Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

DRAGON - ITS THE REAL DEAL !!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Antonio,

I second what was said about learning by exchanging ideas and having intelligent cyber-conversasions. Nobody can claim here to know everything. All my comments were made with sincere opinion, no agendas, and in a respectful way. I think that this is the gaining formula: to provide opinions, hear other points of view, and be humbled enough to modify ours because we have been receptive enough to extract from others what at one point we thought was an absolute fact.

Respectfully,
 
Wow. I don't chime in often but I do read reduser everyday and go through all the threads. I usually like to just observe and learn and check out all of the different points of view. There are a lot of very talented people on here. I think this may be one of the least tactful threads I have read. Loads of totally inappropriate things on here. There are lots of good points and perspectives. I wish I did not have to weed through the terrible ways of talking to other people.
 
Michael Jarvis said:
Wow. I don't chime in often but I do read reduser everyday and go through all the threads. I usually like to just observe and learn and check out all of the different points of view. There are a lot of very talented people on here. I think this may be one of the least tactful threads I have read. Loads of totally inappropriate things on here. There are lots of good points and perspectives. I wish I did not have to weed through the terrible ways of talking to other people.
Click to expand...

I agree, but Antonio just kept on posting outrageous things and had to be exposed in order to defend our cameras from calumnies.
 
Maybe we should stop using the term clipping since we're really talking about roll-off or exposure shoulder.
 
Scott I wasn't being specific about you. Is just that I'm here trying to do exactly that, to learn. But it's exhausting to be constantly fighting my way through the noise... And instead of providing me with straight answers or examples some people rather take the time to tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about and can't expose properly and such nonsense. When in fact I know what I can do with a Red an Alexa or film, because I shot with them all. Not once, but many times! So, that argument is so old school is irritating, but I don't have to prove anything to anyone here.

I just want to learn.

now, for for God's sake, someone tell me what a soft 3dlut is!
 
Michael,

I get you since for period of times, I do the same. And I learn a lot during that time! However, there are times that one really believe that can contribute with our own experiences. By exchanging them and hear others point of views, you realize that there are another angles you never explored or considered and through that learning, modify your own thoughts.
 
Given RED's history of over delivering I have complete confidence in their ability to make a camera that will give me everything I personally need to create the stories and emotions I want to convey. I am sure anything concerning highlights are in the right hands of the RED crew and they will make its handling of highlights as visually pleasing as possible. They read all these threads. They listen...and are masters of their craft.
 
António Fagundes said:
...now, for for God's sake, someone tell me what a soft 3dlut is!
Click to expand...

Is a fancy word for using a LUT with the black at 64 and white at 960 (using the scale of 0 - 1023 points). Or any other flavor that will never take you to crushing or clipping.
 
Another interesting side note, the images from 42 that we're discussing here were shot with the either Epic or Red One - not clear which (AC 5/2013) . And some minor Warm Pro-Mist filtration. Basically the kind of halation filter they are discussing adding to the Dragon.

Without the RAW files direct from camera - ARRILog and RedLog - we're really chasing our tails guessing what is really going on with the image capture. How can we judge highlight roll-off noise on a jpeg?
 
Last edited:
Mike P. said:
I still contend that if "Clarity" in the Alchemy Group can be controlled to just the highlights (80+IRE), when you apply negative values (-0.200 to -0.300) it actually blooms/blurs an incredible soft rolloff to highlights that would otherwise look harshly clipped. Problem is, as it stands, it softens the entire image (since you can't specific only the highlights)...

Similarly, if RED had their own MX/Dragon-specific noise reduction secret sauce in RCX, I bet you could get another stop or so out of MX's shadows without a noticeable quality loss (but at the cost of render time). I mean, if it's raw and nothing is baked in, and we're supposed to dial in sharpness to taste in post (unsharp mask and clarity) whilst rendering to dpx or aces or prores, then I don't see the harm in having even more control going from raw to the working (baked-in) codec when rendering out of RCX.
Click to expand...

+1 I would love this.
 
Elsie N said:
I agree, but Antonio just kept on posting outrageous things and had to be exposed in order to defend our cameras from calumnies.
Click to expand...

Here we go again Mr. Elsie!

Exactly what outrageus things did I say that hurt your feelings? How on earth did you expose me?? There's nothing to expose! Just my need to know the facts about the problem I see. And so far I haven't had any answers... It's annoying because I do need answers I want to shoot on Red no matter what kind of light I'll be using, that's all I'm asking.

I don't care if you love your camera, do it privately! I don't need your soft emotions here buddy, now could you once and for all leave the conversation and leave my ignorance fade away with some proper examples and explanations?

thank you
 
Tommaso Alvisi said:
Thanks David, which filter/strength did you use in this one?
Click to expand...

Let us guess, shall we?

I say none. Just good old fashioned lighting control. Exquisite control over the dynamic range inherent in the scene, and proper exposure.
 
António Fagundes said:
now could you once and for all leave the conversation and leave my ignorance fade away with some proper examples and explanations?

thank you
Click to expand...

Toia gave us #33 in the OP. One of my favorites is this

attachment.php


We can't draw conclusions about noise, but the overall range is stunning.
 
Scott Crawley said:
??? That was my point; there is no data in the white portions of any of your samples. They may no longer be peaked, but they have been blown out and realigned to a value just under peak.

attachment.php


Same in the red area here... one reading is R 247 G 252 B 256... blown out. In terms of highlight fall off, the green area is what we are interested in and it is excellent.

attachment.php




I am trying to have an intelligent conversation without attitude. I'm not sure what you are sensing with that regard. I have some time on my hands, and learn a lot when engaged in this kind of discussion on RedUser. I am hoping that you, or another reader might teach me something in the process. You see it is not that I have no life, but some of my love of life comes from learning about photography. Teach me something about photography instead of your character flaws.

As for pictures, I am attempting to use your own examples to show you how your argument may be flawed through mis-interpretation of the evidence. Maybe someone will provide a better analysis of the images and teach us both something.
Click to expand...


Scott, I'll try to give you my best explanation to what peeking is. Peeking at the centre of the hot spot will have 'bleeding', poor rolloff and some other ugly artifacts around it. The pictures above do have a white spot, but don't be fooled because is clean all way around the center and gradually fades away in what we call 'beautiful' rolloff, it's clean as a baby's bottom. No bleeding, no pink edges, artifacts, or whatever else happens when the sensor goes nuts.

that's peeking for me.
 
António Fagundes said:
Scott, I'll try to give you my best explanation to what peeking is. Peeking at the centre of the hot spot will have 'bleeding', poor rolloff and some other ugly artifacts around it. The pictures above do have a white spot, but don't be fooled because is clean all way around the center and gradually fades away in what we call 'beautiful' rolloff, it's clean as a baby's bottom. No bleeding, no pink edges, artifacts, or whatever else happens when the sensor goes nuts.

that's peeking for me.
Click to expand...

As I understand it, that is the definition of roll off not peaking. The peak of the signal is that value where the pixel registers white. On some scales that is value R=255 G=255 and B=255.
 
Roll-off is a way to refer to the exposure shoulder.
 
If you were to plot sensor response as pixel values on a graph from black to white showing a gradient, the shoulder (or roll off) would be a description of how smooth and continuous that gradient is, or is not and where on that range middle grey lands.

That is essentially what you are describing, Antonio.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top