PDA

View Full Version : DRAGON - ITS THE REAL DEAL !!!! - (PART 2)



Mark Toia
08-11-2013, 07:21 AM
SINCE The original "DRAGON - ITS THE REAL DEAL !!!!" thread got modded / closed, due to some crazy out bursts, lets keep this one civil ya... :)

Hi Everyone...

Having the Dragon in my hands was privilege… and a curse !
Hundreds of emails from people wanting me to do tests for them, people wanting to know if there lenses will still work on it, people wanting to fly down and help out... crazy stuff going on in the back ground. (and sorry not to respond to you all )


To say that I'm not not flattered is an understatement, but knowing that the world is watching I wanted to be true to my testing.
I'm going to be pretty straight forward with my results as a "No bullshit" clause comes with this test. So sharing exactly what I think is best for RED and all of you.


Jim and Jarred have not pressured me in anyway (surprisingly enough) which was great, because if they did start to control me, I probably would have told them to keep it.
I don't need the pressure from both sides of the fence, as I'm not being paid for this test, I'm just cracking it out under my own steam and have nothing to loose. So you if the is a problem or it did not meet my expectations, then I decided I would share good and bad.
So I'm glad they left me alone and a credit to them for trusting me with there baby.


I started to type up a lot of fluff and carry on, tying to explain what we saw with our own eyes, and about how bright and contrasting certain shots were, but unless you were standing next to me to actually see the extremes we were shooting into, then…. you just wouldn't believe me. So you all have to dig deep into your minds and remember all those times you shot in a rain forest and it looked like hi contrast shit, and the trying to shoot that shiny silver in bright light, but only to get an underexposed shot due to the hight taking over or vise versa. Well… Those days are gone ! Long gone !


I think its best I just share with pictures as you will all have your own ideas, expectations and opinions and I'm not going to defend anything I've done to get the exact results I wanted out of this test. I just pushed and pulled the camera from one end of the spectrum to the other, including RCX. Shot dead into the sun with a 600mm (sorry Jim) then shot into pitch black… I just wanted to smash this thing and see where we ended up.
I didn't worry about lighting, reflectors or fill, no fancy props, on gorgeous models… I did not want to cloud peoples judgement with beautiful contrived over lit, over stylised shots then turning this test into some sort of wanky showreel. The images are just normal real world situations without any aids.


This is as basic a test as you can get, so there are no manipulated images, nothing has gone into Smoke, AE, or FLAME for any touch up's or masking, nothing went to Resolve or any other grading program (other than RCX) No power windows where used to lift or push down certain areas, no colour keying, no noise reduction, no nothing… This is as basic as it gets, straight out of the camera then into RCX for a very basic curve which was applied to a RED LOG film setting. And some shots are directly out of the camera using the default RG3 settings.
I can only imagine what a talented colourist within a powerful grading tool could do with all this extra information.


The two main areas I wanted the camera to perform in are :
HIGH CONTRAST information, just how much is hiding on the shadows and highlight. And secondly, Just how far can I push it in the dark. What is the most usable ISO without the aid of any noise reducing plugins.


Data was also big question for me, I'm a laptop warrior, I travel the world with RED and MAC.. I don't need anything slowing me down. So the question was, Just how long are these cards going to last… So my idea of testing lower compression rates to save space, and then to push the limits of the ISO into 17:1+ compression to see if it fell apart. The simple answer is no… Dragon @17:1 looks like MX @8:1. So we are all saved, none of us have to run out to buy more cards.
Skin tests, filter tests, IR tests, were also done.


Ok.. Thats all said, my feed back as follows.


The Red Dragon sensor has 3 F STOPS more than before. 1 in the hight lights which rolls over wonderfully !, 2 solid extra stops in the darks…. maybe 3 once the colour science has been perfected.
But there is still noise, but nothing like before. I ran some 250d 2k film rushes next some of my 4000asa stuff, And silly as it sounds, it looks like film grain, not noise. Don't ask me how, as I wouldn't have a clue. But it looks great !


Red Dragon now has the best highlight fall off I have ever seen from any digital camera. Beating film! Big call I know, but after shooting film and pushing it around in telecine chains for more than a decade, I can categorically say that this new sensor has a better range than film ever had.


Single still frames compared to a top of the line professional 35mm Digital stills cameras, I'm going to say that the EPIC matches, if not betters most. Don't ask me how they do it, but every single frame from the DRAGON is 109meg !! @16bit when saved as a tiff from RCX. and at 100 Frames per second, I tell you this… someone has sold there soul to the devil.
If you are a pro photographer, you are mad if you don't have this camera in your tool box. You quite literally will never miss a single shot.


Is Dragon better than 65mm Film…. (with good lenses) YES. No shit…
The images out of the Dragon are so smooth now… so so smooth, like low asa large format film.


The Dragon is more stable than my current MX EPIC's.


The SONY F65 I rate as having the best sensor in the market for a production cine camera. Yes.. it's better than the EPIC- MX. (I'm not going to harp on about the size of it or the price comparisons).
Even Jim knows that Sony have done very well with the F65 sensor and that was obviously pissing him off, because his new Dragon sensor has just given the the F65 notice.
All the F65 SONY purists out there will dispute this. But I have Sony files here with me, and I'm looking at both side by side… and Dragons grain (noise) structure is cleaner and it has more range.
Dragon is now the King. (AND… I'm not going to harp on about the size of it or the price comparisons). or did I ..ha !


The single one sentence i can say that can sum up everything is this..
It's the first camera ever that I have used that captures exactly what I see with my own eye.
Never have I seen this before. !

Jim... You done good man, Real good ! The world of digital cinema owes you a big thanks.
You have know more to prove.
Go and retire !

RED TEAM, Seriously dudes... WOW ! Great work, your the "A" team !

Thanks Jarred. Lets get dunk!

Ipad RETINA recommended.
Enjoy.

https://vimeo.com/71666317
https://vimeo.com/71666317

Sharing is caring.

Please excuse the grammar and spelling, I'm typing so fast here to get this all out to you… Ive broken a nail !


Toia Out/

http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/DRAGON/DRAGON_stills_01.jpg

http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/DRAGON/DRAGON_stills_02.jpg

http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/DRAGON/DRAGON_stills_03.jpg

Mark Toia
08-11-2013, 07:26 AM
Jim's thread is also worth reading again.

From Jim...
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?103853-Dragon-misconceptions-and-clarification

Let’s see if we can clear up some Dragon misconceptions.

1. The native Dragon sensor clearly shows 18+ stops shot on our Frankie test bed last December which was posted. Obviously, we were excited out of our skull. Stuffing the sensor’s capability into an electronics package the size of a matchbox always causes loss of performance. That is why we stuck with 3-4 stops of improvement over the EPIC MX. We always measure dynamic range with the engineering definition… as do most others. We said repeatedly 16 stops for EPIC Dragon, which is more than any other digital cinema camera. We stick by this statement… even though we see continuing improvements over time, just as we have always done. For free.

2. If you want 20 stops of dynamic range… shoot EPIC Dragon HDRx 4.

3. We do not incorporate a low contrast filter inside our camera as does the Alexa. While it does soften roll off, we think the user should have control of that aspect of the image. Add a 1/4 LowCon and match that characteristic if you like it. Since many seem to be lost on this point, we are now looking at adding a low-con LP filter option which you can change out with your original. It certainly gives the appearance of more dynamic range because the rolloff “blooms” or softens the transition. It is a baked in look however if it is done in camera. Maybe someone should make a post filter?

4. I recently posted that the Dragon was “insert the highest superlative known to man here”. Of course I have taken a lot of flack for being a hype-monster over this quote (and a few others). Maybe that moniker is well deserved… or maybe I’m just being proud of the team’s real accomplishments. You make the call. In defensive of my statement, which I will reiterate now, I offer the following:

The Dragon has more native dynamic range than any motion capture camera ever made as measured by the standard engineering definition… signal to noise ratio. And it does it with the least amount of noise.

The Dragon outputs more measured resolution than any motion capture camera. That includes a 4K scan of 65mm film or the Sony F65. Notice I didn’t say captured resolution… I said measured resolution.

The Dragon shoots 100fps at 6K. Good, cheap and fast. Pick all three.

The color depth of the Dragon was increased to 16 bit. New Graeme color science. Skin tones.

We have a thousand knobs to turn to extract more performance from the Dragon’s electronic package, just as we did with the RED ONE and EPIC MX. You remember, it was a “new camera for free” several times. If you are not familiar with this… ask any long term RED customer.

The Dragon is an upgrade to EPIC… one of the smallest, lightest and most accessorized cameras in the cinema industry. You don’t have to buy a new camera to get Dragon.

You can shoot REDCODE RAW on Dragon at an incredibly high compression ratio and get incredible results. That means your SSDs are not obsolete. You really want to shoot uncompressed or RGB?

Now… if you want to debate a single point, feel free. Then I would ask you to look at the total package above and tell me why I can’t retire tomorrow having delivered what was promised… for less than $10K.

My goal when I started RED was to make the best camera in the world. The most important showcase for image capture is the motion picture industry. Check.

I am old. I am tired. I started Oakley 38 years ago. RED 7 years ago. In both cases my goal was to make a difference. To declare war on conventional thinking. Inventions wrapped in art. Dedicated to purpose beyond reason. Thermonuclear Protection.

I have had the chance to work with the most incredible people for so many years… both at Oakley and at RED. Too many people to mention… except one. Jarred Land. To release the Dragon with my closest buddy is a dream come true. I really don’t think I can ever top it. We’ll see.

God love us all.

Jim

Michael Mayda
08-11-2013, 07:35 AM
Thank you for bringing this great thread back to life. And getting me to read Jim's post again...

Tom Van
08-11-2013, 07:44 AM
Mark... Your efforts are much appreciated. I've picked up all I need to know about this new sensor from your post alone.

Martin Stevens
08-11-2013, 07:48 AM
THANKS AGAIN MARK!

Can you say at what ISO the Dragon has equal stops above and below middle gray?

Elijah Kelley
08-11-2013, 07:51 AM
Another round of congratulations and thanks for your efforts Mark.

David Battistella
08-11-2013, 07:51 AM
Mark,

Great stuff.

Let's hope this one stays civilized.

David

steve green
08-11-2013, 08:07 AM
Mark,
I'd still love to know the max frame rate (at present) of all the resolutions. Knowing that they may change before release.

RivaiC
08-11-2013, 08:53 AM
These are all great stuff !

Rivai

Bill Anderson
08-11-2013, 09:46 AM
Mark, perhaps I've overlooked this, but what f stops did you use on the car shots:
frames 15 and 24 from the top?

Elsie N
08-11-2013, 09:48 AM
Mark, your movie is a Dragon Classic and should be posted anew on a timely basis just to remind us of what should become a RED standard for a Dragon stress test.

paul schefz
08-11-2013, 09:57 AM
glad this one is getting a fresh start....

still wondering about compression and workflow...
17:1 seems unbelievable to me, i try to stay at 6:1 with my epic...
also: you mentioned somewhere that you were able to play back full 6k in RCX at 1/4 on your mbp?!?!

it somehow does not make much sense that we are getting more pixels with more DR at a much more flexible iso range and get smaller files that are easier to work with? don't get me wrong....i am all for it....any input on this?

Dr. Sassi
08-11-2013, 10:11 AM
Mark, I said it before, but I have a deep respect of what you have gotten done in these few days. I'm also amazed about the camera itself, but I am very certain that I will see so much more in the near future, when the Dragon is unleashed to the "Studios" and to all the great DPs in the world.

There is a deep grateful feeling to RED and the supportive people on RED-users, more importantly -- I'm thrilled to think about the option to have "my" second update of a RED -- in a not so far future perhaps. So far it has been a blast: Thank you.

ericyoung
08-11-2013, 10:23 AM
Thanks for pushing the limits of the camera for us and sharing your thoughts Mark! :biggrin:

Elsie N
08-11-2013, 10:28 AM
glad this one is getting a fresh start....

still wondering about compression and workflow...
17:1 seems unbelievable to me, i try to stay at 6:1 with my epic...
also: you mentioned somewhere that you were able to play back full 6k in RCX at 1/4 on your mbp?!?!

it somehow does not make much sense that we are getting more pixels with more DR at a much more flexible iso range and get smaller files that are easier to work with? don't get me wrong....i am all for it....any input on this?

Paul, I'll offer a possible reason and then punctuate it on the end with a question mark... because I'm just taking a shot in the dark.

But Jim stated the read resets are cut in half (which halves skew BTW, and that was the question he was answering) so maybe that is why the files are eaisier to handle on a computer?

TD Wood
08-11-2013, 10:36 AM
Back on track! Hopefully this one stays civil and strictly Dragon.
Many thanks again, Mr. Toia.

Are Luke Muggerud
08-11-2013, 12:48 PM
Paul, I'll offer a possible reason and then punctuate it on the end with a question mark... because I'm just taking a shot in the dark.

But Jim stated the read resets are cut in half (which halves skew BTW, and that was the question he was answering) so maybe that is why the files are eaisier to handle on a computer?

I think the reason for the improved compression is that random sensor noise hiding in the dark is reduced with Dragon, and anything that changes on a pixel-level for every frame is hell on compression therefore rendering better results within similar compression ratios with the improved S/N of Dragon

Elsie N
08-11-2013, 01:04 PM
I think the reason for the improved compression is that random sensor noise hiding in the dark is reduced with Dragon, and anything that changes on a pixel-level for every frame is hell on compression therefore rendering better results within similar compression ratios with the improved S/N of Dragon

I like your answer better. '-)

Mike P.
08-11-2013, 02:05 PM
Hey Toia, are you allowed to post a tif/dpx (in RLF)? I'd love to see what any of those 17:1 frames look like at something better than vimeo/jpeg quality. Jim?... Jarred? Bueller?

Eirik Tyrihjel
08-11-2013, 02:16 PM
This could just be one of those; "OMG they did it again threads!"

And it is!


Sorry I can't do better, but thanks Mark and thanks Red, I am truly inspired, the images are great, I am sooo ready!

Chris Henze
08-11-2013, 02:52 PM
Any feeling for how long the RedVolt lasts in the side handle compared to the standard Epic?

Bob Gundu
08-11-2013, 03:12 PM
Any feeling for how long the RedVolt lasts in the side handle compared to the standard Epic?

My guess is that it will be relatively the same.

Scott Crawley
08-11-2013, 04:25 PM
Any feeling for how long the RedVolt lasts in the side handle compared to the standard Epic?

I would be prepared for a surprise, but not too anxious. It draws less power itself, generates less heat, has better fans and a new cooling algorithm. Depending upon where you are coming from, you might see a notable improvement. We'll have to wait and see.

Robert Ruffo New
08-11-2013, 06:03 PM
There's lots to love here - enough to be worth $9500, that's for sure. But- And I say this because I assume constructive comments from users are actually welcome:

1 - On day close-ups, saturation of skin is still anemic. Maybe this will be 100% fixed by new color science - in which cases great. But I do hope it is, at least as an option. What I do prefer about all Sony and Canon cameras is that out of the box, skin is well saturated. No secondaries needed. Maybe this is just a choice Mark made - in which case fair enough.

2 - Mark sometimes says "shot at 250 ISO - but then graded to whatever". This is confusing. What does it matter what you "shot at" if it is still 100% RAW? All you do with a RAW camera is "meter at" or "assume that the sensor is" a certain ISO, what you select as metadata has zero effect on the recorded data. Since it also says it's deliberately underexposed, then Mark was not "metering at" 250 - because then it would be metered-for/ accurately exposed for 250. It makes me question, is ISO still 100% RAW?

Justin Marx
08-11-2013, 06:12 PM
Mark, amazing as usual. Can I be your cam op? Ill bring my Epic :-)

Mike P.
08-11-2013, 07:44 PM
2 - Mark sometimes says "shot at 250 ISO - but then graded to whatever". This is confusing. What does it matter what you "shot at" if it is still 100% RAW? All you do with a RAW camera is "meter at" or "assume that the sensor is" a certain ISO, what you select as metadata has zero effect on the recorded data. Since it also says it's deliberately underexposed, then Mark was not "metering at" 250 - because then it would be metered-for/ accurately exposed for 250. It makes me question, is ISO still 100% RAW?

ISO was never "raw", it was metadata applied to the raw data capture itself, which was always captured the exact same regardless of the ISO setting (but always completely dependent on the physical exposure settings - shutter, aperture, ND). Conversely, that's also why people still continue to ask "what is RED's native ISO." Whatever it captures at it's base, is the sensors "native ISO" (for lack of a better term) and lowering/brightening it via ISO/FLUT/Exposure/Brightness/Curves/GammaSpace/Etc. is applied to that base raw data -- which was always a FIXED/finite capture.

Dragon seems to be different. It appears that as you adjust ISO, it doesn't just move middle grey like it does on MX, but it actually periscopes it's ~16 stops of DR around that setting (which, to be honest, has always been a better system, as it's basically the exact same as above, but you are no longer "fixed" to that "native ISO" capture.) Other cameras do this via amplification and then bake it in to whatever codec -- RED did the exact same thing, but didn't bake. Dragon does it differently again, only this time it's really not contingent on a native/base ISO of the sensor... Or at least that's how I understand it...

...something tells me I really fubared that explanation.

EDIT: Bare in mind this is all anecdotal, based on that "~16stops (6+/10-?) at 200 and 2000" comment Jarred made.... The post where he said lowering to 100ISO means less ND, which means less IR contamination and glass in front of the lens.

Robert Ruffo New
08-11-2013, 08:48 PM
ISO was never "raw", it was metadata applied to the raw data capture itself, which was always captured the exact same regardless of the ISO setting (but always completely dependent on the physical exposure settings - shutter, aperture, ND). Conversely, that's also why people still continue to ask "what is RED's native ISO." Whatever it captures at it's base, is the sensors "native ISO" (for lack of a better term) and lowering/brightening it via ISO/FLUT/Exposure/Brightness/Curves/GammaSpace/Etc. is applied to that base raw data -- which was always a FIXED/finite capture.

Dragon seems to be different. It appears that as you adjust ISO, it doesn't just move middle grey like it does on MX, but it actually periscopes it's ~16 stops of DR around that setting (which, to be honest, has always been a better system, as it's basically the exact same as above, but you are no longer "fixed" to that "native ISO" capture.) Other cameras do this via amplification and then bake it in to whatever codec -- RED did the exact same thing, but didn't bake. Dragon does it differently again, only this time it's really not contingent on a native/base ISO of the sensor... Or at least that's how I understand it...

...something tells me I really fubared that explanation.

EDIT: Bare in mind this is all anecdotal, based on that "~16stops (6+/10-?) at 200 and 2000" comment Jarred made.... The post where he said lowering to 100ISO means less ND, which means less IR contamination and glass in front of the lens.

But... Either it's RAW or is' not - if it's RAW there is no reason to mention what you "shot at" because it really doesn't matter - because an image "shot at" 250 ISO and later adjusted to 6400 in RCX will look identical to an image "shot at" 100 000 ISO and adjusted to 6400 in RCX - all you can talk about is what you "metered for" or were "aiming for" in terms of a final ISO in post..

And... if it's a floating "periscope" of 16 stops, as opposed to a flexing gamma curve, but still RAW - that means the recorded dynamic range is much more than 16 stops, because in post I can layer many different ISO exposures in the same frame and composite them with windows. That would be great, if that is the case. Within that, there would still be an ideal sweet spot ISO to choose for metering, with the most latitude - way more than you need, but still - at either end.

Gavin Greenwalt
08-11-2013, 09:00 PM
I think the reason for the improved compression is that random sensor noise hiding in the dark is reduced with Dragon, and anything that changes on a pixel-level for every frame is hell on compression therefore rendering better results within similar compression ratios with the improved S/N of Dragon

Correct although RED is intraframe compressed so changes between frames don't matter. That being said, noise does create per-pixel detail that has to be compressed and is murder on compression engines. Then again if you are shooting a naturally noisy subject like a fine textured paper or a forest, or dirt or something else with sub-pixel detail... you're equally going to stress the compression engine with or without noise.

