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 :)

OLD or NEW DRAGON OLPF ?... What's best.

Timur Civan said:
Well thats my point. I treat it like film. Use a meter compensated for the look, set the stop, light, then process in the "lab". I dont touch ISO on set cause the LUTs dont line up right if you change ISO in camera, its better to pull it properly in post with a seperate lut. The camera sits in RLF painted live by DIT.
Click to expand...
I can see that making sense. In my case at least, video village is usually a direct feed from the camera (no DIT/LUT/CDL going on), so it's often easier to change ISO in camera rather than try to tell directors/producers/clients "don't worry, it'll look darker in post," especially when the DP will often not be asked to supervise the color session, or there is no color session, or they get married to the brighter look after looking at it all through editorial.

Different workflows for different people.
 
A little rental house perspective on how this is shaking out at the moment.

We keep an even mix of Dragons and MX cameras because they get rented in equal measures. The client who has total control over the shoot and knows what they are getting into tends to go for the Dragon ( we only have new OLPF) . Thats if they can work with the 320ASA.

Clients who's shoots are unpredictable, available light or who know they need higher ASA are sticking to the MX sensor.
If you are freelance keeping your client by playing safe outweighs the interest of an incremental image upgrade if risks are involved. This doesn't just apply to crew using Red, it applies to all new camera equipment.

All would be good, except the confusion over which Red to use appears to be keeping DPs who aren't already fully onboard with the Red from getting onboard. I am concerned that swapping out OLPFs isn't going to work as smoothly as hoped for non owners. We have the two different OLPF for the Sony F55/ F5 and a not single client has asked us to swap them out for shooting 1080 at high frame rates. Even though there is an incremental benefit. It appears it just isn't enough to matter for most people or they don't have time to test and understand. It appears to confuse the situation more than help. In a business that is already somewhat chaotic there is comfort in tried and tested. Right or wrong.

Our challenge is when we do convert our MX cameras to Dragon. We are letting clients decide that. I can say we don't like having to stock both. It plays havoc on inventory.

John Chater
Chater Camera
San Francisco
 
I've been holding off upgrading, even though some have asked for it. I just finished a show that required MX, so there is nothing other than doubt at this point preventing me from upgrading. I tend to shoot with smaller light packages and need a clean ISO 800 (which we only get now on daylight sources) If Dragon was as clean in Tungsten 800 as MX at 800 is in Daylight Sources, I'd be happy.

Anyone do that test yet? MX 800 Daylight, Dragon 800 Tungsten.
 
Thomas Koch said:
I've been holding off upgrading, even though some have asked for it. I just finished a show that required MX, so there is nothing other than doubt at this point preventing me from upgrading. I tend to shoot with smaller light packages and need a clean ISO 800 (which we only get now on daylight sources) If Dragon was as clean in Tungsten 800 as MX at 800 is in Daylight Sources, I'd be happy.

Anyone do that test yet? MX 800 Daylight, Dragon 800 Tungsten.
Click to expand...

I'm shooting an interior under Tungsten at 800 later this month. I can probably sneak a grab off of that.

What I can safely say is color temperature and noise-wise Dragon performs better than Mysterium-X under Tungsten. Meaning, I'm not using a blue glass filter anymore.
 
John Chater said:
A little rental house perspective on how this is shaking out at the moment.

We keep an even mix of Dragons and MX cameras because they get rented in equal measures. The client who has total control over the shoot and knows what they are getting into tends to go for the Dragon ( we only have new OLPF) . Thats if they can work with the 320ASA.

Clients who's shoots are unpredictable, available light or who know they need higher ASA are sticking to the MX sensor.
If you are freelance keeping your client by playing safe outweighs the interest of an incremental image upgrade if risks are involved. This doesn't just apply to crew using Red, it applies to all new camera equipment.

