Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

All the Epic/Dragon Vs. Alexa/Sony threads are belong to us...

Kemalettin Sert said:
You can sell Dragon buy New camera...simple
Click to expand...

So, you are saying all advantages would be lost?

What I mean where is that probably 6K is more than enought, maybe 5k would, probably RED team should concentrate their eford in creatin better color science to the existing sensors.

Yes, alexa costs more, its heavier, its only 2k+, but people still want them, why?

Red already have pushed the resolution, and I apreciate, cause I beleave in resolution, but color science is also important and to me 1+ stop in highlight is very important.
 
Good Lord! Pull yourselves together.

You guys are talking about a camera that's had the softest of soft launches and performance that, in the state it was tested, is already irrelevant compared to what the vast majority of people will get when their camera ships.

I look at this test and think, "Cool. Assuming Phil Holland's findings were accurate, with the new OLPF, sensor calibration and color science tweaks, I can look at gaining 1.3 stops more in the highlights over what this test shows...with improved color saturation."

You can basically eliminate the last three exposures on the high end (they're 1/2 stop apart) to get a very close approximation of what the improvements will look like (it would actually be somewhere between B001_C012 and B001_C013, but closer to C012).

That frame (B001_C012) compares very favorably to the top Alexa exposure. Of course, we'll see for sure when the new specs have been tested, but at least it's promising, IMO.

Remember, the Alexa has bigger photosites and, as Adrian pointed out, uses a dual readout technique. Dragon has smaller photosites and doesn't use the dual readout method (according to Jarred). That's quite the accomplishment.
 
Humberto Ramos said:
So, you are saying all advantages would be lost?

What I mean where is that probably 6K is more than enought, maybe 5k would, probably RED team should concentrate their eford in creatin better color science to the existing sensors.

Yes, alexa costs more, its heavier, its only 2k+, but people still want them, why?

Red already have pushed the resolution, and I apreciate, cause I beleave in resolution, but color science is also important and to me 1+ stop in highlight is very important.
Click to expand...

Have you graded a bit of Dragon material?
 
Brian Boyer said:
Good Lord! Pull yourselves together.

You guys are talking about a camera that's had the softest of soft launches and performance that, in the state it was tested, is already irrelevant compared to what the vast majority of people will get when their camera ships.

I look at this test and think, "Cool. Assuming Phil Holland's findings were accurate, with the new OLPF, sensor calibration and color science tweaks, I can look at gaining 1.3 stops more in the highlights over what this test shows...with improved color saturation."

You can basically eliminate the last three exposures on the high end (they're 1/2 stop apart) to get a very close approximation of what the improvements will look like (it would actually be somewhere between B001_C012 and B001_C013, but closer to C012).

That frame (B001_C012) compares very favorably to the top Alexa exposure. Of course, we'll see for sure when the new specs have been tested, but at least it's promising, IMO.

Remember, the Alexa has bigger photosites and, as Adrian pointed out, uses a dual readout technique. Dragon has smaller photosites and doesn't use the dual readout method (according to Jarred). That's quite the accomplishment.
Click to expand...

Could not agree more...
 
Ergin Ozturk said:
Gunleik i trust you:)

but i am still waiting something like;

dr4-dragon.jpg


dr4-dragon2.jpg
Click to expand...
Same woman different Camera :)
 
Ergin Ozturk said:
Gunleik i trust you:)

but i am still waiting something like;

dr4-dragon.jpg


dr4-dragon2.jpg
Click to expand...

Nice shots.
Not particularily DR challenging, or maybe I miss the point?

And quite heavily graded and green :)

And with the flatness in skin which I have come to expect from a particular camera... :)

Looks like you have tons of good stuff on your site!
 
Last edited:
Gunleik Groven said:
Nice shots.
Not particularily DR challenging, or maybe I miss the point?

And quite heavily graded and green :)

And with the flatness in skin which I have come to expect from a particular camera... :)

Looks like you have tons of good stuff on your site!
Click to expand...

not for DR or skin tone. just a example for rich, saturated colours of other camera:). yes it seems lots of secondaries going on. Tom Poole (company 3) did colour grading of this movie. i hope some guys in company 3 (or any other pro level colourist) make some grading with dragon and we see the power of Dragon's colour science.
 
Humberto Ramos said:
Not as much I would like...

Is it possible to open a thread and put together all existing and future R3D files? That would be fine...
Click to expand...



That sounds like a good idea.

I do not have the time right now, but in Marks, Phils and my "dragon footy" threads there is a bit.
And of course in the CML test.

Also in the Dragon/epic comparison I posted. I think I will not post any new R3Ds until I have the new OLPF/colorscience. Except for maybe one practical side-by-side with F55/Alexa from Bristol.

just now, Time is not on my side...
 
Humberto Ramos said:
What if, Arri would release a new camera in a couple of months that could do 6K with the DR and Highlights of the Alexa, at the price of a DRAGON CF, what would be the advantage of having a Dragon?
Click to expand...

