Modular Dragon OLPF sneak peak

[Phil Holland]

magnetic edges

It's been mentioned, but magnets are a bad choice for a variety of reasons. For the sensor, for the potential particles, and even random chaos.

Honestly though, most should be very happy with 4 screw/bolts. You will be changing the OLPF less than the lens mount and that's not really a huge deal with 4 bolts.

 

[Brian Merlen]

But the cinema camera market may soon be saturated in sales, the other 90% is what is needed. Especially if go pro launch a hybrid normal/ cinema camera in September or NAB. People also wonder if there might be a BMD release in September. This is not to mention other companies too.

just cuz a company calls its a cinema camera does not make it a cinema camera...all my gigs shoot red, arri, phantom, f55, stuff like that. BMD is not a cinema camera maker no matter what they name it. how many million dollar productions shoot on it is what makes it a cine camera, not whether they call it cine or not. even low budget gigs don't shoot BMD whenever i work on low budget stuff, its more of a film school student or super duper low budget solution. an arri matte box costs more then it, a lens, certainly a mag... there is something to be said for high end productions respecting expensive tool sets...even if good tech trickles down to cheap half ass solution productions will always choose arri/red, high end sony or canon, and only use BMC if they had to...much less go pro...i hate those things.. its like the mainstream never saw a pov shot before they put it in a POS camera that only shoots f22 with no way to control the lens...its insanity to worry about go pro or BMC killing Arri or Red...If you go to any rental house in LA or NYC, every Arri there is booked, not the same case for BMC, that thing is so cheap its the price to buy that an arri rents for in a single day, its suspiciously cheap, lots of bugs until recently (probably some left too). i just don't see the next big name, or even little name project shooting on it, its kind of a joke they even all it a cine camera. can the next iPhone be named cine too? does that make it so? the name is hogwash

 

[David Battistella]

Honestly though, most should be very happy with 4 screw/bolts. You will be changing the OLPF less than the lens mount and that's not really a huge deal with 4 bolts.

I agree Phil. It's seems that as people explore this as a "creative option" and might want to do more swapping, that a quick release system could also work really well if it is implemented correctly. I'm talking about changes that can happen with the camera on a rig as opposed to on the bench.

If it's more of a "let's go with this OLPF" for most of the shoot, then I think bolts are great. If it's more like, let's swap things out quickly, which also involves pulling whatever lens mount is attached, then it's the mount plus the OLPF and a quick release system might work better.

I'm most likely to go with one OLPF for one situation, but people might be getting the idea that this replaces a Mattebox (talking nd options, locon, high light, low light, ecc) and that, I think would call for a quick release system.

All depends on what people want and of course how red wants to go with what is actually possible or what they make possible.

Battistella

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Swapping?

 

[HD Hildebrand]

I've been watching this thread since it came out and I think this is a neat idea for upgrades and such, perhaps some customized stuff, but I honestly think this whole idea of swapping sensors, and tweaking (even more) in post with the software Graham is working on is all fine and great, but adds up to a whole lot of mess in the end - for Red, for owners, for users.

There are too many variables for things to go wrong and I think even more will jump on the Arri bandwagon. DP's, producers, directors want to know what they are working with and want to know the tool they are using delivers specific out of the box results they can depend on. Not, "okay, you used what sensor, with which lenses, with some asa/iso, and you did what in post to get x, y or z????" Maybe I'm wrong and this could be the new frontier, but I still want a certain dependability I can always fall back on.

I just did a shoot with my dragon and the results were stunning, but I also know people have not wanted to touch my Dragon due to all the question marks out there. I feel that fear is greatly unwarranted, blown way out of proportion and just plain wrong, however I jumped on Dragon for the promised boost in ISO with stunning-clean results.

Instead of spending all kinds of time on post patchwork and swapping this or that to get the desired goal, I think time should be devoted to a third pass at this sensor. Yes, I want my cake and eat it too.

 

[Marcos Montenegro]

My creative side likes the artistic opportunities different OLPFs will bring to the table, and applauds the thinking behind it.

However, for many of the reasons already posted, I don't think it's the right direction for RED to take, especially given it's already "complicated workflow" reputation (warranted or not) among the industry. Let Graeme continue do his thing with REDCINE-X post tweaks (granted I prefer in-camera options for some of these); it's much more desirable not to have to change hardware. Many people complain about changing lens mounts, can you imagine "swapping OLPFs"?

RED, please keep it simple- develop another OLPF if you must, or give us the variety and options via REDCINE-X to push this v2 to its limits. Done.

 

[David Battistella]

but I still want a certain dependability I can always fall back on.

I just did a shoot with my dragon and the results were stunning, but I also know people have not wanted to touch my Dragon due to all the question marks out there. I feel that fear is greatly unwarranted, blown way out of proportion and just plain wrong, however I jumped on Dragon for the promised boost in ISO with stunning-clean results.

