- Banned
- #1
Robert Ruffo New
Banned
Let me begin by saying that in a narrative context, our MX Epics were never a problem in terms of their sensitivity. NDs came out quite often, but not too often, and really the sensitivity level was just right more often than not. Most gigs combine outdoor daylight with interiors that are 100% lit and night exteriors, f stops that range between F2 and F8, with a lot of F4 in there (f stop choice to me is only aesthetic - we control exposure with NDS and lighting, AFTER choosing F-stop). Mx was balanced just right for our needs.
Now if Dragon is much less sensitive, this is a problem, and a big one. It's fine to say that film was no better, but we no longer have the budgets to light for 250ISO stock, and no producer would stand for that, at least not my clients, when they can instead just choose another camera, as both Epic MX, Alexa and F55 are pretty much 800ISO cameras, and people just expect that to be the case and allocate lighting rental budgets accordingly. Gone are the days of shooting music videos on 35mm stock, gone is the money to ever do that again.
I hear conflicting reports:
1 - Its' more sensitive than MX (Fine, that's why some smart folks invented NDs, even more fine since IR pollution issues everyone seems to agree are vastly less of a problem with Dragon))
2 - It's less sensitive than MX (As explained above, big problem)
3 - It's the same as MX (As explained above, fine)
I suppose that some of this confusion comes from the fact that there are 2 OLPF versions out there and they are very different. I talked to the AC on "No Net" and they specifically requested the old OLPF Dragons for that Robert Zemeckis film. Is the old OLPF better? Should I ask for that? Is a new OLPF coming out, a V3 that will be better still?
From Red I hear "we're on it", but then again the last thread was closed, and Jarred's response to the OP was maybe a little aggressive - telling him he was "hung up on things" as if to trivialize his concerns. This makes me think that Red doesn't have a solution just yet, or doesn't agree that noise on Dragon is a problem, or I'm not sure what. Also not clear is whether this is a bad batch of sensors, a bad batch of OLPFs, or just something that can indeed be fixed by firmware.
We love our Red cameras, and my Bomb Squad rep is a great guy, but Red QC, in my direct experience, is severely lacking. I got delivered an Epic that had no working sound on it (just none at all, and it would crash as soon as you turned sound on). What, they didn't test that? How could they not test that? What do they test then? How could they possibly ship cameras with the OLPF facing the wrong way, as they recently did? Which makes me wonder: is this a QC issue?
I think we would all love to have some straight answers - and so would my clients.
I am debating between waiting, never upgrading and upgrading as soon as possible, and I'm not sure which OLPF to ask for - but I can't make a good decision, because I just don't have enough info right now. I wish I did. Like most independent prodcos in 2014, we do OK, but we are never too many miles away from bankruptcy if we make too many mistakes, and in Montreal where budgets salaries and cost of living are all lower than in L.A. and NY, $9500 (plus very expensive two-way international shipping, plus inability to shoot with camera while she's away) represents a more significant amount of money to us than it might to some of you.
All and any info, form both users and Red, are most welcome.
Now if Dragon is much less sensitive, this is a problem, and a big one. It's fine to say that film was no better, but we no longer have the budgets to light for 250ISO stock, and no producer would stand for that, at least not my clients, when they can instead just choose another camera, as both Epic MX, Alexa and F55 are pretty much 800ISO cameras, and people just expect that to be the case and allocate lighting rental budgets accordingly. Gone are the days of shooting music videos on 35mm stock, gone is the money to ever do that again.
I hear conflicting reports:
1 - Its' more sensitive than MX (Fine, that's why some smart folks invented NDs, even more fine since IR pollution issues everyone seems to agree are vastly less of a problem with Dragon))
2 - It's less sensitive than MX (As explained above, big problem)
3 - It's the same as MX (As explained above, fine)
I suppose that some of this confusion comes from the fact that there are 2 OLPF versions out there and they are very different. I talked to the AC on "No Net" and they specifically requested the old OLPF Dragons for that Robert Zemeckis film. Is the old OLPF better? Should I ask for that? Is a new OLPF coming out, a V3 that will be better still?
From Red I hear "we're on it", but then again the last thread was closed, and Jarred's response to the OP was maybe a little aggressive - telling him he was "hung up on things" as if to trivialize his concerns. This makes me think that Red doesn't have a solution just yet, or doesn't agree that noise on Dragon is a problem, or I'm not sure what. Also not clear is whether this is a bad batch of sensors, a bad batch of OLPFs, or just something that can indeed be fixed by firmware.
We love our Red cameras, and my Bomb Squad rep is a great guy, but Red QC, in my direct experience, is severely lacking. I got delivered an Epic that had no working sound on it (just none at all, and it would crash as soon as you turned sound on). What, they didn't test that? How could they not test that? What do they test then? How could they possibly ship cameras with the OLPF facing the wrong way, as they recently did? Which makes me wonder: is this a QC issue?
I think we would all love to have some straight answers - and so would my clients.
I am debating between waiting, never upgrading and upgrading as soon as possible, and I'm not sure which OLPF to ask for - but I can't make a good decision, because I just don't have enough info right now. I wish I did. Like most independent prodcos in 2014, we do OK, but we are never too many miles away from bankruptcy if we make too many mistakes, and in Montreal where budgets salaries and cost of living are all lower than in L.A. and NY, $9500 (plus very expensive two-way international shipping, plus inability to shoot with camera while she's away) represents a more significant amount of money to us than it might to some of you.
All and any info, form both users and Red, are most welcome.
Last edited: