D Log M (with Auto ISO) Superior to D Log

[GadgetGuy]

Yes, thank you for the that but I was hoping to hear from the author of that YT video or his supporters/admirers on this forum to offer some explanation how this suppose to improve dynamic range and provide other benefits to video quality. But only silence so far from that end..

I suspect, based upon one of the comments on his YT video, that he may have performed the testing incorrectly, and come to a false conclusion. He's still enjoying the views and doesn’t want to admit his mistake.

 

[Filmarik]

I suspect, based upon one of the comments on his YT video, that he may have performed the testing incorrectly, and come to a false conclusion. He's still enjoying the views and doesn’t want to admit his mistake.

Your assessment might be right on the money

 

[GadgetGuy]

Your assessment might be right on the money

Here is comment I was referring to:

 

[Filmarik]

Here is comment I was referring to:

View attachment 183918

Aah well..Yet another click bite youtuber without substance..

 

[GadgetGuy]

Aah well..Yet another click bite youtuber without substance..

So it would now seem!

 

[Wave Shot Media]

Yes, thank you for the that but I was hoping to hear from the author of that YT video or his supporters/admirers on this forum to offer some explanation how this suppose to improve dynamic range and provide other benefits to video quality. But only silence so far from that end..

Did you comment or DM them on the video?I don’t think the author of that video lives in this chat.

 

[Wave Shot Media]

If you lock exposure, there is no benefit to having previously selected Auto ISO, other than deciding which ISO to use throughout. You might as well have selected any single manual ISO to start, which is exactly what you have done, when you lock exposure after having chosen Auto ISO.

My thought was more that you can have a more precise ISO increment selection. Otherwise you are stuck with selecting an iso manually at around 100 and only being able to go up to 200 or 400 in larger increments. The auto feature will go in between. But either way, unless we can reproduce the results on the video I think to each their own, we call the shots and decide what we think it’s best for our case. Nobody is wrong in the art of filmmaking. It’s just a choice we get to make.

 

[Filmarik]

My thought was more that you can have a more precise ISO increment selection. Otherwise you are stuck with selecting an iso manually at around 100 and only being able to go up to 200 or 400 in larger increments. The auto feature will go in between. But either way, unless we can reproduce the results on the video I think to each their own, we call the shots and decide what we think it’s best for our case. Nobody is wrong in the art of filmmaking. It’s just a choice we get to make.

I agree but if someone is making claims to only get clicks on his YT channel he needs to be called out.
M4P has 1/3 EV increments in Manual mode. While not as gradual as 10 point increments in Auto Mode better than full stops. But even 1/3 is plenty sufficient to achieve accurate exposure. I was more concerned (and therefore responded here) about his claim of above 17 EV of dynamic range. Arri Alexa has 17 and that is one of best cine cameras in the world! His methodology was obviously flawed and some members here seem to have fallen for this click bite hence my response and my questioning of his claim.

 

[akdrone]

I agree but if someone is making claims to only get clicks on his YT channel he needs to be called out.
M4P has 1/3 EV increments in Manual mode. While not as gradual as 10 point increments in Auto Mode better than full stops. But even 1/3 is plenty sufficient to achieve accurate exposure. I was more concerned (and therefore responded here) about his claim of above 17 EV of dynamic range. Arri Alexa has 17 and that is one of best cine cameras in the world! His methodology was obviously flawed and some members here seem to have fallen for this click bite hence my response and my questioning of his claim.

What makes you think methodology is flawed? Just because you don’t believe the results?

 

[Filmarik]

What makes you think methodology is flawed? Just because you don’t believe the results?

Because of their own admission about their methodology at around 9min time in the video. Quote: "This could be correct or widely incorrect".
In other words believe what you want to believe. My alarm bell usually rings loudly when I hear a claim that a prosummer camera has greater dynamic range than the best cine cameras in the world such as Arri or Red...

 

[akdrone]

Because of their own admission about their methodology at around 9min time in the video. Quote: "This could be correct or widely incorrect".
In other words believe what you want to believe. My alarm bell usually rings loudly when I hear a claim that a prosummer camera has greater dynamic range than the best cine cameras in the world such as Arri or Red...

I live in North Pole so I prefer to believe...LOL

 

[Filmarik]

I live in North Pole so I prefer to believe...LOL

Can not argue with that !!

 

[Wordenskjold]

That video confuses Dual Native Fusion, which works in almost all modes, with Dynamic Range Expansion. This is in their FAQ: https://www.dji.com/ch/mavic-4-pro/faq. It is correct that DRE only works for dlogm (and auto ISO), probably because dlog is for the "clean" image.

It is really not a secret. I was very confused with their video and added this as a comment, but I think it got deleted.

