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 :)

Whats Next After Dragon From Red????

David Mullen ASC said:
Personally, I'd rather they increase the size slightly if it would allow better heat management.
Click to expand...

No moving parts, solid heat transfer so that the camera is weather sealed like in still photography. That would make a lot of productions easier and insurance issues less common :thumbsup:
 
Kemalettin Sert said:
+1 on that.i want little bigger camera that perfectly sits on my shoulder.
Click to expand...

Ergonomics are important. Red should have a look at the Amira. A bit heavy but well designed for operating.

---

But someone said it earlier: Red is taking part in photography conventions and marketing the Epic as a high-end swiss-army knife. I'm a filmmaker and not a photographer. I doubt that I will gain from a photography-design.

---

Resolution is not the problem of my Epic Dragon. This is what I would like to see improved:

1. boot-up times.

2. heat management

3. power consumption

4. 4:3 sensor for anamorphic lenses

5. solid 100 fps at 5kHD/S35 gate, 150 would be better

6. simplification of the SDK/RedCine

7. ProRes support up to 4KHD

8. better viewfinder with better focus tools



Hans
 
I think the path is quite clear. Bigger sensors, more DR and better signal to noise ratios that's whats matter. The rest is something the film industry has learned to find work arounds for from day one.

Of those three I think bigger sensors is the next step for sure.
 
David Mullen ASC said:
Personally, I'd rather they increase the size slightly if it would allow better heat management.
Click to expand...

Its a good idea.
We get the efficiency of having one size fits all and if that size is "small" then you can always build it out, but because the Epic form is so small does cause issues, like heat management, cables. Many of the Ac's who do bigger jobs don't like the Epic form factor because it can be built out in so many different ways its too many options and choices, and HH sort of sucks. Some think the "build it out" strategy an advantage, but most AC's I believe love the Alexa and its simplicity with lack of options. An Alexa is an Alexa, it makes their jobs easier. It wouldn't be the worst idea to have a larger "production" version of the next gen Red. All the connections outboard, big handle, better heat control with quiet fans. It could still be smaller and lighter then an Alexa, but also keep producing the smaller version for everybody who wants the Epic size and for movi, steadicam, stills etc. The Film world always had the big, quiet studio camera then your MOS cameras, lite steadicam versions, etc.
 
Problem with bigger sensors is that we need medium format lenses and I'm not sure there's any anamorphic option for 65mm, but maybe you know more about that.
But yeah, I think that bigger sensor is the next step. Might be that 65mm becomes the new cinematic standard over the years. I think DR is pretty good as it is now (it's nice to improve on it but not crucial), but improvements in noise (low light), color science and camera body weight are all good next steps.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
Problem with bigger sensors is that we need medium format lenses and I'm not sure there's any anamorphic option for 65mm, but maybe you know more about that.
But yeah, I think that bigger sensor is the next step. Might be that 65mm becomes the new cinematic standard over the years. I think DR is pretty good as it is now (it's nice to improve on it but not crucial), but improvements in noise (low light), color science and camera body weight are all good next steps.
Click to expand...

Have you ever touched a 65mm camera, carried lenses for such a beast? I doubt that there are zooms available, never heard of one. 65mm is meaningful for big cinema productions and totally useless for those 99.9% who don't shoot the "last emperor". Catchword DOF....

Hans
 
Hans.

I really see no conflict in having a FF35 4:3 sensor available on the same camera (and as far as I remember, it was also on your list)
You'll have a hard time digging up wide cinema zooms and primes in PL covering that, for sure, but you'd add a lot of flexibility for those of us who shoot both stills and film, for use with anamorphic glass and I wouldn't know, but I am pretty sure many would shoot longer lenses (say +35mm) on the wider format, for a number of different uses.

Also I think it seems like there is a trend in glass going in the direction of covering FF35 width, too (but I might be wrong), as many use their stills cameras for film purposes.

You don't take anything away from S35, by having the option for a wider/higher image circle… :)
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Hans.

I really see no conflict in having a FF35 4:3 sensor available on the same camera (and as far as I remember, it was also on your list)
/QUOTE]

Oh, yes, FF35 is fine for me. With say 8k resolution at FF35 I could use the sensor cropped for S35 PL glas with 5-6k resolution which is plenty enough. But I don't see any meaningful use of the 65mm format for mainstream filmmaking. Camera huge, lenses monstrous, data rate enormous etc... and last but not least even more shallow DOF at given FOV and stop.

---

I doubt that dancing on two weddings (photography vs film) will be beneficial for any of the two. Cobbler stick to your last.



Hans
Click to expand...
 
Rather than trying to reinvent the wheel with 'cool' and 'game changing' features it would nice if they just tried to perfect the basics first. A bigger camera body for better cooling has been mentioned a few times in the past. More industry standard connectors located in a position that doesn't make every person i've ever worked with say 'what on earth were they thinking!'. Also, a side benefit of increasing the size of the 'matchbox' should get you more dynamic range. But i'll believe that if i see it.
 
70mm highspeed cam! that is buyable (but still up there in price)
 
Phil Holland said:
Kodak will tell you film is 13 stops and if shot "perfectly" you can squeeze 15 out of it, and I mean absolutely perfectly. I don't have to think about it, it was a large part of my job for a long while. I've measured 19 visible stops on Dragon via REDlogFilm, though you can argue what's usable. Shooting/rating around ISO 800-1280 will give you what you are looking for.

These are measured full stop patches:



Most of what people are experiencing with Alexa is a variation in LOG, general exposure across response, and "that other thing that I dare not mention" that involves a small piece of glass.

It's cool to disagree on this one. I've been whacking the poor dead horse for far too long.

if you are curious I can add something into the mix that makes Dragon see about 20 stops of measurable DR and it's an optical component, not HDRx. It will give you the luma you are looking for and the highlight "effect" that you find pleasing about Alexa.

Sadly I'm at a point where this has more or less become "meh". I'm 100% doing things with Dragon that I could never do before with film. I'm very sure of that.
Click to expand...


Dito....
 
Hans von Sonntag said:
Haha!

Ok. So which mount on the market is better suited for Filmmaking?
Click to expand...

Having a mount that has a flange distance so long so most lenses can not fit and such small diameter that only allows for small image circles can not be the way of the future and thats why I think it's kind of a obsolete standard. There is so many other mounts that has gone out of fashion trough the years so I see no reason to think that PL will be any different. PL came after Arri bayonet, as there was a.... need for a larger diameter.... and now arri is moving on to Maxi PL mount or XPL mount... A new format and a new standard. But as the formats will change just about every other year now I think The arri XPL mount will for sure be one standard but I think there will also be something bigger / closer to the sensor kind of mounts that can pretty much take on any lens with a simple adaptor ring. That would be the most logical solution, who or what company would set such standard is difficult to know.

PL is built for a 45 deg spinning mirror and 35mm filmback. Thats why it has a rather long flange distance and rather small diameter... that combo is what will kill it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top