OLPF for Tungsten?

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Which OLPF is better balanced for Tungsten 3200k? Is one or the other better balanced for warm light? I would think skin tone would be better since it's already red channel starved a bit.

 

[Mike P.]

Yeah, but the LLOLPF would let in more light (blue included) which would help when adjusting white balance to compensate. Something tells me the difference between the two will be minuscule when comparing the final result.

Interesting question though; where's Dr. Phil?

 

[David Battistella]

Since the STH is slightly more accurate on the color side, i think it makes it the "more accurate" in tungsten choice. if your are pumping in plently of light you can go with the STH. all this being said the LLO is very close as well.

The choice would be on how much light we are talking about, fully lit set STH, LLO for low light.
Very confident in tungsten with both.

Battistella

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Yeah, but the LLOLPF would let in more light (blue included) which would help when adjusting white balance to compensate.

That's like saying it's better to shoot MX without an 80a/b/c filter since it lets in more light (including red). If you can light to your exposure then you should have enough light either way but the filtered camera provides the sensor a more balanced clip point. I feel like just looking at the STH filter that it's got a pretty strong red reduction which if Dragon is a native 5600k sensor would push the 'native' temperature of the STH + Dragon as something lower than the LLOLPF, something closer natively to Tungsten.

 

[David Battistella]

I feel with the sth the native color temperature sits at about 4400k

battistella

 

[Patrick Tresch]

I also would instincty go with the LLO as the light is not balanced and we are under exposing the blue.



Pat

 

[Tommaso Alvisi]

I feel with the sth the native color temperature sits at about 4400k

battistella

same here!
maybe even 4300k...

 

[Martin Stevens]

Does Red say what the native color temp is for the Dragon sensor?

 

[David Mullen ASC]

I thought all sensors preferred near-daylight color temps naturally unless unnaturally filtered to force a tungsten-balance (I think the 3-CCD Sony cameras like the F900 do that so that the base is 3200K.) Every digital camera I've used seems to produce the cleanest blue channel in daylight color temps.

 

[Sidney L. Plaut]

I also think all silicone based sensors including red and alexa, etc.. are native around 5000k.

 

[David Battistella]

I imagine red dragon native sensor color temp to be right around 5000k as it is with most silicon based sensors.
With red one, red one mx, epic mx and now epic dragon you tend to get the crispest images with daylight sources.

i pretty much leave the camera (when filming) at neutral settings, 320 ISO, 5000k 172.8 degree shutter (europe). I carry a passport color checker and quickly film those charts in different setups.

With dragon and STH OLPF when performing POST WB in redcine X I have noticed that the native WB tends to be a bit lower than 5000k, more like 4200-4400k leaning toward tungsten. This, I feel, makes the tungsten color reproduction a bit more faithful, but with the STH you need MORE light. So, unless you are in a well lit tungsten situation, I would probably want the LLO OLPF (for run and gun, etc. if I was capturing mixed light or tungsten based interviews where I control the lighting, I would go with the STH.

I have been using both OLPFs for a while now and I must say they both perform well, but there is something about the STH (in many situations) that renders a more filmic image. Even the lowlight I have pushed to 1280 with DEB renders out with a low light texture that I personally like.

Tungsten irendereing is much improved on Dragon and I never feel the need for an 1/8 blue or to cool off tungsten sources.

Both th are exceptional, the STH is a more distinct and unique look.

Battistella

 

[Mike P.]

That's like saying it's better to shoot MX without an 80a/b/c filter since it lets in more light (including red). If you can light to your exposure then you should have enough light either way but the filtered camera provides the sensor a more balanced clip point. I feel like just looking at the STH filter that it's got a pretty strong red reduction which if Dragon is a native 5600k sensor would push the 'native' temperature of the STH + Dragon as something lower than the LLOLPF, something closer natively to Tungsten.

Touche; though to be fair, the 80-series filters only work if you have a decent amount of (tungsten) light, otherwise you could end up underexposed in all channels... The reason your argument may not hold is because, in the case of MX, the blue channel does *not* change (you merely reduce the R and G to match), whereas with the STH and LLO, your blue channel cleanliness/sensitivity will actually INCREASE between the two OLPFs (along with the other two channels). And while my experience with Dragon is limited, it may be moot anyway. Given how well Dragon saturates the channels, I'd imagine you'd be better off with the brighter image. Not only that, but looking at Phil's tests, the differences in colour accuracy between the two OLPFs seems to have diminished considerably with the official/latest swappable versions. In other words, I think you're splitting hairs when arguing colour accuracy in any kind of light at this point, in which case, the LLO would offer a little more oomph to the blue channel.

Conversely, with the LLO, you can set the camera to ISO1600 cleanly and use an 80c guilt-free (leaving you around the ~ISO800 exposure level of the STH) but all channels would be even. I know you're asking to avoid the 80s filters, but it's food for thought.