Has anyone tested if exposure locking will disable the dynamic Range Expansion? Right now I'm leaning towards only using dlogm for very low light conditions, but I'm not a fan of auto ISO.

 

[akdrone]

That video confuses Dual Native Fusion, which works in almost all modes, with Dynamic Range Expansion. This is in their FAQ: https://www.dji.com/ch/mavic-4-pro/faq. It is correct that DRE only works for dlogm (and auto ISO), probably because dlog is for the "clean" image.

It is really not a secret. I was very confused with their video and added this as a comment, but I think it got deleted.

Has anyone tested if exposure locking will disable the dynamic Range Expansion? Right now I'm leaning towards only using dlogm for very low light conditions, but I'm not a fan of auto ISO.

I use the tele lenses a lot including those on my Mavic 3 and Mavic 3 Pro so using Dlog M makes it very easy to ensure similar color grading but if I was only shooting with my Mav 4 I would probably shoot Dlog if I thought Auto ISO was not appropriate which to me means video with changing lighting that would look odd when the camera does it's own thing moving from one exposure to another. In traditional videography one would simply shoot two scenes, exposing them appropriately. If you do this with DLog M you cure the changing ISO. No free lunch .

 

[Wordenskjold]

I use the tele lenses a lot including those on my Mavic 3 and Mavic 3 Pro so using Dlog M makes it very easy to ensure similar color grading but if I was only shooting with my Mav 4 I would probably shoot Dlog if I thought Auto ISO was not appropriate which to me means video with changing lighting that would look odd when the camera does it's own thing moving from one exposure to another. In traditional videography one would simply shoot two scenes, exposing them appropriately. If you do this with DLog M you cure the changing ISO. No free lunch .

So if you are doing an orbit shot for example, you would still shoot manually in dlog? That is what I'm leaning towards. I still need to test dlogm with auto ISO in low light where I think the range expansion might be useful - but I would probably still exposure lock.

 

[akdrone]

So if you are doing an orbit shot for example, you would still shoot manually in dlog? That is what I'm leaning towards. I still need to test dlogm with auto ISO in low light where I think the range expansion might be useful - but I would probably still exposure lock.

I rarely do video orbit shots (meaning spin the camera around 360 degrees?) because going at a nice reasonable panning speed that the viewer would enjoy (defined by me ) takes too long to complete the orbit and would be too much for any video I do and honestly I can't recall anyone putting in a full 360 turn of the video camera. If, by orbit you mean a pan of some amount to left or right, then yeah...Pro (manual) Dlog or DlogM mode for sure. If you are shooting with the sun in back of you and not panning too far it won't make much difference but if you shoot that Auto and the next pan includes light/dark areas you're screwed so I am almost always shooting video in Pro (manual) mode. Stills too. A video exception might be starting low, shooting trees in shadow and raising up to a landscape when you want the dark trees to be at a reasonable exposure and later, the landscape a reasonable exposure. That can only be done shooting Auto so my tactic on that kind of thing is to pan up (reveal) slowly so the transition of exposure is slow. I can raise the speed later in post. DJI drones shoot photographic panos including 360 orbits in jpg so Dlog doen't apply but when considering that scenario if you use Auto when you pan and get anywhere near the sun the earth turns too dark or almost black but in virtually ever case I want to earth to remain at the same exposure and the heck with the sky and clouds. Here are two examples of Auto and Pro done with my Mavic 3 Pro (or Mav4?) with the DJI fly app creating a 360 pano automatically. These will show up on Facebook or Google etc as 360 panos. . The darker sky one is Auto. Note that the one with the darker sky was done closer to the lake so one would expect that the darker area of the lake would have caused the over all exposure to be lighter but the sun was so much brighter that the over all image shot in the direction of the sun was stopped in down making the lake almost black and much of the ground darker. Both show significant variations in tone in the sky but the auto exposure is even worse. Here are both image, with the first large dark lake in front shot auto, the second 360 shot on Pro (manual) mode. The third is the real solution to the sky problem..photoshop in a new sky! Of course the fake sky does not work as a real 360 pano as the sky breaks for lack of continuity at what should have been the stitching line but it looks good as a flat image. The forth image is for somebody that might want the darker sky and that super nice sun with the lighter foreground. That was done by layering both images in Photoshop and masking out the sky from the manually exposed images. It still retains its' 360 image ability. These images work as still images better than most flat panos . Lastly, the fifth image is what I might create for a show or maybe for sale, evening out the sky in Photoshop.
I have admittedly gone off script a bit here. I just enjoy drones, photography and videography as well as the challenge of post production. So there. More than you wanted to know.

 

[Wordenskjold]

Thank you for such a useful reply! I'm an absolute beginner, but I really just enjoy every process along the way, from flying to compositions and color grading.

But GOD it is a minefield, and I don't have a lot of the basic camera or color knowledge, so this is very useful to me!