One nice feature for future RED cameras would be an analysis engine which evaluates the uncompressed image for detail and gives you a suggestion for a maximum compression level.

Mike P.
08-11-2013, 09:17 PM
But... Either it's RAW or is' not - if it's RAW there is no reason to mention what you "shot at" because it really doesn't matter - because an image "shot at" 250 ISO and later adjusted to 6400 in RCX will look identical to an image "shot at" 100 000 ISO and adjusted to 6400 in RCX - all you can talk about is what you "metered for" or were "aiming for" in terms of a final ISO in post..

And... if it's a floating "periscope" of 16 stops, as opposed to a flexing gamma curve, but still RAW - that means the recorded dynamic range is much more than 16 stops, because in post I can layer many different ISO exposures in the same frame and composite them with windows. That would be great, if that is the case. Within that, there would still be an ideal sweet spot ISO to choose for metering, with the most latitude - way more than you need, but still - at either end.

Yes, but your "ISO" (monitoring path) dictates your physical exposure settings, which is why pushing something in post wouldn't necessarily look the same. When Mark pushed a ISO250 shot to 4000 (what is that, a 4stop push?), he was basically stretching the shit out of the mid-to-blacks (as it was presumably shot wide-open at ISO250 to get any kind of exposure at all) which means the highlights were being pressed towards clipping (but there's actually still a lot of details in the highs and everything below mid-gray still looked pretty good despite the stretch).

As for the periscope; maybe there is a technical limitation. Maybe they can only fit a certain amount of stops comfortably (with data meaty enough to be manipulation-worthy) within the 16bit REDcode container. The reason they can't go to 32bit is simple; it requires exponentially more processing than Epic has (and would chew up a boatload more data too... aka we're not there yet). Moreover, I think it's a SNR thing - at ISO2000 its comparably clean to ISO200, so you can get away with setting the ISO that high. That being said, a dual-ISO HDRx method (rather than the current dual shutter speed method) would be the cat's PJs and truly offer what you're suggesting (16stops + 5 stops = 21stops total all at 1/48th in two 16bit streams).

...OR maybe what Jarred said is being taken completely out of context (by me and anyone else who read it.)

RED/Jim/Jarred/Graeme/Mark, please jump in at any time to clarify. At the very least, I'd like to be corrected if I'm spewing fud...

Mark Toia
08-12-2013, 01:28 AM
Mike and Robert, your both correct...

I personally only use the ISO settings to make things brighter for the video village monitors, or if I need to see in the dark, I up the ISO just so I'm able to see what Im doing...
But the fact is, your not changing sensor ISO, your only changing the Metadata settings so you can actually see deeper into what the sensor is capturing. thats all...
So yes Robert your correct, there is and was no need for me to share ISO settings, but in saying that this was the only way for me to show people noise in dark situations, which was to push the META DATA ISO upwards into the 2000, 4000, 6400 ISO range (even though I exposed for a 250iso shot) as this was the only way to do induce noise dramatically.
Silly as it sounds, its was the only way to demonstrate hi ISO range to everyone.

For example : Just say your running in gunning and you chase a man from the bright sunlight as he races into a dark warehouse... He runs from a F22 scene into a f4 scene... Or from a 250iso scene into a 4000iso scene. The question I posed my self was... How much range or how much can I lift in the darks / shadows? As a RAW sensor goes yes... you can almost pull this shot off without even touching your aperture... and this was the reason for that particular test.

As a base ISO goes for the sensor.. and after all our testing and even after much discussion we did not really come to a final conclusion as what that might be...
I thought it might have been between 320-400iso.. My AC felt it was around 400-800Iso... others will think its is between 800iso and 2000iso... Its subjective. At the end of the day, people will park the ISO where they are most happy.

I've decided that I will shoot at mainly 250iso for almost everything, only because I felt the image was smoothest at that point... The highlights are safe if you watch your histogram and this ISO will also save me loading up on the ND's .
Hence why I'm keen as hell for the MOTION mount.

Mark Toia
08-12-2013, 01:38 AM
Mark,
I'd still love to know the max frame rate (at present) of all the resolutions. Knowing that they may change before release.

Same as the EPIC MX at this point... I was hoping for more with the test build.
6k WS was 100fps, 6k 2.1 was 87... there was no 6k HD... but Im sure its coming.



Mark, perhaps I've overlooked this, but what f stops did you use on the car shots:
frames 15 and 24 from the top?

I was around f4 to 5.6, with some serious ND over the lens to blank out that sun flare.


Hey Toia, are you allowed to post a tif/dpx (in RLF)? I'd love to see what any of those 17:1 frames look like at something better than vimeo/jpeg quality. Jim?... Jarred? Bueller?

This is not the final production ready sensor, It was still a TEST camera, RED are still perfecting everything including the new colour science. So i'm expecting even better image performance than what I shared with you all. So when its 100% ready to go out, I'm sure they will load up a proper 6k image for you all to scrutinise over. :)


There's lots to love here - enough to be worth $9500, that's for sure. But- And I say this because I assume constructive comments from users are actually welcome:
On day close-ups, saturation of skin is still anemic. Maybe this will be 100% fixed by new color science - in which cases great. But I do hope it is, at least as an option. What I do prefer about all Sony and Canon cameras is that out of the box, skin is well saturated. No secondaries needed. Maybe this is just a choice Mark made - in which case fair enough.


Uuum... not sure how to respond, but maybe my daughter looked Anaemic. The image / color / looked exactly colour perfect to actual human being standing in front of me. I'll tell her to get some more sun. :) Maybe your monitor your watching the Compressed quicktime on is a little flat? So many variables.
Looking at this shot via a RETINA Ipad is the closest thing to perfect... I'm looking at it now with my daughter sitting beside me, looks exactly the same.
Sorry Rob, your not going to get a bite out of me.


glad this one is getting a fresh start....

still wondering about compression and workflow...
17:1 seems unbelievable to me, i try to stay at 6:1 with my epic...
also: you mentioned somewhere that you were able to play back full 6k in RCX at 1/4 on your mbp?!?!


6k playback via RCX at 1/4 res ... yes.... Via my MBP. no Rocket inline.
17:1 was clean... Seemed unbelievable to me too... but its fine.



it somehow does not make much sense that we are getting more pixels with more DR at a much more flexible iso range and get smaller files that are easier to work with? don't get me wrong....i am all for it....any input on this?

I have no idea how they do it.


Any feeling for how long the RedVolt lasts in the side handle compared to the standard Epic?

We were getting an extra 3 to 5mins out of them with the DRAGON.

Phil Holland
08-12-2013, 02:26 AM
I've decided that I will shoot at mainly 250iso for almost everything, only because I felt the image was smoothest at that point... The highlights are safe if you watch your histogram and this ISO will also save me loading up on the ND's .
Hence why I'm keen as hell for the MOTION mount.

Interesting. I'm real curious about shooting at lower ISOs as well. I have a feeling I'll expose/light for midtones with ISO 500-1000 in mind to give me more "meat" in the grade. Eager to test out and find where that sweet spot is for the fattest possible "digital negative". We'll see where that actually lands in regards to the histogram and what Raw sees.

I like to explore some not so typical grades in post and enjoy pushing those boundaries, stretching values and moving color around a lot. Mysterium-X w/ REDCODE is fairly liberating on that front already. Curious where Dragon brings this to the next level is for sure.

ISO 2000 and I'd say up to around ISO 4000 are certainly going to be usable straight out of camera from what I'm seeing. Maybe even up to ISO 6400 based on your tests here Mark because that boat in the water looks rather lovely to my eyes.

Roy Rossovich
08-12-2013, 02:48 AM
frame rates are on the webpage

REDCODE™ 12 and 16-bit RAW : Compression choices of 18:1 to 3:1
1-100 fps 6K
1-120 fps 5K, 4.5K
1-150 fps 4K
1-200 fps 3K
1-300 fps 2K

Mark Toia
08-12-2013, 03:07 AM
Interesting. I'm real curious about shooting at lower ISOs as well. I have a feeling I'll expose/light for midtones with ISO 500-1000 in mind to give me more "meat" in the grade. Eager to test out and find where that sweet spot is for the fattest possible "digital negative". We'll see where that actually lands in regards to the histogram and what Raw sees.

I like to explore some not so typical grades in post and enjoy pushing those boundaries, stretching values and moving color around a lot. Mysterium-X w/ REDCODE is fairly liberating on that front already. Curious where Dragon brings this to the next level is for sure.

ISO 2000 and I'd say up to around ISO 4000 are certainly going to be usable straight out of camera from what I'm seeing. Maybe even up to ISO 6400 based on your tests here Mark because that boat in the water looks rather lovely to my eyes.

Yes that 6400 boat shot did catch me by surprise as well.... And yes, 2000 and 4000 are completely usable straight out of the box.

Everyone is going to find there own sweet spot with the dragon.... and yours Phil, could be completely different to mine. :) ...

David Battistella
08-12-2013, 03:53 AM
It makes sense.

With the lower noise floor you can easily push ISO higher in post because as you move up the "gain" there is much less noise being pronounced. No noise at the onset means no noise when you push the ISO in RCX.

Since I am a 320 ISO guy on MX I trust your rating Mark at 250 ISO, that is exciting.

David

Robert Ruffo New
08-12-2013, 04:12 AM
Mike and Robert, your both correct...

I personally only use the ISO settings to make things brighter for the video village monitors, or if I need to see in the dark, I up the ISO just so I'm able to see what Im doing...
But the fact is, your not changing sensor ISO, your only changing the Metadata settings so you can actually see deeper into what the sensor is capturing. thats all...
So yes Robert your correct, there is and was no need for me to share ISO settings, but in saying that this was the only way for me to show people noise in dark situations, which was to push the META DATA ISO upwards into the 2000, 4000, 6400 ISO range (even though I exposed for a 250iso shot) as this was the only way to do induce noise dramatically.
Silly as it sounds, its was the only way to demonstrate hi ISO range to everyone.

For example : Just say your running in gunning and you chase a man from the bright sunlight as he races into a dark warehouse... He runs from a F22 scene into a f4 scene... Or from a 250iso scene into a 4000iso scene. The question I posed my self was... How much range or how much can I lift in the darks / shadows? As a RAW sensor goes yes... you can almost pull this shot off without even touching your aperture... and this was the reason for that particular test.

As a base ISO goes for the sensor.. and after all our testing and even after much discussion we did not really come to a final conclusion as what that might be...
I thought it might have been between 320-400iso.. My AC felt it was around 400-800Iso... others will think its is between 800iso and 2000iso... Its subjective. At the end of the day, people will park the ISO where they are most happy.

I've decided that I will shoot at mainly 250iso for almost everything, only because I felt the image was smoothest at that point... The highlights are safe if you watch your histogram and this ISO will also save me loading up on the ND's .
Hence why I'm keen as hell for the MOTION mount.

Mark - I meant no offense to your daughter. I felt that both the man and your daughter looked a little flat and a little off - still what that slightly excessive yellow I always grade away with secondaries, but wish I didn't have to (although it's already better than uncorrected MX)- it has nothing to do with their actual skin tones, as they both looked off in the same way. To my credit, I have something a little fancier than a retina display here, and much more precise, calibrated every two weeks to within 0.3% of Red 709 perfection using a Hubble probe that is itself calibrated every 6 months, with perfect 5600K backlighting on a wall panel painted with special neutral grey paint. It's not my monitors/projectors leading me astray. The problem really is there, although it's subtle.

Elsie N
08-12-2013, 05:15 AM
Mark - I meant no offense to your daughter. I felt that both the man and your daughter looked a little flat and a little off - still what that slightly excessive yellow I always grade away with secondaries, but wish I didn't have to (although it's already better than uncorrected MX)- it has nothing to do with their actual skin tones, as they both looked off in the same way. To my credit, I have something a little fancier than a retina display here, and much more precise, calibrated every two weeks to within 0.3% of Red 709 perfection using a Hubble probe that is itself calibrated every 6 months, with perfect 5600K backlighting on a wall panel painted with special neutral grey paint. It's not my monitors/projectors leading me astray. The problem really is there, although it's subtle.

But still, you would agree that this came off pretty well for quick and dirty test footage, no? I'm pretty sure you are not suggesting Mark can't get a proper skin tone, so I am assuming you are not laying the blame for the "bad skin" on Mark, correct?

Rob, I think you are like those people who are known as a "Nose" for sniffing perfume or a "Palette" for tasting wine or cheese. I think you have proved that you have brain/eye coordination that well exceeds the norm.

Thanks for pointing out these flaws that the rest of us cannot see.

Juan Melara
08-12-2013, 06:29 AM
Rob, with regards to the anaemic skin tones, I'm seeing the same thing you are.

Its due to a too weak curve being applied to REDlogFilm footage, which in turn isn't accurately placing the log values where they need to be to properly de-log REDlogFilm. This is most apparent on well modelled skin as it occupies a large slice of the log range. If the curve isn't right, a large portion of the skin is left quite flat and most of it will be left rather desaturated. Apply the correct curve, or even just a slightly sharper curve and not only will the values be closer to where they need to be, but the sharper curve will also bump the image saturation. Both of these lead to more traditionally pleasing skin tones.

Mark mentioned this exactly, stating that he took the footage into RCX for "a very basic curve which was applied to a RED LOG film setting".

This isn't really a wrong way of doing it, in fact it's probably the best way to show the entire range captured by the camera. As a basic, less aggressive curve means there is limited compression to the information in the shadows and highlights, which better shows off the entire captured range. After all, showing the entire range of the sensor was the main goal behind the stress test, correct?

This is actually the workflow used in a lot of low-con, desaturated grades on TVCs etc. As its easier to create your own custom curve for log gamma images that places the values and contrast where you want it. Rather than starting from a standard log2video curve and trying to work back from there.

I'm happy to put up some examples that illustrate what I'm talking about...

Brant Hadfield
08-12-2013, 06:35 AM
But still, you would agree that this came off pretty well for quick and dirty test footage, no? I'm pretty sure you are not suggesting Mark can't get a proper skin tone, so I am assuming you are not laying the blame for the "bad skin" on Mark, correct?

Rob, I think you are like those people who are known as a "Nose" for sniffing perfume or a "Palette" for tasting wine or cheese. I think you have proved that you have brain/eye coordination that well exceeds the norm.

Thanks for pointing out these flaws that the rest of us cannot see.

No, I saw it too. I have dealt with this by curving the LUT in my own Scarlet in such a way that generates better color response. But there is always a trade off to be made between smaller photo sites/resolution vs larger photo sites/color. While one may be good enough for some, the other may be not enough for others. Pick your poison.

Meryem Ersoz
08-12-2013, 06:38 AM
you mean for only $9500, I get to shoot images as beautifully as Mark Toia? such a BARGAIN!!!!

oh wait....that's not how it works?

I'm still in awe of how much ground you covered in two days. still beautiful. still excited for the new sensor.

I actually was on the fence, because I have no complaints, none whatsoever about MX, there is already an astonishing amount which can be pulled from the RAW, if it's needed. I've been far more interested in waiting on some of these support items, modules, etc., which can streamline the camera and enhance its functionality, than in throwing down for a new camera.

The Toia test has changed my mind. I'm way more excited to throw down for this new camera now that we've seen a glimpse (just a glimpse, as per Jim's clarifications) of what it can do.

Keep playing with your knobs, lads! It will only get better from here.

snicker....

Robert Ruffo New
08-12-2013, 06:40 AM
But still, you would agree that this came off pretty well for quick and dirty test footage, no? I'm pretty sure you are not suggesting Mark can't get a proper skin tone, so I am assuming you are not laying the blame for the "bad skin" on Mark, correct?

Rob, I think you are like those people who are known as a "Nose" for sniffing perfume or a "Palette" for tasting wine or cheese. I think you have proved that you have brain/eye coordination that well exceeds the norm.

Thanks for pointing out these flaws that the rest of us cannot see.

I'm not blaming Mark - he specifically avoided sophisticated grades with secondaries so we could see performance of the new camera is a purer state - I am hoping that Dragon will be a little more refined in this regard when its' released and the new color science is ready. I don't know about exceeding the norm, but my clients pay for immense effort, attention and care placed on tiny details. I think everyone can see these things at an unconscious level - the image simply has slightly less impact to them, although maybe not everyone could describe why.

Robert Ruffo New
08-12-2013, 06:43 AM
Rob, with regards to the anaemic skin tones, I'm seeing the same thing you are.

Its due to a too weak curve being applied to REDlogFilm footage, which in turn isn't accurately placing the log values where they need to be to properly de-log REDlogFilm. This is most apparent on well modelled skin as it occupies a large slice of the log range. If the curve isn't right, a large portion of the skin is left quite flat and most of it will be left rather desaturated. Apply the correct curve, or even just a slightly sharper curve and not only will the values be closer to where they need to be, but the sharper curve will also bump the image saturation. Both of these lead to more traditionally pleasing skin tones.

Mark mentioned this exactly, stating that he took the footage into RCX for "a very basic curve which was applied to a RED LOG film setting".

This isn't really a wrong way of doing it, in fact it's probably the best way to show the entire range captured by the camera. As a basic, less aggressive curve means there is limited compression to the information in the shadows and highlights, which better shows off the entire captured range. After all, showing the entire range of the sensor was the main goal behind the stress test, correct?

This is actually the workflow used in a lot of low-con, desaturated grades on TVCs etc. As its easier to create your own custom curve for log gamma images that places the values and contrast where you want it. Rather than starting from a standard log2video curve and trying to work back from there.

I'm happy to put up some examples that illustrate what I'm talking about...

I'm familiar with what you explain, and you could be very right.

Mark Toia
08-12-2013, 08:39 AM
I'm not blaming Mark -

But you should...

Boys, boys, boys... Don't blame the camera for "my" very basic grading. Thats just silly.

Your comments shouldn't be founded entirely from a H264 quicktime... which personally looks a little flat compared to my original source files.
As we all know, when you compress something that is 36gig in size down to 250meg... you will loose information, shades, colors and tones. Thats a fact.

So adding more saturation to a face do you honestly think is a big issue... ? Nope.
Do you guys create content where you don't finial grade any of your work ? , is this why your asking for absolute perfection straight out of the box ? so you don't need to grade?
I usually put everything through a Hi end grading tool... but not this, I wanted to show you all what you get out of the camera pretty much.

Also.. I could have had any silly colour temperature set in these tests, tint could be anywhere.. which then was probably passed down into these shots during transcoding... remembering these images did not go through any hi end grading process to be balanced out. This is a basic as it gets.

I'm finding it very hard Rob to listen to your comments as you sound very intelligent and knowledgable, but your assessments so far are all based from non graded material and from a compressed quicktime.
And to make it even worse, there was know new colour science applied, this was still RG3.
And finally... this test was more a latitude, dynamic range test, not a "HOW GOOD CAN MARK GRADE" test... I wasn't out to hide a single thing.

Once again... Don't blame or judge the camera from my very basic graded shots. That's not a smart idea.

Ted Parkes
08-12-2013, 08:48 AM
Mark . I for one was holding off on the upgrade until I seen something and what you posted had me sign up right away. I appreciate the time, work, effort and professional assessment you have put in to these test.

Thanks again
Ted

Elsie N
08-12-2013, 08:49 AM
But you should...

Boys, boys, boys... Don't blame the camera for "my" very basic grading. Thats just silly.

Your comments shouldn't be founded entirely from a H264 quicktime... which personally looks a little flat compared to my original source files.
As we all know, when you compress something that is 36gig in size down to 250meg... you will loose information, shades, colors and tones. Thats a fact.

So adding more saturation to a face do you honestly think is a big issue... ? Nope.
Do you guys create content where you don't finial grade any of your work ? , is this why your asking for absolute perfection straight out of the box ? so you don't need to grade?
I usually put everything through a Hi end grading tool... but not this, I wanted to show you all what you get out of the camera pretty much.

Also.. I could have had any silly colour temperature set in these tests, tint could be anywhere.. which then was probably passed down into these shots during transcoding... remembering these images did not go through any hi end grading process to be balanced out. This is a basic as it gets.