All would be good, except the confusion over which Red to use appears to be keeping DPs who aren't already fully onboard with the Red from getting onboard. I am concerned that swapping out OLPFs isn't going to work as smoothly as hoped for non owners. We have the two different OLPF for the Sony F55/ F5 and a not single client has asked us to swap them out for shooting 1080 at high frame rates. Even though there is an incremental benefit. It appears it just isn't enough to matter for most people or they don't have time to test and understand. It appears to confuse the situation more than help. In a business that is already somewhat chaotic there is comfort in tried and tested. Right or wrong.

Our challenge is when we do convert our MX cameras to Dragon. We are letting clients decide that. I can say we don't like having to stock both. It plays havoc on inventory.

John Chater
Chater Camera
San Francisco
Click to expand...


Not questioning your judgement directly, or your clients, but I can say I disagree with that choice ? :)

Dragon NEW OLPF has the same noisefloor/going into black at the same levels as Epic. BUT has a lot higher colorprcission in both the high and the low end, and has additional highlights to the Epic MX.

I can follow why some would need the old OLPF in certain circumstances, but this statement I find strange. Compared to Epic (even at the same ISO) Dragon is just "more". (And not IR issues and and and)

But of course, I do not see the situations.

That you CAN shoot the dragon at 320/250, does not equal that it is worse than Epic @ 800...

The dragon is better than MX under any non-5600 light-source under any exposurelevel...
 
Gunleik - There are no judgements in my post. Im just reporting what we see. Its not a rental houses job to tell clients they are misguided. That never works out very well.
I also question why you think that we need educating on the Dragon? Is there something in what I said that makes you think that?

Regards
John
 
nope

and i didn't say you should question customers or your own judgement.

i do shoot both mx and dragon olpf2 frequently, though.
just saying what i see in my shots.

peace
 
Thanks for sharing Mark. Same here...in love with the new OLPF. ;)
 
I also shoot both. Just this week I did two projects with a director that loves to shoot Red. One shoot had controlled lighting and the other was interior available light verite.
I presented the pros and cons of both Dragon and MX for each shoot. He chose Dragon for one and MX for the other. I agreed with choice and footage looked great on both shoots.
Red seem to understand the need for this kind of flexibility. My observation about the F55 OLPF options was that clients don't seem to want to get involved in too many nuances when selecting a camera. For whatever reasons they may have.

Regards
John
 
cool

i have ended up shooting the dragon over the epic as long as it is available...

there are really no absolutes in imagery :-)

after a point, it is about preference
 
Phil Holland said:
I'm enjoying the hell out of it.

phfx_redDragon_caduceusNaga.jpg
Click to expand...

Someone is a Tool fan...
 
I'm with Phil. With the dragon sensor the 1/8th blue glass filter gets retired for tungsten lit scenes.

Just sto shooting charts you can see and feel the color depth and accuracy under tungsten light. My tungsten chimeras are going to get new life. I do prefer how cool LEDs are though.

Battistella
 
Bohdan Klos said:
I guess we don't know what went on in post or what trouble was caused on set by the flaring orbs etc. I`ve completed projects where equipment has given nothing but hassle. No-one would know.

They got amazing pictures, no doubt.
Click to expand...

They didn't do anything to the orbs in post. "The Knick" has them all over the place. They embraced the artifact and made it part of the look of the show.
 
Brian Boyer said:
They didn't do anything to the orbs in post. "The Knick" has them all over the place. They embraced the artifact and made it part of the look of the show.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I guess they had no choice but to live with the orbs back when they filmed this.
 
Bohdan Klos said:
Interesting. I guess they had no choice but to live with the orbs back when they filmed this.
Click to expand...

There's that spin we've all come to expect. Had no choice? You mean like the choice to shoot Epic MX…or any other camera?

Not everybody hates the look of the orbs. And, I bet you won't hear of one television critic or casual viewer panning the show because of them.
 
Brian Boyer said:
There's that spin we've all come to expect. Had no choice? You mean like the choice to shoot Epic MX…or any other camera? Not everybody hates the look of the orbs. And, I bet you won't hear of one television critic or casual viewer panning the show because of them.
Click to expand...

Suggesting ORBS are acceptable is SPIN. You crack me up.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top