DRAGON - ITS THE REAL DEAL !!!!

[António Fagundes]

That "something" is called exposure. If you want to light or fill, or completely sculpt with light, that's your call, but some might choose to exploit the remarkable qualities in any given available light situation. These are changed days, and demand changed mindsets when it comes to such things. We fail the light far more often than the light fails us.

You say that because you can't light. Come on, be honest... :001_tongue:

If you have ever seen the difference between lighting a face on set and let the camera capture that, with how the light hits the subject, the way it spills off, the quality of the light, the angle, the diffused or non diffused light, the texture, etc.. you can never duplicate those qualities in the grade with power windows. Never. It will look like a photoshop job. Your eyes can tell when an image is 'fake' or real. Mine can.

That is why fashion and architectural photographers still use light, despite of how advanced their cameras and post production workflows have become. Because there is no substitute for letting the camera capture what's in front of it...

But to each his own. I prefer not to light in post, I can see the beauty in light be it natural or man made when it flows across a landscape or hits a face. Nothing can get even close to that by pushing exposure keys in power windows on your Resolve... You can absolutely do that BUT as a complement to what you already shot, not to what you didn't shoot.

My 2 cents...

 

[Carey Lee Coffey]

Lighting is overrated. WAY overrated.

 

[Luis Otero]

...If they can't make a better camera than RED, then all that is left is to plant seeds of doubt that they hope will sprout and grow in the brains of any customers they might otherwise lose.

I share a lot of Elsie's sentiments and thoughts. I have come to the conclusion that Red detractors have always underestimated its contribution to this technology and industry, and specially their expertise. They know their sh@# , and the big companies cannot stand that in such a small amount of time Red has surpassed them.

After Mark's video posting, I imagine a lot of "emergency management meeting" at those companies... I 100% agree on Mark's assertion that Dragon is not just better than 35mm film (that was already demonstrated with Epic-X), but that it is better than 65mm. And I have not seen the 4K rendition!

 

[António Fagundes]

Lighting is overrated. WAY overrated.

Depends on what you mean by 'lighting'... because without light you shoot a black frame... I wonder how that can be overrated...

 

[Luis Otero]

I think what is over rated is over-lighting. If you look at "old" movies vs. more recent movies DP'd by great new-crop cinematographers, you can enjoy better the more pleasant, more realistic images.

 

[Bob Gundu]

You're kidding right? You can't argue that LIGHT is not overrated. Even a bounce card bouncing sunlight is considered lighting in my book.

Lighting is overrated. WAY overrated.

 

[Bobby Farokhzad]

There is no substitute for great lighting. It's underrated if anything.

 

[Brian Boyer]

Hear, hear VerHaar.

Is there a time for constructive criticism? Yes. Is now the time to do it? Doubtfully.

Why not now?

Because now is a time for thanks and congratulations... gratitude for countless hours of hard hard work at the expense of time with family and friends... all that effort to put a massive technological and artistic achievement into our hands via an extremely generous upgrade path. And thanks to Mark for an incredible display of DOP talent and work ethic.

Because now is a time for a broad review of the capabilities of the new sensor and not a time for pixel peeping and highly scrutinized analysis. Why? Because the cake isn't done cooking yet. WAIT until Red says its ready and when objective review and analysis and comparison can happen. Mark wanted to do a stress test. Wait until others show us the best that it can give. Wait until you can actually review yourself with an R3D frame in RCX.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Which came first, the hater or the fanboy? In the case of Red, I think the haters and skeptics came first and it's been a war ever since. Fanboys rave because the haters goad and demand a response. Has Red made some mistakes along the way? Sure. But on the cusp of the release of one of the most technological advances in image capture history, can't the haters and critics just give it a break long enough to let the makers and fans savor the moment? Is the raving and backslapping and exuberance just so bothersome that it must be curbed by, "Well that highlight roll off there just doesn't quite seem right to me. Red is STILL just a scam."

My posts go largely ignored on this forum but I'm going to respond to this anyway.

"Because now is a time for a broad review of the capabilities of the new sensor and not a time for pixel peeping and highly scrutinized analysis."

If this were meant to be a celebratory thread only, maybe a stress test was not the best route to go for Dragon's coming out party.

By their very nature, stress tests invite and demand commentary on the findings...the what, where, when, why and how the stress eventually breaks the test subject. Then, there's the discussion about the difference between the technical break and its artistic possibilities and aesthetic merits beyond the break, if any.

It's unreasonable and unfair to chastise people for doing so. Since this is the thread containing the test, this is the most relevant place to post those comments.

Mark himself commented about the point at which the shadows eventual yielded noise. But, since his conclusion was that it looked like film grain, which is viewed as a positive thing, everybody is like, "Yay, Mark!"

Yet, a few unfavorable remarks are said about the highlight areas and those people are out of line?

I get where many of you are coming from and posting negative comments on the first few pages would be poor form. But, how many pages in should be enough to raise concerns (whether you agree with them or not) over the results? There should be room for disagreement, as long as it's done with respect and good intentions.