I'm finding it very hard Rob to listen to your comments as you sound very intelligent and knowledgable, but your assessments so far are all based from non graded material and from a compressed quicktime.
And to make it even worse, there was know new colour science applied, this was still RG3.
And finally... this test was more a latitude, dynamic range test, not a "HOW GOOD CAN MARK GRADE" test... I wasn't out to hide a single thing.

Once again... Don't blame or judge the camera from my very basic graded shots. That's not a smart idea.

Seems you are saying this same thing over and over... maybe you should just quote the above post every few pages?

Humberto Rivera
08-12-2013, 08:53 AM
Mark, Amen! Amen! Amen! Humberto Rivera

Sergio Perez
08-12-2013, 09:21 AM
Mark, how are the encoding times for a 6K to 4K file compared to old 5K to 4K (prores 422 please!)

EDIT with an old Rocket, of course!

Martin Stevens
08-12-2013, 09:36 AM
Mark, what is truly fantastic about your test is that the imagery DOES look fantastic even though
you did NOT put it through fancy grading software.

It amazes me that people cannot see the power of the Dragon in your tests, and also
see a big difference to MX in the DR and Noise.

Peter Majtan
08-12-2013, 09:41 AM
Mark - I meant no offense to your daughter. I felt that both the man and your daughter looked a little flat and a little off - still what that slightly excessive yellow I always grade away with secondaries, but wish I didn't have to (although it's already better than uncorrected MX)- it has nothing to do with their actual skin tones, as they both looked off in the same way. To my credit, I have something a little fancier than a retina display here, and much more precise, calibrated every two weeks to within 0.3% of Red 709 perfection using a Hubble probe that is itself calibrated every 6 months, with perfect 5600K backlighting on a wall panel painted with special neutral grey paint. It's not my monitors/projectors leading me astray. The problem really is there, although it's subtle.

What problem?

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/Lipstick.jpg

PS: Straight out of the camera - no grading what so ever. And yeah - did I mention Scarlet...?

:sifone: Peter

paul schefz
08-12-2013, 09:45 AM
6k playback via RCX at 1/4 res ... yes.... Via my MBP. no Rocket inline.
17:1 was clean... Seemed unbelievable to me too... but its fine.



I have no idea how they do it.



We were getting an extra 3 to 5mins out of them with the DRAGON.

thanks so much mark....that is so awesome....the extra battery life is more then a cherry on top as well....
and: i don't really care how they do it either, wasn't looking for a technical explanation....just your user/tester confirmation....

thanks agina for doing this test and thanks for putting up with all this and taking time to answer questions here....

as for the skin tone thing: not sure how many threads have to be closed because the answers are always the same.....this is not about being a blind red defender or fanboy...at all...this is about an infuriating refusal to listen/read....judging any kind of camera performance (color, tones, even DR) from compressed online stills or video just does not make any sense....you have to take in the information provided by the tester and look at the presented files with that info in mind and make an educated judgement for yourself...that is what an online test (especially of a beta product) is...or at best that is what can get out of one....what the final camera can/will do in your hands is something nobody knows until one can try it out....

i really hope this thread will survive so we can actually get some real and up to date information here....

Michael Ou
08-12-2013, 10:17 AM
Thanks Mark for taking the time to put this most valuable video out there! Like Ted, I was on the fence with respect to upgrading immediately, but your shots in the partially shaded woods, the bright car, all the low light and iso 6400 footage knocked me over and I put myself on the list right after.

Don't listen to the small number of detractors, they have yet to put themselves or any of their work up here for all of us to evaluate. This is a simple test of yet unreleased tech, not an in-depth clinical analysis, you said that from the start, you're saying that now, and yet here we are, it's clear there are other factors driving those motivated few. I feel lucky that we can see this footage so that we get a taste of what's to come, and I'm excited! Thanks!

Martin Stevens
08-12-2013, 10:32 AM
What problem?

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/Lipstick.jpg

PS: Straight out of the camera - no grading what so ever. And yeah - did I mention Scarlet...?

:sifone: Peter

Awesome. Great example.

I like what you're smoking.

Robert Ruffo New
08-12-2013, 10:37 AM
But you should...

Boys, boys, boys... Don't blame the camera for "my" very basic grading. Thats just silly.

Your comments shouldn't be founded entirely from a H264 quicktime... which personally looks a little flat compared to my original source files.
As we all know, when you compress something that is 36gig in size down to 250meg... you will loose information, shades, colors and tones. Thats a fact.

So adding more saturation to a face do you honestly think is a big issue... ? Nope.
Do you guys create content where you don't finial grade any of your work ? , is this why your asking for absolute perfection straight out of the box ? so you don't need to grade?
I usually put everything through a Hi end grading tool... but not this, I wanted to show you all what you get out of the camera pretty much.

Also.. I could have had any silly colour temperature set in these tests, tint could be anywhere.. which then was probably passed down into these shots during transcoding... remembering these images did not go through any hi end grading process to be balanced out. This is a basic as it gets.

I'm finding it very hard Rob to listen to your comments as you sound very intelligent and knowledgable, but your assessments so far are all based from non graded material and from a compressed quicktime.
And to make it even worse, there was know new colour science applied, this was still RG3.
And finally... this test was more a latitude, dynamic range test, not a "HOW GOOD CAN MARK GRADE" test... I wasn't out to hide a single thing.

Once again... Don't blame or judge the camera from my very basic graded shots. That's not a smart idea.

I wasn't blaming you, or the camera, and I'm not drawing any conclusions, only expressing concerns, with the real hope that these concerns are unfounded. Most likely they are.

H264 wouldn't affect colors much, especially in brighter areas, and anyway I downloaded the quicktime original from Vimeo..

Actually it's sometimes some work to pull a clean key off skintones and saturate and 'de-yellow' just those without adding secondaries-noise or affecting other things. Not impossible, by any means, but a pain. Freckles also look oddly more pronounced on MX - I think it's a spectral response thing on the sensor itself, not really completely the fault of the color science. Reducing freckles again, not impossible, but a huge pain requiring a script in Smoke tweaked per-shot. (I didn't see any freckle issues in your video, but it's definitely something to test for with a subject who has them.)

I'm hoping RedColor4 or "Dragon Color" will make all that tweaking unnecessary - i.e. if you nail white balance and exposure based on a grey card where the actor's face was, skin tones will look exactly and wonderfully as they should straight-off - and only look whatever funky way you want if you later choose that direction.

Maybe the very near future will prove these concerns groundless and that will make me very happy, but they are reasonable ones, I think. Again, these are just concerns, not conclusions or accusations in any way shape or form. I am, as you wisely suggest, waiting and seeing how things evolve and improve and I'm sure they will, maybe more than I could ever hope, let alone enough to not be concerned anymore.

Martin Stevens
08-12-2013, 10:38 AM
Remember this Red color example.

41481

PS

How do I post and make the image appear larger?

Robert Ruffo New
08-12-2013, 10:44 AM
What problem?

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/Lipstick.jpg

PS: Straight out of the camera - no grading what so ever. And yeah - did I mention Scarlet...?

:sifone: Peter

Sorry but skin lacks saturation to my eye, and a bit too pink - should be a tad more toward orange. Again, subtle, but...

You can nail skin tones. The problem is nailing skin tones while keeping other colors as they should be without using a secondary qualifications and corrections. This frame is a bad example because there are no known colors in it other than skin - the lipstick's true color is unknown.

Just to be clear - the problem is very subtle, and occurs only under certain types of lighting, with certain types of complexion, but it's there. On an F65, no. On Dragon, I'm hoping, also no.

As to those who are calling me a detractor - as a thinking person I feel it is not my job to just say "Rah Rah Red!!!" no matter what, like a mindless sycophant. Thing is, clients, directors, studios etc., all have these concerns. If you just get angry at me, or them, instead of addressing these concerns they will simply request another camera, and that's no good for Red or for Red owners who promote their use.

Robert Ruffo New
08-12-2013, 10:51 AM
Remember this Red color example.

41481

PS

How do I post and make the image appear larger?

A) Tanned skin has never been a problem.

B) It's a still - you can anything with Photoshop very fast and easily - unlike motion-picture retouching.

Michael Ou
08-12-2013, 11:13 AM
As to those who are calling me a detractor - as a thinking person I feel it is not my job to just say "Rah Rah Red!!!" no matter what, like a mindless sycophant. Thing is, clients, directors, studios etc., all have these concerns. If you just get angry at me, or them, instead of addressing these concerns they will simply request another camera, and that's no good for Red or for Red owners who promote their use.
"doth protest to much, methinks"
Not angry at all, and also will not take the bait. Red has only opened doors for me, not shut them as perhaps you are implying. The FUD regarding skin ended a LONG time ago!

Elsie N
08-12-2013, 11:20 AM
Sorry but skin lacks saturation to my eye, and a bit too pink - should be a tad more toward orange. Again, subtle, but...

You can nail skin tones. The problem is nailing skin tones while keeping other colors as they should be without using a secondary qualifications and corrections. This frame is a bad example because there are no known colors in it other than skin - the lipstick's true color is unknown.

Just to be clear - the problem is very subtle, and occurs only under certain types of lighting, with certain types of complexion, but it's there. On an F65, no. On Dragon, I'm hoping, also no.

As to those who are calling me a detractor - as a thinking person I feel it is not my job to just say "Rah Rah Red!!!" no matter what, like a mindless sycophant. Thing is, clients, directors, studios etc., all have these concerns. If you just get angry at me, or them, instead of addressing these concerns they will simply request another camera, and that's no good for Red or for Red owners who promote their use.

I KNEW IT! Rob, you have that third eye the rest of us do not possess. I thought Peter's image, straight out of the camera, no less, was perfect. I may have to find something else to do. If that image doesn't work, how will I ever achieve a proper looking movie...

Jake Wilganowski
08-12-2013, 11:25 AM
Rob have u seen that recent test on CML with f65, Alexa, Epic, BMCC, c500 and F55? Worth looking at:
http://www.omegabroadcast.com/fmp/omega-detail.php?-manuRecID=630&-recid=2472&-tab=0

Michael Jarvis
08-12-2013, 11:30 AM
Got an idea. Lets all go out an buy the same monitors and calibrate everything the exact same way...and look at those frames again. Something tells me if those skin tones look off to some, there may be other elements at work there. Skin tones look great from here.

paul schefz
08-12-2013, 11:33 AM
Sorry but skin lacks saturation to my eye, and a bit too pink - should be a tad more toward orange. Again, subtle, but...

You can nail skin tones. The problem is nailing skin tones while keeping other colors as they should be without using a secondary qualifications and corrections. This frame is a bad example because there are no known colors in it other than skin - the lipstick's true color is unknown.

Just to be clear - the problem is very subtle, and occurs only under certain types of lighting, with certain types of complexion, but it's there. On an F65, no. On Dragon, I'm hoping, also no.

As to those who are calling me a detractor - as a thinking person I feel it is not my job to just say "Rah Rah Red!!!" no matter what, like a mindless sycophant. Thing is, clients, directors, studios etc., all have these concerns. If you just get angry at me, or them, instead of addressing these concerns they will simply request another camera, and that's no good for Red or for Red owners who promote their use.
sorry, but what you are saying makes no sense at all....we could put up 10 or 20 variations of that shot going from more yellow to more red with all kinds of saturation and everything in between, let people take a poll and most likely not a single version would get more then 25% of the vote....
there is no such thing as "perfect skin tone" does not exist....i am happy for you that you are calibrating your screens and calibrators to keep everything perfectly balanced on your end...but once you let ANYONE see ANYTHNG it all goes out the window...you do know that? right? 5 screens will show you 5 different "perfect skin tones"....and not only that...it is also completely subjective....add to that everybody sees color differently....

Elsie N
08-12-2013, 11:38 AM
....add to that everybody sees color differently....

There may be a simple answer here to explain why Rob sees things differently. At first I thought he may be aesthete, but I think Peter cornered that with his image. But then I thought, what if Rob is a synesthete? Not all out but having just a mild case. That would explain how he sees color differently. Not that that is a bad thing necessarily, just unnecessary when it comes to making pretty images.

Brant Hadfield
08-12-2013, 11:56 AM
I asked Roger Deakins, in the midst of a similar discussion, which shots in Skyfall were used with Epic on the octocopter by the second unit during the chase scenes in Istanbul, vs the other footage shot on Alexa. His reply:
"There were probably just two shots of Bond on the rooftop in Istanbul which were made with the Red and used in 'Skyfall'. They are quick shots and you would never notice the difference. I have done side by side tests on a portrait, however, and that is where you really see the subtle differences in colour representation, differences that cannot be counteracted in a DI suite."
I think there were actually more than just two shots from the octo and Epic, but point taken. More dense though smaller photo sites benefits resolution. Larger photo sites benefit variation in color sensitivity at the cost of resolution. I hope Dragon turns this model on its ear.
I do believe we've not yet really seen a good representation of Dragon's capability, given its current stage of development, and importantly, the color science.

Vadim Bobkovsky
08-12-2013, 11:59 AM
In daylight through the window with slight diffusion, similar Caucasian (I assume) face would look a lot like this, without much of orange. I'm not sure if my eyes are calibrated or I'm partially color blind, but that's how I see it in real life most of the time when I'm sober. Mixed lighting and tungsten is another question, of course. Again, less noise from the sensor, cleaner RGB channels under different complex lighting conditions and increased sensitivity will make cinematographer's life that much easier, no doubts about it. MX is cool, but Dragon is my preciousss.

Andy Roberts
08-12-2013, 11:59 AM
Rob have u seen that recent test on CML with f65, Alexa, Epic, BMCC, c500 and F55? Worth looking at:
http://www.omegabroadcast.com/fmp/omega-detail.php?-manuRecID=630&-recid=2472&-tab=0

Jake, your link was for a shoulder mount pad...

luigivaltulini
08-12-2013, 12:12 PM
Jake, your link was for a shoulder mount pad... http://www.cinematography.net/hannover-2013.html

I have never seen a test like this ...
or rather, I've never seen anyone so bad use the RED.
but how do you make a comparison with the middle of the video signal!!

too bad....

Michael J Brennan
08-12-2013, 01:16 PM
Larger photo sites benefit variation in color sensitivity at the cost of resolution

Variation in colour sensitivity?
How so?



Mike Brennan

Peter Majtan
08-12-2013, 01:22 PM
Sorry but skin lacks saturation to my eye, and a bit too pink - should be a tad more toward orange. Again, subtle, but...

You can nail skin tones. The problem is nailing skin tones while keeping other colors as they should be without using a secondary qualifications and corrections. This frame is a bad example because there are no known colors in it other than skin - the lipstick's true color is unknown.

Just to be clear - the problem is very subtle, and occurs only under certain types of lighting, with certain types of complexion, but it's there. On an F65, no. On Dragon, I'm hoping, also no.

As to those who are calling me a detractor - as a thinking person I feel it is not my job to just say "Rah Rah Red!!!" no matter what, like a mindless sycophant. Thing is, clients, directors, studios etc., all have these concerns. If you just get angry at me, or them, instead of addressing these concerns they will simply request another camera, and that's no good for Red or for Red owners who promote their use.

So first "the problem" is too much yellow in the skin-tones and now it is too little? Rob, with all due respect - you have no idea what that model's skin looked like - just like you have no idea what Mark daughter's skin looks like. I just did a BTS of a major fashion shoot here in Tokyo for GILT. Three European and two Japanese models - all with different skin-tone and hair color. Not a single shot exhibits "your problem"...

Here is the fashion photographer himself against a reasonably neutral grey wall (and the color of his Hassie is also well known...) - again straight out of the camera with no grading...:

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/JoseAragon.jpg

And here is a Japanese model (the lipstick shot was an European model) - behind her to the left is a neutral grey wall...:

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/ModelJapanese1.jpg

Here are all 5 in the same shot (plenty of known colors in there)...:

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/All5.jpg

I am sorry to say so - but you might have spent way too much time in your grading suite. For the record - I am colorist myself and ironically - some of my early color work was for Mark back in 2000/2001. There clearly is no problem. Not with the cameras that is...

:sifone: Peter

Dave Blackham
08-12-2013, 02:19 PM
So first "the problem" is too much yellow in the skin-tones and now it is too little? Rob, with all due respect - you have no idea what that model's skin looked like - just like you have no idea what Mark daughter's skin looks like. I just did a BTS of a major fashion shoot here in Tokyo for GILT. Three European and two Japanese models - all with different skin-tone and hair color. Not a single shot exhibits "your problem"...

Here is the fashion photographer himself against a reasonably neutral grey wall (and the color of his Hassie is also well known...) - again straight out of the camera with no grading...:

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/JoseAragon.jpg

And here is a Japanese model (the lipstick shot was an European model) - behind her to the left is a neutral grey wall...:

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/ModelJapanese1.jpg

Here are all 5 in the same shot (plenty of known colors in there)...:

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/All5.jpg

I am sorry to say so - but you might have spent way too much time in your grading suite. For the record - I am colorist myself and ironically - some of my early color work was for Mark back in 2000/2001. There clearly is no problem. Not with the cameras that is...

:sifone: Peter

Peter, Great post. Every time I had thought theres some skin tone issue and Ive looked hard at has been shot or lit I can track the issue down to something else other than the camera. More recently we have been plagued with poor lighting CRI, which can be very subtle but is an issue. We have a lot of tools available to us and I for one am still learning.

Blair S. Paulsen
08-12-2013, 02:37 PM
Talk about the deleterious effects of poor CRI lighting sources, try shooting the BMCC with them.

My point would be, that the more accurate the capturing device, then the more one notices the color shifts causes by the lighting source. Color temperature and tint are excellent ways to compensate for the impact of lighting type, but since they are global adjustments they cannot precisely track vagaries throughout the spectrum.

Very excited by the move to remote phosphor lighting technology that appears to offer both high efficiency and high CRI (color rendering index).

Cheers - #19

Robert Ruffo New
08-12-2013, 03:19 PM
There may be a simple answer here to explain why Rob sees things differently. At first I thought he may be aesthete, but I think Peter cornered that with his image. But then I thought, what if Rob is a synesthete? Not all out but having just a mild case. That would explain how he sees color differently. Not that that is a bad thing necessarily, just unnecessary when it comes to making pretty images.

See Roger Deakins comments above. He's no idiot and neither am I. I do not have color blindness. My color acuity is in the top fraction of a percentile - i.e. 99.5% of people have less. I am not imagining things. There is such a thing as a sense-memory skin tone that looks just right to us for all races - it is not really all that subjective. Out of the box, (meaning white-balanced on a grey card next to the actor, but no other grading done) Red MX with RG3 is very close but just a bit off, to a varying degree depending on subject skin color (tan, race) and light temperature . Other cameras nail this better. I love Red, we shoot most of our projects with Red, but color precession has never been my favorite thing about the system. It's not off enough for me to prefer another system, it's very good as it is, but it does have some room for improvement. The issues are not very obvious all the time, but they do happen, more than with some other cameras. If you did a survey of top DPs most would probably all say that Red MX color (RG3) is very good but not perfect yet.

Now wether you have trained your eye to be highly discerning about things like this or not, I can't tell you. But I do know that those of us who have trained our eyes and minds to see color very carefully notice these problems - maybe Mark disagrees, and he inarguably does great work, but I am not alone in this position and it is based on many hours spent grading Red footage, and working with the many Red cameras we own, not on hearsay of any kind.

Again, it's a very subtle problem - not a terrible problem.

Robert Ruffo New
08-12-2013, 03:30 PM
So first "the problem" is too much yellow in the skin-tones and now it is too little? Rob, with all due respect - you have no idea what that model's skin looked like - just like you have no idea what Mark daughter's skin looks like. I just did a BTS of a major fashion shoot here in Tokyo for GILT. Three European and two Japanese models - all with different skin-tone and hair color. Not a single shot exhibits "your problem"...

