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 :)

Meaning of 16.5 stops of Dynamic Range

Ramesh Jai said:
More a reproductive activity..
Click to expand...

FADE IN:
INT. A Laboritory - NIGHT

A MAD SCIENTIST sits at a desk by a computer, furiously clicking the mouse. On the desk, connected to the computer via two USB powered electrodes is a large, wet, undulating wad of tissue, next to it a bottle of Jergens.

MAD SCIENTIST
It's alive! It's alive!
Fade OUT.​
 
Last edited:
Mark Wuerthner ,
thanks for your SEKONIC test , in this test are showing this :

Alexa 18.9 DR total
11.9 usable

Dragon 16.3DR total old OLPF
13.6 usable

well we 're saying that Dragon has more usable dynamic range about 1.7 DR!!! ,
then why do you claim the opposite?

However, this test is done poorly, the line is not closed ! ? ! ?
Surely you've done something wrong ! !
You've taken my old place and you just pasted the result ...
I had to remove it from the forum ... it was better .. and repost the correct one.

This should make you realize how hard it is to do testing, and each has different results.



¨¨¨¨¨I redid Alexa sekonic, well here are the results.¨¨¨¨
I find a way to remake soon with the new OLPF .

dr_zps93e7ec98.jpg
[/URL][/IMG][/QUOTE]
Luigi, I believe you are misinterpreting these charts. The green line on the chart is put there arbitrarily by the person making the chart as a setting on their light meter. The green lines have nothing to do with how much dynamic range a camera is showing. You could put the green lines at +/- 1 stop above mid gray if you wanted to, it has nothing to do with the dynamic range of a camera, the lines only tell the user where they are placing their exposure in regards to the exposure range of the camera.
 
Mark Wuerthner said:
Mark Wuerthner ,

Luigi, I believe you are misinterpreting these charts. The green line on the chart is put there arbitrarily by the person making the chart as a setting on their light meter. The green lines have nothing to do with how much dynamic range a camera is showing. You could put the green lines at +/- 1 stop above mid gray if you wanted to, it has nothing to do with the dynamic range of a camera, the lines only tell the user where they are placing their exposure in regards to the exposure range of the camera.
Click to expand...

MARK , we put the poles where I can use a maximum of DR Alexa ... the rest can not seem to recover more so for me it is not "usable" or better where I can pull anything including saturation ....
Same thing looking at the chart of John ..
The stakes are conservative in what we can use to extract something good or better.

I found this on Alexa, and I see that this post reflects what I'm seeing around me and my colleagues.
http://www.ryanewalters.com/Blog/blog.php?id=8375868975844575706

this to let you know that we are closely equal to Alexa as DR or maybe something less or maybe something more.:smiley:
 
Kemalettin Sert said:
thanks, Kemalettin you have new or old OLPF ?
Click to expand...

old one..[/QUOTE]

ok thanks;)
The New have more up :), it could close the gap that I see now in the high lights, in addition to other improvements, I hope soon you will receive the email exchange;)
As soon as you receive this remake still test out of curiosity :)

Thank you Man.
 
Andy Corleone said:
What make you believed that a different OLPF will make any changes on the DR of any camera?
Click to expand...

It seems you and some others in this thread don't realize that a new sensor calibration accompanies the new OLPF and those two things together account for the change in dynamic range.

People who know this fact use "new OLPF" as a shorthand reference to denote better color performance and extended dynamic range on the high end over the "old OLPF." And, "old OLPF" refers to the initial Dragon OLPF, not the MX one.

Some people are dismissing mention of the new OLPF as wishful thinking and fanboyism when it's they who aren't understanding the facts.

As others have mentioned numerous times, there are no DR comparisons between Alexa and Dragon using the new OLPF and sensor calibration…yet.

So, people need to stop using obsolete data from what amounts to pre-release specs as evidence of Dragon's performance. All shipping cameras currently have the new OLPF (and all the improvements that come with it).
 
Last edited:
Brian Boyer said:
I
So, people need to stop using obsolete data from what amounts to pre-release specs as evidence of Dragon's performance. All shipping cameras currently have the new OLPF (and all the improvements that come with it).
Click to expand...

I don't think people were looking at the 'pre release spec' just testing cameras that got shipped.
 
Paris Remillard said:
3414 pixels x 8.25 micrometers = 28.1655mm. If I'm reading the numbers right on that link.
Click to expand...

Your right but I for some reason thought it was more but it's the diagonal of the open alexa gate thats 33.5mm, which is great... it kind of means that epic got the biggest sensor for sphericals going to 16:9 or wider. however I guess this means that Alexa got the biggest sensor for 2x Ana to 2.40, right? to tired to do all the math right now, and you were pretty quick on it :)
 
Stephen Williams said:
I don't think people were looking at the 'pre release spec' just testing cameras that got shipped.
Click to expand...

True. That's why I used the term "amounts to" in connection with "pre-release." I wasn't addressing the tests that were done with the cameras that were available.

But, those results have little bearing on the debate in this thread over which camera has more dynamic range between Alexa and Epic Dragon when the Dragon tested is no longer shipping.

Talking about those tests is fine but the discussion shouldn't veer too far from the context of THAT VERSION of the Dragon, which has since changed and needs to be tested again.

We have the benefit of updated info and 20/20 hindsight, so using those earlier cameras as a de facto measuring stick for Dragon's current capabilities is pointless. The majority of Dragons haven't been delivered yet.

And remember, at some point RED and maybe a select few outside the company knew they were going to make adjustments to the camera that would become the official shipping version.

So, the older Dragon was technically pre-release (albeit a significant achievement), we just didn't know it yet.
 
My point from the beginning has been that

A)This thread shouldn't be a debate about which camera has the most DR. That's not the point. Perhaps I should have said in my posts that the Dragon equalled or even slightly bettered the Alexa instead of pointing out the actual test results. I see that that kicks in a competitive response when one feels like their team is losing.

and

B)It doesn't matter which OLPF/calibration is being used in the tests. Unless people are claiming that there are 3 more stops of DR in the new calibration. Which I would be very surprised to see. And if you read back John Marchant claimed that in his tests with the new OLPF/calibration combo, the overall range was about the same as the old OLPF/calibration used in the tests in question. So there's still a discrepancy between how the Dragon is labeled vs. how most other cameras are labeled. Which should be the point of this thread based on the question that was posed by the OP.

But I understand that people want to wait for the new tests, so I'll just let it go and let everyone use these numbers as they will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top