A stress test is arguably just as valuable as a beauty test to show the best the sensor can give because it exposes the limits. Both are helpful in making an informed decision.

If the camera is going to change that significantly between now and when it ships then this test may have been premature anyway. However, I'm sure many people think something akin to, "If that's the worst it's ever going to look, you've got my money." I understand that sentiment.

I defend RED all the time against inaccuracies and axe-grinders. But it gets a little weird around here sometimes and ultimately does as much to hurt RED's rep as the naysayers and haters, in my opinion.

 

[António Fagundes]

I think what is over rated is over-lighting. If you look at "old" movies vs. more recent movies DP'd by great new-crop cinematographers, you can enjoy better the more pleasant, more realistic images.

Yes I completely agree with you. But not to over light is not the same thing as not light... Look at Terrence Malick, he doesn't use any man-made light, but he completely designs all his movie around the quality of light of his locations. He only shoots at a certain hour, in a certain way, etc... precisely because light is what gives his movies their magic touch, is it not?

Or Steven Soderbergh that also shoots with no light. But he uses reflectors and shades and diffusers, precisely because he cares about how the light falls onto his actors, or how it lights his scene. He has been able to shoot that way since he started to shoot on Red. And his movies do look gorgeous, because he does have a very good eye for light...

On the other side of the spectrum you have people like Robert Richardson that 'over lights', but he still manages to make his images be relevant and modern. Look at Hugo and tell me its a poor job or that its over lit. It is technically over lit, but it doesn't come to the viewer as such. You might not appreciate that type of lighting (I don't) but its unfair to say its a bad lighting job... it's in fact a masterful job.

'Lighting is over rated' is usually supported by people that can't light, or worse even that don't have an eye for light.

 

[Luis Otero]

There is no substitute for great lighting. It's underrated if anything.

Bobby,

I agree with you 100%. The problem is that "great lightning" is very subjective.

 

[luigivaltulini]

but sometimes I think people are ready to criticize too.
Mark did a great job, he shot and showed us the results of a great sensor.
Of course there are those who say that Arri and 'better! no one has yet compared with Dragon, so you can not judge.
The cliping at the high light!?! I am still surprised when I see pictures of MArk, I am convinced that could not even raise his head so the sun was strong.
In different forums who owns an Alexa says that 'better, but nobody shows an example of the sun, as he has done Mark! why? slo also a small example.
I tried to look for something on Alexa in the sun, I found this movie curious, look up to 1.15 onwards, and this would be different from Dragon, and this would be the roll of Alexa!?!
It 's just a thought ....

1:15..
https://vimeo.com/22882566

 

[Rick Darge]

I'm a bit confused. Didn't RED promise 20+ stops of DR? But based on Mark's test, it looks like only +1 stop in the highlights and +2 in the shadows? Is the DR expected to change drastically over the next few weeks?

 

[Luis Otero]

Antonio,

As I said, this is so subjective. For Hugo it was appropriate since they were trying to recreate a time. For a modern/contemporary story, it will be really inappropriate.

 

[António Fagundes]

My posts go largely ignored on this forum but I'm going to respond to this anyway.

"Because now is a time for a broad review of the capabilities of the new sensor and not a time for pixel peeping and highly scrutinized analysis."

If this were meant to be a celebratory thread only, maybe a stress test was not the best route to go for Dragon's coming out party.

By their very nature, stress tests invite and demand commentary on the findings...the what, where, when, why and how the stress eventually breaks the test subject. Then, there's the discussion about the difference between the technical break and its artistic possibilities and aesthetic merits beyond the break, if any.

It's unreasonable and unfair to chastise people for doing so. Since this is the thread containing the test, this is the most relevant place to post those comments.

Mark himself commented about the point at which the shadows eventual yielded noise. But, since his conclusion was that it looked like film grain, which is viewed as a positive thing, everybody is like, "Yay, Mark!"

Yet, a few unfavorable remarks are said about the highlight areas and those people are out of line?

I get where many of you are coming from and posting negative comments on the first few pages would be poor form. But, how many pages in should be enough to raise concerns (whether you agree with them or not) over the results? There should be room for disagreement, as long as it's done with respect and good intentions.

A stress test is arguably just as valuable as a beauty test to show the best the sensor can give because it exposes the limits. Both are helpful in making an informed decision.

If the camera is going to change that significantly between now and when it ships then this test may have been premature anyway. However, I'm sure many people think something akin to, "If that's the worst it's ever going to look, you've got my money." I understand that sentiment.

I defend RED all the time against inaccuracies and axe-grinders. But it gets a little weird around here sometimes and ultimately does as much to hurt RED's rep as the naysayers and haters, in my opinion.

+1. I couldn't have said it better.

 

[Matt Ryan]

I'm a bit confused. Didn't RED promise 20+ stops of DR? But based on Mark's test, it looks like only +1 stop in the highlights and +2 in the shadows? Is the DR expected to change drastically over the next few weeks?

