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 :)

Dragon??? So after nearly 10months what do we think? NATIVE 2000ASA no 18stops no ..

There's no RAW decoding in the SDK
 
Björn Benckert said:
So zooming into the 6k image and see a small loss of detail when the DEB is at work is not so much to complain about is it? If RED would just have choosen to not make a DEB toggle switch and instead just used it on all dragon files most of us would all just be happy to have lost the noise, not many would be able to spot the difference in lost detail without being able to click back and forth or have side by side comparison in 1:1. Again most camera manufacturers would not give you the opportunity to see those options.. Mostly because too many options usually cause confusion and rejection among the less informed... So personally I'm happy that RED does not have to much of that type of DNA, instead they toss things out there for us to experiment with and giving us options. I find that as a very nice gesture and it has to take quite a bit of balls to do so over and over again, especially when everytime they do it, their own forum gets flooded with negative threads about what they do. But then again I think they tackle also that part pretty well.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... you can take DNG files from Blackmagic cameras and de-Bayer them however you want to.

And more importantly: RED is marketing this as a DSMC camera, not a DMC camera, right?

With EVERY OTHER still camera brand, there are a LOT MORE options for de-Bayering and RAW conversion actually.

Don't tell me photographers don't care about pixel-level detail because why else would we have Capture One, DXO, Lightroom, etc all developing their own de-noise and de-Bayer algorithms?

RED is still quite limited by comparison.

It's just the usual Reduser hypocrisy - on one hand folks talk about how much better RED is because it's 6K and not 2.8K like an Alexa. They talk about how that its resolution means it can be used as a still camera too.

Then on the other hand people are like "no no no please don't zoom in and view the actual pixels."

Anyone producing images for print, etc (which RED is advertised to do, right?) would find that argument absurd.

To me the criteria for image quality is really simple: get the best image quality. and part of that (not the majority, but part of it for sure) involves pixel peeping.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top