DRAGON - ITS THE REAL DEAL !!!!

[Martin Stevens]

Great post Evin!

 

[Mike Garrick]

Thankyou Evin interesting . I was sitting on the fence wether to put some low cons in the filter kit ....I've no excuse now not to do it.

 

[Rick Darge]

Can someone reference where it states the Alexa is using a low con filter? I hear this a lot but the only info on google points to this information coming from Reduser

 

[Scott Crawley]

Can someone reference where it states the Alexa is using a low con filter? I hear this a lot but the only info on google points to this information coming from Reduser

I'm not sure I have read that Rick. The remarks I remember reading talk about roll off and curves, but not necessarily a filter. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think I read some of these kinds of comments coming directly from Deakins as well as other Alexa affectionados.

 

[Rick Darge]

Hmm.. Evin just mentioned it but I've heard it in the past.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Hmm.. Evin just mentioned it but I've heard it in the past.

But Evin was saying that a lo-con on the Epic would make the Epic behave more like Alexa, not that Alexa uses a lo-con. Did I misunderstand?

Edit: Maybe I did

I have spent alot of time with Alexa footage lately and I really think that what most people confuse with DR is actually the soft rolloff of the halation filter.

Funny, I always thought it was a gamma curve/color science (read software) thing.

 

[Zeb B]

I'm planning on upgrading to Dragon but am a bit confused by the specs still. I understood it to be 18+ stops of DR (link) but now it seems more in the 15-16 range. Is there an updated official spec sheet for Dragon anywhere? Also puzzled by the highlight clipping in some of Mark's car shots. They didn't seem difficult exposure ranges to capture with any camera. Would like to see some beauty shots showing romantic skin tones. Seen plenty of cool skin tones from Epic.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?92158-Enter-the-Dragon&p=1129439&viewfull=1#post1129439

 

[Evin Grant]

I'm not an engineer but it seems silly to me to do something in the electronics that is so easily achieved in the optical path. My information comes from the techs at Panavison I've worked with and from conversations with Arri representatives. I don't think they are keen to let their sauce out of the bottle but it's not hard to figure out, Arri has been working with and studying film emulsions for decades, it's pretty obvious they designed their low pass filter pack to emulate the slight halation that happens on film when light from bright point sources bounce back into the film. That's why film is designed with anti-halation layer. I'm not critical of the Alexa for this, it's a nice touch, one that I often emulate on my Epic.

 

[Mark Toia]

Well, when you use DPX or Prores for processing, yes DPX is easier to use, as I pointed pointed out in my post, that it is uncompressed and therefore doesn't require the decompression. But in the actual use with modern grading or editing systems with fast enough drives, that are capable of throughput of DPX size data, both files types behave exactly the same, when used for grading or editing. Just push plaMarks point was an exact opposite. He is convinced, that Prores is faster to use

For what I needed to do in a very short amount of time... Yes Prores to edit with was quicker than trying to edit uncompressed DPX.

Come on guys. Your all assuming , I never said prores was better than DPX.

 

[Clovis Ong]

Fantastic footage Mark! thanks for sharing!

 

[Mike P.]

I think Toia nailed it. Putting in the metered f-stops of the highs and lows was a brilliant touch (who's idea was that?) Hey Mark, was 17:1 the lowest ratio at 6k/100fps? Also, did you try any 3:1 at ISO6400 or 12800? If so, was it delicious?

Any word on when we'll be able to get a RCX build and a .r3d? It's time to dig into to these images and see what's in there.

 

[Chase M. Wrenn]

Hmm...loved the footage, but I'd like to pose a question to Mark, and Jim and Jarred if they'd be so inclined to answer as well.

As you all have been able to experience the Dragon, and coming from someone who has a Scarlet-X and, if lucky enough, may only be able to afford one upgrade, would you recommend Epix-X or Scarlet Dragon? I was originally leaning towards Epic-X for all its benefits plus the future upgrade path, but now with the likelihood of not being able to upgrade further to Epic-Dragon, do you think the benefits of the Scarlet-Dragon outweigh those of Epic-X? I'd just like to know your personal opinions if you had to choose...

Thanks!

 

[Matt Ryan]

Can someone reference where it states the Alexa is using a low con filter? I hear this a lot but the only info on google points to this information coming from Reduser

Hmm.. Evin just mentioned it but I've heard it in the past.

http://nofilmschool.com/2012/09/roger-deakins-talking-about-the-arri-alexa-at-ibc/

Roger Deakins mentions in an interview that he believes the Alexa has an equivalent to 1/4 softening filter.

"It’s not just Alexa’s high dynamic range that accomplishes this, but there is supposedly a 1/4 softening filter in front of the sensor. This explains the way the camera blooms a bit with highlights, and overall it actually softens the harshness of digital." - Roger Deakins

 

[Scott Crawley]

Fair enough Evin, and thanks for sharing your insight. As you can no doubt tell, I haven't given as much thought to how they accomplish it rather I accept it for what it is.

Why do you chose to do it optically, rather than in processing? Epic footage graded from Redlogfilm is already inherently low in contrast. Is there a benefit in optically subtracting contrast as well?

I'm not an engineer but it seems silly to me to do something in the electronics that is so easily achieved in the optical path. My information comes from the techs at Panavison I've worked with and from conversations with Arri representatives. I don't think they are keen to let their sauce out of the bottle but it's not hard to figure out, Arri has been working with and studying film emulsions for decades, it's pretty obvious they designed their low pass filter pack to emulate the slight halation that happens on film when light from bright point sources bounce back into the film. That's why film is designed with anti-halation layer. I'm not critical of the Alexa for this, it's a nice touch, one that I often emulate on my Epic.