Here is the fashion photographer himself against a reasonably neutral grey wall (and the color of his Hassie is also well known...) - again straight out of the camera with no grading...:

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/JoseAragon.jpg

And here is a Japanese model (the lipstick shot was an European model) - behind her to the left is a neutral grey wall...:

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/ModelJapanese1.jpg

Here are all 5 in the same shot (plenty of known colors in there)...:

http://www.derylgroup.com/downloads/RED/STILLS/All5.jpg

I am sorry to say so - but you might have spent way too much time in your grading suite. For the record - I am colorist myself and ironically - some of my early color work was for Mark back in 2000/2001. There clearly is no problem. Not with the cameras that is...

:sifone: Peter

The color of your skin tones is very close but its slightly off - the saturation still just a touch under, the shading looks ever so lightly off, which is a spectral response thing (as far as I know, I;m not 100% sure what causes that, but I've seen this very subtle color distortion before) Sorry, but ask any colorist about Epic MX skin tones. They are slightly off "out of the box". Side by side with an Alexa, out of the box, the Alexa does always look slightly more correct - under some lighting situations much more correct. It's so subtle most of the time (and not terribly hard to fix, just a bit of a pain) that it's not worth the weight and complication of shooting ARRI raw, not to mention the resolution hit, and I always nonetheless recommend Epic instead, but if Dragon gets us that last 5% (maybe 2%) of the way, then there will be no more trade-offs. This is what I am hoping for.

Blair S. Paulsen
08-12-2013, 04:21 PM
There are doubtless a number of factors that impact skin tone rendering with any camera system/processing pipeline. Moreover, the way in which mixed or low CRI lighting affects color rendering varies rather widely. With the MX chip, I find daylight Kino's noticeably outperform any other lighting source in terms of natural looking skin values and overall color precision.

Once we have Dragon color science that's ready for prime time, I'll be curious to see how well the color values track with challenging sources. I'll wager the Kinos will still look great ;-)

Cheers - #19

paul schefz
08-12-2013, 04:24 PM
My color acuity is in the top fraction of a percentile - i.e. 99.5% of people have less.

i wonder how THAT is measured....we get together, i show you pantone swatches and you tell me the correct number?

i thought color was light reflecting off a surface, seen by an eye, interpreted by a brain....even that seems to have a lot of variables in it...and that is just 2 people standing next to each other, seeing the same scene....i wonder who told you that you see that scene 99.5% more correct then others....

paul schefz
08-12-2013, 04:32 PM
Remember this Red color example.

41481

PS

How do I post and make the image appear larger?
is that an official red color example? or from a thread?

Eric Haase
08-12-2013, 04:56 PM
See Roger Deakins comments above. He's no idiot and neither am I. I do not have color blindness. My color acuity is in the top fraction of a percentile - i.e. 99.5% of people have less. I am not imagining things. There is such a thing as a sense-memory skin tone that looks just right to us for all races - it is not really all that subjective. Out of the box, (meaning white-balanced on a grey card next to the actor, but no other grading done) Red MX with RG3 is very close but just a bit off, to a varying degree depending on subject skin color (tan, race) and light temperature . Other cameras nail this better. I love Red, we shoot most of our projects with Red, but color precession has never been my favorite thing about the system. It's not off enough for me to prefer another system, it's very good as it is, but it does have some room for improvement. The issues are not very obvious all the time, but they do happen, more than with some other cameras. If you did a survey of top DPs most would probably all say that Red MX color (RG3) is very good but not perfect yet.

Now wether you have trained your eye to be highly discerning about things like this or not, I can't tell you. But I do know that those of us who have trained our eyes and minds to see color very carefully notice these problems - maybe Mark disagrees, and he inarguably does great work, but I am not alone in this position and it is based on many hours spent grading Red footage, and working with the many Red cameras we own, not on hearsay of any kind.

Again, it's a very subtle problem - not a terrible problem.

I agree with you on this. I'm not sure why everyone is so defensive about this subject. You are clearly trying to point out a small shortcoming of the MX sensor with the hopes that RED will note it and improve it. I've been hoping for this kind of improvement since they announced a new sensor. Yes you can get there with the skin tones with some secondaries in DI but the RED sensor and color science COULD be improved for more accurate color rendition OVERALL and specifically for how the sensor sees and color science develops the skin tone. What Rob Ruffo is describing is what most DP's mean when they say they don't like the "skin tones" on the Epic. A lot of redusers including the guys at RED have stated there is no issue at all. But I think a lot of DPs see, feel, and experience a subtle but important difference in the way RED MX sees color compared to other sensors. As he stated, it's not a dealbreaker, just something that could be improved.

Elsie N
08-12-2013, 04:59 PM
See Roger Deakins comments above. He's no idiot and neither am I. I do not have color blindness. My color acuity is in the top fraction of a percentile - i.e. 99.5% of people have less. I am not imagining things. There is such a thing as a sense-memory skin tone that looks just right to us for all races - it is not really all that subjective. Out of the box, (meaning white-balanced on a grey card next to the actor, but no other grading done) Red MX with RG3 is very close but just a bit off, to a varying degree depending on subject skin color (tan, race) and light temperature . Other cameras nail this better. I love Red, we shoot most of our projects with Red, but color precession has never been my favorite thing about the system. It's not off enough for me to prefer another system, it's very good as it is, but it does have some room for improvement. The issues are not very obvious all the time, but they do happen, more than with some other cameras. If you did a survey of top DPs most would probably all say that Red MX color (RG3) is very good but not perfect yet.

Now wether you have trained your eye to be highly discerning about things like this or not, I can't tell you. But I do know that those of us who have trained our eyes and minds to see color very carefully notice these problems - maybe Mark disagrees, and he inarguably does great work, but I am not alone in this position and it is based on many hours spent grading Red footage, and working with the many Red cameras we own, not on hearsay of any kind.

Again, it's a very subtle problem - not a terrible problem.
See? By your own admission you do have greater color acuity than the majority... although I didn't know you could measure that.

And I'm not challenging your abilities either as a colorist or natural color recognition. All I'm sayin' is, that other 99.5% will never see what you have identified... only the .05 percenters like yourself.

I just think you are overthinking this.

Elsie N
08-12-2013, 05:08 PM
i wonder how THAT is measured....we get together, i show you pantone swatches and you tell me the correct number?

i thought color was light reflecting off a surface, seen by an eye, interpreted by a brain....even that seems to have a lot of variables in it...and that is just 2 people standing next to each other, seeing the same scene....i wonder who told you that you see that scene 99.5% more correct then others....

I'm only guessing here, but I think a lot of old hippies from the 60s and 70s who took too many LSD trips are used as controls for measuring psychedelic color recognition. '-)

(Sorry, just too good an opportunity to suggest those old burnt out bags of bones came to some good. Back on topic now. '-)

Scott Crawley
08-12-2013, 05:08 PM
See? By your own admission you do have greater color acuity than the majority... although I didn't know you could measure that.


Well... there is THIS (http://xritephoto.com/ph_toolframe.aspx?action=coloriq) ... FWIW.

paul schefz
08-12-2013, 05:19 PM
I agree with you on this. I'm not sure why everyone is so defensive about this subject. You are clearly trying to point out a small shortcoming of the MX sensor with the hopes that RED will note it and improve it. I've been hoping for this kind of improvement since they announced a new sensor. Yes you can get there with the skin tones with some secondaries in DI but the RED sensor and color science COULD be improved for more accurate color rendition OVERALL and specifically for how the sensor sees and color science develops the skin tone. What Rob Ruffo is describing is what most DP's mean when they say they don't like the "skin tones" on the Epic. A lot of redusers including the guys at RED have stated there is no issue at all. But I think a lot of DPs see, feel, and experience a subtle but important difference in the way RED MX sees color compared to other sensors. As he stated, it's not a dealbreaker, just something that could be improved.
i am not sure why this thread has to be turned into a discussion about how "accurate" dragon color might be...especially when it is judged from ungraded compressed footage from a beta camera with beta color science....
i completely agree that every sensor /camera captures color differently...of course it does....and there is nothing wrong with prefering one interpretation over another....i just can't agree with one being better/more accurate/whatever then another....and especially not in this (test/beta) case....and it really does not make a lot of sense to me when talking about skin tone....
i shoot fashion and getting the color right with fabrics often is extremely critical....and i am not talking about pleasing or nice or looking good....i am tlaking about match the pantone swatch right....and the epic has some of the best color representation out there....even compared to high end phase backs....
i can understand that some people don't like what they are getting with epic....some people don't like how canon DSLRs have a yellowish skin tone (which of course also can be dialed down)....some people prefer the more "neutral" nikon look....most people prefer the canons because of the more "pleasant" look straight out of camera...which really means they don't know anything because they are looking at a jpeg....but often that helps with a client....

regardless.....if anyone does not like the way the camera captures and interprets certain tones or one just can't get the right tones out of it, there is nothing wrong with working with a different camera....

i just don't think this thread is the right place for this discussion...the first thread got shut down, i don't see the point in working on doing the same to this one...

i would prefer mark and other people who can actually answer questions about dragon did not have to wade through all this and loose interest....

Björn Benckert
08-12-2013, 05:33 PM
I agree with you on this. I'm not sure why everyone is so defensive about this subject. You are clearly trying to point out a small shortcoming of the MX sensor with the hopes that RED will note it and improve it. I've been hoping for this kind of improvement since they announced a new sensor. Yes you can get there with the skin tones with some secondaries in DI but the RED sensor and color science COULD be improved for more accurate color rendition OVERALL and specifically for how the sensor sees and color science develops the skin tone. What Rob Ruffo is describing is what most DP's mean when they say they don't like the "skin tones" on the Epic. A lot of redusers including the guys at RED have stated there is no issue at all. But I think a lot of DPs see, feel, and experience a subtle but important difference in the way RED MX sees color compared to other sensors. As he stated, it's not a dealbreaker, just something that could be improved.

I'm not to sure it's has so much to do with sensors as I sometimes had huge problems with skin tones when I used to scan 4k 16bit film 12 years ago and also I have had great difficulty to dial in the skintones on alexa, phantom and a lot of other cameras.

There is so much in the mix, and the colour change need to only be so subtle to look wrong. Then instantly blaming the sensor when looking at an image with poor skintones is not fair. There is human skin involved, makeup, light temperature, grading and further more correcting the colours using the human eye and a colourist taste is not the right approach.

To me discussing skintones for an image and not have a descent colour board in the same frame and pick match the colors back to their original values in low,mids and highlights is just like discussing taste. Which to me does not mean much. Even a person with perfect colour vision can have poor taste and or probably do not know how to dial the knobs of the grading suite to mimic real life to a 100% match. So using the human eye as calibration instrument is purely stupid I think, the tests needs to be a bit more scientific than that to be called test's I think.

However I think there is really a lot of good samples of MX skin around so I do not understand why so many try to blame the camera. We had a high en Fashion still photographer shooting with our epic... He instantly pulled out better result than most and had no complains about the skincolors, on the contrary he was amazed that the epic sensor was so much better than what he was used to in the still world. Shooting medium format and 5D mostly.

Here is a screen grab from one of his shots that he shot with the B cam scarlet. I see nothing wrong with the skin colour, it's straight out of RCXP, it's of course with makeup and graded to taste but still I do not see the issues you guys complain about.

http://www.syndicate.se/Files/~usr/hawk/Bcam4k48fps.jpg


link to full rez: http://www.syndicate.se/Files/~usr/hawk/Bcam4k48fps.jpg

Peter Majtan
08-12-2013, 05:35 PM
The color of your skin tones is very close but its slightly off - the saturation still just a touch under, the shading looks ever so lightly off, which is a spectral response thing (as far as I know, I;m not 100% sure what causes that, but I've seen this very subtle color distortion before)

I find it amusing that you can make statement like that. I did not realize that you have access to actual skin grafts from all the actors/models (and other people for that matter) around the world to make such a comparison...



Sorry, but ask any colorist about Epic MX skin tones. They are slightly off "out of the box".

As I have mentioned before - I am colorist myself. The only time I have to deal with weird skin-tones is when they are shot in such a way = read "DP's artistic choice, or plain incompetence".
Being both DP and Colorist allows me to understand all the issues involved and because of that I was able to hon my skills to the point where I am more then happy with the MX sensor. Dragon for me is just a gravy (and a lot of it!) with higher sensitivity and lower noise floor. I know once I get mine it will free me up as an artist that much more. But in the meantime - I am perfectly happy with MX...



Side by side with an Alexa, out of the box, the Alexa does always look slightly more correct - under some lighting situations much more correct.

OOTB? I am sorry but this is not a BS I am willing to subscribe to. Any experienced DP can shoot with MX using proper optics and filtration to match OOTB image to that of Alexa. Period.
I have said this number of times - the biggest "curse" of RED is the affordability of the MX systems. There are thousands of owners of RED cameras out there who overnight became "DP's" and I say this will all due respect to all the proper DP's out there...
Alexa are 99% of the time rented out - and that too most of the time by very experienced DP's used to shoot on ARRI's 35mm offerings over many years. This is IMHO the no.1 reason why most of the Alexa footage posted online looks better then RED's...



It's so subtle most of the time (and not terribly hard to fix, just a bit of a pain) that it's not worth the weight and complication of shooting ARRI raw, not to mention the resolution hit, and I always nonetheless recommend Epic instead, but if Dragon gets us that last 5% (maybe 2%) of the way, then there will be no more trade-offs. This is what I am hoping for.

The irony of you search for "perfect" skin tones is that it takes that much away from you as a colorist. If the differences are so subtle as you keep saying - then I really fail to understand what your "problem" is...
What I highly recommend you to do is to go out with an experienced DP and shoot some skin tone tests yourself setting the camera, optics and filtration to your heart's desire to get your "perfect" skin tones. It might be a wake up call for you Rob...

:sifone: Peter

Scott Crawley
08-12-2013, 05:40 PM
:emote_popcorn:

Sorry Toia. The shit is busted... and I didn't touch this one.

Björn Benckert
08-12-2013, 05:45 PM
:emote_popcorn:

Sorry Toia. The shit is busted... and I didn't touch this one.

thats funny:)

Mark Toia
08-12-2013, 06:14 PM
i just don't think this thread is the right place for this discussion...the first thread got shut down, i don't see the point in working on doing the same to this one...
i would prefer mark and other people who can actually answer questions about dragon did not have to wade through all this and loose interest....

Yes agreed, I think ROB should start his very own new thread talking about how he thinks skin color is off...
His comments in this thread are becoming quite destructive and people are starting to get annoyed with him... It will probably then get out of hand again and then get closed. Hopefully not.

Mark Toia
08-12-2013, 06:17 PM
thats funny:)

hahahahaaa... :)

Martin Stevens
08-12-2013, 06:26 PM
is that an official red color example? or from a thread?

I don't recall.

mikeburton
08-12-2013, 06:34 PM
Personally i have my own likes and dislikes and i grade digital cinema cameras everyday. But, arguing about skintones at this point on this forum is irrelevant and I think its looking for a fight. We all know how defensive folks get around here and well, its f'ing Reduser so, what would you expect? Its like going into your grandmothers house and throwing her homemade meatloaf against the wall and calling it total shit. Complaining about it here is not going to make the camera better nor is it going to make you any new friends that will be thankful that you are doing them all a favor in the long run. Each digital cinema camera is what it is. This thread is Mark's and should not turn into a ridiculous pissing match. And for f'!!k sake, please don't post anymore pictures you took on a shoot or in your backyard or wherever that you think has perfect skin tones whether its on film, RED, Alexa, Phantom, GoPro, DVX100, Betacam or VHS. Seriously, who cares, your all right and all wrong. These discussions are why I've avoided this forum for a while. Mark's thread is pretty straight forward, and the rest of us would like to keep it that way without going into another boring skin tones debate.

Kemalettin Sert
08-12-2013, 06:54 PM
oh please not again with SKIN COLOR bullshit...
i remember it was all NOT REAL 4K bullshit few years ago and now Skin Color

Elsie N
08-12-2013, 07:02 PM
I'm not to sure it's has so much to do with sensors as I sometimes had huge problems with skin tones when I used to scan 4k 16bit film 12 years ago and also I have had great difficulty to dial in the skintones on alexa, phantom and a lot of other cameras.

There is so much in the mix, and the colour change need to only be so subtle to look wrong. Then instantly blaming the sensor when looking at an image with poor skintones is not fair. There is human skin involved, makeup, light temperature, grading and further more correcting the colours using the human eye and a colourist taste is not the right approach.

To me discussing skintones for an image and not have a descent colour board in the same frame and pick match the colors back to their original values in low,mids and highlights is just like discussing taste. Which to me does not mean much. Even a person with perfect colour vision can have poor taste and or probably do not know how to dial the knobs of the grading suite to mimic real life to a 100% match. So using the human eye as calibration instrument is purely stupid I think, the tests needs to be a bit more scientific than that to be called test's I think.

However I think there is really a lot of good samples of MX skin around so I do not understand why so many try to blame the camera. We had a high en Fashion still photographer shooting with our epic... He instantly pulled out better result than most and had no complains about the skincolors, on the contrary he was amazed that the epic sensor was so much better than what he was used to in the still world. Shooting medium format and 5D mostly.

Here is a screen grab from one of his shots that he shot with the B cam scarlet. I see nothing wrong with the skin colour, it's straight out of RCXP, it's of course with makeup and graded to taste but still I do not see the issues you guys complain about.

http://www.syndicate.se/Files/~usr/hawk/Bcam4k48fps.jpg


link to full rez: http://www.syndicate.se/Files/~usr/hawk/Bcam4k48fps.jpg

A lot has been made about getting a person's actual skin tone etc. onto the screen. Is that really all that important? For instance, this picture has skintone that is a perfectly acceptable shade for the subject's hair color, eye color, etc. and if I should meet him on the street I think I would have no problem recognizing him.

I've never understood why anyone tries to match an actor's on-screen look to his or her actual look. If the on-screen persona is a good one, why go for real? These are the movies, after all. Maybe it's important in a documentary, but movies?... these aren't about reality.

Bjorn, I hope you don't mind my using your image to make my point. Not saying this is anything other than the actor's actual look.

Robino_J
08-12-2013, 07:02 PM
See Roger Deakins comments above. He's no idiot and neither am I. I do not have color blindness. My color acuity is in the top fraction of a percentile - i.e. 99.5% of people have less. I am not imagining things.

oh my god - really?

Someone needs to start a thread for these amazing quotes. That would be the best thread ever.

paul schefz
08-12-2013, 07:26 PM
Not saying this is anything other than the actor's actual look.

or, wait a minute...is it the color of the base the make up artist used?

Dr. Sassi
08-12-2013, 07:37 PM
Skin-Tones: Color Correction "Handbook" Profesional Techniques for Video and Cinema, Author: Alex van Hurkman 2011

On Page 308 he has collaged 210 skin-tones, and the variety is quite large. All from swim suit models, which have normally (so I assume) an acceptable skin.

I'm really sorry that Mark has to go through that.

Elsie N
08-12-2013, 07:38 PM
Well... there is THIS (http://xritephoto.com/ph_toolframe.aspx?action=coloriq) ... FWIW.

HAH! Rob got nothin' on me! I scored a perfect zero on the test. Yes, this is where zero is the perfect score.


EDIT: Copied and pasted my results.

Based on your information, below is how your score compares to those of others with similar demographic information.

Your score: 0
Gender: Male
Age range: 60-69
Best score for your gender and age range: 0
Highest score for your gender and age range: 1970

0 ( Perfect Color Acuity )
99 ( Low Color Acuity )

Elsie N
08-12-2013, 08:00 PM
or, wait a minute...is it the color of the base the make up artist used?

No, what I meant was I was not saying that Bjorn hadn't captured the actual skin tone of the way the actor was presented, but even if he hadn't, the look works just fine for a movie since I don't expect the actor to be in the audience in makeup and wardrobe to compare him with the image on the screen.

David Battistella
08-12-2013, 11:54 PM
Look,

Pantone has identified over 100 skin tones. No one can get it right, "out of the box".

http://www.designboom.com/art/pantone-skintone-guide/
http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone.aspx?pg=21046


The best thing a camera can do is reproduce the spectrum of color accurately. If Mark is telling us he looks at his daughters face and skin every day, then he takes a shot of her on the Dragon and tells us that the shot exactly represents her skin, then that is good enough for me.

