12 Late Night Dragon Thoughts

[paul schefz]

That was my conclusion as well and I was annoyed with myself for missing that exposure iteration. Next time I will be more thorough. And with the newer sensor calibration, more revelant!

don't get me wrong....i am not complaining and always grateful if someone takes the time and helps everyone else out...especially if it is a tedious comparison...
interested to see the new color tech as well....
what i am hoping to get from dragon (along with the smoother highlight roll-off) is (i am not sure if i am using the right terms or if i am making any sense) better micro contrast in open shadows (or opened up shadows)...the ability to pull some contrast out of image areas that might not have gotten enough light (or weren't lit properly)...i hate to over-light but the final image should also not look flat or muddy....a certain crunchiness in the darker areas (and shadows) without being hard or too digital crispy.....
that's all i want for (or hopefully before) christmas...

 

[Ian D]

Hi Phil, if dragon is used with a s16 lens how is it performing, 2k -3k I have avoided due it being soft and overall lacking, I was wondering if images are more useable at lower resolutions?

Cheers
Ian

 

[Matthew Glover]

can somebody tell me what is still being worked on at the dragon? Is it not 100% finished? Will all the specs still be the same? Will the extra 3 stops of DR still be there?

 

[Dave Summers]

Will, I can say this, the VFX super on my recent job has started doing post work and composites... and a shot came up that had a hot edge light for a daylight feel... His initial response was to be concerned that the information would be all clipped out... but then he dialed it down and there was tons of meat in there. I just smiled and nodded knowingly...

Great news! I love finding detail that didn't seem to be there before tweeking it in Redcine

 

[Phil Holland]

Just got in for the evening and have a minute.

Thank you for the info Phil, we can't wait for our Dragons to arrive. For me just the 6k is good enough reason to upgrade. The rest are super gifts.

I was out earlier at Best Buy watching a 65" UHD Sony Led tv and they had a demo that was playing with some Red strawberries etc.

The picture quality of the video looked fantastic in 4k.

I did not played with the Dragon yet but I'll be very interested to find from you or anyone else if Dragon can take better footage than that and in the first place what camera they used (obviously a sony but which model).

I've shot with the other cameras that they likely used for that demo footage (and know them well too). You'll have to take my word for it for now, but yes, you can indeed shoot "better" footage. How you define that better might be subjective. I know my little It's Just Paint shoot looks really, really good in 4K.

New sensor box, awesome. Looks like Leica Summilux Still lens wider than 50mm can be used. Hopefully. Fingers crossed.

You're on the right page with that. From what I gather it looks like newer Leica M 35mm primes will work with this box. There's a whole bunch of M glass I need to test out once I get my Dragon. So many more lenses to test!

Thanks Phil for the frequent write-ups—definitely appreciate it. I noticed your images have a nice natural sharpness, is that just the lenses you're using or is there additional sharpness you add in post? Thanks.

If you're talking about the BTS stills I post I do sharpen those "for web". If you're talking about my footage, depends on what shots your'e looking at and if I've done anything crazy in post. For that last Dragon shoot for the final grade I ended up doing a single pass of extremely light sharpening at 6K and scaled to UHD 4K. Other than that it was the nice natural look the Schneider Cine-Xenars have.

After my original stress tests (with an earlier Dragon) I'm still more than happy... evan as it was.
I know through my chats with RED since then that it's even better again, and by the time its released (PROPER) it will be better yet again.
Which sounds kind of crazy... as the body I had was good enough all ready !.

I can see your fascination Phil and Chris to dig deeper, which is all the better for the RED community. Great work guys. ! I enjoy the posts.
Keep it up.

I still think about that wide city shot where you recovered the shadow detail while keeping the sky held.

They need a new Ted Schilowitz... I think they found him!

Keep up the great info. Great insights.

Heh. I miss that guy. Trade shows and notable releases need a face with clear and concise information. I'm not nearly as handsome as Ted though and I also don't work for Red. I'm certainly happy to discuss the tools I choose to use and it's certainly an honor to get a close look at Dragon's journey.

I personally haven't arrived at what I will ultimately rate this sensor at and what I will consider my optimum shooting range. I need more formal time with it rather than a rushed handheld camera on a side walk and no light meter...

Does it hold highlights better and roll off those highlights in a more pleading, neutral color way? Yes. Does it seem more sensitive? Yes? 3 stops? Not sure for my personal exposure methodology. Whatever I feel it ends up being is fine with me as I can see the improvements immediately and the gains are impactful to my work today.

That's pretty much dead on really. A lot are asking for hard figures, but in reality the footage just looks better in every way. That's what really counts here. Hard numbers will come though.

Can I ask how much rolling shutter you are seeing with the Dragon sensor? Thanks very much.

I didn't see much. I've done a couple of whip pans. On par or better than Mysterium-X really. I don't really think Mysterium-X really has a bad rolling shutter effect though.

tech as well....
what i am hoping to get from dragon (along with the smoother highlight roll-off) is (i am not sure if i am using the right terms or if i am making any sense) better micro contrast in open shadows (or opened up shadows)...the ability to pull some contrast out of image areas that might not have gotten enough light (or weren't lit properly)...i hate to over-light but the final image should also not look flat or muddy....a certain crunchiness in the darker areas (and shadows) without being hard or too digital crispy.....