They never promised 20+. In the initial tests Jarred said 18 max (it had a total of 20 in the chart but the first step was crushed and the last was clipped so those don't count) but that different tests get different results. What they have been quoted as saying is 16.5+ stops of DR.

 

[David Battistella]

I see this thread is getting a bit thread jacked. But it's an interesting read.


The fact that Mark shot all of this available light is what is the most amazing part. I am kind of happy about that.

Why?

First, imagine loading up an 435 with some fast glass and going out into the night and shooting a bunch of stuff or city scapes and in subway stations without a single effing light? In this way it is a stress test against the standard of 35mm film. No water trucks, no HMI's hiding in the background. Available light sources at 6400ISO. That is a stress test, trying to see what the sensor sees without "help". Translation, properly cared for, lit images are going to be unreal.

That is good for us. That means when we go into those situations we can rethink our lighting plan based on our story. Maybe those shots need a couple of light panels on batteries instead of a 5k now.

Take the other extreme. Again, blinding available light, as mark describes it, where he can't even look at the reflection coming off a white car, but the camera sees what he wasn't able to resolve on set. I trust his experience on this one. The the sunset shot. I remember the last time i looked (maybe I should say squinted at someone in that situation) even with sunglasses on (ND) that is not easy DR for our human eye to handle, but the camera is seeing and rendering detail in the face. That again means when you go after that kind of shot "properly" you will have much more latitude to work with.

I appreciate everyone comments about highlight rolloff and such, but I also appreciate that this is not the tweaked version of FOUR conerstones of the RED image. it's not all about the sensor.

1. the sensor,
2. the OLFP,
3. color science
4. RCX (post processing)

All of these things need to combine for the "final image quality", which i think can only get better than what Mark has shown us, which is great for all.

David

 

[Rudi Herbert]

So, by that rationale, those who have concerns about perceived weaknesses of the sensor should wait until RED has had time to address those issues, but those who want to celebrate and proclaim it as the wonder of wonders can do so right away? Hummmm....

This is Jim and RED's house. I don't come here to be disrespectful to the hosts, I was taught better manners than that, the same way I wouldn't criticize Mark's footage after he spent two manic days all over the place doing every test he could think of. And given that Mark is in high demand, his time is probably worth more to him that ours is to most of us. So, without talking about Mark's ability and sensibility, that is, without calling this "his" footage, but rather just footage, I too see some of the issues the MX has been exhibiting for a while now (along with all of its strengths). So, for the many people who expected (whether rightly or not) the Dragon to behave completely different to the MX, given all the talk that this is a new design from the ground up, it should be understandable that they may be a little surprised at seeing some of the old behaviors popping up again. And nothing wrong with pointing that out, even if everybody understands that the sensor can get nothing but better from this point on. If those who are experienced enough, and good enough, to detect areas of problem, always keep their mouths shut out of false respect, then we do run the real risk of the people in charge never realizing that improvements are needed. So although it is indeed a little early to jump the gun, as long as it is done respectfully and constructively, there is never a wrong time to do so.

And BTW, all the real RED "haters" out there, not those who post legitimate concerns here, are already out there passing judgment and pretty much assuming Dragon is as good now as it'll ever be, so for those who believe that first tests, or early tests, are not important, you're wrong. Every publicly available image IS important, irrespective of stage of development and what not. Which is not to say that RED should be quivering in their boots, but simply that for a company that makes products that literally create images, image itself is very important. I still know people that never got past the horrible blown highlights of the first R1 M iteration, and however many samples of better footage they were shown afterwards, they never "trusted" the camera. And some of those people had/have opinions that are respected in this industry, and whether we think that is not a constructive way to look at things, it is irrelevant as it is their way. So taking first impressions lightly is a mistake., for first impressions are ALWAYS the most important ones of all.

Ketch, I wasn't speaking about you, don't worry. In fact, I wasn't speaking about anyone in particular, I don't have time to be taking names and holding grudges. In fact, I think I'm done here and let me head to some other thread where I can find something to learn, for which there is always room.

 

[luigivaltulini]

I'm a bit confused. Didn't RED promise 20+ stops of DR? But based on Mark's test, it looks like only +1 stop in the highlights and +2 in the shadows? Is the DR expected to change drastically over the next few weeks?

Rick,
Please.....
Xyla-21
The 20stops is from an engineering bench mark test. Essentially a linear image that lifts the blacks so you can see what the sensor does. That doesn’t mean all 20 will make it through. 16stops was the estimate, and is apparently about accurate.

 

[Rudi Herbert]

That tells me he doesn't need anyone helping him find the weaknesses of Dragon. Their professional camera makers will do that themselves.

Quote of the year right there, that about sums it all up. Thanks.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

I'm a bit confused. Didn't RED promise 20+ stops of DR? But based on Mark's test, it looks like only +1 stop in the highlights and +2 in the shadows? Is the DR expected to change drastically over the next few weeks?

14+ stops of DR is quite enough!!!

There is no sensor that has 20+ stops of DR on the market.

RED should focus on colour science and after 6 years finally to fix it!!!!!