In 2019 the price of a used Arri Alexa 6k will be equal to the price of a Dragon today at $29k. Lol. Even the Amira and Alexa HD cameras are more expensive than the Dragon.
The advantages of a Dragon are vast, size, weight, resolution, DR, frame rates, modularity, Robust Codec, easy existing Workflow, wide DOP & operator familiarity, excellent customer service, vibrant user community, upgradable, continuously updated color science that can improve old footage.
Need I list more.
I own an Alexa and can look you in the face and tell you the Dragon is the camera to beat. The best camera out now for almost any Job.
 
Totally respect that Geoff. However, the presence of data in a chart is undeniable, where real world images can make such subtleties more subjective and even impossible to assess. Where that subtlety comes into play is in manipulation of the image, meaning more than just exposure latitude. Dragon footage for me shows exceptional flexibility, especially in the shadows, and not just for exposure but for chroma adjustment and detail... The last couple of buried stops are critical to achieving this IMHO.

I'm working on a more scientific approach to quantifying an images post-flexibility. I'd be interested to hear your input on that; I'm looking to accurately measure the quality of result from a gamut of typical grading operations.
 
geoffboyle said:
Yeah but in the best possible taste we don't shoot charts.

I really don't care what this chart shows.

I care about what I see in real pictures.
Click to expand...

Here is what I have to say about charts. One of the most amazing classes that I took back in college was color theory. One of the big lessons was how the interaction of different color wavelengths, when close together or interacting in specific ways, affect our perception of them in VERY radical ways, creating "new hues" that are not individually there. The magical quality of 'perceived' visual reality is precisely this rich mix of real and psychologically compounded hues, luminosity, contrast, etc.

With sensors I believe it's the same thing. Their effectiveness (together with their color science) lie in their ability to capture and render this mix. So back to the charts. My biggest complaint with them is that they conveniently take away all this interaction and reduce the "test" to a very simplistic one dimension. It's like trying to test out the acoustics of a concert hall by just playing one note at a time from one instrument at a time. All the cross-resonances of all the instruments playing at the same time are missing.
 
As a general note, I think it bears saying we need to see Dragon tested with the new OLPF, and new color science.

That said, Dragon already has a stunning elasticity and look, all neatly packaged into a small body, shooting 6K, all for a $9000 upgrade. I think RED deserves nothing less than a standing ovation, personally.

Humberto Ramos said:
What if, Arri would release a new camera in a couple of months that could do 6K with the DR and Highlights of the Alexa, at the price of a DRAGON CF, what would be the advantage of having a Dragon?
Click to expand...

Arri hasn't even announced a 4K camera, and seems firmly committed to 1080. No one else appears to take resolution as seriously as RED.

Martin Stevens said:
PLEASE remember that the Dragon has a new OLPF and Color Science that was not used in the CML test, and that
this new OLPF and Color Science finally bring out the Dragons power.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Thanks Martin. This is an important reminder. We are still seeing Dragon in it's "teen" phase. As it matures into "Adulthood" with new OLPF and revised color science, I expect we'll finally see the camera RED envisioned.

Humberto Ramos said:
I'm also fan of RED, even just having a RED ONE, but the true is that those tests also have been very disappointing to me, I intend to upgrade my gear in a near future, and now even knowing the Dragon is better than MX I don´t know if I should buy an EPIC MX or Dragon, and keep dreaming with Alexa highlights, or if I should wait for a 4K+ Alexa...
I will wait for new OLPF tests and keep wishing it would get close to the Alexa Highlights..
Click to expand...

I'm assuming a 4K Alexa is likely going to cost over a $100,000, so I can't imagine it will be affordable for more mortals. And I'm sure it will weigh a considerable amount, so I can't imagine seeing it on a Movi, or in fluid, run n' gun situations. I presume you're going to need a real crew to work with this high rent item. It just feels like it's going to be a very pro, very exclusive camera that won't make rebellious film making particularly easy, though of course anything is always possible.

I just love the performance/size/price ratio of a Dragon. To me it's impossible to beat.

Gunleik Groven said:
That is the problem with tests, they only test for what we test for.

I have said a number of times that I would have taken the Dragon even if it was 5K and did NOT have better DR than the Epic.

There is soooo much more to the image than the DR which is in a league of its own.

1+ stop difference in the top compared to the Alexa currenty, does not change that.

i would have had it with the current OLPF, even.

Chill down... :)
Click to expand...

Agree 1000 percent. Dragon is already a super camera. So is Alexa. Feels like comparing a Ferrari and a Lamborghini; the arguments are passionate but in the end it probably comes down to which leather seats you like best.