Mark has also stated that he has filmed a wide variety of people and races over his career. I trust him on this one.

It means the color reproduction is accurate. That is what is most important. Fix the rest with make up or secondaries to get what you need, but it's pointless to blame the color science or to say a camera does it bad.

David

Try this one. Next time you are at a dinner party with a bunch of friends, look at each person carefully and notice the subtly of each one's skin tone. You will find they are no where near alike.

Meryem Ersoz
08-13-2013, 12:56 AM
does anyone remember back in the day when Jarred added a command to reduser which changed the phrase "soccer mom" to "hootchie mama" whenever a user would type it?

maybe it is time to find an equally clever replacement for "skin tones" - it is starting to feel like a gong in my head. Humperdinck, humperdinck, humperdinck!

I think there is a slightly different textural quality to skin tones between an Alexa and a RED - RED is slightly earthier, Alexa texture feels a little brighter. Skilled hands can match these pretty easily, however, with lighting and filtration. I think we have already sorted that one out repeatedly...

But really, these differences come down to a matter of aesthetic choice. I happen to love the RED approach - that earthy texture, evident in the early Milk Girls footage, is what won me over from the beginning.

Does RED have a distinct sensor footprint. Maybe, possibly, but I think lighting, lens selection, filtration, and post-processing dictate the look WAY, WAY more than the sensor footprint.

If RED has a look, then it is a look that I love. I just look at the footage from my EPIC-M and SCARLET - right now, right this minute, with my measly MX sensors - and I am always beyond happy. Always. Beyond. Happy.

And soon my lovelies are about to skyrocket to the next level of dynamic range, resolution, and yes, even the humperdinck is going to improve. Jim and Jarred already said so. I believe them. Toia's footage is already representing accurately. I believe him, too.

Seriously, with the chance to own outright some of the best imaging tools available on the planet right now, how can I be anything but ecstatic?

I lost a big job to the Alexa at the beginning of the summer. I, too, hope that Dragon turns the tide in RED's favor, for some of these situations, by improving the humperdinck. But I'm not going to sit around waiting for the grass to grow while that happens. I got movies to make and fantastic tools, on the eve of becoming even better, to make them with....splendid days!

Mark Toia
08-13-2013, 01:24 AM
I lost a big job to the Alexa at the beginning of the summer. I, too, hope that Dragon turns the tide in RED's favor,

I find this really amazing.... I've never been asked in 20 years what camera I was using... or ever was there a time where I may have lost a job because of a particular camera I was using... I do remember a client some 15 years ago asking if we were shooting 16 or 35mm... but I think he was curious more than anything. I doubt the job hinged off my reply. (and i hated 16mm)

At the end of the day they wanted my eye... What camera I used was way over their heads.

It's really weird knowing that clients choose cameras over skills.
Really sad to here this Meryem. I hope it never happens again to you. Good luck mate.

PS... Unless your a rental house, then i understand.

Mick van Rossum, NSC
08-13-2013, 01:34 AM
Mark,
Any difference in tungsten vs. daylight material ? Sometimes an issue in MX sensor.....

Mark Toia
08-13-2013, 01:45 AM
Mark,
Any difference in tungsten vs. daylight material ? Sometimes an issue in MX sensor.....

Tungsten low light you have to stay clear of, in other words, try never to under expose. Because thats when tungsten for most cameras (including the EPIC) starts to get annoying.

However, with our tungsten DRAGON tests, the images were a lot cleaner than the MX, probably due to more pixels and more depth.

Ergin Ozturk
08-13-2013, 02:09 AM
I asked Roger Deakins, in the midst of a similar discussion, which shots in Skyfall were used with Epic on the octocopter by the second unit during the chase scenes in Istanbul, vs the other footage shot on Alexa. His reply:
"There were probably just two shots of Bond on the rooftop in Istanbul which were made with the Red and used in 'Skyfall'. They are quick shots and you would never notice the difference. I have done side by side tests on a portrait, however, and that is where you really see the subtle differences in colour representation, differences that cannot be counteracted in a DI suite."
I think there were actually more than just two shots from the octo and Epic, but point taken. More dense though smaller photo sites benefits resolution. Larger photo sites benefit variation in color sensitivity at the cost of resolution. I hope Dragon turns this model on its ear.


+1.
color seperation. main issue. and creating a skin tone is just a part of it.

Dave Blackham
08-13-2013, 02:20 AM
Talk about the deleterious effects of poor CRI lighting sources, try shooting the BMCC with them.

My point would be, that the more accurate the capturing device, then the more one notices the color shifts causes by the lighting source. Color temperature and tint are excellent ways to compensate for the impact of lighting type, but since they are global adjustments they cannot precisely track vagaries throughout the spectrum.

Very excited by the move to remote phosphor lighting technology that appears to offer both high efficiency and high CRI (color rendering index).

Cheers - #19

Great post. This needs to be taken note of by every one using Modern high resolution high bit depth cameras. I would suggest much of the criticism of late comes down to not so good lighting sources. With the less expensive cameras on the market being more widely available Id suggest that less good lighting instruments may being used and we are now seeing images with created with not so good colour, Skin tones may be one aspect of it.

Robert Ruffo New
08-13-2013, 02:37 AM
Great post. This needs to be taken note of by every one using Modern high resolution high bit depth cameras. I would suggest much of the criticism of late comes down to not so good lighting sources. With the less expensive cameras on the market being more widely available Id suggest that less good lighting instruments may being used and we are now seeing images with created with not so good colour, Skin tones may be one aspect of it.

This is true and more crap cinematography in general on endless obscure productions. But how fast colors get thrown off, and exactly how and why they get thrown off, and how easy they are to correct, varies from camera to camera. None are really absolutely perfect, but some are a little easier to get good-looking results from in practice.

Robert Ruffo New
08-13-2013, 02:43 AM
HAH! Rob got nothin' on me! I scored a perfect zero on the test. Yes, this is where zero is the perfect score.


EDIT: Copied and pasted my results.

Based on your information, below is how your score compares to those of others with similar demographic information.

Your score: 0
Gender: Male
Age range: 60-69
Best score for your gender and age range: 0
Highest score for your gender and age range: 1970

0 ( Perfect Color Acuity )
99 ( Low Color Acuity )

That's the same result I got - but there exist other, longer tests as well. I wasn't claiming you were deficient in your ability to see color - I didn't comment on my assessment of that ability at all. You were speculating that maybe I was remember? Plus, this measured ability is not the same as developing an eye for what "feels' right (again, I am not commenting on your ability here)

It seems on this forum those who do not mindless agree that everything Red is always wonderful all the time just get bashed. Not a very stimulating intellectual milieu, is it, where only one point of view is tolerated. Not my cup of tea, I must say.

Adam Eden
08-13-2013, 02:48 AM
Some people around here need a hug.

Hugs!

Hans von Sonntag
08-13-2013, 02:55 AM
Great post. This needs to be taken note of by every one using Modern high resolution high bit depth cameras. I would suggest much of the criticism of late comes down to not so good lighting sources. With the less expensive cameras on the market being more widely available Id suggest that less good lighting instruments may being used and we are now seeing images with created with not so good colour, Skin tones may be one aspect of it.

Yes!

Skintones are effected by:

1. Quality of light, e.g. soft-box vs. direct fennel vs. Briese vs. Kinoflo vs. good old sun, etc...

2. Colour temperature

3. Tint. Older HMI lights tend to become greenish, LED lights tend to be magenta, bluish, horrible

4. Make-Up.

Of course different sensors react differently, and, of course, the colour science behind them renders skin tones differently. However, the above mentioned factors influence the resulting look of the skin much more than the sensor and colour science of a camera.

But I agree with the folks that prefer one camera over another due to the fact that in their own workflow a particular sensor/colour sciences fits better than other. I for my part like CameraRGB and RedSpace more than RedColor3 for instance. RedColour1 seems to be somehow over-saturated, RedColor2 has a weak red-channel and hence leads to funky results.

Developing colour sciences is not only affected by the aim to strive for the most realistic colours but also by fashion and taste. Personally I expect Dragon's colour science generally less saturated/vibrant than RedColour3 but delivering more colour in means of depth and "pronunciation" with a clear emphasis on pleasant skin tones.

One remark to Mark's work: Interesting and promising, in many ways mouth-watering! But why not RedLogFilm encoded pictures? Since log encoded is the production path for most of us. Grading always kills information, also "basic" grading or a "basic" Rec709 curve. Would have opened a few more cans of worms probably...


Hans

Robert Ruffo New
08-13-2013, 03:32 AM
Look,

Pantone has identified over 100 skin tones. No one can get it right, "out of the box".

http://www.designboom.com/art/pantone-skintone-guide/
http://www.pantone.com/pages/pantone.aspx?pg=21046


The best thing a camera can do is reproduce the spectrum of color accurately. If Mark is telling us he looks at his daughters face and skin every day, then he takes a shot of her on the Dragon and tells us that the shot exactly represents her skin, then that is good enough for me.

Mark has also stated that he has filmed a wide variety of people and races over his career. I trust him on this one.

It means the color reproduction is accurate. That is what is most important. Fix the rest with make up or secondaries to get what you need, but it's pointless to blame the color science or to say a camera does it bad.

David

Try this one. Next time you are at a dinner party with a bunch of friends, look at each person carefully and notice the subtly of each one's skin tone. You will find they are no where near alike.

Had I had time, I would have elaborated further. I alos did not want to say something too resonating and critical about Epic, but all you fanboys forced my hand.

I mean after a feature shoot you get to know the color of the actors skin very well. I mean color vs what I see in front of my eyes. White balanced off a grey card placed exactly where the actor will perform, I compare Alexa to Red, and Red needs a grade beyond white balancing for colors to match, and Alexa des not. Alexa will also frequently hold saturation higher within skin tones that the Epic will. Yes I can crank saturation up, but unless I do that only for skin tones the rest of the image will look over-saturated.

It's not a huge difference, i's very subtle. Sometimes isn't even perceptible, but sometimes it is. Doing this grade is a matter of a few minutes per shot, not hours, but I'd rather not have to do it.

The biggest skin problem with Red is freckles. They show up way too much (meaning they do not match reality) all the time and fixing that is more tricky. By the same token, tanned actors seem to look more tan (an actor that is somewhat more tanned than someone sitting next to them will look, say, more than just that somewhat more) - maybe this is due to the same phenomenon. Pale (untanned caucasian) skin looks paler than it should, freckles and tan and darker skin look more freckled and dark than it does in reality. Olive skin will look too olive (actually often will look a bit yellow).

I'm not trying to spread FUD here. These are all super subtle differences from what most DPs and colorists I talk to would ideally prefer, a bit better in Epic than it was on Red One MX. Hopefully with Dragon the problem will just be gone. Super subtle and not the end of the world, even if you don't grade the problem out.

Of course, also, RAW gives you lost and lots of room to fix things.

All cameras apply a color LUT to reality. None are 100% exact/linear and match our eyes, neither perceptually nor technically. Sony used to be famous for their red-push, and I think it was Ikegami that always pushed green (before my time, I read about this, although the Sony red-push continued, to a lesser and very subtle extent, into the EX1, which we do own, and I seem to notice it in the F3 as well).

Now you can all be mindless fanboys and say that there is no room for improvement in Red's color fidelity. The thing is I am not writing anything here that the business as a whole does not agree with as a fairly wide-spread consensus. Sure, there are some Arri fanboys too, who spread all kinds of FUD, but most DPs and producers just coldly evaluate what the best tool will be for a given job. They are brand agnostic, and what I say here has been a frequent conclusion.

They'll shoot Epic anyway, for a bunch of other reasons (including malleability for grading, resolution, small size and lower cost) but out-of-the-box (white balance to grey card, ISO and Luma curve only) color fidelity I have never heard of as the number one reason to choose Red over Alexa or F55/F65.

I think Deakins is exaggerating, and I disagree that it can't fairly easily be 100% fixed in DI almost all the time (and the depth of the RAW means you can in fact make color anything you want, for an end result that exceeds the color capabilities of other cameras, but Epic color - not just skin tones, all of it - could be a bit better "out of the box" especially in cases where DI budgets and time for grading are limited.

That, and I would gladly buy "clip-on" low cons to put over the sensor, preferably in a variety of grades. That would be crazy-handy. But the highlight roll-off issue has been a non-issue that we easily handle in many other ways, but that clip on thing would sometimes be even easier and faster. Plus it would open up new creative possibilities, and I always welcome that.

Now all you fanboys can tear me to shreds in my absence, despite the fact that I own several Red cameras, and use them all the time, and even promote their use to other people. I know the only permitted position here is that Red is 100% perfect and wonderful in all ways. I disagree - Nothing is perfect and unless you point out and discuss where improvement has room to occur everything would stagnate. You know, even my wife isn't perfect, but I'm still very glad I married her. Despite these very subtle issues I'm glad I shoot with Red on most projects

That said, I think I've had enough of this forum. Sometimes it reminds me of "right-think" in the book 1984.

Mark Toia
08-13-2013, 03:58 AM
MY GOD !!!!! Robert... ! Take your skin problems and start your very own thread please.

I've heard enough of your hi and mighty pretentious claims about how amazing your eye is over everyones else's... Take your conversation to a new thread (yours) and then you can carry on all you want.

I don't want this "DRAGON" thread turning ugly and then being turned off again by Mod's (or Jim) all because of one individual !.

Weather you are right or wrong, I don't really care... I turn over millions per year from my work, and I have never every heard anyone complain about skin once... and I'm talking about huge skin care clients that use me who are paranoid about skin !

Please move on..

Thank you.

David Battistella
08-13-2013, 04:11 AM
Well Rob,

Not sure why you singled me out as a fanboy. If that means a constructive and positive attitude, then I am guilty. I did not post in response to you specifically, but the overall years or RED skintone discussion that has permeated this forum for many years. I don't doubt your qualifications, I take them at face value and I am sure, by your passion on the subject that you have looked at it very carefully in a calibrated setup that you carefully tweaked.

I take no issue with what you have posted here at all and I have not resorted to calling any one individual, anything (whether it's highlights or skin tones).

This is REDuser, so there is a good chance you will get people extolling the virtues of the RED camera, I think that is natural. There are many other people here who do what you do and don't share your opinion or do not feel as passionately as you do about this part of the RED color science.

I just stated that skintone is like looking at the many shades of green in a forrest (if you shoot landscapes) or hues of blue, cyan and green in the ocean (if you shoot water). You see those hues more subtly, I think we all get that, but I don't share the view that it is a problem, nor do i think that RED should tweak their color science to favour skin.

There is not a RED image i have not tweaked in the past six years, that is the point of the raw system. RED does not have to get color balance right "out of the box", because it is not baked in, ARRI does. They push their color palate toward film stocks (which I daresay do not render skin perfectly either) .

I think the RED is far more accurate, so we see more with the increased resolution. What we see from RED is correct, it has not been smoothed over and more tones are being rendered, maybe that is why we see more imperfections. There is so much subjective stuff to this argument, so many factors but the basic thing is this:

Don't now come in here and call us all fanboys, its a great community where we all share a lot of information, there's alot of talented people contributing here. Trying to insult people is not a great way to get your point across or to be noticed or heard.

I hear you. I've understood your point and read about your capacity to do your job well. Do what you need to do to get your images correct according to your standards and if RED's color science does not meet your standards then you should perhaps write Graeme an e-mail or start a thread asking RED to improve their skin tone color accuracy.

It's not fair to Mark to have done this work for the community to have another thread closed because it was derailed.

It's early in the process, we are mostly all happy and grateful that RED has done this much to date and that MArk would take the time to share, if that is what being a Fanboy is then fine, flame away.

David

Humberto Rivera
08-13-2013, 04:18 AM
Robert Ruffo, what are you, what I’m? Let’s see if I’m a Fan-boy, they you’re a Destroy-boy! If I’m a Fact-boy, you’re a Wait till it comes out boy, but mean while I’ll just Bashed-it-boy. Now I truly belief in given everyone it’s space to say whatever it wants, with courtesy! But you’re a Time after Time-boy! The same thing, different people have different ideas, you cannot change that! It’s like pit bull once it gets its yaws into your person, it won’t let go, and how many times are you going to discuss the same subject over and over! I would not generally take the time to comment, but I just could not have sat down idly while you continue with your well written rant! GIVE IT A REST!

Humberto Rivera

Roy Rossovich
08-13-2013, 04:32 AM
Mark, Thanks for the tests, looks great, so buttery smooth, you planning on upgrading all your cameras or keep an MX around for old times sake?

Elsie N
08-13-2013, 04:41 AM
That's the same result I got - but there exist other, longer tests as well. I wasn't claiming you were deficient in your ability to see color - I didn't comment on my assessment of that ability at all. You were speculating that maybe I was remember? Plus, this measured ability is not the same as developing an eye for what "feels' right (again, I am not commenting on your ability here)

It seems on this forum those who do not mindless agree that everything Red is always wonderful all the time just get bashed. Not a very stimulating intellectual milieu, is it, where only one point of view is tolerated. Not my cup of tea, I must say.

Rob, I have no doubt in your ability to parse color in an image. And maybe that is what some of your clients demand and why they choose you for their projects. But I think a lot of the pushback you are getting is because you don't make allowances for other approaches to image making. At least, you haven't voiced that very well if you do.

There are a lot of successful and talented people, and that includes others on the forum than Mark Toia, whom you have (unintentionally, I'm sure) more or less dismissed their professionalism by constantly promoting yours. You call them (us) fanboys while in fact they are professionals who react when their methods are challenged. Consider that you are the one who does not tolerate differing views instead of vice versa, as you stated above.

I'm not trying to tell you how to act. I'm sure you do just fine in many circles. I'm just trying to point out that like when Glen Ford and Henry Fonda walked into that bar full of rodeo bronc busters in the movie "The Rounders" and proclaimed they had a horse no cowboy could ride, all hell is gonna break loose.

Pushback doesn't make you a fanboy... but it can be the result of a need to defend your honor, or skillset or even your choice of a camera.

luigivaltulini
08-13-2013, 05:03 AM
Robert,
yes, i agree with Mark,
why not open a new thread on skin tone?
it would be very nice of you, and it would be interesting to see all the various differences in tone between Alexa, F65 and Epic and other out of the box.
Same pictures, the same objective and original files to download, so all we realize, and we can play with these.:smilewinkgrin:
I think it's much more constructive to see the actual frames.

Sabyasachi Patra
08-13-2013, 05:19 AM
" Only two things are infinite. The universe and human stupidity. And I am not so sure about the former." - Albert Einstein

Mark has already said that the short posted was meant to showcase the dynamic range and it was not graded. Why the fight guys? It is really painful to flip through pages to find information.

Michael Jarvis
08-13-2013, 05:24 AM
I heard the university film majors are now drinking once every time someone says "skin tones" and twice for "fan boy."

Scott Brown
08-13-2013, 05:31 AM
Never had any issues with skin tone on our Red's.

When comparing Alexa to Epic, a quick look at the number of mega budget Hollywood movies being shot on Red camera's v Alexa speaks volumes. The world's top directors and DOP's are choosing to work with Red because the quality of the footage is superb!

Now, I'm NO fanboy and I have been critical of Red in the past over issues such as poor audio quality, noisy fans etc BUT I have always been knocked out by the quality of the footage we get :o)

Alexa is a really nice camera and here in the UK it is used on a lot of TV drama's. Mostly down to speed of post production where productions use the ProRes QuickTimes to get straight to work on the edit.

I think we should park the whole skin tone ramble as it is tired and has run out of steam.

I don't doubt for a second that once Dragon is out in the wild that this camera will be crowned as the best digital cinema camera in the world - oh, and also the most affordable :smiley:

Scott

Jay A. Kelley
08-13-2013, 06:09 AM
Uh guys.. In order for Mark's demand that Rob piss off to work, you've really got to stop responding to Rob's posts. You're baiting the hook. :001_tongue:

Martin Stevens
08-13-2013, 06:33 AM
So..........Mark, can you say at what ISO the Dragon has equal stops above and below middle gray?

