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 :)

Red Dragon Info and Data Sheets

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #82
Chad Lancaster said:
Trying to wrap my head around this but how do lenses like the new Optimo 25-250 cover 6k if their circle is only 31.4mm?
Click to expand...

Older lenses won't, but that ne one might. Remember you don't have to use the entire 6K frame. You'll be seeing lots of 6K HD, 6K WS, 5.5K, and 5K shot on Dragon. And remember 5K itself is essentially the Super 35mm frame width.

However, at some point during the zoom range of the most common zooms they will likely cover the full 6K sensor.

However, what Angenieux has done with two of their upcoming zooms like the Optimo DP 25-250 is redesigned them for additional coverage. I haven't seen this lens in person yet, but I hear it covers 6K WS, which means it would also cover 6K HD just fine. I don't know if they even tested 6K Full Frame or 2:1.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #84
** Added Dragon ISO and FLUT Breakdown graphic to the front page:



** Moved thread to Dragon sub-forum, was previously in Epic sub-forum before the Dragon one existed.
 
Phil Holland said:
** Added Dragon ISO and FLUT Breakdown graphic to the front page:



** Moved thread to Dragon sub-forum, was previously in Epic sub-forum before the Dragon one existed.
Click to expand...




thanks a lot Phil :)
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #86
That 6K HD resolution is indeed strange. Logic would have it be 3x 1080 by 3x 1920, which comes out at 3240 x 5760 Which is more than the sensor's height (3160).
The logic behind the HD options is to have a round number when converting to HD (for faster debayering), 3132 is 2.9 x 1080 (and 5568 is 2.9 x 1920). Since 3x wasn't possible, they went with 2.9x, logical.
Cheers,
Damien

Phil Holland said:
That's easy as it's now in the Operations Guide PDF that can be downloaded.

6K Full Frame = 6144x3160
6K 2:1 = 6144x3072
6K WS = 6144x2592
6K HD = 5568x3132

The odd duck out here is 6K HD which break a bit of the mold on the resolution scheme. I think there's mathematical reasons for it being that particular resolution rather than the full height of the sensor.
Click to expand...
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #88
There's Dragon footage is apparently showing up in post houses and I got an interesting phone call. Also there's more Dragons out there now so I've decided to clean up and add a few things.


** Updated 11/22/2013
- Removed old Red Dragon Formats (2 years old things changed)
- Removed Red Dragon: Crop Factors, Dimensions, and Diagonals (2 years old thigns changed and I'll make a new graphic)
- Added What is 6K? Graphic and Information.
- Added Red Dragon Format Key 2013
- Added Red Dragon Record Times 24fps 256GB REDMAG
- Added Link - Official Dragon FAQ Page
- Added Link - Official Dragon Upgrade Info Page


What is 6K?



  • 6K is the maximum resolution of Epic Dragon. 6144x3160 or 19.4 megapixels at a 1.94:1 aspect ratio.
  • 6K is 9.36x more pixels than 1080p.
  • 6K is 8.78x more pixels than 2K.
  • 6K is 2.2x more pixels than 4K.
  • 6K is 1.4x more pixels than 5K.
  • At 300 DPI you can make a 20.48x10.53 inch print from a full 6K Dragon image.
  • At 150 DPI you can make a 40.96x21.067 inch print from a full 6K Dragon image.
  • 6K is 14% more resolution than 5K for a pristine full debayer down to 4K. Meaning it's a 66.7% down sample/debayer to 4K.


Red Dragon Format Key 2013



*note - Crop Factors derived from 1.94:1 crop of FF35 and S35 formats to make them "relevant".
** note - Scarlet Dragon information coming soon.


Red Dragon Record Times 24fps 256GB REDMAG



* note - Record times are for a stock 256GB REDMAG and don't reflect the additional REDCODE Compression Ratios available on the 512GB REDMAG and other high speed media cards.


Have a great weekend!
 
Last edited:
Hold the phone, on Red.com it says 300fps @ 2k, not 2k WS. Could've sworn it used to say 300fps@3k... maybe I'm just trippin about that last part
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #90
Stephen Franchek said:
Hold the phone, on Red.com it says 300fps @ 2k, not 2k WS. Could've sworn it used to say 300fps@3k... maybe I'm just trippin about that last part
Click to expand...

As of 11.19.2013 the info is accurate at 2K. The DSMC Ops Guide - 2K Max FPS = 298.36.

However, as always, firmware can be tweaked and we're still in the early days of Dragon. So who knows what's truly possible just yet.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #91
I should also add, to achieve the highest frame rate per each resolution format the "WS" format yields the fastest results due to how the sensor is read out. This has always been the case with Mysterium-X and is the case for Dragon as well.
 
While I've got your attention, how is 4k on the dragon looking next to 4k on the MX? I'm curious because, while 6k is a nice option, I don't have the post workflow to support. Is dragon 4k amazingly better in lower lighting conditions than MX at 4k? I'd really like to see a side by side comparison of the same resolutions on each sensor
 
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #93
Stephen Franchek said:
While I've got your attention, how is 4k on the dragon looking next to 4k on the MX? I'm curious because, while 6k is a nice option, I don't have the post workflow to support. Is dragon 4k amazingly better in lower lighting conditions than MX at 4k? I'd really like to see a side by side comparison of the same resolutions on each sensor
Click to expand...