Tricky one really. Depending on which camera system is used we're often fooled into being able to salvage material in some sort of miraculous hidden workable latitude, but in reality if it's not in the system's total captured dynamic range it's simply data that's not there. Red's a bit different on this regard in that the exposure tools, Raw View, Stop Lights, and Histogram tell you exactly what dynamic range you will put into the REDCODE and that's the material you have to work with. Exposing properly for whatever lighting condition is really what the secret is on that end.

In terms of Micro Contrast, that to me is more of a function of the lens itself. If you're looking to salvage detail from unlit darkness there's just not going to be much there. However, if it's got detail in the REDCODE and not crushed in the raw you can do what you'd like with it.

Hi Phil, if dragon is used with a s16 lens how is it performing, 2k -3k I have avoided due it being soft and overall lacking, I was wondering if images are more useable at lower resolutions?

Good question. And this is where the new resolutions have some format relevance. In my world Super 35mm = 4K resolution. S16 = 2K. That's the real truth of it. It's how it's scanned (often oversampled at 6K/8K). It's how it's filmed out. Take a look at this graphic:

You'll notice that 5K fits within Super 35mm 3-perf. And Super 16mm fits in essentially 2.5K.

If we're going straight off the common debayer 80% logic 5K width of 5120 pixels comes out to 4096 pixels. 2.5K width of 2560 pixels comes out to 2048 pixels. So essentially you have the formats producing exactly what you would want them to in comparison to film stock. However, I'll say this. 5K Dragon has smaller pixels with a bit more detail than Mysterium-X and it's already been demonstrated that Red 5K out resolves Super 35mm. The same is true here for both 5K and 2.5K formats.

This should be extremely exciting for people honestly.

can somebody tell me what is still being worked on at the dragon? Is it not 100% finished? Will all the specs still be the same? Will the extra 3 stops of DR still be there?

The real truth is they are doing exactly what they said they are doing. Tweaking a few knobs here and there. Adding some last minute goodies like the triumphant return of HDRx. Nothing on the spec side will change in a negative way. Red published safe specs. That 16+ stops of dynamic range is actually a very easy 16. There's a few more bodies trickling out and a large sensor shipment coming in December. Late December-January and then likely from there on out you'll be seeing a good amount of cameras flying into the hands of people.

 

[Tommaso Alvisi]

You'll notice that 5K fits within Super 35mm 3-perf. And Super 16mm fits in essentially 2.5K.

This especially and the these 12 thoughts are why I think Scarlet Dragon is the definitive camera for the rest of us who don't always need high fps!!

Please RED include a 2.5K s16 preset! Up to about 120-125fps since 3K is 100 and 2K is 150 on the spec page!!

I know there are custom resolutions but a preset like that would be really handy!

Great thread Phil, as always!

 

[Gabriele Turchi]

phill,
do you know anything about the release of the new color science ? did you see it ?

will it be new new "red color XXX " and a new "red gamma XXX" ?

i am wondering if the new color science is about mainly " greatly" using the data from dragon (color space , etc..) , or if it will also produce quite different/better images out of the camera "as is " ( i mean better/different than what RC3/RG3 is doing right now ...)

being a colorist i can tell that dragon images are quite more thick than epic .. more color depth (so you can push more without issue) , but i am also curious if this announced new color science will also be about getting a different image (look) "as is out of the camera"

thanks
g

 

[Asif Limbada]

Just got in for the evening and have a minute.

You're on the right page with that. From what I gather it looks like newer Leica M 35mm primes will work with this box. There's a whole bunch of M glass I need to test out once I get my Dragon. So many more lenses to test!

Looks like getting 21mm f1.4 won't be a bad idea. hehehehe

 

[Detlev Eller]

hahaha. I'll keep asking this question about quantifiable light sensitivity until it's answer you know.

Do you have any way of testing light side by side with MX?

... you probably won´t get one ... ;-)

it´s different.

From the little time i had with the dragon, it was immediately "sensable" ... and that´s about the only way to go about it, i guess.

Same like picking one spice of master chefs recipe .... won´t do any good measuring that. so, why bother ... it´s delicious!

;-)

 

[Kevin Pham]

And do not listen to those that as why you do it, just keep doing it as we enjoy the reads...

Nice...

 

[Shadi Abu Sharar]

Will Done Phil!! big like, hope to hear from you and see more of your work

 

[Ian D]

Thanks Phil, having camera that could work across format sizes would be so useful as an owner, operator. I have more more question if you could indulge me about how the sensor reacts to fire light. I have found on the mx sensor firelight creates a 'light smear' (a big internal flare, like a ghost fire above the real fire. I conclude its the sensor as I have used different lens and cameras, different distances and each one has the effect) it can be a great effect but it is extremely annoying when working with fire sources.

Thanks you for your testing and conclusion, very informative.