Mark Toia
08-13-2013, 06:44 AM
So..........Mark, can you say at what ISO the Dragon has equal stops above and below middle gray?

Sorry, not qualified enough to answer that one... If I was to guess close... I'm going to say 1000ISO

Martin Stevens
08-13-2013, 06:47 AM
Sorry, not qualified enough to answer that one... If I was to guess close... I'm going to say 1000ISO


Thanks Mark.

Any chance that you are going to post any more Dragon imagery etc. into this new thread of yours?

Mark Toia
08-13-2013, 06:53 AM
Thanks Mark.

Any chance that you are going to post any more Dragon imagery etc. into this new thread of yours?

I'm waiting for the latest DRAGON to come, with the latest colour science... and the new IR lowpass... Then I'll drop some more online... :)

Meryem Ersoz
08-13-2013, 07:02 AM
It's really weird knowing that clients choose cameras over skills.
Really sad to here this Meryem. I hope it never happens again to you. Good luck mate.

PS... Unless your a rental house, then i understand.

In this instance, I would have been the rental house. I was working in another capacity on this particular project, in production management, and could have used the double dip...to pay for all these new toys, sensors, and motion mounts, and Rocket upgrades.....

I hope they keep giving you toys to test, Mark, because I am still in awe at how much ground you can cover in such a short time. Give me two days with a Dragon and I'd probably turn around a couple of shots of my cats playing with a box and some bugs in the backyard.....Mark, you gave us the world and threw in the moon, for laughs. Still enjoying the reel, repeatedly.

Andy White
08-13-2013, 07:16 AM
I'm waiting for the latest DRAGON to come, with the latest colour science... and the new IR lowpass... Then I'll drop some more online... :)

You get all the nice toys :)

Think you missed the Motion Mount in that list... might as well go the whole hog!

Sergio Perez
08-13-2013, 08:50 AM
Mark, I asked you politely a question back in your previous thread and here. If you couldn't answer due to a NDA or something that I could understand with a simple "I can't answer that sorry", but sincerely didn't enjoy the "ignore", in the 3 different places I asked this question. If I was in your position- at least here in reduser- having the privilege to beta test the Dragon, I would at least made an effort to reply to legitimate questions. I was asking about the Old Rocket and transcoding from 6K to 4K prores times compared to the old 5K to 4K prores workflow.

Anyway you do know how to get nice pictures and are an excellent professional. I did enjoy this test. Thank you.

Medavoym
08-13-2013, 09:21 AM
Mark,

People are complaining about the blown highlights in many of your shots (the ugly specular highlights etc).

The majority of us know what's happening (basic grade, no fancy things done in post etc)... but to put them to rest, why don't you take 2-3 shots that exhibit those hard clipping highlights and re-grade them more carefully? As if you'd be doing a real-world job. Grade them carefully, post them here and everyone will shut up.

No reason to stick to the fast, basic grade forever - I think the effort won't be much for 2 or 3 shots...

What do you think? I think it's worth it.

Great test, thanks for taking the time Mark!

António Fagundes
08-13-2013, 09:24 AM
Mark,

People are complaining about the blown highlights in many of your shots (the ugly specular highlights etc).

The majority of us know what's happening (basic grade, no fancy things done in post etc)... but to put them to rest, why don't you take 2-3 shots that exhibit those hard clipping highlights and re-grade them more carefully? As if you'd be doing a real-world job. Grade them carefully, post them here and everyone will shut up.

No reason to stick to the fast, basic grade forever - I think the effort won't be much for 2 or 3 shots...

What do you think? I think it's worth it.

Great test, thanks for taking the time Mark!

+1.

paul schefz
08-13-2013, 10:57 AM
I don't recall.

not important...i thought it was kate beckinsale who has pretty fair skin? hard to tell anyway....

Roberto Lequeux
08-13-2013, 10:58 AM
+1.


I'm waiting for the latest DRAGON to come, with the latest colour science... and the new IR lowpass... Then I'll drop some more online... :)

Soon enough

Julian Banos
08-13-2013, 11:07 AM
Is it possible not to discuss color until the color science is done?

Mark just did an impressive test that shows a lot of capabilities on the new sensor. To begin with, how many people can cover such a big variety of interesting shots that reflect real-life shoots in two days? So I am really thankful for this. There is a lot of work we have to do as a community, constructive and focused.

What I gather is the following:

1. The Dinamic Range is absolutely mind-blowing. This is opening my imagination: what if you add HDRx to these images? Can anyone point me to a frame from a digital motion camera that has more DR? EPIC is the only camera with dual channel capacity. And with DRAGON how far is that going to push the envelope, this is going to bring in images I have never seen before. Lets see them!

2. Flexible ISO. This is an amazing capability as well, as soon as we get our hands on Dragon we will have to do a ton of shooting to determine the best uses. This is going to be a very useful discussion.

3. Resolution. Although we are only seeing small pics and compressed movies, by looking at the wide shots of the city, the details on the tail of the car, the leaves on the forest and the sand on the dog track; I can notice a great deal of detail. If anybody wants to talk about "texture" I think this is where it best applies. Once we get our Dragons, we need 4K output.

4. Noise. With the MX upgrade what we noticed right away was how much cleaner the MX was versus the M sensor. But by looking at how much the sensor was pushed by this test, I am really, really impressed with how clean it is. In order to push the EPIC MX I would suggest shooting with the lowest compression and highest resolution possible, then have the images Debayer at full quality. But the lowest compression ration we got from this test is 8:1. Is this the lowest you can go at 6K?

5. Compression ratios and Media. I am really curious about this aspect for two reasons: First there has to be a limit on the data bandwith that the Epic can record. And Secondly, we need to prepare for media management costs. Media cost is down and data i-o gets faster, but we still need to account and know what were are looking at.
So 2-part question:
How does compression ratios work with 6K, what are the lowest compression ratios? How much data per minute is generated?
And our testing should be: What is the kind of image you get from different ratios. This will be a lot more different for the increase in resolution and the lower noise.

So while I get my dragons, Mark would you mind answering a couple of things:

1. Did you shoot any HDRx? Are you planning on your next test?
2. Did you shoot the same show with different ISO and different apertures? Although what you shot is very telling here.
3. Can you show us a city shot at 4K? Anything!! We would all love to see the detail.
4. What is the lowest Compression ratio you can use? How much data is generated from 6K 8:1 and 6K 17:1?


Lets keep this thread useful.

Bill Anderson
08-13-2013, 12:04 PM
"f4 to 5.6": Thanks for the info on the car shots Mark. Remarkable.

I realize it's early in the game for Dragon, and many "adjustments have yet to be tweaked", but for those of you who are familiar with film and the zone system, this would mean that the car highlights fall on Zone 12. Yikes! Zone 8 was considered max white with detail, Zone 9 ( 4 stops above exposure value) as pure white with zero detail. It would be quite a task to control a Zone 12 (7 stops above exposure value) to retain texture, no matter what darkroom wizardry you employed. And that was black and white film, which has an emulsion much more conducive to such post compensations. Color film is a bit more conservative.

However you skin it, Dragon is looking extraordinary.

Andy Roberts
08-13-2013, 12:09 PM
Mark, I asked you politely a question back in your previous thread and here. If you couldn't answer due to a NDA or something that I could understand with a simple "I can't answer that sorry", but sincerely didn't enjoy the "ignore", in the 3 different places I asked this question. If I was in your position- at least here in reduser- having the privilege to beta test the Dragon, I would at least made an effort to reply to legitimate questions. I was asking about the Old Rocket and transcoding from 6K to 4K prores times compared to the old 5K to 4K prores workflow.

Anyway you do know how to get nice pictures and are an excellent professional. I did enjoy this test. Thank you.

Sergio, with all due respect, i think Mark made it abundantly clear with just a cursory reading of his posts, that he really wasn't using a Rocket workflow. Maybe I'm wrong. But there is no need for him to answer questions about Red Rocket if it is obvious that he isn't using a Red Rocket.

I never feel ignored if someone doesn't answer a question I post in this forum. But I always feel thankful when they do. Mark is INSANELY busy and complaints just come across as ungrateful.

Eryc Tramonn
08-13-2013, 12:11 PM
There are a lot of successful and talented people, and that includes others on the forum than Mark Toia, whom you have (unintentionally, I'm sure) more or less dismissed their professionalism by constantly promoting yours. You call them (us) fanboys while in fact they are professionals who react when their methods are challenged. Consider that you are the one who does not tolerate differing views instead of vice versa, as you stated above.
.

This comment is in NO way directed at any one person here, but what Elsie states is the number one reason I don't post much in the way of technical consideration or otherwise.

When posting to REDuser, the possibility of getting ripped to shreds even when a comment is valid, and part of a real production workflow, is high. And it goes without saying that there are a handful of hyper-technical, hyper-critical posters/speculators that cover all the bases, and the rest of the forum population mostly follows. I guess that is simply human nature, but it seems to discourage or dismiss the value that the other 99% might offer.

Bottom line: Everything is subjective. Even the "laws" of physics are not immutable; however, there appears to be an extremely definite way to define imagery per some REDuser opinions.

Maybe one of the reasons there is so much debate is because individuals are not taking one thing into consideration: the beauty of the RED camera system is that users define what they want, and how they choose to interface with the gear (through modularity) to arrive at their subjective viewpoint. And the captured image is malleable enough to allow for a single image (provided it was acquired with certain things in mind) to be rendered/processed in virtually infinite ways.

Could things be better -- sure. But the manner some of us go about expressing criticisms simply needs to be examined, and softened. Some of the stuff people say on here, would likely get their ass kicked on a set -- OR simply not asked back. I'm not really sure which is worse. Haha.

Scott Crawley
08-13-2013, 12:32 PM
Guys,

You are making good points. We're all looking for a little bit of validation, even if it comes in the form of a smackdown. Sometimes we feel validated when we smack someone else down and get away with it.

As good as these points may be they are unfortunately off topic.

Keep the thread alive please. Stay on target.

Robert Ruffo New
08-13-2013, 01:54 PM
MY GOD !!!!! Robert... ! Take your skin problems and start your very own thread please.

I've heard enough of your hi and mighty pretentious claims about how amazing your eye is over everyones else's... Take your conversation to a new thread (yours) and then you can carry on all you want.

I don't want this "DRAGON" thread turning ugly and then being turned off again by Mod's (or Jim) all because of one individual !.

Weather you are right or wrong, I don't really care... I turn over millions per year from my work, and I have never every heard anyone complain about skin once... and I'm talking about huge skin care clients that use me who are paranoid about skin !

Please move on..

Thank you.

Mark: someone said maybe I was color blind, so I said I wasn't, and I know this because I took a test, thats' all. I didn't say it was I was amazing in any way - I referred mostly to a general concensus among our peers, and other far more impressive people than I ever could be, including Deakins, and feedback I get from agencies, directors, colorists and clients, not all of whom are knowledgeable, but some of whom are.

I also never doubted you ability to turn over millions or whatever. You may forget, or, understandably didn't care, but I've complimented you on your work, without reserve, many times, and not just here on Reduser. I'm sure you make way more money than me. I'm also sure you are much more important than I am in this world, way more powerful, way more connected, doubtlessly way more successful, much more respected and invited to far more parties. That's all fine. That doesn't mean I have to agree with all of your aesthetic perceptions and technical choices, nor does it mean that I can't notice certain things that you don't, or be sensitive to them in a way different from you. That doesn't make me better or worse than you, just different.

I'll leave your thread alone. I really meant you nor Red nor anyone else any offense.

António Fagundes
08-13-2013, 02:02 PM
That's ok Ruffo more people here share your concerns.

Bill Anderson
08-13-2013, 02:50 PM
Mark's Dragon thread is going to have more "parts" to it than Breaking Bad.

Let's try and avoid a "Dragon Part 3", huh.

Mark Toia
08-13-2013, 05:02 PM
Mark: someone said maybe I was color blind, so I said I wasn't, and I know this because I took a test, thats' all. I didn't say it was I was amazing in any way - I referred mostly to a general concensus among our peers, and other far more impressive people than I ever could be, including Deakins, and feedback I get from agencies, directors, colorists and clients, not all of whom are knowledgeable, but some of whom are.

I also never doubted you ability to turn over millions or whatever. You may forget, or, understandably didn't care, but I've complimented you on your work, without reserve, many times, and not just here on Reduser. I'm sure you make way more money than me. I'm also sure you are much more important than I am in this world, way more powerful, way more connected, doubtlessly way more successful, much more respected and invited to far more parties. That's all fine. That doesn't mean I have to agree with all of your aesthetic perceptions and technical choices, nor does it mean that I can't notice certain things that you don't, or be sensitive to them in a way different from you. That doesn't make me better or worse than you, just different.

I'll leave your thread alone. I really meant you nor Red nor anyone else any offense.


Fair enough... and you don't have to agree with anything I've shared as that's your god given right.

But lets just move on. You've had your say, I took no offence. But your subject can be sustained on another thread that you can start. And I'm sure António Fagundes (http://www.reduser.net/forum/member.php?91678-Ant%F3nio-Fagundes) will gladly follow you.

I'm starting to get people emailing me directly Dragon questions, as they don't want to post here on this thread due to the direction its heading in. Which is unfair to them and others

Moving forward... Thank you Robert.

Gavin Greenwalt
08-13-2013, 05:08 PM
There are a lot of successful and talented people, and that includes others on the forum than Mark Toia, whom you have (unintentionally, I'm sure) more or less dismissed their professionalism by constantly promoting yours. You call them (us) fanboys while in fact they are professionals who react when their methods are challenged. Consider that you are the one who does not tolerate differing views instead of vice versa, as you stated above.

This is complete revisionism of the conversation. People made polite requests about whether or not skin tones were better. Instead of saying "No, they are the same which is to say if you like them they're still great, if you don't like them then they haven't changed." or "Yes, the color is different, whether or not it's better or worse is up to you" You and others accused Rob of being color blind, , implied that's it's all in people's heads and claimed that Red is effectively perfect and doesn't need to change a thing. Numerous people have said that if you have a problem with skin tones you don't know what you're doing etc because (Insert flawed argument about being rich therefore the color is perfect etc...) Complaining that the people who ask about skin tones are being mean and insulting is completely flipping the situation.

You don't get to call people blind and stupid and then complain that they aren't treating you with respect in return. Don't be a bully and then complain when the kid hits back.

Gavin Greenwalt
08-13-2013, 05:10 PM
Mark's Dragon thread is going to have more "parts" to it than Breaking Bad.

Let's try and avoid a "Dragon Part 3", huh.

Dragon 3: The Dragoning. :D

Eryc Tramonn
08-13-2013, 05:15 PM
It's like the Summer of Sam on the forum. DRAGON is bringing a heatwave along with it. :)

Much love guys. Seriously.

Elsie N
08-13-2013, 06:05 PM
... You and others accused Rob of being color blind, , implied that's it's all in people's heads and claimed that Red is effectively perfect and doesn't need to change a thing.

Gavin, I cut out some of the rambling stuff so as not to be confusing. Anyone wanting to try and make sense out of it can read your original post.

Now, for the part that was a little more coherent, I did not accuse Rob of being color blind... I suggested he may be a synasthete which is more like an enhanced color recognition rather than being color blind.

And while I did suggest it's all in his head, I said that while saying he has powers of recognition above and beyond what most people have, and he confirmed that he is indeed in the top .05% of color recognition capability... i.e., Perfect Color Acuity. He didn't say how he was measured for that but I take him at his word that he does possess these traits.


Numerous people have said that if you have a problem with skin tones you don't know what you're doing etc because (Insert flawed argument about being rich therefore the color is perfect etc...) Complaining that the people who ask about skin tones are being mean and insulting is completely flipping the situation.

This doesn't directly apply to me but I'm guessing the part in parentheses is referring to Mark pushing back at Rob's subliminal assertion that Mark's test is either a short coming of the camera or a shortcoming of Mark's abilities.

Reference my earlier post about The Rounder's movie... if you enter a thread making "fighting words" statements, expect the fireworks that will soon follow. And for the 1,327th time (I'm just estimating here) the comments were made about a quick and dirty camera stress test. If someone posts that either the camera or the tester is flawed, they are somewhat flawed in their thinking (IMO) for harping on the/any expected imperfections.

I've said this before and I'm saying it again... that smacks of someone trying to put a notch on their gun in order to build a reputation as a gunfighter. And the overwhelming response against suggests he encountered a whole posse of Redusers standing against him instead of just being allowed to walk through the streets of Dodge with everyone fearfully cowering behind saloon doors and curtained windows based on his "reputation."


You don't get to call people blind and stupid and then complain that they aren't treating you with respect in return. Don't be a bully and then complain when the kid hits back.

You obviously interpreted anything I've written this way or you would not have posted it. But again, I did not call Rob blind... synesthesia is neither blindness nor is it color blindness. And I never asked for Rob's respect... I could care less. I did try to point out that he was disrespectful to others here, perhaps unconsciously, and that is why the posse is lining up against him rather than behind him. Rob may be an excellent colorist but he lacks leadership skills, IMO. '-)

And no problem with Rob hitting back. But if I read the Reduser Posse correctly, he's just going to get bloodier and bloodier. As for bullying? I see it as Rob trying to be the bully by accusing everyone who disagrees with HIM of being blind-faith fanboys.

But I understand that you may see things the same way as Rob does. Probably a generational thing... or maybe it is as simple as you saying to-mae-to and me saying to-mah-to.

Mark Toia
08-13-2013, 06:13 PM
I enjoy your retorts Elsie, You have me cracking up laughing !

Elsie N
08-13-2013, 06:20 PM
I enjoy your retorts Elsie, You have me cracking up laughing !

Thanks Mark... REDusers, for the most part... gotcher back.

Eryc Tramonn
08-13-2013, 06:33 PM
I enjoy your retorts Elsie, You have me cracking up laughing !

Same.

George A.
08-13-2013, 07:03 PM
Mark,

People are complaining about the blown highlights in many of your shots (the ugly specular highlights etc).

The majority of us know what's happening (basic grade, no fancy things done in post etc)... but to put them to rest, why don't you take 2-3 shots that exhibit those hard clipping highlights and re-grade them more carefully? As if you'd be doing a real-world job. Grade them carefully, post them here and everyone will shut up.

No reason to stick to the fast, basic grade forever - I think the effort won't be much for 2 or 3 shots...

What do you think? I think it's worth it.

Great test, thanks for taking the time Mark!

+3

Mark - do you want to give it a try?

Sergio Perez
08-13-2013, 07:24 PM
Sergio, with all due respect, i think Mark made it abundantly clear with just a cursory reading of his posts, that he really wasn't using a Rocket workflow. Maybe I'm wrong. But there is no need for him to answer questions about Red Rocket if it is obvious that he isn't using a Red Rocket.

I never feel ignored if someone doesn't answer a question I post in this forum. But I always feel thankful when they do. Mark is INSANELY busy and complaints just come across as ungrateful.

No, he hasn't. He said he was getting 1/4 playback in a Retina for 6K. He also said he edited everything in FCPX in 4K prores. He didn't say how he got there. He said he wanted to be fast, so I assume he was using a rocket, because converting all that material would take a lot of time.

Disappointed with Mark. Never did nothing to the guy. In fact, quite supportive and a big admirer of his work. But as a reduser and someone that should be sharing with the community about Dragon specific things, personally, I am very disappointed. And my questions in no specific way harm anyone or anything.

Mark Toia
08-13-2013, 07:36 PM
+3

Mark - do you want to give it a try?
The moment resolve has Dragon 6k installed. Ill be onto it. :)

paul schefz
08-13-2013, 07:38 PM
Am I the only one who thinks this is madness?

Mark Toia
08-13-2013, 08:03 PM
No, he hasn't. He said he was getting 1/4 playback in a Retina for 6K. He also said he edited everything in FCPX in 4K prores. He didn't say how he got there. He said he wanted to be fast, so I assume he was using a rocket, because converting all that material would take a lot of time.