Set the camera to 800ISO RC 3 and RG3 *(release build) or Dragoncolor, RG4 (beta build), look at the histogram and the monitor. If it looks good there it will be good.
Doesn't get much simpler than that. But from your stunning results you already know that.

Dragon is cleaner than MX and there are other benefits as well.

Battistella

 

[Neil Dearman]

I just want a camera that they promised, swapping out stuff that is very sensitive and deals with the brain scares me!!! Most of my shoots I don't have a safe place to do that most of the time

 

[David Battistella]

I just want a camera that they promised, swapping out stuff that is very sensitive and deals with the brain scares me!!! Most of my shoots I don't have a safe place to do that most of the time

So go with one, learn it well and stick with it.

Battistella

 

[Bohdan Klos]

You will be changing the OLPF less than the lens mount and that's not really a huge deal with 4 bolts.

I agree - and think about it. Phil Holland is someone who likes to experiment. Imagine regular users. I dont see anyone I know swapping out OLPFs unless the script calls for something really unique. And even then we would likely not have time to experiment to get to know the OLPFs.

Swappable for the bulk of users means choose-able when ordering the camera and likely that OLPF will very seldom or never again be touched. Hence why I think a more all round OLPF is desirable for people not wanting to swap.

I honestly think this whole idea of swapping sensors, and tweaking (even more) in post with the software Graham is working on is all fine and great, but adds up to a whole lot of mess in the end - for Red, for owners, for users.
There are too many variables for things to go wrong and I think even more will jump on the Arri bandwagon. DP's, producers, directors want to know what they are working with and want to know the tool they are using delivers specific out of the box results they can depend on.

Instead of spending all kinds of time on post patchwork and swapping this or that to get the desired goal, I think time should be devoted to a third pass at this sensor. Yes, I want my cake and eat it too.

Cant agree enough. Wanting a smooth workflow without speedbumps is (not as some would call it) unproffessional nor is it being out your depth. If you have time and budget concerns (as most of us do) Red cant continually get more complicated on the body of the camera or in post for us.

Also as you say, please make the perfect 3rd OLPF and release it and promote it as THE one to have. I want the OLPF I think Red would release if they were unable to create DEB. DEB feels like a bandaid but ultimately it will be helpful on some of the more extreme OLPFs. I see its use , but it should not be a go to solution for use with a standard OLPF.

; it's much more desirable not to have to change hardware. Many people complain about changing lens mounts, can you imagine "swapping OLPFs"?
RED, please keep it simple- develop another OLPF if you must, or give us the variety and options via REDCINE-X to push this v2 to its limits. Done.

On Reduser I see people who speak up for what they want even in the face of a few vocal members. Red is a good listener and understands which posts contain REAL value. Its not the ones saying the status quo is fine and dandy as they say.

 

[Patrick Grossien]

Its not that simple.. the new OLPF isnt just an ND that shifts the bottom to the top. So you can't get the best parts of every filter in one filter with no penalty.

That said.. we already plan on making one that lands somewhere in the middle. And I really do like the Low-Con option that people are discussing, but that is going to take some time.

The options really start to open up as we open this option up to both individuals like John Marchant that have their own unique take as well as to the big filter companies to make modules as they may.

Really cool stuff. I'm excited that this is happening now! I remember the mentioning of it in the olden days.

Will this be trickling down to the MX?

 

[Patrick Grossien]

BTW how will the user replacement work? Since we would have to remove the tamper seals, the warranty would be void, wouldn't it? ... what's the difference here?

 

[Wayne Morellini]

Thanks in no small part to RED

You mean all of us that went before red. Red has actually been a diversion to the market, that has stopped better competing products than from BMD being produced much sooner. They promise a ground breaking camera and about the time of release after years of talking they cancel. I always give Red its credit and light in the sun, but realistically. Very few high end cameras seem overly affected, they maybe cheaper, but not as cheap and radical as they should be.

Well until the next cameras and crimson.

 

[Wayne Morellini]

just cuz a company calls its a cinema camera does not make it a cinema camera...all my gigs shoot red, arri, phantom, f55, stuff like that. BMD is not a cinema camera maker no matter what they name it. how many million dollar productions shoot on it is what makes it a cine camera, not whether they call it cine or not. even low budget gigs don't shoot BMD whenever i work on low budget stuff, its more of a film school student or super duper low budget solution.

Cine is what it is Brian. If it is designed to shoot at even the most basic level of cinema production, or is designed to record that cine level. it is a very credible cine camera. No elitism there. The fact that it might not be very good equipment, is another credible issue..

The fact that general high end cine camera sales to cine makers might fall to 10%, is everything...

 

[Ivan Kovax]

Am I nuts to be thinking about taking the Clear OLPF and customizing it with various coatings to create bizarre organic or linear flaring?

I want 3 of them. I love this idea and have been experimenting with this for a while too...

