DRAGON - ITS THE REAL DEAL !!!!

[Robert Ruffo New]

Lighting is overrated. WAY overrated.

No offense, but most directors and producers I know, if they heard a DP say this, would assume he/she was extremely under skilled didn't know how to light, didn't even understand what light was all about. I'm assuming you're just joking.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

I think what is over rated is over-lighting. If you look at "old" movies vs. more recent movies DP'd by great new-crop cinematographers, you can enjoy better the more pleasant, more realistic images.

You are comparing low-budget Vimeo shot by mainly untrained people to high budget work shot by trained professionals. Audiences mostly dislike the unlit doco look, (this has been studied at length in surveys) and it doesn;t really fit many stories. Not every story is supposed to feel"gritty". If you don't know how to light, you are a camera operator, not a DP.

 

[Samir Patel]

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 agree. I also am not a paid DOP at the moment. but I aspire to work my way back to that one day. I am a RED owner as well and primarily see it as a tool for me to use on my own projects. I thought Mark's test was great in that I saw some capabilities of what the camera can do. It likely could do even better if Mark had time to send it to a colorist, etc. But as a owner/operator working for myself I likely would never have that option anyway (that and I am a control freak). So simply seeing what you can do in RCX looked very good to me. 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)

 

[jake blackstone]

Jake,

uncompressed workflows are actually faster and less processor intesive than ProRES which does require a decompression of the CODEC, uncompressed is a faster, less processor intensive pipeline than working with compressed codecs (H.264 is a great example of a processor intensive codec) Maybe you are talking about data rates, as DPX frames are much larger than compressed frames so you need fast (fiber channel storage or Thunderbolt raids, etc) to push all that data.

David

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 play and it plays. Marks point was an exact opposite. He is convinced, that Prores is faster to use

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

Let me clarify:

Light is necessary to capture an image. Obviously. What's overrated is the importance beauty lighting, or super slick Hollywood-style (artificial) lighting plays in creating a filmic image. Of couse you need light and you need to manipulate light and shadow in order to get the image you are after, but the lighting should not make everything look so beautiful, so perfect, that it looks fake. Unless, of course, that's the look you are going for. Personally, I detest the look of a lot of modern films because they are so perfectly lit that it pulls me out of the story. There are exceptions. It's totally subjective. Dragon enables you to shoot with less light. That's the future.

That is your personal opinion. Most audiences prefer that look. Here in Canada the "natural look" is almost all anybody (except Amber and I) ever shoot. I find Canadian films almost unwatchable for this reason. When you film reality without relighting it it doesn't look like reality to the viewer - it looks dingy and depressing, to a distorted extent that does not represent most reality at all.

Canadian films are the least commercially successful on planet earth - existing mostly on government hand-outs. A top Canadian "hit" will make 20c on 1$ invested. Most make around 2c.

I think DPs who don't light - or can't - are overrated.

 

[jake blackstone]

This seems like an odd statement since it sounds like you are saying all workflows are the same speed if you compare them running on hardware with infinite speed, yes that's true but a bit impractical

In the majority of cases, DPX will be a slower workflow than Prores given that DPX workflows are more commonly limited by hard drive speed (its relative limitation) than Prores workflows are by CPU speed (its relative limitation). For realtime decode/encode, just about any modern laptop nowadays has the CPU power to encode/decode a couple streams of prores and any hard drive can handle the bitrates required for several streams of prores, whereas a single 1080p DPX sequence requires 10x more space and at least 2 3.5" hard drives in a RAID0. Of course there is a difference in quality between the two, however. Seems like there would be very few situations in which DPX would be faster to deal with than prores. Probably the only case would be if you have a super old computer hooked up to a really fast RAID? Or is there something I'm missing?

Yes, you completely missed the original point as well as my point
It is amazing to me, that we can even have this discussion. People are screaming and demanding more of everything- more resolution, more dynamic range, more color bit depth, 4k finish "just because more is better" and in the same breath they are arguing about practicality of finishing their project in 4K on their MacBooks.
Just amazing...

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Sanjin.....there is nothing wrong with the Dragon color science that cannot be altered or fixed via grading.

Martin, if you have unbalanced RGB beam that coming from the sensor you can't get balanced RGB signal even if you would be able to employ the best algorithm during interpolation of a mosaic based sensor.

