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 :)

OLPF and Epic

Michael Epple

Michael Epple

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
328
Reaction score
3
Points
18
Location
San Francisco & Los Angeles, CA
Website
www.michaelepple.com
I was wondering what kind of OLPF was going to be in the Epic camera. While many people here agree that Red's current OLPF is not too strong for motion picture work, I find it hard to agree that when using Epic as a still camera that that is not the case. The Red is soft at 1:1 pixels as a result of no sharpening and a strong OLPF. Obviously scaling down and adding post sharpening counteracts that. Take a look at 1:1 from a still camera with sharpening turned off and you can easily see the difference. The print world does not scale down the way motion picture does so a degree of sharpness down to the pixel level is needed. I would like to hear red's comment and their plan for an OLPF in Epic.
 
Go read the thread on CML about moire on the F35. RED One OLPF is not too strong - it's about right. Given how good even the lowly RED One looks on the 40ft screen in 4k, even sitting really close.... Given how good the magazine covers look shot on RED One M-X....

Graeme
 
The F35 is not a DSMC camera. No motion picture camera is a DSMC camera until Epic. My question was in regards to still imaging and print. I have worked with many photographers who all say the same thing about Red and their still camera of choice. I am also not saying that there is another motion picture camera that they feel compares to their still camera in still mode. This is not to prompt a comeback with all of the photographers that you have talked to who are bigger and more successful than mine, or what magazine covers have been shot with the Red. It is just used as an example for why I am asking the question. It is also to show that it is not solely based on my opinion.

I am also guessing by your response that the Epic will have an OLPF very close to the one in front of the M-X chip. Am I wrong in that assumption?
 
The impression of more resolution with the still cameras (assuming similar pixel resolution) is not necessarily realistic. Many digital SLR's exhibit aliasing and chroma moire issues on fine detail that indicate they could benefit from a more aggressive OLPF. I was walking through an art fair last Saturday with several booths selling large fine art digital prints that showed chroma moire at some fine detail level. That is the choice and compromise one faces and it is difficult if not impossible to correct in post. Personally I like the choices Red has made in this respect. If one is truly after a smooth artifact free film like image quality, then one may have to sacrifice a bit of theoretical resolution to achieve it.
 
This is a little understood battle that's full implications seem to beyond/outside most currently posted thinking.

The hyperreal (false detail) no-OLPF medium format look is used/enjoyed by allot of stills guys....

Read this thread to see one still guy get upset by the 'truth' behind this look

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=31465

I hate false detail even though I do occasionally use it for a look... and for motion aghhhh

Red has a difficult choice lets hope they make the right one.

Michael L

PS I haven't tested MX enough but I am worried it is a step in the wrong OLPF direction.

PPS I wish Rocket exports where less 'edgy'
 
Have any full resolution stills been posted from Epic? And I mean stills shot as stills, not stills taken from a frame of motion work with 180 shutter, etc. (I only remember the 1200x600 scaled images Jim posted a while back.
 
OLPF is working fine for me when it comes to pulling stills from the Red One M-X:

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=47441

If you want to sharpen the full 4K files in Photoshop without oversharpening, try Unsharp Mask at 100, 0.7, 3 as a good start.

HTH

Paul
 
Michael Epple said:
Michael, I don't know if the Still guy was upset about the "truth" of the matter but it does bring up a good point about what is important to most people and what is best for motion vs. still.
Click to expand...

I don't think aliasing, moire, and false detail are good for either motion or stills. I would pay several hundred dollars for the fine art prints I saw at 20 x 30 that were showing significant chroma moire in the wood grain of an old barn for example.
 
I think the points about sharpening are key.

DSLR's add sherpening in-camera (is this tru of DSLR RAW also?).

The RED does not. That's not to say a small amount of sharpening should not be applied... the Red Boys have suggested it should be, they just prefer to leave it up to you to determine how much, rather than force it on you via baked-in camera sharpening.

-sc
 
Like I said, I'm not looking for a debate on the subject, real resolution vs. false or tips on how to sharpen. I was just looking to see what Red planned on doing for the Epic and i didn't really get an answer. From Graeme's response I'm assuming it will be the same OLPF for both motion and stills mode in Epic and that it will be a similar intensity to what is in front of the M-X chip, but I'm just assuming.
 
Michael Epple said:
Like I said, I'm not looking for a debate on the subject, real resolution vs. false or tips on how to sharpen. I was just looking to see what Red planned on doing for the Epic and i didn't really get an answer. From Graeme's response I'm assuming it will be the same OLPF for both motion and stills mode in Epic and that it will be a similar intensity to what is in front of the M-X chip, but I'm just assuming.
Click to expand...

I don't think you are listening to what people are trying to explain to you pertaining to an OLPF. It's not enough to just compare what is in front of the sensor, it also depends on what you do AFTER the sensor in camera before it reaches the file.

My stills cameras have the ability to reduce the sharpening IN camera to zero and I can tell you, the softness of the actual image is on par with what I see from the MX sensor.

I've taken those images and worked with them inside photoshop adding sharpening then and have produced equivalent sharpness to what the camera does internally.

Doesn't sound like to me your 'professional photographers' are comparing apples to apples.

And I can also tell you that the MX sensor isn't applying overly strong OLPF as I can definitely see aliasing in very sharp spacial contrast, like photographs of chrome and the reflections it produces.
 
Last edited:
Epic's pixels are the same size as Red 1 M and MX 5.4 microns. So the OLPF should be the same I would expect. Might have been changed a bit between M and MX.
 
David Rasberry said:
Epic's pixels are the same size as Red 1 M and MX 5.4 microns. So the OLPF should be the same I would expect. Might have been changed a bit between M and MX.
Click to expand...

You are correct :) Had been awhile since I was looking at the Epic specs. But that said, I still stand behind the image quality assertions. Going 1:1 with a 7D, 5Dm2 or 1Dm4 with the sharpening turned all the way down produces soft images. As I would expect.
 
Graeme's "first do no harm" mantra resonates with logic. I support an OLPF strength that eliminates 99% of aliasing so my master is "clean". If I need to sharpen the living crap out of something for a particular reason, even if it introduces aliasing and moire, I can.

Now that we have smooth and creamy, what is the best way to sharpen those images that need it. Moreover, I often wish to match sharpening to each deliverable - without overnight renders. Different codecs produce very different results from high frequency detail, particularly if there is a lot of it in the frame and the content of sequential frames varies greatly.

Love to hear about people's favorite solutions for sharpening - I want fast, cheap and good - how close can I get?

Cheers - #19
 
Here are some examples of removing the OLPF on Canon and Nikon stills cameras:
http://www.maxmax.com/hot_rod_visible.htm

Yes, you increase resolution, but you also increase aliasing and moire. Aliasing is especially bad with moving pictures, as it moves in the opposite direction of camera or subject movement, really drawing attention to itself.

In a world where Canon and Nikon have spent years building cameras that get tested side-by-side and pixel peeped to death to see which one has higher resolution, don't you think they would've already removed or weakened their OLPF filters by now if it really was a worthwhile tradeoff?
 
The OLPF should and will be designed for the best motion use of the tool... this is a 4.5k soon to be 5k camera in a 2k world that is going on 4k. The OLPF is perfect where it is, and they should not change it. Please don't!

Now if you can use the same tool as a professional stills camera, DSMC, great! But if what you need is a stills camera, and not a DSMC, then save yourself some money and get a dedicated stills camera which might play the trade-off balance between a clean image and the most resolution possible. But then again, I don't think they do that either... It is just that they have very high resolution sensors that can shoot RAW at about 8fps, and with less DR than M-X if I am not mistaken.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top