 

[Robert Berger]

I've been watching this thread since it came out and I think this is a neat idea for upgrades and such, perhaps some customized stuff, but I honestly think this whole idea of swapping sensors, and tweaking (even more) in post with the software Graham is working on is all fine and great, but adds up to a whole lot of mess in the end - for Red, for owners, for users.

There are too many variables for things to go wrong and I think even more will jump on the Arri bandwagon. DP's, producers, directors want to know what they are working with and want to know the tool they are using delivers specific out of the box results they can depend on. Not, "okay, you used what sensor, with which lenses, with some asa/iso, and you did what in post to get x, y or z????" Maybe I'm wrong and this could be the new frontier, but I still want a certain dependability I can always fall back on.

I just did a shoot with my dragon and the results were stunning, but I also know people have not wanted to touch my Dragon due to all the question marks out there. I feel that fear is greatly unwarranted, blown way out of proportion and just plain wrong, however I jumped on Dragon for the promised boost in ISO with stunning-clean results.

Instead of spending all kinds of time on post patchwork and swapping this or that to get the desired goal, I think time should be devoted to a third pass at this sensor. Yes, I want my cake and eat it too.

+1

New showreel on www.camlight.nl

 

[Ben Scott]

Now forget the fact it's nofilmschool and/or indiecineacadamy but have a quick look at

http://nofilmschool.com/2014/07/red-epic-dragon-vs-mx-sensor-raw-camera-shootout/

and reading the findings and the comments.

I don't own a Dragon but I've read enough to know that a lot of people on here will take issue with the methodology of the test and findings and say the user should/could have done a/b/c/d instead.

Those posts, and the fact there is so much variance - even among professionals - to set up and test an Epic or Dragon correctly and report back those findings to a wide audience just sows more and more confusion and doubt among would-be users down the line.

And that is just one user. Now multiply that by everyone who got their hands on a Dragon and doesn't know them back to front and who has a blog. It's a genuine and valid concern.

Options are wonderful but the 1-page 'baseline' setup info with the official OLPF should be included with every purchase and rental and should be stickied at the top of every red forum.

 

[Maz Mawlawi]

Now forget the fact it's nofilmschool and/or indiecineacadamy but have a quick look at

http://nofilmschool.com/2014/07/red-epic-dragon-vs-mx-sensor-raw-camera-shootout/

and reading the findings and the comments.

I don't own a Dragon but I've read enough to know that a lot of people on here will take issue with the methodology of the test and findings and say the user should/could have done a/b/c/d instead.

Those posts, and the fact there is so much variance - even among professionals - to set up and test an Epic or Dragon correctly and report back those findings to a wide audience just sows more and more confusion and doubt among would-be users down the line.

And that is just one user. Now multiply that by everyone who got their hands on a Dragon and doesn't know them back to front and who has a blog. It's a genuine and valid concern.

Options are wonderful but the 1-page 'baseline' setup info with the official OLPF should be i with every purchase and rental and should be stickied at the top of every red forum.

I think an "in between/ happy medium" OLPF should be high on thr priority list. One that maybe gives us an extra at the bottom and loses a stop on top

I guess I'm still hoping for the promised noise free low ligh (iso 2000) and 15 stop DR t

 

[Bohdan Klos]

I think an "in between/ happy medium" OLPF should be high on thr priority list. One that maybe gives us an extra at the bottom and loses a stop on top

Im waiting for this OLPF - I have no plans to be swapping out OLPFs.

I guess I'm still hoping for the promised noise free low light (iso 2000) and 15 stop DR t

That's their next camera I guess.

 

[Elsie N]

Now forget the fact it's nofilmschool and/or indiecineacadamy but have a quick look at

http://nofilmschool.com/2014/07/red-epic-dragon-vs-mx-sensor-raw-camera-shootout/

and reading the findings and the comments.

I don't own a Dragon but I've read enough to know that a lot of people on here will take issue with the methodology of the test and findings and say the user should/could have done a/b/c/d instead.

Those posts, and the fact there is so much variance - even among professionals - to set up and test an Epic or Dragon correctly and report back those findings to a wide audience just sows more and more confusion and doubt among would-be users down the line.

And that is just one user. Now multiply that by everyone who got their hands on a Dragon and doesn't know them back to front and who has a blog. It's a genuine and valid concern.

Options are wonderful but the 1-page 'baseline' setup info with the official OLPF should be included with every purchase and rental and should be stickied at the top of every red forum.

Ben, I get what you are aiming at but my goals are different. I don't want a camera that is limited to a look that transfers across all usage. That's great for the movie-mills that keep grinding out similar material.

And while there will be many who spread fud based on what this one said or what that one said, people will eventually see the results from knowledgeable shooters and wonder why they ever listened to the "fudders".

What I like about the Dragon as it sits now and with ADD and the coming DEB and swappable OLPFs, is the ability to have my footage stand apart from the crowd.

I really hope the hurry-up-and-shoot crowd gets the camera they want... as long as I can still have the camera I want.