In that case it means you would not be able to get so much help with grading an unbalanced RGB just because you'll get a colour shift always when you start to correct something...

So basically there are four elements in the circle that are important for a digital cine camera colours: silicon or sensor itself, board around the sensor, OLPF (blur filters) and codec (R3D).

 

[Andrew Huse]

So just to be clear, Dragon can record at any ISO without effecting dynamic range? This could eliminate my need for 8 IRND filtes

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

(snip)
That is good for us. That means when we go into those situations we can rethink our lighting plan based on our story. Maybe those shots need a couple of light panels on batteries instead of a 5k now. (snip)
David

Mark noted that by rough guess there are 2 more usable stops under key and one above. If that includes decent chroma in those 2 lower stops, that's significant.

Being able to shoot on location without needing big gennys and heavy distro is a gift. Add the ability to battery power many LEDs and/or the new remote phosphor lighting fixtures, now your location footprint is significantly smaller. Not to mention the advantage of being able to shoot night exteriors with the light levels on talent low enough that background elements "play" more naturally.

I am also pumped to think that when lighting a scene I can focus on how to best realize creative goals without using half my resources just to "get a stop".

Cheers - #19

 

[paul schefz]

sanjin....the quote in your signature is from ansel adams...

 

[Elsie N]

Mark noted that by rough guess there are 2 more usable stops under key and one above. If that includes decent chroma in those 2 lower stops, that's significant.

Being able to shoot on location without needing big gennys and heavy distro is a gift. Add the ability to battery power many LEDs and/or the new remote phosphor lighting fixtures, now your location footprint is significantly smaller. Not to mention the advantage of being able to shoot night exteriors with the light levels on talent low enough that background elements "play" more naturally.

I am also pumped to think that when lighting a scene I can focus on how to best realize creative goals without using half my resources just to "get a stop".

Cheers - #19

Love this post... No more trying to re-create natural light through the use of faux light.

 

[Jeff Whitehurst]

I'm a bit confused. Didn't RED promise 20+ stops of DR? But based on Mark's test, it looks like only +1 stop in the highlights and +2 in the shadows? Is the DR expected to change drastically over the next few weeks?

No, RED never said that. Unfortunately, there's been a bunch of comments around the web in the last few months saying "20+ stops is coming with Dragon". I think that initial dynamic range test chart went beyond it's intended purpose and got a bit pimped. Still to say "it looks like only +1 stops in the highlight and +2 in the shadows" fails to recognize the major technical achievement of the Dragon sensor program IMHO. 3(+) stops more range, lower noise, better IR filtering, etc. are major feats that deserve due credit and all were evident in this test. To boot, the fact we don't have to run out and buy new cameras and support to get these benefits is simply amazing.

The bottom line is this test wasn't a "shootout", it was a stress test of the Dragon. Based upon this test I'd say the Dragon betters MX in every regard. For now that's good enough for me, although I wouldn't mind seeing Mark's test with a pretty grade put on it, mostly to put a stop to those who are obsessing over pink highlights and such. This footage showed beautiful and perfectly useable images from 250-6400 ISO, and I am very impressed and optimistic the best is yet to come.

 

[Stephen Matthews]

So, you are not a dop. You own a camera, full stop. I too own a football, does that make me a footballer...? Why am I not getting paid, I can kick the ball nice enough...?

With all due respect, your post was not only extremely naive and embarrassing but extremely offensive. It's people like you, that mean nothing to this business that give this forum a bad rep.

Nobody pays you for your work, but you feel that if someone shows a certain concern about Mark's footage, he is trolling... What do you know about anything my friend, to know what my concerns were?

Do you realize how pathetic you make this forum look to outsiders with people like you trying to pick up fights, out of sheer ignorance mixed with arrogance?

Get a life my friend, and you are very lucky that I even took the time and effort to tell you like it is.

Maybe now is the time to take some time away from this thread... all he said was when he first read your comments they came off trollish, he's just making an observation just as you have, are we all not entitled to our opinions? the only issue I see here is you resorted to an ad hominem in retaliation for apparently no reason. Attacking a person's profession or personal life outside the form is rude and totally uncalled for.