Adrian Jebef said:
I've toyed with the DRAGON frames a bit in RedCineX but I am basically getting the same results that I got in Resolve. I'd love to see if anyone else is getting different results. That being said, the DRAGON does have a very, very nice "feel" to it. The image is sharp and contrasty yet I'm not noticing the "hard edge" that I sometimes get when shooting with the SONY F65 or F55. This is all subjective analysis from someone who has worked with these top-end cameras day in and day out. At this point in my career I'm much more interested in how I'm subjectively "drawn" to a camera's images vs. how "technically" superior/inferior they may or may not be.

A quick note about how the ALEXA makes images: ARRI has been at this game for a long time. The company has specialized in digital log encoding and printing with their ARRISCANNERS and ARRILASERS. The entire back-end processing of their D-20, D-21, and ALEXA cameras are all based on years and years of refining Cineon Log encoding/decoding. The ALEXA, though a linear CMOS-based camera, is basically designed to produce an extremely well-rounded Cineon (log) image range. For every frame the ALEXA captures it reads out that frame in 2 steps: basically a high gain and low gain exposure. These readouts are then merged to produce the camera's overall dynamic range and image data. Subjectively, I've found the ALEXA to behave very closely to an 800 ISO camera in most shooting situations. However, on occasion, during high-contrast scenes with extreme over or underexposure I've found the camera uniquely capable of somehow bringing back certain highs and lows in a very "organic" way. In contrast, the SONY F65 actually exhibits more DR and high/low tolerance but it's overall image tends to "look" much more "linear" than "rounded". Again, these are all just non-official, non-technical musings of some guy on the internets...
Click to expand...

Adrian - always love reading your posts. Thanks so much for your contributions, especially these past couple of months during the Dragon transition.

Humberto Ramos said:
So, you are saying all advantages would be lost?

What I mean where is that probably 6K is more than enought, maybe 5k would, probably RED team should concentrate their eford in creatin better color science to the existing sensors.

Yes, alexa costs more, its heavier, its only 2k+, but people still want them, why?

Red already have pushed the resolution, and I apreciate, cause I beleave in resolution, but color science is also important and to me 1+ stop in highlight is very important.
Click to expand...

Dragon is a great camera. So is Alexa. No one would fault you for going the Arri route. Get whatever suites your workflow best.

shashbugu said:
In 2019 the price of a used Arri Alexa 6k will be equal to the price of a Dragon today at $29k. Lol. Even the Amira and Alexa HD cameras are more expensive than the Dragon.
The advantages of a Dragon are vast, size, weight, resolution, DR, frame rates, modularity, Robust Codec, easy existing Workflow, wide DOP & operator familiarity, excellent customer service, vibrant user community, upgradable, continuously updated color science that can improve old footage.
Need I list more.
I own an Alexa and can look you in the face and tell you the Dragon is the camera to beat. The best camera out now for almost any Job.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing! Love reading your posts as well.

geoffboyle said:
Yeah but in the best possible taste we don't shoot charts.

I really don't care what this chart shows.

I care about what I see in real pictures.
Click to expand...

Geoff, love to hear your real world experiences with Dragon. Excited to see you back on these boards, and looking forward to frank, honest discussions about what Dragon is, and what it can do. Thanks again.
 
Last edited:
Manfred Lopez said:
With sensors I believe it's the same thing. Their effectiveness (together with their color science) lie in their ability to capture and render this mix. So back to the charts. My biggest complaint with them is that they conveniently take away all this interaction and reduce the "test" to a very simplistic one dimension. It's like trying to test out the acoustics of a concert hall by just playing one note at a time from one instrument at a time. All the cross-resonances of all the instruments playing at the same time are missing.
Click to expand...

Beautifully put...
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Agree Manfred.

This has been my point about the Dragon all along.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's got a nice looking image, did I just say that!? I'm looking forward to the new OLPF etc

I wasn't that fond of the look of the MX, in fact I think I preferred the look of the M, it's a choice I'm going to make in the next month or so, a really low budget movie that I'm shooting on two Red Ones, I do have a choice of M or MX and in terms pf look I'm leaning towards the M.

It's all about what it looks like, someone mentioned the C500 earlier and it not having a huge DR, it doesn't but it does have exactly what canon says it has, and I like the look :-)

But that's what it has to be about, do you like the look, test certainly to find your limits but ultimately do you like the look.

Years ago I was testing film for Kodak, we had the current film '93, 2 prototypes and I made them get Agfa XTR 250, we shot some extreme tests, a model walking down a staircase in a Chateau going in and out of shafts of light and ending up sitting in a window drinking from an Evian bottle.

The was in a very saturated red dress and of course the Evian bottle had pale pink and blue on it.

The current stock just couldn't cope with the contrast and looked dire, one of the prototypes looked horrid but the other worked really well and held both highlights and shadows that the Agfa didn't so the guys at Kodak said "when we make tis you'll obviously switch from the Agfa" I then told them no, I would stick with the Agfa because although the new stock was better in every technical way it just wasn't as pretty as the Agfa and I get paid to make pretty pictures not accurate ones.


I still feel the same way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top