Cheers
Ian

 

[Christopher Probst]

Phil, I too have a question... How does the Dragon sensor react to scenes with Pink ponies in them... Do the look REALLY pink? or does the color bleed... How about something like a Purple Barney dinosaur... Can you go test that too!

 

[Phil Holland]

Thanks Phil, having camera that could work across format sizes would be so useful as an owner, operator. I have more more question if you could indulge me about how the sensor reacts to fire light. I have found on the mx sensor firelight creates a 'light smear' (a big internal flare, like a ghost fire above the real fire. I conclude its the sensor as I have used different lens and cameras, different distances and each one has the effect) it can be a great effect but it is extremely annoying when working with fire sources.

Thanks you for your testing and conclusion, very informative.

Cheers
Ian

Evin had some rather clean looking fire footage from his test. I didn't see anything glowing or funky. I also don't see that with Mysterium-X though and I've shot my fair share of fire elements. I need to see what you're talking about. That said I haven't shot fire light or anything just yet with Dragon.

Phil, I too have a question... How does the Dragon sensor react to scenes with Pink ponies in them... Do the look REALLY pink? or does the color bleed... How about something like a Purple Barney dinosaur... Can you go test that too!

Red cameras do not render Pink Ponies, however, due to a miraculous advancement in color science it does actually make them transparent. We're currently looking for ways to exploit this for VFX use

 

[soren k jensen]

bleeding unicorn

bleeding unicorn

Yes, pink unicorns do bleed, but please wait for Dragon colour science, this is early days.

 

[Randall Weatherington]

Phil, you might want to correct designations on your chart.
In my entire career in film, "Super" referred only to an image that went full width, i.e. sprocket to sprocket.
"Full frame" is full width and full height.
All other formats that allowed for a sound track area or were cut into on the sides never had the designation of "super."
I did many, many conversions throughout my career, and this was standard industry designation.
I just want to eliminate any confusion as newer people entering the industry are beginning to lose track of the film formats, and are getting crossed up a bit.

 

[Phil Holland]

Phil, you might want to correct designations on your chart.
In my entire career in film, "Super" referred only to an image that went full width, i.e. sprocket to sprocket.
"Full frame" is full width and full height.
All other formats that allowed for a sound track area or were cut into on the sides never had the designation of "super."
I did many, many conversions throughout my career, and this was standard industry designation.
I just want to eliminate any confusion as newer people entering the industry are beginning to lose track of the film formats, and are getting crossed up a bit.

I agree on the "Full Frame" designation being the most confusing thing ever. Whatever happened in these last 14 years during the digital revolution people seemed to run away from the 135 Film designation in relation to "Full Frame" DSLRs and it's penetrated other aspects of the industry. APC naming convention really only cover the smaller formats. I'm betting that this term sprouted up originally due to varied formats within that typical 36x24mm as you'd see "Full-Frame" 24×36 mm on boxes of film and cameras themselves and the "Half-Frame" on the same material from certain cameras from around the 60's.

In the Red world and how it should be 6K Full refers to the full frame (Full Aperture) coverage of the sensor and smaller resolutions like 4K Full refer to the full frame aspect ratio in relation to that windowed/cropped format. Although on Dragon it's a bit different than that norm.

On the capture side many folks who worked on features shot "Super 35mm Full Aperture" a great deal. I realize that's not the Academy or Widescreen standard, but that's why I also included them in this graphic. That would be the big different in this one area on capture through delivery or conversion. It's pretty much mirroring the information available in the ASC Manual, published by the Academy, and also what we've put up on the wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_35

Full Aperture remains an important designation and there is of course no audio strip with digital.

But yes, I agree that Full Frame 35mm is sort of the worst term ever coined in regards to formats. Oddly this is only due to the popularity and eventual move to motion capture on the DSLR side. In the motion world we have lovely names for different formats that make much more sense.

Oddly my career was pretty much defined by format and perforations. This is how I chose to keep track of things. 4-perf Super35, 3-perf Super35, 8-perf VistaVision, 5-perf 65mm, 8-perf 65mm, 15-perf IMAX mainly being the formats I was ever truly concerned with.

 

[Randall Weatherington]

Phil, your link to the Super 35 format is a very good one.
I have not looked at one of the latest versions of the ASC Manual, but I hope that it retains the formats that we had a few years ago.
In the Super 35 format we also had issues such as "common center" or "common top" with the academy 1:85 top line being the "top."
You are correct in the sense that "still" people refer to 8 perf horizontal as full frame, and 4 perf vertical as half frame while the cinema people refer to 4 perf full width as full frame, and 8 perf horizontal as double frame or "VistaVision." (Paramount trademark)
Ok, I better stop before I derail the thread.

 

[David Mullen ASC]

The only confusing part is labeling Academy 4-perf 35mm as Super-35 ("Super-35 Academy") since Academy isn't Super-35.

 

[Phil Holland]

The only confusing part is labeling Academy 4-perf 35mm as Super-35 ("Super-35 Academy") since Academy isn't Super-35.

Ah. Yep. That makes sense. Fixed if you reload it.