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 :)

Can someone explain the real benefit of the STO OLPF over LLO?

B

Brant Hadfield

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
251
Reaction score
0
Points
0
A couple months ago when I was trying to determine which filter to have installed in my Dragon upgraded Scarlet, I looked closely at these test on the CML: http://www.cinematography.net/cml-uwe-2015.html. Based on what I saw there, where the STH was exposed for 400 (apparently per recommendation from Red), the LLO exposed for 800, I saw what appeared to be earlier clipping in the STH sample. I attributed this to exposing for 400 instead of 800 or higher. I don't understand why that recommendation was made. What I also saw, was a cooler image coming from the STH sample, and frankly I thought the LLO sample looked better, and was off the shelf, closer to say, the Amira or Alexa. I surmised that grading the STH to bring some more warmth back is possible, though at the expense perhaps of noise.So based on these tests, and my own experiences in using both OLPF filters, I am really struggling to understand how the STH helps me, other than the very notable reduction of orbs, blobs, and nasty reflections. But at what cost? If I run the LLO with the very nice Firecrest ND, and rate for 1000 or 1280 on exteriors, am I not moving middle gray and gaining highlight protection as I would with the STH at 640 or 800? By reducing the incoming red freaquency, isn't the STH basically robbing the sensor of color information the sensor could have recorded, and I could decide in grading whether to dial back?Based on the CML tests, and raw frames, I cannot understand why a 400 rating was recommended for the STO, nor can I frankly see much benefit in its additional filtering (other than artifact reduction), or how it somehow improves skin tones. Opinions please!
 
Last edited:
Certainly a decisive looking test Maik, I had not seen that. I am still very interested in what people might have to say of the CML tests. Clearly, that test was not designed to point out the particular weak points or strengths of either OLPF. Why they had been told to test the STH at 400 is still something I don't understand, given the impact that would have on lowered highlight protection.
 
Hi Brant.

I did a whole bunch of tests here as well:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?122074-First-Look-Interchangeable-OLPF-on-Dragon&p=1433752&viewfull=1#post1433752

For me, as you mentioned, the STH OLPF is about minimizing potential artifacts while maintaining slightly better color and a slightly smoother Highlight Roll-Off. There is about a 1 to 1.3 stop difference in grain/texture/noise if you compare tones etween the STH and LLO OLPF. Essentially if you shoot with the STH at ISO 400 it will have similar texture to the LLO OLPF at ISO 800-1000.

I personally work mostly with the STH OLPF and work between ISO 250-1280. The LLO gets whipped out if I need to go beyond that for sure. Also use it for some overcranked work. Some folks like us g the STH outdoors and the LLO indoors. For me it's all about light and rating consistantly. When I shoot I say I'm rating and exposing for ISO 500 for example and proceed from there. I like to say the STH gets me a very film-like image and the LLO gets you something cleaner than that.

Don't really have anything to say about the CML tests, they do what they do. I understand the pros and cons of both OLPFs while testing "everything" related to practical and technical exposure practices.
 
I'm curious how workflows will change with Weapon, where both OLPFS seem to match much more and have minimal artifacting of any kind (at least according to the samples Jarred posted a month or two ago...)
 
I'll be getting my Epic to Dragon back next week. I have Tiffen IRND Hotmirror filters. How would I use them with the Dragon and STH OLPF?
 
Linda Barzini said:
I'll be getting my Epic to Dragon back next week. I have Tiffen IRND Hotmirror filters. How would I use them with the Dragon and STH OLPF?
Click to expand...

I'd seriously consider the Firecrest NDS. By all accounts, they are the most consistent looking.

Dragon doesn't really need IR protection, btw. One of the benefits of the new sensor. In general, standard ND's seem todo - and consensus is the Firecrests are the way to go!

best
 
Linda Barzini said:
I'll be getting my Epic to Dragon back next week. I have Tiffen IRND Hotmirror filters. How would I use them with the Dragon and STH OLPF?
Click to expand...

I've tested everything really. I use Formatt Hitech Firecrests and a nice matched set of regulag Schneider NDs. You don't really need IRNDS or Hot Mirror combos anymore. I sold off all but one of my sets of those just in case I need to use MX ever again.
 
After seeing the little tutorial video of the mystery man with the rubber gloves changing OLPF, it looks kind of sketchy and super easy to drop one of those annoying little screws either inside the camera or worse, against your naked sensor!!!
Have they improved this design with a captive screw system yet? Have there been many horror stories of people dropping screws or scratching sensors?

Where do I get some of those creepy rubber gloves???
 
Lee Kelly said:
After seeing the little tutorial video of the mystery man with the rubber gloves changing OLPF, it looks kind of sketchy and super easy to drop one of those annoying little screws either inside the camera or worse, against your naked sensor!!!
Have they improved this design with a captive screw system yet? Have there been many horror stories of people dropping screws or scratching sensors?

Where do I get some of those creepy rubber gloves???
Click to expand...

I've dropped one bolt in about 80+ changes and it darted across the floor only to be found. It's good to be careful and on a flat surface if you're changing it, but I do it with the camera on tripod even.

Black Latex Gloves are common in tattoo shops and salons. Not real creepy in reality. Lot's of make-up and practical FX artists use them as well. Had some on recently to avoid dyeing my hands black the other day while mixing some slime.

Weapon gets a new OLPF design that we don't have all the details on yet, but we do know they electronically communicate with the camera now and you no longer will have to tell the camera which OLPF you have installed in the menu. There were hints about a more convenient mounting system for Weapon too, but I haven't seen it just yet.
 
Lee Kelly said:
After seeing the little tutorial video of the mystery man with the rubber gloves changing OLPF, it looks kind of sketchy and super easy to drop one of those annoying little screws either inside the camera or worse, against your naked sensor!!!
Have they improved this design with a captive screw system yet? Have there been many horror stories of people dropping screws or scratching sensors?
Click to expand...
This. I've definitely dropped a few and spent awhile crawling around on the ground with a flashlight. It's really best to do it on a workbench with a clean soft white surface to drop the screws on and with lots of light. You can't tilt up much for fear of the screws falling onto the sensor cover glass, and you can't tilt down for fear of dropping them on the ground and losing them forever. It's idiotic not to have captive screws for these OLPFs. The lens mounts should also have captive screws.
 
... or you may get John´s entired paranoia kit, which also includes a magnetic torx driver and some spare screws. Seriously not a bit deal.

Cheers, Ulf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top