Dragon Reality Check

[Carlos Reyes]

What is it that people are so worried about? I cant understand this obsession with "low light." Are people trying to light entire movies with a candle?

Take a look at Her, shot with Alexa wide open using ambient light and small LEDs. http://www.icgmagazine.com/wordpress...nts-my-dreams/

Dragon has been proven to AT LEAST match Alexa in DR though its probably more based on whats been written here by very respected members of the industry, there has been an obvious improvement in the noise floor, better compression schemes. The color science is much improved and the skin tones I've seen look phenomenal, and we all know things are being tweaked so we can expect even more improvement which is kind of mind blowing. The camera can shoot up to 100 FPS at 6K and even higher FPS as you window down to less resolution (Funny how I'm referring to 4K as less resolution). It has a bigger than S35 sized sensor at 6K which yields a different look and one many have been asking for, and for those complaining about lens coverage you get a S35 size sensor at 5K.

For $10K you get to upgrade your camera to AT LEAST the equivalent of a 6K Alexa, though I'd say when everything settles a bit I'd expect Dragon to outshine Alexa in at least a couple of ways, only because its new technology just as I'd expect the 4K Alexa to have obvious improvements over the original Alexa.

Some peoples expectations on here dont make any sense to me, and I guess hyping up the sensor for at least two years didnt help that situation.

You get an entirely new camera for $10K. If that doesnt blow your fucking mind I dont know what will. Buy a GH 4K for $2K which im sure will make some nice images and be done with it.

The Epic with all its quirks and perceived issues already has the ability of creating phenomenal images, many of which are playing at tens thousands of theaters world wide. Now Dragon kicks everything up a couple of notches and people are still complaining. There are no excuses anymore, the camera can't be blamed at this point.

Please let me know if I'm crazy or what I'm missing here.

 

[Stephen Franchek]

There's no replacement for a good lighting setup. When you have to make do without a full lighting kit and crew, it's nice having a camera that can squeeze every bit of detail out of your available light.
Not to mention, Jim Jannard personally promised us a much more sensitive camera. Remember that post?
I've yet to see a low light test vs the MX sensor, both recording at 4k. Hopefully Jannard didn't over-promise and under-deliver. From the Dragon footage I've seen so far I don't think that's the case, but a side by side is still very important

 

[Chris Henze]

Well said Carlos, my thoughts exactly. Shut up and shoot. If the Dragon's not for you, move on.

 

[Ted Parkes]

+ 1 Carlos . I'll just add that every Craftsman has more then one tool in their kit.

 

[Bob Gundu]

There's is more than enough dragon footage to download and see for yourself if it's worth the upgrade. I look forward to getting the upgrade soon!

 

[Les Dittert]

Nobody is complaining. At least I'm not.
However some people are primarily looking for less noise than the MX sensor . My shooting style has no 'lighting kit' as I shoot run N gun in difficult 'available darkness' locations.
For example: The inside of a temple. A street market at night. etc. Not America . Many times more fire than filaments.
The MX has worked well enough for me. I'm looking forward to the Dragon sensor, and I want to see a clear side by side example in 4K showing what exactly I can expect.

 

[Adam Rook]

I agree, too. My dad always said, "Do the best you can with what you have."
I'm in love with what I'm seeing from Dragon and honestly I can't wait to see what Arri comes up with next. Because you know RED will do whatever it takes to trump it. In the end we all win.

What an exciting time to be alive!

 

[D Fuller]

There's no replacement for a good lighting setup. When you have to make do without a full lighting kit and crew, it's nice having a camera that can squeeze every bit of detail out of your available light.
Not to mention, Jim Jannard personally promised us a much more sensitive camera. Remember that post?
I've yet to see a low light test vs the MX sensor, both recording at 4k. Hopefully Jannard didn't over-promise and under-deliver. From the Dragon footage I've seen so far I don't think that's the case, but a side by side is still very important

Why in the world would you even want a comparison of both shooting 4k? Photographically, that makes no sense. Sure, the pixel count would be the same, but how is that important? The sensor size and field of view would be different. It you want to make an apples-to-apples comparison, it would require the same lens and the same sensor size, so that the lens's rendering is equalized. That would mean comparing MX at 4k and Dragon at 5k, or some other combination that equalizes sensor size rather than resolution.

Increased resolution is part of the design of the Dragon sensor. You have to include that increased resolution in any comparison.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Jannard did not over promise or under deliver. Rather the opposite...

If you want to create images, create them.

Lights are a good tool for that.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Dragon is probably the all-in-all coolest thing around for quite a while.

I will get a proper realitycheck on that statement shortly, but still...

One of the things I love with it, is that it can eat MORE light, and less.

If anything, RED has undersold the DR on the Dragon vs the Epic.
What takes a bit of hands-on with it, is to figure out that THAT is not the only thing that makes it Rock.

Even with little to "none" lights, a photographer has to shape the shot. The camera can never do that for you.

Pointing the camera at "whatever" and think that it somehow miraculously will look like a million bucks... Sorry. Aint gonna happen.

What counts to me, is the potential of the camera, and for the Dragon, that is pretty insane.

 

[Stephen Franchek]

Why in the world would you even want a comparison of both shooting 4k? Photographically, that makes no sense. Sure, the pixel count would be the same, but how is that important? The sensor size and field of view would be different. It you want to make an apples-to-apples comparison, it would require the same lens and the same sensor size, so that the lens's rendering is equalized. That would mean comparing MX at 4k and Dragon at 5k, or some other combination that equalizes sensor size rather than resolution.

Increased resolution is part of the design of the Dragon sensor. You have to include that increased resolution in any comparison.

