Low light test with the dragon

[Pascal Payant]

This is a small test that i did with the Red dragon
Red gamma 2 applied. it was shot on redlogfilm
Canon 24mm, 1.4, iso800
I had to apply the gamma2 to remove some of the noise.
It's dark but i think it's like a cool dark

and i've added another one in day light

 

[Brandon J.F.]

Do you mean Red Color 2 and Redlogfilm?

Can you share an R3D snapshot (single frame) from these?

 

[sergio arguello]

which olpf v1 or v2

 

[David Battistella]

Why not post an r3d?


battistella

 

[Julio Quintana]

It is of course a matter of taste, but because there is so little contrast in these shots I feel they are too dark when processed at this ISO setting. Realistically you would have to push these images to 1600 or 2000 ISO to achieve any sort of normal night scene brightness levels. This would definitely be muddy and reveal noise, but I think it would be a more useful test of the sensor in low light conditions.

 

[Pascal Payant]

The goal of the test was to crank as little iso as possible.
I know 800 was the max i could have gone to have a clean result. Yes it's dark but i like the moodyness of the scene
It was Dragon color and logfilm. then in REdcine X i've change log film to gamma color 2

 

[Michael Tiemann]

The goal of the test was to crank as little iso as possible.
I know 800 was the max i could have gone to have a clean result. Yes it's dark but i like the moodyness of the scene
It was Dragon color and logfilm. then in REdcine X i've change log film to gamma color 2

I have posted some lighting tests on this forum and people have told me that I underexposed my images. Those images had a lot more light hitting the sensor than yours do. I thought that my photos were nice and moody. I think that your photos don't look moody--they just look wildly underexposed. Which tells me that these images are in no way a test of the DRAGON sensor. They are a test of the person who is viewing them, and in particular, where they draw the line between artistic creativity and technical failure. Your tests (especially the harp image) show that we draw those lines very differently.

 

[Pascal Payant]

I don't think insulting people who try stuff will do you any good.
it was not a technical failure. i brought it down,it was lighter then this but way too grainy at 1200 ISO and more

 

[Michael Tiemann]

Pascal, I'm not trying to insult anybody. I'm just saying that in the case of these images (especially the harp image), I do not see "a cool dark". I'm not saying you are wrong to see it. I'm not saying everybody else is wrong if they can see it. I'm merely reporting that I don't see it. And that what I do see--a lack of appropriate lighting--is so overwhelming that I cannot see anything else. And I admit that that's personal to me. If you think my interpretation of your test is invalid, then discard it as junk data. I won't be insulted ;-)

 

[David Battistella]

it was shot on redlogfilm

I don't get what you mean by this?

You had the camera set to REDlog film while you were filming?

Battistella

 

[Lakis Amarantithis]

Nice shots. Well balanced! I am almost sure this is V2 olpf. The V1 will give you more light and the Clear olpf in 2 months will give you even more. And if you can't wait (like me) you can get the olpf out and get 4 extra stops. Well.. it might not be 4 full stops but that's how it feels like.