Dragon vs Epic MX colors

[AndreasOberg]

Hi,
I just had the fortune to see my first Epic Dragon footage live this weekend (Tom kindly showed his amazing setup!). And I must say that I was shocked by how much better the colors appeared that our Dragon Epic MX. I could instantly spot it on the screen in the camera. (We missed the Dragon upgrade with 2 month beeing between projects, bah!)

Now I wonder is this only due to the sensor or could there be other things going on here?
- Better white balance calibration. I can be a bit sloppy since I often shoot outside in harsh terrain. We bought a color match board, that should help.
- Better blackshading. I don't do blackshading that often, usually I set it up for outdoors temperature.
- Better lenses. I normally shoot with Canon but Tom had Leica Summicron lenses

I just feel that I always have to work quite much with my Epic MX footage to get rid of a greenish/brown tint.

After reading online I thought the colours would be better, but not *crazy* much better.
Is this what you others experience as well?
Cheers!
/Andreas

 

[Gunleik Groven]

As mentioned too often, colors and saturation is my reason to upgrade. The difference is striking.
You can make Dragon look like MX, but not MX look like Dragon...

 

[Matthew Quinn]

It's interesting because I'm editing my 3rd feature shot on dragons, and the footage is amazing. BUT i just watched a screening of a film i shot 2 years ago with the MX and woah baby it looks nice.. maybe im just pumped but there really IS something about the MX i truly like, its gritty and real to me.. at any rate they are both great sensors

 

[Mike P.]

On MX I've noticed a huge difference with types of light; anything other than daylight never looks as good or as saturated, to the point where I actually prefer to recover slightly underexposed-daylight-sources, then go with a properly exposed tungsten-sources... The colours just look better and it actually subdues noise substantially since the blue channel is well fed.

Similarly, I think Dragon does much better with mixed sources than MX (though still not as good as Alexa).

Off topic but, Andreas even though you missed the Dragon upgrade, you can get a Raven for less than the upgrade price and keep your Epic... Just saying. Heh heh.

 

[AndreasOberg]

As mentioned too often, colors and saturation is my reason to upgrade. The difference is striking.
You can make Dragon look like MX, but not MX look like Dragon...

That is what I felt when looking. Difference was striking! I will do some more details tests using the same glass and lighting with both Dragon and MX.

Cheers
/Andreas

 

[PatrickFaith]

Some people "get" mx color space, others dont. As a beginner I could never grade mx but i dont have a problem grading Dragon. what i should have done for mx is get a expert to create a redloffilm 3d lut for me in nuke, but i am glad i moved to dragon. i btw love the luminence of the mx sensor a bit more then dragon, i still have a monochrome mx.

 

[Hal Long]

The difference between MX and Dragon is striking, but I would still happily shoot MX if my Dragon weren't available for some reason. I really loved the look of my MX projects before and after the grades. No reason to feel ashamed about that camera.

 

[Zeb B]

Last night I was looking through some old MX high fashion footie that I shot years ago in NYC . . . wow! The MX was way ahead of its time. Combined with the right lens / lighting / subject combo . . . it was (and can still very much be) da shit

 

[Doug Beatty]

RED knocked the Epic MX so far out of the park that Dragon really didn't make sense to chase as an upgrade, being late to the party. No regrets missing the upgrade now that Raven is so close.

If we need Dragon w/ PL lenses (never been an issue for us, BTW), I feel renting a Dragon DSMC will become twice as much more affordable than it was during the NAB upgrade rush. Good times!

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Last night I was looking through some old MX high fashion footie that I shot years ago in NYC . . . wow! The MX was way ahead of its time. Combined with the right lens / lighting / subject combo . . . it was (and can still very much be) da shit

To this I agree.
Still the fidelity improvements with Dragon (which I originally didn't plan to upgrade to) were so striking that it was really no question for me after seeing it.

 

[Zeb B]

Currently the best value on the Market: used full Epic MX kit with RED PP or Leica R lenses. Out of fashion but still cutting edge in the right hands

 

[Zeb B]

Circa 2012, shot on Canon glass, screen shot of R3D in RCX with no adjustments. I had a bunch of magical moments with my Epic-M

 

[Peter Hodgins]

Hi,
I just had the fortune to see my first Epic Dragon footage live this weekend (Tom kindly showed his amazing setup!). And I must say that I was shocked by how much better the colors appeared that our Dragon Epic MX. I could instantly spot it on the screen in the camera. (We missed the Dragon upgrade with 2 month beeing between projects, bah!)

You do know of course that what you see on the camera screen has no bearing on what your chip is recording as an .r3d. Send the .r3d's thru Redline-X then compare! The screen image may be just RED catering to most Director's misunderstandings of the Camera technology.

 

[Björn Benckert]

You do know of course that what you see on the camera screen has no bearing on what your chip is recording as an .r3d. Send the .r3d's thru Redline-X then compare! The screen image may be just RED catering to most Director's misunderstandings of the Camera technology.

Well depends what kind of screen you are using, on your camera, no?

 

[AndreasOberg]

Well depends what kind of screen you are using, on your camera, no?

I use the Red 9" Haven't done any special calibrations on it, just set the white balance. Do I need to do any more I think the screen is pretty representative of what I get on the computer.
/Andreas

 

[Doug Beatty]

I use the Red 9" Haven't done any special calibrations on it, just set the white balance. Do I need to do any more I think the screen is pretty representative of what I get on the computer.
/Andreas

This is 100% false in the case of the 5" Touch. It's a great monitor because it is bright and rugged, but if I am judging exposure solely looking at the touch monitor, I can be fairly certain I'm under exposing by 1.5 stops minimum. The touch is not meant to be used for critical, accurate HSL decisions. The SmallHD 502 blows it out of the water in that regard.