Have a nice day! and please be respectful in your comments even if others are not, or you believe them to be.

oh and great work Mark thanks for taking time from your busy schedule to do this test. I very happy so far can't wait to get my hands on some R3D's, see what I can push and pull, also rather interested to check out how the blue channel is fairing. I guess I'll have to wait until I make my final judgements until Dragon is actually released.

 

[paul schefz]

So, you are not a dop. You own a camera, full stop. I too own a football, does that make me a footballer...? Why am I not getting paid, I can kick the ball nice enough...?

With all due respect, your post was not only extremely naive and embarrassing but extremely offensive. It's people like you, that mean nothing to this business that give this forum a bad rep.

Nobody pays you for your work, but you feel that if someone shows a certain concern about Mark's footage, he is trolling... What do you know about anything my friend, to know what my concerns were?

Do you realize how pathetic you make this forum look to outsiders with people like you trying to pick up fights, out of sheer ignorance mixed with arrogance?

Get a life my friend, and you are very lucky that I even took the time and effort to tell you like it is.

woah! someone needs to tone it down!
sad how the first dragon thread has to come to this...someone please pull the plug....

 

[Filip Orlandic]

I gotta admit that I've expected some new creative look achievement with Dragon upgrade but according to these frames it hasn't changed much.

Technical specification is pretty good and at the end of the day it only costs 9,500 USD for EPIC owners. It's not like another 30,000 USD for a body.

 

[Samir Patel]

So, you are not a dop. You own a camera, full stop. I too own a football, does that make me a footballer...? Why am I not getting paid, I can kick the ball nice enough...?

With all due respect, your post was not only extremely naive and embarrassing but extremely offensive. It's people like you, that mean nothing to this business that give this forum a bad rep.

Nobody pays you for your work, but you feel that if someone shows a certain concern about Mark's footage, he is trolling... What do you know about anything my friend, to know what my concerns were?

Do you realize how pathetic you make this forum look to outsiders with people like you trying to pick up fights, out of sheer ignorance mixed with arrogance?

Get a life my friend, and you are very lucky that I even took the time and effort to tell you like it is.

Hilarious. Antonio. I do own a RED camera and yes by your analogy that does make me a Camera Owner. What part of that did you not understand? Just as you owning a football does not make you a footballer it makes you a football owner. Anyway that is as much acknowledgement I will make to an obvious troll that has 166 comments yet has no location stated where they are posting from. no website as part of their signature. No nothing to speak of. Continue your trolling. Just because you were outed you are pissed. Just come out with it.

 

[Elsie N]

I gotta admit that I've expected some new creative look achievement with Dragon upgrade but according to these frames it hasn't changed much.

Technical specification is pretty good and at the end of the day it costs only 9,500 USD for EPIC owners. It's not like another 30,000 USD for a body.

Mr. Cool... '-)

 

[Elsie N]

So, you are not a dop. You own a camera, full stop. I too own a football, does that make me a footballer...? Why am I not getting paid, I can kick the ball nice enough...?

With all due respect, your post was not only extremely naive and embarrassing but extremely offensive. It's people like you, that mean nothing to this business that give this forum a bad rep.

Nobody pays you for your work, but you feel that if someone shows a certain concern about Mark's footage, he is trolling... What do you know about anything my friend, to know what my concerns were?

Do you realize how pathetic you make this forum look to outsiders with people like you trying to pick up fights, out of sheer ignorance mixed with arrogance?

Get a life my friend, and you are very lucky that I even took the time and effort to tell you like it is.

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

 

[Nick Morrison]

I gotta admit that I've expected some new creative look achievement with Dragon upgrade but according to these frames it hasn't changed much.

Remember you are still seeing DRAGON processed with the CURRENT color science (RC3, RG3). We still haven't seen what Dragon can do when the next iteration of color science is presumably released with the next version of RCX that is DRAGON specific. There is an assumption (and hope) that RC4 and RG4 will provide even more insight into what DRAGON is fully capable of.

 

[Jannard]

Where did RED promise 20 stops? Everyone keeps saying that. You can get there with Dragon and HDRx but all we have said is 16 stops native...

I have also said that we can find more in the image than the camera that Mark shot.

Jim

I'm a bit confused. Didn't RED promise 20+ stops of DR? But based on Mark's test, it looks like only +1 stop in the highlights and +2 in the shadows? Is the DR expected to change drastically over the next few weeks?