like you no camera will be issue free. And by the way heres another minimizing approach: No camera is issue free. Bet that freaks you out huh? Quick put on the full body condom.
 
Last edited:
mico said:
Bassman you realize that the EX cameras are the only ones I've ever owned where I have to turn detail off or way down? Take away sharpness? Unbelievable.
Click to expand...

Actually my comments are based upon DSLR usage with filters. They resolve a lot more resolution than video cameras and a less than high end filter does affect detail.

I don't want any ill feelings and argument, but it seems you need to defend this camera. I have seen its image and compared it to other cameras, but I need to justify it for my workflow.

Its just a camera. I have cameras that are pretty much defect free. They produce a great image, and can be used in any situation. But they are 4:3 SD and are going out.

Your response sounds as if I am not worth of an EX-1 because I am doubting its greatness.

Once again, it is just a camera. A better model will be out in a year or two and Sony or whoever will be telling us all that This is the one you need to own.
 
I would also like to suggest people try the Cinema matrix setting in picture profiles

Most picture profile recommendations floating around here and elsewhere have mostly all had High Sat as the matrix setting. Most people are following this recommendation.

I have found from my limited tests ( 5 different jackets ,sweaters, and shirts that were all black at different color temp - 2700- 3100K) that if you use the Cinema Matrix setting it helps eliminate the problem greatly. I did the same in late day ambient daylight and found no color issues.

By the way if it matters to anyone the BBC's Ex1 and EX3 pdf document recommends Standard or Cinema for matrix setting. With the most accurate color rendering obtained by using Standard matrix and standard gamma curve.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/whp/whp034-add30.shtml
 
Last edited:
That's interesting? My post regarding objectivity in reviewing products has been deleted.

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Standard – the camera’s default color matrix.
High SAT – boosts all colors by about 15%-20%.
FL Light – boosts the red-cyan axis by 15%.
Cinema – shrinks the red-cyan axis by 20%. [/FONT]
 
Last edited:
Did I misunderstand the PVC article? As I understood it, there is a filter that corrects the problem, without the green cast on the outer edges.

Anomalous reflectance is nothing new. Film has problems. Video has its own versions. Have you ever seen purple presented correctly, either on film or video?

Pete
 
Thanks for your comments

Thanks for your comments

Hello all,

Thanks very much for all your comments, but I have to agree with GuyB. This is a defect. PERIOD. Sony is responsible, and shame on them for not fixing this problem with the EX3, their second generation camera. I've been shooting indoor concerts for over 10 years, I've owned tons of Panasonic and Sony standard-def 3CCD cameras, big and small and never in my 10 year shooting experience have I *ever* encountered this IR problem. Frankly, reducing the reds as you recommended mico "Eliminates" the problem - well i have to try it, but it's no magic that it will decrease other "proper" reds and that is not a great solution either, I want bright and saturated colors which Sony is known for, I'm not shooting a movie, this is a 1080i LIVE-look recording.

I also am not crazy about having to put some filter over a lens. I've read all the articles to death, i don't want a filter that has green problems, or one that improves it -- I want to shoot in bright saturated colors and I want the camera to produce CORRECT COLORS.

The bottom line this is a defect, admit or not, and GuyB i'm on your side here. If anyone thinks a possible class-action lawsuit against Sony would help, let me know. My jist is that I want Sony to take my 90-minute master and fix the colors using their equipment, I really could care less about getting money, I just don't feel I'm responsibel to sit here for 50 hours for free to fix someone else's problem, especially when I wasn't made aware of it.

I think I have a good case - THOUSANDS of people who own this camera have spent lots of their *own* time to try to address this issue, and Sony has obviously cared less about our interests. With regards to cameras costing 10x, I would hope the manufacturers understand that this is a serious issue and will issue some kind of a filter that PROPERLY FIXES THE PROBLEM.

I'm very serious in this matter - I have to spend 50 to possibly MORE hours to color correct this using a 4-point color corrector, and as I said before my client is in no position to pay me.

With regards about doing homework, I research this camera to death, and in nothing of the manual or from Sony is there a WARNING about possible INACCURATE COLORS shooting in SPECIFIC conditions - I had no idea about this problem and neither my video rental company.

AB
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top