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 thoughts

Mark, thank you for testing this..... As more and more of us test the camera an shoot it in more situations we will learn more and more about the sensor and the color science.

And please everyone let us not make this about Dragon vs. Alexa. Arri is not going anywhere. This is just the Moore's law evolutionary path and Red has done their homework, listerned to all of you and has worked long hours to create Dragon.
I think of it like when Kodak came out with T Grain. (hopefully there are some of us old DPs out there who remember that!)
 
Yup. Good plan to keep the "vs" discussions off the track, at least until everything is done and it is it tested in a relevant context, which would be something like testing for a particular shootingstyle for a specific show or movie when cameras are actually released... :)

And with all images we get to see, let us just rejoice the gifts and remember:

it is not done yet
it is not done yet
it is not done yet
 
Mark and Tom, didn't the Dragon that Tom tested have a newer OLPF than the one Mark had? That might be a red dot fix in the newer version. I remember Jarred or someone saying that Mark didn't have the new OLPF for his test...
 
Peter Lyons Collister said:
Mark, thank you for testing this..... As more and more of us test the camera an shoot it in more situations we will learn more and more about the sensor and the color science.

And please everyone let us not make this about Dragon vs. Alexa. Arri is not going anywhere. This is just the Moore's law evolutionary path and Red has done their homework, listerned to all of you and has worked long hours to create Dragon.
I think of it like when Kodak came out with T Grain. (hopefully there are some of us old DPs out there who remember that!)
Click to expand...

I agree with what you say, but for a while, I think Dragon will be THE hot item for rental, and will create a few converts from the Arri camp who will stick around afterwards, or at least mix-and-match, so there will be more Dragon demand. At least agencies won't ask us to shoot Alexa as much "because they've heard " this or that. I actually like the Alexa in some ways, but this will definitely help me rent our gear more often than we do now.
 
How much more sensitive to light is the new Dragon sensor in dark situation? Do we gain +1 stop? Is the need for T1.3 Super Speed Lenses lessened by this sensor? What about the lower noise floor, how does that help?

Tom?

Mark?

Phil?
 
Will Keir said:
How much more sensitive to light is the new Dragon sensor in dark situation? Do we gain +1 stop? Is the need for T1.3 Super Speed Lenses lessened by this sensor? What about the lower noise floor, how does that help?
Click to expand...

I'll shoot something for you on this one. Yes, the lower noise floor is a big part of the equation. In terms of shooting sensitivity I think some will find the difference as Tom describe really, but each will have their own opinion. I'd say it's somewhere around 2 more stops on the "floor side" of things. I have a good idea for a test on this one.
 
Peter Lyons Collister said:
Mark, thank you for testing this..... As more and more of us test the camera an shoot it in more situations we will learn more and more about the sensor and the color science.

And please everyone let us not make this about Dragon vs. Alexa. Arri is not going anywhere. This is just the Moore's law evolutionary path and Red has done their homework, listerned to all of you and has worked long hours to create Dragon.
I think of it like when Kodak came out with T Grain. (hopefully there are some of us old DPs out there who remember that!)
Click to expand...

I have respect for all camera manufacturers and their efforts and especially Red. Let us take Dragon on its merits which so far look excellent and lets not have another flaming war. Peter is right.
 
Mick van Rossum said:
any tests done in let's say 200-300 FPS in 2K and 3K ? 2K was never usable for me, just curious if the quality has improved with Dragon.
Click to expand...

Sorry Tom for answering this one.

Mick, you really need good sharp glass when shooting 2k, 3k.. even with the Dragon...and never ever shoot under exposed ! - Shooting at 2000asa I noticed alot of noise myself, shooting at 250-320 iso looked more than usuable.
Keep to these simple rules and you can shoot 3k and 2k all day. :)

Here is a test from my very first EPIC M I received close to 2 years ago. using pin sharp glass and low ISO.

 
That would be cool to gain 2 stops. That would make a zoom lens at T2.8 become a Super Speed Zoom on the Dragon sensor at T1.3. That's Fing awesome!