I haven't done a true side by side yet, but Chris Probst has some examples here:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?107332-My-Dragon-Thoughts&p=1277866&viewfull=1#post1277866

What I can say from close inspection of those .R3Ds is that Dragon is just a smidge higher resolution at the pixel level. This likely is directly due to the new pixel design and size as well as the new OLPF optimized for the Dragon sensor.

Not entirely clear why you have a post workflow for 4K that doesn't support 4.5K, 5K, 5.5K, or 6K using REDCODE though. If it's for VFX use down sample to 4K and deliver, if it's anything else work with the native REDCODE Raw or transcode to your desired output. If it's native 4K playback at full quality debayer I guess I understand that. But make sure you check out the new GPU support in Redcine-X Pro and also check out the Red Rocket-X if it fills your needs.
 
Phil Holland said:
I haven't done a true side by side yet, but Chris Probst has some examples here:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...gon-Thoughts&p=1277866&viewfull=1#post1277866

What I can say from close inspection of those .R3Ds is that Dragon is just a smidge higher resolution at the pixel level. This likely is directly due to the new pixel design and size as well as the new OLPF optimized for the Dragon sensor.

Not entirely clear why you have a post workflow for 4K that doesn't support 4.5K, 5K, 5.5K, or 6K using REDCODE though. If it's for VFX use down sample to 4K and deliver, if it's anything else work with the native REDCODE Raw or transcode to your desired output. If it's native 4K playback at full quality debayer I guess I understand that. But make sure you check out the new GPU support in Redcine-X Pro and also check out the Red Rocket-X if it fills your needs.
Click to expand...

I should clarify. I could deal with the higher resolution footage, I just don't want anymore data overhead and 4k (even 3k) is a fine resolution for me.
Anyway, the thing that I'm most excited about with Dragon is the increased light sensitivity. I've just had a hard time getting a straight answer about whether each photosite on dragon is drastically better than in low light those on the MX or whether the image just looks cleaner because of the increased resolution. For example: 4k footage on my Scarlet-X looks amazing in some low light conditions, but if I record those same conditions in 2k, the image is so grainy, it's unusable. That's why I'm hoping dragon is apples to apples, 4k to 4k, way better in low light. I'm sure it is, but I'd like to hear in very simple terms "Yes, Stephen, the Dragon sensor will shoot much better video in low light than the MX sensor, regardless of your chosen resolution. Here's a cookie. Good boy."
My little Sony FS100U is still my go to camera for run and gun low light work. That's an honor I'm hoping to pass on to my Epic Dragon, whenever it descends from the heavens
 
Stephen Franchek said:
I should clarify. I could deal with the higher resolution footage, I just don't want anymore data overhead and 4k (even 3k) is a fine resolution for me.
Anyway, the thing that I'm most excited about with Dragon is the increased light sensitivity. I've just had a hard time getting a straight answer about whether each photosite on dragon is drastically better than in low light those on the MX or whether the image just looks cleaner because of the increased resolution. For example: 4k footage on my Scarlet-X looks amazing in some low light conditions, but if I record those same conditions in 2k, the image is so grainy, it's unusable. That's why I'm hoping dragon is apples to apples, 4k to 4k, way better in low light. I'm sure it is, but I'd like to hear in very simple terms "Yes, Stephen, the Dragon sensor will shoot much better video in low light than the MX sensor, regardless of your chosen resolution. Here's a cookie. Good boy."
My little Sony FS100U is still my go to camera for run and gun low light work. That's an honor I'm hoping to pass on to my Epic Dragon, whenever it descends from the heavens
Click to expand...

2K on Scarlet is sensor cropped - it's not a 4K capture and then downscaled, that's why you're dealing with more noise. Dragon does the same thing when you use smaller resolutions.

Dragon has a cleaner s/n ratio and therefore you will get a cleaner image compared to MX no matter at which resolution you compare the sensors. Additionally you have the higher resolution which when downscaled to your delivery format, also helps to reduce noise.

If it is gonna be "drastically better" (by your standards), well only you can decide that when you do a side by side test...

- M
 
Mike Nagel said:
2K on Scarlet is sensor cropped - it's not a 4K capture and then downscaled, that's why you're dealing with more noise. Dragon does the same thing when you use smaller resolutions.

Dragon has a cleaner s/n ratio and therefore you will get a cleaner image compared to MX no matter at which resolution you compare the sensors. Additionally you have the higher resolution which when downscaled to your delivery format, also helps to reduce noise.

If it is gonna be "drastically better" (by your standards), well only you can decide that when you do a side by side test...

- M
Click to expand...

Thank you sir! That was mostly the answer I'm looking for. However, I'd like to decide whether it's drastically better using someone else side by side ;)
 
Stephen Franchek said:
Thank you sir! That was mostly the answer I'm looking for. However, I'd like to decide whether it's drastically better using someone else side by side ;)
Click to expand...

it appears you're looking for very specific things and hopefully you are lucky finding somebody who does exactly these tests... ;-) and then you'd still have to acknowledge that they did the tests, and not you with your own workflow and attention to detail to very specific things that are important to you...

but, the good things is that Dragon brings so many other improvements (DR | less overall noise | skin tones | low light | 6K | better compression | etc) that it is an upgrade easily worth the price...
 
Thank you very much for your effort Phil


Sunil Prem
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top