Disappointed with Mark. Never did nothing to the guy. In fact, quite supportive and a big admirer of his work. But as a reduser and someone that should be sharing with the community about Dragon specific things, personally, I am very disappointed. And my questions in no specific way harm anyone or anything.

Sorry Sergio, I missed your question. Don't be upset.
But I'll answer this current question.

No Red Rocket was used for this test... There is no current firmware from RED that will get the rocket working with 6k Dragon. As yet.
Yes I could play in 1/4 res (even better in 1/8res) the 6k footage straight out of a mac book pro laptop.
Using RCX only I performed a simple grade with no secondaries and no windows (only because RCX cannot perform secondaries or windows ) most shots were directly from RG3 colour space directly from the camera. I made a mistake by not ticking DRX when I exported from RCX which did not save the highlights as well. But.. Have corrected it now.
My export settings from RCX were 4444 - 4k and 2k prores. Reason for this was that I wanted to edit something quickly and FCPx is my chosen program to do so. No grading was performed in FCPx.
The only reason I did not grade out of Resolve is because resolve cannot read Dragon 6k as yet. Plus even If I did not want to hide anything with selective grading. I wanted to show you all what the camera delivers straight out of the box with Free software from RED. But knowing that this was not the final Dragon that will be delivered or the final colour science Im hoping for even better results.
I hope this resolves your issues.

And Sergio. You have done nothing to upset. All is good man.

Sergio Perez
08-13-2013, 08:13 PM
Sorry Sergio, I missed your question. Don't be upset.
But I'll answer this current question.

No Red Rocket was used for this test... There is no current firmware from RED that will get the rocket working with 6k Dragon. As yet.
Yes I could play in 1/4 res (even better in 1/8res) the 6k footage straight out of a mac book pro laptop.
Using RCX only I performed a simple grade with no secondaries and no windows (only because RCX cannot perform secondaries or windows ) most shots were directly from RG3 colour space directly from the camera. I made a mistake by not ticking DRX when I exported from RCX which did not save the highlights as well. But.. Have corrected it now.
My export settings from RCX were 4444 - 4k and 2k prores. Reason for this was that I wanted to edit something quickly and FCPx is my chosen program to do so. No grading was performed in FCPx.
The only reason I did not grade out of Resolve is because resolve cannot read Dragon 6k as yet. Plus even If I did not want to hide anything with selective grading. I wanted to show you all what the camera delivers straight out of the box with Free software from RED. But knowing that this was not the final Dragon that will be delivered or the final colour science Im hoping for even better results.
I hope this resolves your issues.

And Sergio. You have done nothing to upset. All is good man.

Thanks Mark, that's all i wanted to hear. Glad to know it wasn't one or 2 of my silly remarks - there are often- that put me on your "ignore" list :)

My concern with the Rocket is that I hope to be getting a Dragon upgrade for a once in a lifetime event over here- the 60th Macau GP- and I wanted to be prepared. I can rent a Epic MX body for the event and use the Dragon at the same time, but would love to have some real world input from someone who also uses the Prores 4K workflow- and you seem to be a big fan of it so was hoping you got to try it!

Robert Ruffo New
08-13-2013, 11:05 PM
Gavin, I cut out some of the rambling stuff so as not to be confusing. Anyone wanting to try and make sense out of it can read your original post.

Now, for the part that was a little more coherent, I did not accuse Rob of being color blind... I suggested he may be a synasthete which is more like an enhanced color recognition rather than being color blind.

And while I did suggest it's all in his head, I said that while saying he has powers of recognition above and beyond what most people have, and he confirmed that he is indeed in the top .05% of color recognition capability... i.e., Perfect Color Acuity. He didn't say how he was measured for that but I take him at his word that he does possess these traits.



This doesn't directly apply to me but I'm guessing the part in parentheses is referring to Mark pushing back at Rob's subliminal assertion that Mark's test is either a short coming of the camera or a shortcoming of Mark's abilities.

Reference my earlier post about The Rounder's movie... if you enter a thread making "fighting words" statements, expect the fireworks that will soon follow. And for the 1,327th time (I'm just estimating here) the comments were made about a quick and dirty camera stress test. If someone posts that either the camera or the tester is flawed, they are somewhat flawed in their thinking (IMO) for harping on the/any expected imperfections.

I've said this before and I'm saying it again... that smacks of someone trying to put a notch on their gun in order to build a reputation as a gunfighter. And the overwhelming response against suggests he encountered a whole posse of Redusers standing against him instead of just being allowed to walk through the streets of Dodge with everyone fearfully cowering behind saloon doors and curtained windows based on his "reputation."



You obviously interpreted anything I've written this way or you would not have posted it. But again, I did not call Rob blind... synesthesia is neither blindness nor is it color blindness. And I never asked for Rob's respect... I could care less. I did try to point out that he was disrespectful to others here, perhaps unconsciously, and that is why the posse is lining up against him rather than behind him. Rob may be an excellent colorist but he lacks leadership skills, IMO. '-)

And no problem with Rob hitting back. But if I read the Reduser Posse correctly, he's just going to get bloodier and bloodier. As for bullying? I see it as Rob trying to be the bully by accusing everyone who disagrees with HIM of being blind-faith fanboys.

But I understand that you may see things the same way as Rob does. Probably a generational thing... or maybe it is as simple as you saying to-mae-to and me saying to-mah-to.

You have my respect nonetheless. I did think synesthesia meant color blind (was "sure", in fact). My bad. I've never been diagnosed with that, but I do think I see things a little differently than most people. Not necessarily "better", just differently.

You guys do have to chill out though. As Gavin pointed out, I was asking a question, with a great amount of respect, as well as expressing a hope, always mentioning the fact that whatever color issues I would like to see resolved, I still chose to invest in Red (we had the money to buy Alexa and opted for Epic) and that I prefer shooting with Red, overall, prefer it to any other camera. If you think that's me looking for a gunfight, that's a bit extreme. A simple answer could have been "Well I didn't spend much time grading that, but the skin tones could easily look more saturated, or "wait until the color science, we are working on it" or
Mark could even have posted a re-graded still - any number of responses would have been great. If all this board will tolerate is "Awesome Jim!" then I think many of us will loose interest. You don't learn much from reading 6 pages of "I can't wait" and "Red Rulz"

If "rah rah awesome" is the only customer feedback Red is interested in, then I'd say that's not how you run a business. My feeling is it absolutely is not what they want. They want to learn from us, see through our eyes, and reality is never 100% positive. It's always a mix.

I for one did indeed feel bullied. I'd guess (juts a guess) Mark was the popular captain of the football team dating all the cheerleaders, as he speaks of nerds with some derision on many occasions (including at the beginning of the first Dragon thread), but I was that nerd growing up, and still am, very much, proudly. In high school I was bullied to the point of requiring an ambulance and two days in the hospital, and I really, really don't like it any more now then I did then.

Now to get back to Dragon, it would be great of Mark could send some r3Ds to an experienced and talented colorist. (I;m not saying he is not talented, only that that color correction is not his full time job). There's Mr Most on this board, Jake Blackstone, others. I want to hear what they have to say, because honestly my wife and I try to avoid "quick and dirty" jobs graded on laptops, much more relevant to us and I would imagine many others on this forum, is how good something can be with a lot of careful effort applied to the grade, and how much work it is to get to perfection. I want to hear how far you can push layered windows of different ISOs.. all that. I want to hear the nerdy stuff, the careful stuff, at great, nerdy length.

TD Wood
08-13-2013, 11:27 PM
Back to Dragon, señores!! Pronto!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL9s8pGHvzQ

Mark Toia
08-14-2013, 01:01 AM
You have my respect nonetheless. I did think synesthesia meant color blind (was "sure", in fact). My bad. I've never been diagnosed with that, but I do think I see things a little differently than most people. Not necessarily "better", just differently.

You guys do have to chill out though. As Gavin pointed out, I was asking a question, with a great amount of respect, as well as expressing a hope, always mentioning the fact that whatever color issues I would like to see resolved, I still chose to invest in Red (we had the money to buy Alexa and opted for Epic) and that I prefer shooting with Red, overall, prefer it to any other camera. If you think that's me looking for a gunfight, that's a bit extreme. A simple answer could have been "Well I didn't spend much time grading that, but the skin tones could easily look more saturated, or "wait until the color science, we are working on it" or
Mark could even have posted a re-graded still - any number of responses would have been great. If all this board will tolerate is "Awesome Jim!" then I think many of us will loose interest. You don't learn much from reading 6 pages of "I can't wait" and "Red Rulz"

If "rah rah awesome" is the only customer feedback Red is interested in, then I'd say that's not how you run a business. My feeling is it absolutely is not what they want. They want to learn from us, see through our eyes, and reality is never 100% positive. It's always a mix.

I for one did indeed feel bullied. I'd guess (juts a guess) Mark was the popular captain of the football team dating all the cheerleaders, as he speaks of nerds with some derision on many occasions (including at the beginning of the first Dragon thread), but I was that nerd growing up, and still am, very much, proudly. In high school I was bullied to the point of requiring an ambulance and two days in the hospital, and I really, really don't like it any more now then I did then.

Now to get back to Dragon, it would be great of Mark could send some r3Ds to an experienced and talented colorist. (I;m not saying he is not talented, only that that color correction is not his full time job). There's Mr Most on this board, Jake Blackstone, others. I want to hear what they have to say, because honestly my wife and I try to avoid "quick and dirty" jobs graded on laptops, much more relevant to us and I would imagine many others on this forum, is how good something can be with a lot of careful effort applied to the grade, and how much work it is to get to perfection. I want to hear how far you can push layered windows of different ISOs.. all that. I want to hear the nerdy stuff, the careful stuff, at great, nerdy length.

Nerd to me is the smart, clever guy in class... not the guy that got bashed.
I got bashed at school almost everyday because I was small and because I was from another country, (seriously) and a very easy target, because I never fort back and I never told on the bullies.
So take no offence my nerd comments as they are more aimed at people more intelligent than I being able to give a more technically polished response.

Robert... Lets hug. lets move onwards and upwards.

Ok...
In regarding wanting R3D's.
I cannot load up the R3D's as I have been instructed not to by RED. Why, because the camera I was using is an unfinished beta camera.

You wont be able to read the R3D's in any of your systems anyway unless you have the beta RCX. Which I cannot share with anyone as I have been instructed not to... why? because it does not have the desired colour science in it as yet and RED don't want to release a build that is still in test beta mode. As they have been burnt before with early releases.

You won't be able to grade the R3D's in any other program other than the beta RCX, So technically what i have shared with you already is currently all I can do from within RCX.

Until RED releases the SDK for Dragon to the world, we then wait until Resolve, base-light , Scratch, Auto desk, Apple colour, and Adobe Speed grade etc etc etc release an update to actually be able to play 6k R3D's.

Now... I promise you this, the moment RCX has been released by RED to the public, and then RED give me permission to upload my raw files. then I will.
But once again, don't hold your breath, because the current beta Dragon camera I used , does not have the latest colour science, does not have the desired IR filtration and does not have the up incoming low pass filter in it so I doubt RED actually want R3D's from this camera actually floating around being judged on, knowing that the images generated from it will be not as good as compared to the release models that we will all someday get.

So in fact... this test was more about depth and range of the new sensor, just to give everyone a taste of the up incoming latitude and DR... not color. As that's still work in progress. And I'm sure you will have plenty of material to grade and test once the finally finished camera is released.

I hope this all makes sense, because Im starting to feel and sound like a broken record.

Thats it from me Robert... I'm all done.

Phil Holland
08-14-2013, 01:56 AM
Just to add to what Mark said above.

To appease folks hungry for Dragon R3Ds, it has been mentioned that a "Dragon compatible" version of Redcine-X Pro would be coming around the end of the month. Which also means that around that time if anybody has a camera and is willing to share their raw material or if Red themselves uploads a few clips to share that's when everybody gets to dig their fingers into it.

Vadim Bobkovsky
08-14-2013, 02:56 AM
I guess half of the colorists in this thread were asking for redlogfilm TIFFs to grade away, though. I get that it may not be acceptable to Red and therefore beta-testers to release log files with RC3 prior the new RCX and dragon's color science. As always, better late than "unfinished".

Björn Benckert
08-14-2013, 03:43 AM
Just to add to what Mark said above.

To appease folks hungry for Dragon R3Ds, it has been mentioned that a "Dragon compatible" version of Redcine-X Pro would be coming around the end of the month. Which also means that around that time if anybody has a camera and is willing to share their raw material or if Red themselves uploads a few clips to share that's when everybody gets to dig their fingers into it.



Are all 3rd party software out of the game then? until they implement the new tech, or?

Phil Holland
08-14-2013, 03:52 AM
Are all 3rd party software out of the game then? until they implement the new tech, or?

Once everything is "hammered down" Red will get 3rd parties what they need to support Dragon's new color science. How long that takes is up to the 3rd parties. However, I have a feeling this will be a speedy upgrade for a good deal of software suites.

Jay A. Kelley
08-14-2013, 03:59 AM
II'm going to try a novel approach. I'm gonna keep my mouth shut about dragon until it's all done.

jay

Marcos Montenegro
08-14-2013, 05:29 AM
Mark:

Is RED allowing you to post TIFFs or is that also not allowed?


Nerd to me is the smart, clever guy in class... not the guy that got bashed.
I got bashed at school almost everyday because I was small and because I was from another country, (seriously) and a very easy target, because I never fort back and I never told on the bullies.
So take no offence my nerd comments as they are more aimed at people more intelligent than I being able to give a more technically polished response.

Robert... Lets hug. lets move onwards and upwards.

Ok...
In regarding wanting R3D's.
I cannot load up the R3D's as I have been instructed not to by RED. Why, because the camera I was using is an unfinished beta camera.

You wont be able to read the R3D's in any of your systems anyway unless you have the beta RCX. Which I cannot share with anyone as I have been instructed not to... why? because it does not have the desired colour science in it as yet and RED don't want to release a build that is still in test beta mode. As they have been burnt before with early releases.

You won't be able to grade the R3D's in any other program other than the beta RCX, So technically what i have shared with you already is currently all I can do from within RCX.

Until RED releases the SDK for Dragon to the world, we then wait until Resolve, base-light , Scratch, Auto desk, Apple colour, and Adobe Speed grade etc etc etc release an update to actually be able to play 6k R3D's.

Now... I promise you this, the moment RCX has been released by RED to the public, and then RED give me permission to upload my raw files. then I will.
But once again, don't hold your breath, because the current beta Dragon camera I used , does not have the latest colour science, does not have the desired IR filtration and does not have the up incoming low pass filter in it so I doubt RED actually want R3D's from this camera actually floating around being judged on, knowing that the images generated from it will be not as good as compared to the release models that we will all someday get.

So in fact... this test was more about depth and range of the new sensor, just to give everyone a taste of the up incoming latitude and DR... not color. As that's still work in progress. And I'm sure you will have plenty of material to grade and test once the finally finished camera is released.

I hope this all makes sense, because Im starting to feel and sound like a broken record.

Thats it from me Robert... I'm all done.

Mark Toia
08-14-2013, 06:08 AM
It's sort of color baked... and not a RED RAW file...

Lets all wait for RED to allow this to happen. I'm just following a simple request from Jarred.

Elsie N
08-14-2013, 06:35 AM
...
I for one did indeed feel bullied. I'd guess (juts a guess) Mark was the popular captain of the football team dating all the cheerleaders, as he speaks of nerds with some derision on many occasions (including at the beginning of the first Dragon thread), but I was that nerd growing up, and still am, very much, proudly. In high school I was bullied to the point of requiring an ambulance and two days in the hospital, and I really, really don't like it any more now then I did then.

....


Nerd to me is the smart, clever guy in class... not the guy that got bashed.
I got bashed at school almost everyday because I was small and because I was from another country, (seriously) and a very easy target, because I never fort back and I never told on the bullies.
So take no offence my nerd comments as they are more aimed at people more intelligent than I being able to give a more technically polished response.

Robert... Lets hug. lets move onwards and upwards.


...

I think it very revealing how the two of you arrived at your current level of success and I suspect your stories mirror those of many others here on REDuser. Not only that, a backstory helps one understand someone's written words better and helps a reader to put their words into a context that is based on what the reader knows about the person rather than what they read into the sterile words on a page.

So I will share my backstory. I went to a small school which was appropriate because I too was a small person as a kid. And while I don't recall being bullied, we did have a bully at my grade school. He was my cousin and one day he picked on my best friend so I challenged him, although he was my cousin and was literally, twice my size. We were supposed to meet at the gymnasium after lunch. Everybody gathered, even high schoolers, because a fight was a big event back during that time... plus they wanted to make sure nobody got hurt really bad (meaning me.) Long story short we semi-wrestled and my cousin pinned me against the wall and was squushing me pretty hard, so I bit him in the back... the lower back because that's how much bigger he was than me. The high schoolers pretty much stopped the fight then and there and declared it a draw.

I was still small for my age in high school which was a different one than the school where I grew up, but probably a lot like high schools everywhere. Interestingly, I was able to move within the different cliques fluidly, even the cool guys clique. But one of the members of that clique was particularly obnoxious and actually had one or two teachers a little fearful of him because his Dad was on the school board. I didn't like that guy and I guess it showed in my demeanor.

So one day after a track meet we competed in, I was assigned to ride back in my nemesis's Dad's car with some other team members. Looking back, I may have been a little sullen on the ride back to my own car, parked at a meeting place where we left from to go to the track meet. When we got there my nemesis said some stuff to me and I said some stuff back at him and we took a few swings at one another until his Dad decided it was time to break it up. Pretty much allowed to be a draw.

Again, looking back, I think it was the Dad who may have covertly promoted the fight through his son. And re-living the scene in my mind, I think he thought he was doing it for my own good. But by his son trying to wield power over others through his Dad's position, at that time I assumed the Dad was as bad as the son.

But anyway, here I was having had two fights ending in draws.

Then, a third (and final) fight ending in a bloody, scrambled-brain mess that taught me not to get into physical altercations.

My Dad and I were not close, nor was he close to my three older brothers. I think he saw his job as being a teacher to his kids and not their (our) best buddy. There was bonding and doing stuff together of course, but for the most part, he always maintained his posture as parent as opposed to best friend.

As time passes, I think I have a sense of fair play and having seen my Dad make many decisions throughout his life that were detrimental financially to him but were the right thing to do, if I indeed do possess such a trait, I think it came about through observing him.

Brice Ansel
08-14-2013, 07:59 AM
Nerd to me is the smart, clever guy in class... not the guy that got bashed.
I got bashed at school almost everyday because I was small and because I was from another country, (seriously) and a very easy target, because I never fort back and I never told on the bullies.
So take no offence my nerd comments as they are more aimed at people more intelligent than I being able to give a more technically polished response.

Robert... Lets hug. lets move onwards and upwards.

Ok...
In regarding wanting R3D's.
I cannot load up the R3D's as I have been instructed not to by RED. Why, because the camera I was using is an unfinished beta camera.

You wont be able to read the R3D's in any of your systems anyway unless you have the beta RCX. Which I cannot share with anyone as I have been instructed not to... why? because it does not have the desired colour science in it as yet and RED don't want to release a build that is still in test beta mode. As they have been burnt before with early releases.

You won't be able to grade the R3D's in any other program other than the beta RCX, So technically what i have shared with you already is currently all I can do from within RCX.

Until RED releases the SDK for Dragon to the world, we then wait until Resolve, base-light , Scratch, Auto desk, Apple colour, and Adobe Speed grade etc etc etc release an update to actually be able to play 6k R3D's.

Now... I promise you this, the moment RCX has been released by RED to the public, and then RED give me permission to upload my raw files. then I will.
But once again, don't hold your breath, because the current beta Dragon camera I used , does not have the latest colour science, does not have the desired IR filtration and does not have the up incoming low pass filter in it so I doubt RED actually want R3D's from this camera actually floating around being judged on, knowing that the images generated from it will be not as good as compared to the release models that we will all someday get.