Thank you too, Matt.

http://nofilmschool.com/2012/09/roger-deakins-talking-about-the-arri-alexa-at-ibc/

Roger Deakins mentions in an interview that he believes the Alexa has an equivalent to 1/4 softening filter.

"It’s not just Alexa’s high dynamic range that accomplishes this, but there is supposedly a 1/4 softening filter in front of the sensor. This explains the way the camera blooms a bit with highlights, and overall it actually softens the harshness of digital." - Roger Deakins

 

[Brian Boyer]

Sigh...

Brian, I'm just a guy who owns an Epic. I'm not a DOP. I've never posted my fun little projects to Shot on Red. You're having a multi point argument with one opinion from one guy. Your very first post after Mark posted made me cringe. Not because Red doesn't need or value input but because it just felt disrespectful. (Did you delete that post?) Anyway, that's just me. But for now, let's move along. You've made your point.

I will make this my last post in this thread (I can hear the cries of "Huzzah!" from here).

First of all Andy, I only responded to you personally because I thought your reasoning was particularly weak and made little sense to me. You were, IMO, poorly defending a point that others also expressed, so it wasn't merely a multi-point argument against one opinion from one guy.

Secondly, my first post is right where I left it, 22 pages in, where I thought it was a reasonable distance from the initial outpouring of thanks, congratulations and adoration for RED, Mark and Dragon.

I really wasn't expecting that level of praise and the thread turned into something quite different from what I thought it was intended to be, which is why I waited as long as I did (not long enough, apparently).

I wasn't going to post at all but thought some honest, less enthusiastic comments might actually help, as far as outsiders were concerned, by bringing a little balance to what was already starting to be characterized by some as another (undeserved) RED strokefest.

Disrespectful, you say? Please read it again. I always try to be forthright, well-reasoned and objective. In this case, I was as apologetic, thankful, humble, unsure, congratulatory, appreciative, respectful and self-deprecating as you can get and still be the tiniest bit critical.

I said I was hoping the highlights looked better to me when they clipped...perhaps had a cool quirkiness, funkiness or silky smoothness to them so that it would, in effect, give me even more usable range from the sensor once it did clip - like overdriving a tube amplifier.

I didn't open the Seventh Seal for crying out loud.

When I first read Brian and Antonio's comments they sounded like they were trolling. Just an opinion. (I guess everyone likes to use that line)

You're right, I'm a monster.

Really? Are you sure you aren't laying it on just a little thick? Because I've never encountered such polite trolls in all of my travels. So you can tell the difference in the future, head on over to nofilmschool.com and say RED is great and then let us know how that goes.

For what it's worth, I'm a RED owner who tried to respect the situation while still being honest and objective about what I saw. RED can more than handle it.

 

[Ivan Kovax]

Also puzzled by the highlight clipping in some of Mark's car shots. They didn't seem difficult exposure ranges to capture with any camera. Would like to see some beauty shots showing romantic skin tones. Seen plenty of cool skin tones from Epic.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?92158-Enter-the-Dragon&p=1129439&viewfull=1#post1129439

It is just the in camera gamma curve or the grade. Other cameras handle that with their own gamma spaces and curves in camera.

Please look at this and let us know if you are still puzzled (applied a simple curve to roll off highlights... this can even be done in camera if needs be).

ANd this is grading from just a simple compressed mov file. Imagine the flexibility one is afforded in raw.

 

[Matt Ryan]

It is just the in camera gamma curve or the grade. Other cameras handle that with their own gamma spaces and curves in camera.

Please look at this and let us know if you are still puzzled (applied a simple curve to roll off highlights... this can even be done in camera if needs be).

ANd this is grading from just a simple compressed mov file. Imagine the flexibility one is afforded in raw.

Looks good.

I think most people miss the point that the clipping etc, is based on two things, Marks choice in exposure for the given shot and the grading/post processing. Given the same shots, several shooters would get different results. This is just plain common sense. This was just his test and isn't indicative of what the Dragon will achieve in someone else's hands because they would handle the shot differently. He may have chose to let the highlights go as a trade off to get exposure in the darks. It's a first time test and I'm sure if he did it again he'd already have a better idea of how to expose properly and get the most out of the shot knowing it's parameters.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Really, f45-f4 fully within proper exposure range in a single exposure? What cameras are those, giving you that?

They didn't seem difficult exposure ranges to capture with any camera.

 

[Medavoym]

Comments removed... maybe they were called for, maybe they weren't. But when on the fence, I choose to remove.

You should do just the opposite. When on the fence, give the benefit of a doubt.
I have no idea what all this fuss is about (haven't read all the posts) but just pointing out the common sense attitude.

 

[Ivan Kovax]

Looks good.

I think most people miss the point that the clipping etc, is based on two things, Marks choice in exposure for the given shot and the grading/post processing. Given the same shots, several shooters would get different results. This is just plain common sense. This was just his test and isn't indicative of what the Dragon will achieve in someone else's hands because they would handle the shot differently. He may have chose to let the highlights go as a trade off to get exposure in the darks. It's a first time test and I'm sure if he did it again he'd already have a better idea of how to expose properly and get the most out of the shot knowing it's parameters.

Clearly it was meant as a stress test for a hungry audience.

More than anything, just like most people here, I just want to shoot with this camera. The increased ISO performance will do wonders for my doco stuff. I can shoot at 2.8-5.6 and be confident that a) I will have nice skin tones, and b) the camera will handle light/dark transitions fine.