There are those of us who don't need 6k for the time being. It's a nice thing to have but 4k is an amazing video resolution. I realize the dragon will have a larger crop factor at 4k, but I'll still be able to tell which image has more detail and less noise. I hope noone takes this as me bashing Red or their products. Every camera red has produced will be an amazing camera FOREVER. It's just important to analyze every aspect of a professional product and it's surprising that there's been no apples to apples comparison.
Increased light sensitivity should not come at the cost of higher data rates.
So that's why I want a 4k vs 4k comparison. To know once and for all if Dragon is more sensitive on the individual photosite level or if it uses increased resolution to lower perceived noise.

 

[Nick Morrison]

There are those of us who don't need 6k for the time being. It's a nice thing to have but 4k is an amazing video resolution. I realize the dragon will have a larger crop factor at 4k, but I'll still be able to tell which image has more detail and less noise. I hope noone takes this as me bashing Red or their products. Every camera red has produced will be an amazing camera FOREVER. It's just important to analyze every aspect of a professional product and it's surprising that there's been no apples to apples comparison.
Increased light sensitivity should not come at the cost of higher data rates.
So that's why I want a 4k vs 4k comparison. To know once and for all if Dragon is more sensitive on the individual photosite level or if it uses increased resolution to lower perceived noise.

Personally I'd rather shoot Epic at 5K, Dragon at 6K, and then downscale both to 4k...and see that comparison...so we're seeing both cameras at their best!

 

[Stephen Franchek]

Jannard did not over promise or under deliver. Rather the opposite...

If you want to create images, create them.

Lights are a good tool for that.

I agree, there's no replacement for lights. However, some of my clients have no choice but to use available light. I'm speaking for the little productions who want to shoot Red 4k but sometimes can't because of the noise floor and lack of resources to buy/support proper lightning. I can't tell them "go spend money you don't have on either lights, or more hard dives for the 6k footage. That's like telling man with no legs to "walk it off"

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Personally I'd rather shoot Epic at 5K, Dragon at 6K, and then downscale both to 4k...and see that comparison...so we're seeing both cameras at their best!

I kinda published exactly that...

 

[Gunleik Groven]

I agree, there's no replacement for lights. However, some of my clients have no choice but to use available light. I'm speaking for the little productions who want to shoot Red 4k but sometimes can't because of the noise floor and lack of resources to buy/support proper lightning. I can't tell them "go spend money you don't have on either lights, or more hard dives for the 6k footage. That's like telling man with no legs to "walk it off"

Available lights is a fair thing.

For some stuff, I do it a lot.

My point is that available lights is not like "not deciding how to use the lights you have", being a match, a halogen lamp, streetlights or whatever.

You can shoot Dragon at higher compressions than epic with better results. Filesizes are not really a good argument...

 

[Bob Gundu]

It's one of the arguments as to why Epic footage is less noisy than Scarlet. Shooting 5K and downsampling to 4K reducing much of it. Dragon is also beginning with denser pixels which will also contribute to pristine images a 4K.

 

[Stephen Franchek]

Available lights is a fair thing.

For some stuff, I do it a lot.

My point is that available lights is not like "not deciding how to use the lights you have", being a match, a halogen lamp, streetlights or whatever.

You can shoot Dragon at higher compressions than epic with better results. Filsizes are not really a good argument...

That's a good point. I do now remember that someone said 18:1 is now a usable compression ratio. If that's true then I have nothing more to say about the light sensitivity

 

[Gunleik Groven]

13:1 works well for many things. All Peter Collisters examples are shot at that.

It is pretty handleable.

I have not tested 18:1

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

What is it that people are so worried about? I cant understand this obsession with "low light." Are people trying to light entire movies with a candle?

Take a look at Her, shot with Alexa wide open using ambient light and small LEDs. http://www.icgmagazine.com/wordpress...nts-my-dreams/

Dragon has been proven to AT LEAST match Alexa in DR though its probably more based on whats been written here by very respected members of the industry, there has been an obvious improvement in the noise floor, better compression schemes. The color science is much improved and the skin tones I've seen look phenomenal, and we all know things are being tweaked so we can expect even more improvement which is kind of mind blowing. The camera can shoot up to 100 FPS at 6K and even higher FPS as you window down to less resolution (Funny how I'm referring to 4K as less resolution). It has a bigger than S35 sized sensor at 6K which yields a different look and one many have been asking for, and for those complaining about lens coverage you get a S35 size sensor at 5K.

For $10K you get to upgrade your camera to AT LEAST the equivalent of a 6K Alexa, though I'd say when everything settles a bit I'd expect Dragon to outshine Alexa in at least a couple of ways, only because its new technology just as I'd expect the 4K Alexa to have obvious improvements over the original Alexa.

Some peoples expectations on here dont make any sense to me, and I guess hyping up the sensor for at least two years didnt help that situation.

You get an entirely new camera for $10K. If that doesnt blow your fucking mind I dont know what will. Buy a GH 4K for $2K which im sure will make some nice images and be done with it.

The Epic with all its quirks and perceived issues already has the ability of creating phenomenal images, many of which are playing at tens thousands of theaters world wide. Now Dragon kicks everything up a couple of notches and people are still complaining. There are no excuses anymore, the camera can't be blamed at this point.

Please let me know if I'm crazy or what I'm missing here.

You can't blame the camera even with an Epic MX (seriously, you're a loser if you do, just quit the business now) so… Agree with you.

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

It's one of the arguments as to why Epic footage is less noisy than Scarlet. Shooting 5K and downsampling to 4K reducing much of it. Dragon is also beginning with denser pixels which will also contribute to pristine images a 4K.

And even better ability to use tools like Neat Video. 2K / 1080p / 4K - since human eyes can't really see the difference (unless your face is pressed up against the screen) "true 4K" is kinda irrelevant, but being able to be aggressive with noise reduction and still have a nice sharp textured image is certainly not irrelevant.