Phil Holland said:
I'll shoot something for you on this one. Yes, the lower noise floor is a big part of the equation. In terms of shooting sensitivity I think some will find the difference as Tom describe really, but each will have their own opinion. I'd say it's somewhere around 2 more stops on the "floor side" of things. I have a good idea for a test on this one.
Click to expand...
 
So a zoom lens at T2.8 would have the same DOF but with +2 stops more light. OH YA!

What other characteristics?

Robert Ruffo New said:
Well no, because the depth of field and other characteristics would still be different.
Click to expand...
 
Will Keir said:
So a zoom lens at T2.8 would have the same DOF but with +2 stops more light. OH YA!

What other characteristics?
Click to expand...

I find your reaction strange. Do you really often find the MX is not sensitive enough to get a shot? Do you always want as much depth of field as possible? (I would answer NO to both those questions, but I guess to each their own.)
 
Aperture, depth of field, and lighting are tricky mistresses. And I enjoy spending time with all of them.

The allure of more sensitivity can certainly come based on a variety of factors. Shooting with practicals, shooting in with ambient sources, shooting in dark places without fast glass, shooting at night, etc....

Typically on a production set we can plan ahead and light for T whatever. That's all good. However, sometimes and especially these days you can indeed get away with not having a generator on location if you so choose.

There's many ways too shoot. Narrative speaking It's pretty much a world between T2.8-5.6 in my overall experience on set. However, I shoot a good about at T8-10 for other reasons and types of shots. I also enjoy T1.3-T2 a hell of a lot to play with focus within the shot. No one way to shoot and a great deal of us don't always shoot talking heads, not to say that's not the bread and butter for a lot of people.

It's about creative control and having more sensity is often better than not. You can always knock it down, but it's real tricky to lift it up sometimes.
 
Phil Holland said:
Aperture, depth of field, and lighting are tricky mistresses. And I enjoy spending time with all of them.

The allure of more sensitivity can certainly come based on a variety of factors. Shooting with practicals, shooting in with ambient sources, shooting in dark places without fast glass, shooting at night, etc....

Typically on a production set we can plan ahead and light for T whatever. That's all good. However, sometimes and especially these days you can indeed get away with not having a generator on location if you so choose.

There's many ways too shoot. Narrative speaking It's pretty much a world between T2.8-5.6 in my overall experience on set. However, I shoot a good about at T8-10 for other reasons and types of shots. I also enjoy T1.3-T2 a hell of a lot to play with focus within the shot. No one way to shoot and a great deal of us don't always shoot talking heads, not to say that's not the bread and butter for a lot of people.

It's about creative control and having more sensity is often better than not. You can always knock it down, but it's real tricky to lift it up sometimes.
Click to expand...

As usual your answer is spot on Phil! Agreed on all your points! :)
 
Robert Ruffo New said:
Do you really often find the MX is not sensitive enough to get a shot?
Click to expand...

Yes. It's also an issue with introduced noise in low light situations in the blacks and compression artifacts in the blacks. You can't add more light when the sun goes down.

Robert Ruffo New said:
Do you always want as much depth of field as possible?
Click to expand...

Depend on the work. They are different tools for different situations and feels. CU work on an actor, I love shallow DoF. I love the deep DoF for awesome vista shots.

Don't take my answer too seriously, they are only movies.
 
Phil Holland said:
Aperture, depth of field, and lighting are tricky mistresses. And I enjoy spending time with all of them.

The allure of more sensitivity can certainly come based on a variety of factors. Shooting with practicals, shooting in with ambient sources, shooting in dark places without fast glass, shooting at night, etc....

Typically on a production set we can plan ahead and light for T whatever. That's all good. However, sometimes and especially these days you can indeed get away with not having a generator on location if you so choose.

There's many ways too shoot. Narrative speaking It's pretty much a world between T2.8-5.6 in my overall experience on set. However, I shoot a good about at T8-10 for other reasons and types of shots. I also enjoy T1.3-T2 a hell of a lot to play with focus within the shot. No one way to shoot and a great deal of us don't always shoot talking heads, not to say that's not the bread and butter for a lot of people.

It's about creative control and having more sensity is often better than not. You can always knock it down, but it's real tricky to lift it up sometimes.
Click to expand...

Yes, fair enough. BTW I don;t shoot many talking heads :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top