KipperTie Lowcon OLPFs - sharpness/aliasing opinions

[John Marchant]

I think the reduser voice has been heard Thank you guys

 

[Mark Pugh]

I'm amazed by the conservative nature of the responses of this thread, and the amount of certainty, when nobody's had a chance to see the results of a less-aggressive OLPF, and compare it with Red's stock option. I'd be disappointed to not get the chance to compare options. Personally, at this stage I'd be less inclined to buy the Kippertie alternative, if all it provides is halation. I can get that from a filter. Please John, offer an peek at an alternative...

 

[John Marchant]

Don't worry, I'll show some examples when we're closer... I may yet have a solution to run sub-batches of these so I can offer broader choices. Stand by

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Stay close to the RED OLPF, but I would want it a bit sharper as long as halation or aliasing don't become an issue. Sharper is good when we can get it... At least for me, since I tend to pull a lot of stills and try to retain as much of the original resolution/ pixels as I can.

 

[Brandon J.F.]

Don't worry, I'll show some examples when we're closer... I may yet have a solution to run sub-batches of these so I can offer broader choices. Stand by

That would be great. I could see wanting to use each of these depending on the project. I often use old lenses for narrative film work because I want a softer image, but I would love to have the option of using modern glass with a softer OLPF. If we could vote for more than 1, I would go for option 2 and 3.

 

[Craig Lees]

Hi John. Both sharpness and normal? They're swappable anyway? You could call the sharp one the 1K, 2K super slowmo olpf. I'd definitely swap a sharp one in for slomo shooting at lower res. But then that would probably be a separate supersharp OLPF with no lowcon? Les Dittert had some interesting results on reduser removing the OLPF completely for high speed 2K shooting which looked great. Obviously won't work well when filming brick walls & checkered jackets etc due to aliasing but then swap with one that best optimises the content.
I really like the swappable OLPF concept. Right tool for the right job. I can see myself swapping these out in the field in some strange places like public toilets lol.
if you're looking for any testing in south UK, let me know.
Keep up the good work!

Craig Lees
ED UK
3dstories.co.uk
craig@3dstories.co.uk

 

[scott devitte]

That would be great. I could see wanting to use each of these depending on the project. I often use old lenses for narrative film work because I want a softer image, but I would love to have the option of using modern glass with a softer OLPF. If we could vote for more than 1, I would go for option 2 and 3.

I am here with you on this, I am testing some old Canon LTMs with the Leica mount. They render lovely, problem is wides don't exist or don't work . I would love an OLPF that gave me some of that dreaminess on my wide Cine Primes or Efs.

 

[antoine carpentier]

2 olpfs:
- for modern lenses : lowcon1/8 and just a bit softer
- for old (anamorphic) lenses : same contrast but sharper

THx!

 

[Nick Morrison]

If we could vote for more than 1, I would go for option 2 and 3.

+1
Agreed!

 

[Björn Benckert]

So John when can we buy these new LoCon OLPF's and do we get a package deal if we buy all three? LoConSharp,LoConMid,LoConSoft... And then it would be great to have at least 3 levels of contrast to choose between as well, making it into a matrix of 9


A bit of a joke but, making it into a matrix of 27 or so that goes from less to more haloation and with 3 steps of predebayer behind lens softness would make the camera so much more.

 

[Wey Wang]

Our softening / halation / lowcon is a thing in its own right. I want to get a little glow around highlights, a little lift of shadows, but no veiling across a scene from a large bright source.

Because its rear of lens, none of the pre-existing strengths of filtration apply conceptually... and we're working to minimise the appearance of artefacts in the bokeh which show up with rear filters (ie nets can be visible in the bokeh quite clearly).

I may yet make a heavy version that uses a real net embedded in the glass for people who want that look without the pain and fiddlyness.

I love the idea of a net embedded in the OLPF. I rarely use nets because of the pain and the fiddlyness, more often than not, just don't have the time for it on set. Embedding it in the OLPF would be amazing!

 

[John Marchant]

How do people feel about needing to make actual adjustments to backfocus after swapping an OLPF?

We recommend checking, but design to avoid any real change. Going substantially softer on the OLPF means changing the overall thickness, and hence impacting backfocus. Not sure that's smart in my book.

 

[Nick Morrison]

How do people feel about needing to make actual adjustments to backfocus after swapping an OLPF?

We recommend checking, but design to avoid any real change. Going substantially softer on the OLPF means changing the overall thickness, and hence impacting backfocus. Not sure that's smart in my book.

I'd certainly prefer not to adjust back focus...

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

Personally I've always felt like RED is slightly too aggressive on their OLPF. I would lean towards slightly sharper.

Yes. Feel the same.

Hans

 

[Björn Benckert]

How do people feel about needing to make actual adjustments to backfocus after swapping an OLPF?

We recommend checking, but design to avoid any real change. Going substantially softer on the OLPF means changing the overall thickness, and hence impacting backfocus. Not sure that's smart in my book.

Go for it, I think if you can make a dope olpf that changes everything then that does not really matter. With all the things we go through on a daily basis to achieve better image results a little back focus calibration procedure is not going to stop things from happening...

And as a suggestion you could possibly have a little print on such olpf mount that for example says "dial back focus about 45 degrees counter clockwise for this olpf"...

As I think if the glas is thicker / have different braking index it will still be a consistent change from the normal setting. So if people don't have a tool to calibrate with they can get a decent back focus by following such instruction.

Also I think it´s quite easy to be on one olpf and a given set focus on the wall infront of you and read the markings... Then take of lens, mount and olfp, put on new olpf,mount and same lens and make sure the marking is the same... then check focus on the wall and if it´s off calibrate with the back focus screw and then check your infinity marks and a few others, and most likely you have a good back focus with the new OLPF... easy as one, two, three Or just get a RED focus and it takes a few seconds to calibrate.

 

[Nils Ruinet]

I think I'd like both ;-)
- a low con halation OLPF that matches Red's OLPF in terms of sharpness. I guess it would be counter-productive to make that one too sharps, as what most people who are buying it will be looking for a softer more cinematic look, not a mega-sharp one.
- a normal OLPF but without (or with much lower) low pass filter, because there are definitely situations where I would want the sharpest possible image. Not for faces or so, but for wide shots of cities, landscapes, etc...