Will Edwick

The adapters have a 13A socket with a bit of cable running to a 16A socket on the other end so slightly different to the one you linked. Would the voltage drop still be the same if we used an adapter? And would it be any more safe? Cheers

Thanks for the replies guys! The cables we've got are definitely 13 amp but not sure how thick they are. Would getting a 13 amp to 16 amp adapter and getting longer cables make things easier/safer? Cheers

I'm just wondering how safe it is to run a 2K light (with circuit breaker) off a 13 amp home circuit (UK) through a chain of 3 or 4 single 20m stingers? I know people usually recommend avoiding daisy chaining but we'd only be running that one light off that single chain. Cheers!

Great, cheers John! That was exactly what I was looking for. Thanks again!

Yeah I'm pretty sure it's Log to Rec.709 then making that look more filmic, I think I'm understanding this a lot better now and I'm going to purchase an 11 step chart to help with accuracy in the future. Thanks a lot Dave!

I'm not sure, it's a film emulation LUT that I like the look of and I'm just wanting to make sure that when I use it, it's not making mid grey darker. Or anything over mid grey for that matter Thanks a lot for the help!

So as I understand it, different camera manufacturers rate their ISO's to varying IRE values and two different cameras at the same ISO can be quite different in terms of exposure when shooting Log? So to combat this, it seems like I should compensate with my meter, so that I can stick on my LUT without converting the footage to Rec.709, and get a similar exposure between multiple cameras?

I shouldn't really have used the term 'rating' because I'm not looking to find the sweet spot of the sensor, I'm more trying to find out how to get mid-grey at mid-grey so that my LUT isn't splitting the image at 1/1.5 stops over if that makes sense? Adrian - I was shooting ProRes in 'Film' mode. I'm pretty sure my meter is calibrated but if you could explain how to test that, it would be much appreciated. Yes I'm sure I was using a grey card and yes I'm sure my lenses measure in T-stops. I also took spot and incident readings which gave me the same stop. David - I was shooting Log. If mid grey can fall lower in log than in Rec.709, would you recommend compensating for that with my meter if I don't want to convert to Rec.709 before putting on my LUT? It seems annoying that middle grey can fall anywhere other than middle grey. Also, what's the best budget 11-step grey-scale chart? Cheers for the help guys!

I ask because I recently tested the Blackmagic Ursa and my (possibly inaccurate) test revealed that the camera was shooting at around 50 ISO when set to 200 ISO. I know cameras often shoot slightly over or under what they say they do but this seemed a little too much and is making me think that my method of testing is completely wrong. Essentially, I set up the camera about 2 metres away from my grey card and put on an 85mm so that the card filled the majority of the frame. I then lit the card to a flat stop and took a reading on my meter at 200 ISO and set my stop accordingly. Once in Resolve, I pulled up the waveform and the horizontal line of my grey card fell well below the mid-grey threshold. I re-did this test until my grey card was falling on the mid-grey line in the waveform, and by that point my meter was reading about 50 ISO. For the record my lenses measure in T-stops, I wasn't using anything like a speedbooster and all the settings on my meter were the same as the camera. To me this seems like a sensible way to test that sort of thing but I could be totally wrong and if I am, does anyone have a better/more accurate way of testing this?