So in fact... this test was more about depth and range of the new sensor, just to give everyone a taste of the up incoming latitude and DR... not color. As that's still work in progress. And I'm sure you will have plenty of material to grade and test once the finally finished camera is released.

I hope this all makes sense, because Im starting to feel and sound like a broken record.

Thats it from me Robert... I'm all done.

Humility and maturity...
I don't know you but you sounds like a wise man Mark.
Good on ya.
B.
Ps At my school, the smart guys you are mentioning were the ones who had their ass kicked.

António Fagundes
08-14-2013, 08:50 AM
I wasn't bullied. I was the bully. Good times!

Elsie N
08-14-2013, 08:54 AM
I wasn't bullied. I was the bully. Good times!

Thought it was just a cultural thing with you '-)... good to know how you became who you are.

Scott Crawley
08-14-2013, 09:03 AM
Thought it was just a cultural thing with you '-)... good to know how you became who you are.

Watch it! There are other Portuguese folks here you might not readily recognize... But then I am boorish, so maybe you have a point. I am just one other guy though. ;-)

If I had a Dragon in my hands we might almost be on topic...

Brice Ansel
08-14-2013, 09:08 AM
Thought it was just a cultural thing with you '-)... good to know how you became who you are.

Bummer the ignore button doesn't ignore the quote. ;-)

Elsie N
08-14-2013, 09:17 AM
Bummer the ignore button doesn't ignore the quote. ;-)

Hopefully the smiley thing showed I was joking about that. The second part of the comment was in a more serious vein unless Antonio was making a joke. No smiley in his post though, so who knows?

EDIT: Apologies to Brice Ansel. My post using his quote makes it look like I thought he was directing his post at something I said, but he was of course referring to something else entirely. Thanks Brice for bringing that to my attention so I can clear that up.

António Fagundes
08-14-2013, 09:49 AM
Hopefully the smiley thing showed I was joking about that. The second part of the comment was in a more serious vein unless Antonio was making a joke. No smiley in his post though, so who knows?


Just thought this conversation of feeling sorry for yourself as a kid was getting very boring, plus it's way off topic. Who had a perfect chidhood anyway? We're all grownups now, so lets all behave accordingly.

Scott Crawley
08-14-2013, 09:56 AM
Mcqueen: "And there's the insult we were missing. Grazzi."

Lliam Worthington
08-14-2013, 10:24 AM
Mark thanks for your terrific work and no bullshit approach. I haven't done much car work, but shooting in forests and in and around the Ocean I know pretty well. I wasn't paying attention to the quality of the highlights as I didn't think that was the point, I cared how much I could see in the stress tests you chose. DR and low light looked pretty incredible to me. Oh and managing to catch Mick Fanning free surfing too by the looks was cool:)) Thanks mate.

Best

Lliam

Robert Ruffo New
08-14-2013, 02:59 PM
Nerd to me is the smart, clever guy in class... not the guy that got bashed.
I got bashed at school almost everyday because I was small and because I was from another country, (seriously) and a very easy target, because I never fort back and I never told on the bullies.
So take no offence my nerd comments as they are more aimed at people more intelligent than I being able to give a more technically polished response.

Robert... Lets hug. lets move onwards and upwards.

Ok...
In regarding wanting R3D's.
I cannot load up the R3D's as I have been instructed not to by RED. Why, because the camera I was using is an unfinished beta camera.

You wont be able to read the R3D's in any of your systems anyway unless you have the beta RCX. Which I cannot share with anyone as I have been instructed not to... why? because it does not have the desired colour science in it as yet and RED don't want to release a build that is still in test beta mode. As they have been burnt before with early releases.

You won't be able to grade the R3D's in any other program other than the beta RCX, So technically what i have shared with you already is currently all I can do from within RCX.

Until RED releases the SDK for Dragon to the world, we then wait until Resolve, base-light , Scratch, Auto desk, Apple colour, and Adobe Speed grade etc etc etc release an update to actually be able to play 6k R3D's.

Now... I promise you this, the moment RCX has been released by RED to the public, and then RED give me permission to upload my raw files. then I will.
But once again, don't hold your breath, because the current beta Dragon camera I used , does not have the latest colour science, does not have the desired IR filtration and does not have the up incoming low pass filter in it so I doubt RED actually want R3D's from this camera actually floating around being judged on, knowing that the images generated from it will be not as good as compared to the release models that we will all someday get.

So in fact... this test was more about depth and range of the new sensor, just to give everyone a taste of the up incoming latitude and DR... not color. As that's still work in progress. And I'm sure you will have plenty of material to grade and test once the finally finished camera is released.

I hope this all makes sense, because Im starting to feel and sound like a broken record.

Thats it from me Robert... I'm all done.

Hug accepted and reciprocated. Thanks Mark.

As I've said many times before, I may not always agree with your work methodology, but I do pretty much always think your work is amazing.

Thank you also for the further tech details, (which may have been stated before, but perhaps buried in other long threads) which are of great interest. They make me even more eager than before to plunk down my 9.5K, because even if all Dragon was was what we saw n your footage, I was already a future satisfied customer. As you are are all I would imagine aware, I am not a fanboy by any means, so that is sincere.

Robert Ruffo New
08-14-2013, 03:09 PM
II'm going to try a novel approach. I'm gonna keep my mouth shut about dragon until it's all done.

jay

At which time it will be too late for you to express your concerns or affect its chosen technical compromises (nothing is perfect, everything is a compromise) in any way. I've affected the design of many products I use by speaking with the companies that make them. I'm now even looking at, on my desk, a product I basically invented through my comments to its manufacturer about another device. This device is amazing, for our work, even game changing.

I'm glad I don't live by that book. That book says other should always be left to make choices for you, and that you have little power. There are only a few thousand Red owners out there and this forum is a direct form of two-way communication. We do each have some power to have our voices heard and affect real change.

Gunleik Groven
08-14-2013, 03:20 PM
There is a difference in here somewhere. And I can understand the reluctance to release stuff, because all thing possible and impossible are interpreted in the extremes. Either extremely good or extremely bad, like the sun reflection in Marks initial video.

Those who knew what they saw, knew that that was "nothing".

Others went ballistic.

The camera isn't done. If it was, it would be out making RED money.

But it is close enough for real world testing.

THAT is an achievement in and by itself.

There will be tons of comparative tests, and they will have little value in public display until RED says the cam is done and start shipping.
And most of them will not have much value in public display anyways, because if the methodology isn't recreateable, it isn't of any real value.

And we test for different things.

BUT
Being able to have a glimpse at what guys like Mark and Tom can make out of it with their individual approaches to photography, gives a certain hunch as to what might be in there.

And at the moment, I actually think that sounds more promising than any 18+ stop image of a wedge chart I have seen.

And hopefully there will be more tests dripping out in the next month or so.

THAT does not mean that legitimate concerns are illegitimate, but as long as we don't know how the dragon actually performs on a couple of areas, it is of little use to make assumptions.

But to me, Dragon with MotionMount seems like a killer package.

Tony Harris
08-14-2013, 03:34 PM
what happen to seeing some more amazing Dragon footage or is this a skin tone thread??

Robert Ruffo New
08-14-2013, 04:42 PM
There is a difference in here somewhere. And I can understand the reluctance to release stuff, because all thing possible and impossible are interpreted in the extremes. Either extremely good or extremely bad, like the sun reflection in Marks initial video.

Those who knew what they saw, knew that that was "nothing".

Others went ballistic.

The camera isn't done. If it was, it would be out making RED money.

But it is close enough for real world testing.

THAT is an achievement in and by itself.

There will be tons of comparative tests, and they will have little value in public display until RED says the cam is done and start shipping.
And most of them will not have much value in public display anyways, because if the methodology isn't recreateable, it isn't of any real value.

And we test for different things.

BUT
Being able to have a glimpse at what guys like Mark and Tom can make out of it with their individual approaches to photography, gives a certain hunch as to what might be in there.

And at the moment, I actually think that sounds more promising than any 18+ stop image of a wedge chart I have seen.

And hopefully there will be more tests dripping out in the next month or so.

THAT does not mean that legitimate concerns are illegitimate, but as long as we don't know how the dragon actually performs on a couple of areas, it is of little use to make assumptions.

But to me, Dragon with MotionMount seems like a killer package.

For sure it's a killer package. No arguments there. Very reasonably priced.

Martin Stevens
08-14-2013, 05:22 PM
So.....how many years has there been since the MX came out?

I ask because I wonder when the next Sensor from Red might be released.

Gunleik Groven
08-14-2013, 05:31 PM
3+ years these days, even though it performs differently in the R1 MX and in the Epic...

Why?

Scott Crawley
08-14-2013, 05:59 PM
3+ years these days, even though it performs differently in the R1 MX and in the Epic...

The original R1 sensor was close to four years old when MX came out as well, right? One more sensor in 3-4 years and we can call it a pattern. :-)

Martin Stevens
08-14-2013, 07:13 PM
3+ years these days, even though it performs differently in the R1 MX and in the Epic...

Why?

Because I wonder when the next Sensor from Red might be released.

Robert Ruffo New
08-14-2013, 10:00 PM
Might take a while - Dragon pretty much gives you all you need, from the looks of it.

Phil Jagger
08-15-2013, 05:31 AM
Hi Mark, Mega off topic but could you please tell me what the handle/evf set up includes on the epic the man is holding in the rainforest, looks good. Pretty cool you got a world champ in thems shots too! Cheers Phil

Mark Toia
08-15-2013, 06:24 AM
Hi Mark, Mega off topic but could you please tell me what the handle/evf set up includes on the epic the man is holding in the rainforest, looks good. Pretty cool you got a world champ in thems shots too! Cheers Phil

Yes we where very lucky to have Mick Fanning dropping in the moment we arrived :)

The handles are all RED.
http://www.red.com/store/products/outrigger-handle

http://www.red.com/store/products/sliding-top-handle

http://www.red.com/store/products/bolt-on-camera-guide-clampn

http://www.red.com/store/products/red-arm

Phil Jagger
08-15-2013, 07:32 AM
Thanks mate. Phil

Jim Hoffman
08-15-2013, 11:39 AM
Sorry if this sounds silly -

Have you shot anything in 5k? 4k? with the dragon yet - I know...why - when you have beautiful 6k right? I am just curious. With the way this sensor impacts some of our lens choices and we are needing to push a bit if you've explored that. Curious as to see if using a smaller sensor area is still as pleasing - holds sharpness - etc.

Harcharan Singh
08-16-2013, 07:47 AM
But we are there. Final parts are now being sent off to manufacturing and customer upgrades will begin the first week of September.

Another 3 weeks to go.....

Harcharan

Mark Toia
08-18-2013, 02:59 AM
Sorry if this sounds silly -

Have you shot anything in 5k? 4k? with the dragon yet - I know...why - when you have beautiful 6k right? I am just curious. With the way this sensor impacts some of our lens choices and we are needing to push a bit if you've explored that. Curious as to see if using a smaller sensor area is still as pleasing - holds sharpness - etc.

5k looks as good as ever...
4k we shot some 150fps tests with at.. and could not see any difference between 6k,5k and 4k when down scaled to HD.
Of course its softer that 6k... when viewing at 6k.

Antoine Fabi
08-18-2013, 08:22 AM
Hi Mark,

Thanks a lot for doing these hi DR tests!
I'll ask you the same question i asked Evin...

What kind of IR filtration did you use with the Dragon?
...and what IR filtration do you normally use with the MX ?

Thanks!

Antoine

Mark Toia
08-18-2013, 08:44 AM
Hi Mark,

Thanks a lot for doing these hi DR tests!
I'll ask you the same question i asked Evin...

What kind of IR filtration did you use with the Dragon?
...and what IR filtration do you normally use with the MX ?

Thanks!

Antoine

I don't use any IR filters. Actually I'm a liar, one day a year or two ago we put in a IR filter in place because we needed to kill of 7+ stops of light as the IR poisoning was becoming to much for me to grade out.

It's never really worried me to much be honest... as I try never to filter down to much past 5 stops as the IR problem starts to becomes a real problem.... and for this Dragon test, I made sure not to use any IR filter at all, because I wanted to see in an extreme situation what it would do over the MX. It was better.... and I know it will be even better again when RED get there new IR internal filter installed for the new dragon sensors when released,.

Tommaso Alvisi
08-18-2013, 09:11 AM
Thanks Mark,
it should also be possible with Dragon to use lower isos with less DR penalty, right?
What do you observed?

Eric Haase
08-18-2013, 11:38 AM
Unless RED has changed the way ISO works, the ISO is metadata and will merely shift the midpoint of the Dynamic range up and down the scale of values. Just like on the current MX sensor where shooting at 320 puts middle grey in a place where there are many more stops under key than over key available in the dynamic range and where ISO 1280 or 1600 puts about an even number of stops below and above key. Of course, with more Dynamic range in Dragon, this matters LESS but it would be nice to be clear if this is functioning the same way. So yes, if you shoot at a lower ISO you have the same DR but it is shifted, and at a lower ISO there is more of a chance of clipping as you have fewer stops over key exposure available before clip. This is how the MX works currently and I'm curious if it is the same with Dragon.

For example, If you have a heavily backlit scene with white objects in the frame or are under a jungle canopy looking out onto the ocean, you're going to need all the DR you can get..both over an under. So setting your exposure based on ISO 200 is likely not going to yield good results as you won't have the range in the highlights you would if you set exposure at a higher ISO like 800 or 1000. In a LOT of instances it won't matter because you're not using the full DR of the sensor- for example a front lit or overhead noon sun day exterior- you're mostly exposing for the sun anyway and you don't need the range in the highlights so ISO 200 might be fine. PLUS with Dragon's expanded DR you can shift the midpoint of the DR with the ISO and have less chance of clipping or losing shadow detail. It frees up some options. Maybe this is what people mean when they say "lower ISO with no DR penalty."

But I think it's an important distinction to make so you know what it means to shoot at a lower ISO. Again, it seems like the ISO functions the same way on Dragon as MX based on the current threads. You just have a more elbow room.

Martin Stevens
08-18-2013, 12:45 PM
Unless RED has changed the way ISO works, the ISO is metadata and will merely shift the midpoint of the Dynamic range up and down the scale of values. Just like on the current MX sensor where shooting at 320 puts middle grey in a place where there are many more stops under key than over key available in the dynamic range and where ISO 1280 or 1600 puts about an even number of stops below and above key. Of course, with more Dynamic range in Dragon, this matters LESS but it would be nice to be clear if this is functioning the same way. So yes, if you shoot at a lower ISO you have the same DR but it is shifted, and at a lower ISO there is more of a chance of clipping as you have fewer stops over key exposure available before clip. This is how the MX works currently and I'm curious if it is the same with Dragon.

For example, If you have a heavily backlit scene with white objects in the frame or are under a jungle canopy looking out onto the ocean, you're going to need all the DR you can get..both over an under. So setting your exposure based on ISO 200 is likely not going to yield good results as you won't have the range in the highlights you would if you set exposure at a higher ISO like 800 or 1000. In a LOT of instances it won't matter because you're not using the full DR of the sensor- for example a front lit or overhead noon sun day exterior- you're mostly exposing for the sun anyway and you don't need the range in the highlights so ISO 200 might be fine. PLUS with Dragon's expanded DR you can shift the midpoint of the DR with the ISO and have less chance of clipping or losing shadow detail. It frees up some options. Maybe this is what people mean when they say "lower ISO with no DR penalty."

But I think it's an important distinction to make so you know what it means to shoot at a lower ISO. Again, it seems like the ISO functions the same way on Dragon as MX based on the current threads. You just have a more elbow room.

You are most certainly correct Sir.

I believe you have nailed it exactly. Well written.

Antoine Fabi
08-18-2013, 01:14 PM
I don't use any IR filters. Actually I'm a liar, one day a year or two ago we put in a IR filter in place because we needed to kill of 7+ stops of light as the IR poisoning was becoming to much for me to grade out.

It's never really worried me to much be honest... as I try never to filter down to much past 5 stops as the IR problem starts to becomes a real problem.... and for this Dragon test, I made sure not to use any IR filter at all, because I wanted to see in an extreme situation what it would do over the MX. It was better.... and I know it will be even better again when RED get there new IR internal filter installed for the new dragon sensors when released,.

Thanks very much Mark!
Impressive :)

Antoine

Tommaso Alvisi
08-19-2013, 03:21 AM
PLUS with Dragon's expanded DR you can shift the midpoint of the DR with the ISO and have less chance of clipping or losing shadow detail. It frees up some options. Maybe this is what people mean when they say "lower ISO with no DR penalty."

Thanks Eric for your detailed post!

Yes you are right, I meant since we have more DR, probably would happen more to have "room",
to use lower isos as required by the amount of light / desired Tstop...

just wanted to have a feedback from Mark on this...a sort of confirmation he he

Isaac Marchionna
08-19-2013, 08:42 AM
Pardon me asking, but was this the Lady Gaga video in question that utilized Dragon?

http://www.vevo.com/watch/lady-gaga/applause-official/USUV71301730

Joris van den Berg
08-20-2013, 12:16 PM
Thanks for the great tests Mark!

Mark Toia
08-22-2013, 09:06 AM
Thanks for the great tests Mark!

Cheers...

I'm hoping Tom gives us some good (moving) tests as well : )
I did the hard tests, I want some pretty tests shot now.

Corey_O
08-22-2013, 09:54 AM
Thanks Mark for your time and diligence in putting the dragon through the fire.

Have you screened any dragon footage on big screen in 4k, maybe Sony or Barco projector 50 ft screen?

Thanks again.

Mark Toia
08-23-2013, 07:41 AM
Thanks Mark for your time and diligence in putting the dragon through the fire.

Have you screened any dragon footage on big screen in 4k, maybe Sony or Barco projector 50 ft screen?

Thanks again.


Yes I have... :)
Looks as sharp as 5k footage downsized to 4k... but what looks alot better is the depth range.

Corey_O
08-23-2013, 09:31 AM
Yes I have... :)
Looks as sharp as 5k footage downsized to 4k... but what looks alot better is the depth range.

I think that I will name my Dragon "Depth Finder"!

Thanks again Mark

Kyle Dones
08-23-2013, 10:09 AM
I think that I will name my Dragon "Depth Finder"!

Thanks again Mark

Johnny Depth...

Mark, judging by your photos, I feel like the higher ISOs are actually useable. But since I haven't seen the r3d files, how useable are images at 4000 and 6400 truly? I'm sure it's subjective but I'd like to hear your thoughts.

also I know I didn't see any HDRx shots but did you play with HDRx at all?

Sergio Perez
08-23-2013, 10:14 AM
Mark, how does 6K 100fps compares in look to MX 5K 100 fps?

Chris Bourke
08-23-2013, 12:40 PM
Being such a fan of low light shooting, I can't wait to put the Dragon to the test.
Mark, you created a perfect camera tests that convinced me to go ahead and upgrade.

Thank you for your contribution to our network of cinematographers and filmmakers, it's much appreciated, as is Jim's, Jarreds, and the whole RED team's contributions.

I couldn't be more excited for this upgrade.
I'm just dying to find out when it will come!

Best,
Chris

Mark Toia
08-28-2013, 06:19 AM
Mark, how does 6K 100fps compares in look to MX 5K 100 fps?

You don't get 100fps full frame, only 87fps. 6k 100 Fps only in wide screen mode.
Other than that, the latitude difference and the dimension difference, and the smoothness difference makes it alot better.

Kyle Dones
08-28-2013, 03:45 PM
Mark, looking at your signature, you obviously have a few Epics. Do you plan on upgrading them or are you thinking of having a dragon and mysterium mixture?

If yes, why? (Other than $?)

Mark Toia
08-30-2013, 09:55 AM
Mark, looking at your signature, you obviously have a few Epics. Do you plan on upgrading them or are you thinking of having a dragon and mysterium mixture?

If yes, why? (Other than $?)


All will be swapped over...
Ive tested the DRAGON and cannot wait to have one back in my hands. The difference is really noticeable.

Mark Toia
10-06-2013, 09:42 AM
Mark, how does 6K 100fps compares in look to MX 5K 100 fps?

Smoother :)