PDA

View Full Version : OLPF v1 and v2



Jake Wilganowski
08-24-2014, 10:13 AM
So it looks like I may have nabbed one of the discounted epic dragons (used in the military shoot) that Jarred put up for sale on his Facebook, so I need to decide which OLPF to get. Ive looked at all the tests here, but wanted to ask some simple questions to people who've used both. Ive only shot with version 2 personally and it was an outside shoot.


1) How often does the magenta orb issue rear its head? I shoot a lot of music videos with bright lights/flares in frame, is this going to happen all the time? Does it happen if I'm shooting with a bright a window in frame in a narrative setting for example? Would moving the camera slightly or changing the angle slightly remedy this pretty easily?

2) Does rating the V1 OLPF at 800 produce the same rolloff as shooting v2 at 250ish after processing, or will v2 aways have a superior tonal gradient up in the highs? Meaning, if i expose darker on the V1 OLPF, then correct in post, will I get a nice rolloff superior to MX and equal to that of V2?

3) Do i need IR filtration with V1 OLPF, and after how much ND?

4) Final simple question, is V1 OLPF dragon superior to MX in every way? Or just in every way besides the Orb issue?

THANKS!

Gunleik Groven
08-24-2014, 10:33 AM
Hi. I'll move this to the Dragon section, but you should have a look at this thread:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?120231-OLD-or-NEW-DRAGON-OLPF-What-s-best

I'd also suggest you talk with Sergio Perez.

Best of luck!

G

Phil Holland
08-24-2014, 10:47 AM
So it looks like I may have nabbed one of the discounted epic dragons (used in the military shoot) that Jarred put up for sale on his Facebook, so I need to decide which OLPF to get. Ive looked at all the tests here, but wanted to ask some simple questions to people who've used both. Ive only shot with version 2 personally and it was an outside shoot.


1) How often does the magenta orb issue rear its head? I shoot a lot of music videos with bright lights/flares in frame, is this going to happen all the time? Does it happen if I'm shooting with a bright a window in frame in a narrative setting for example? Would moving the camera slightly or changing the angle slightly remedy this pretty easily?

2) Does rating the V1 OLPF at 800 produce the same rolloff as shooting v2 at 250ish after processing, or will v2 aways have a superior tonal gradient up in the highs? Meaning, if i expose darker on the V1 OLPF, then correct in post, will I get a nice rolloff superior to MX and equal to that of V2?

3) Do i need IR filtration with V1 OLPF, and after how much ND?

4) Final simple question, is V1 OLPF dragon superior to MX in every way? Or just in every way besides the Orb issue?

THANKS!

1. Magenta Highlight Orb, It's a reflected effect that dangles off of in frame hot sources like headlights, flashlights, and any similar source. It can also produce an interesting "glow" to highlights.

2. No. They are mapped differently and calibrated the same (though you can shoot and process however you want). Meaning the image you get at ISO 800 is correct for exposed Middle Gray for both OLPFs. The difference falls in approximately 1.3 stops of improved overall sensitivity for the V1 (how far it sees into the shadows and cleaner higher ISOs). Whereas the V2 OLPF pushes that 1.3 stops into highlight retention. That said, both versions of the OLPF have nice highlight roll-off. V2 is more or less "more film-like"

3. Not necessarily. The V2 does a better job at cutting IR and is superior to the V1 in terms of color science and accuracy. If you look at the example here (the shadows on the shirt) you can see where IR comes into play at ND 2.7 in the shadows and that's more or less the visual difference:
http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/photography/redEpicDragon_Kozmo/bigs/phfx_redDragon_NewOLPF_ChartDaylight.jpg

4. I would say the V1 OLPF is more or less similar to Mysterium-X as there are similar artifacts in terms of higher aperture reflected sensor dots. The cleaner available higher ISOs could be considered superior however.

5. If you haven't already look at this post here with the examples between the Version 1 and Version 2 Dragon OLPF:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?112230-the-New-Dragon-OLPF

6. Congratulations!

Mark Wuerthner
08-25-2014, 09:03 AM
2) Does rating the V1 OLPF at 800 produce the same rolloff as shooting v2 at 250ish after processing, or will v2 aways have a superior tonal gradient up in the highs? Meaning, if i expose darker on the V1 OLPF, then correct in post, will I get a nice rolloff superior to MX and equal to that of V2?


THANKS!
From my way of thinking about exposure, I believe you are correct in thinking that the "rolloff" (what i would call highlight latitude) would be the same. If you expose dragon v2 at 250 iso you are moving your mid gray point higher up the grayscale. As you do so you lose highlight latitude between your new mid gray and clipping point. Since your new mid gray point is 1.6 stops higher up the scale (compared to mid gray at 800 iso) you have effectively chopped off 1.6 stops of latitude above your new mid gray, which makes your highlight latitude about the same as v1 dragon. Except now you get that same highlight latitude at 250 iso. Assuming that Phil is correct and that v2 dragon has 1.3 stops more highlight latitude than v1 dragon, exposing v2 dragon at 320 iso should give you the exact same highlight latitude that v1 dragon gives you. I think you are also correct in that you could go the other way and expose v1 at a higher iso and extend the highlight latitude that way. Theoretically you would have to expose v1 at 2000 iso to match the highlight latitude of v2 at 800 iso. That would be an interesting test for someone to make to see if noise is the same between v1 at 2000 and v2 at 800 iso.

Jake Wilganowski
08-25-2014, 09:37 AM
Yes this is what I'm talking about. Anyone else care to weigh in? Phil?

David Battistella
08-25-2014, 09:46 AM
I get the theory and it does kinda work when it comes to exposure but you are leaving out important aspects of the other improvements with v2 so when you try to extend the highlight latitude of the v1 then you are taking it into a different direction in terms of visual artifacts.

Plus the optical path physically changes between v1 and v2 so that has an overall effect on color fidelity, etc, in relation to how the calibration of the camera is set relative to the OLPF.

I imagine red is devoting most of its calibration effort towards the "shipping" OLPF and not towards the one that has been replaced in favor of highlight latitude. (That's just my thinking, I don't know if that is true)

so while this argument might hold true for light levels, there is more to consider than just the measured light because the optical path does physically change and that changes things like color.

Battistella

Jake Wilganowski
08-25-2014, 09:56 AM
But, BESIDES color improvements and flare improvements, version 2 is basically remapping middle grey so that 800 on both olpf's looks the same brightness correct? But in version 2 the sensor is actually receiving less light so it's is noisier.
Am I getting it?

David Battistella
08-25-2014, 10:30 AM
But, BESIDES color improvements and flare improvements, version 2 is basically remapping middle grey so that 800 on both olpf's looks the same brightness correct? But in version 2 the sensor is actually receiving less light so it's is noisier.
Am I getting it?

The bias is toward the highlights in V2, I don't think its an ND thing as much as when you have to introduce elements into the OLPF that eliminate big problems (like the RED Dot noise so prevalent in Phil's excellent tests). This requires filtration of specific light spectrums.

For example V2 contains an excellent built in IR filter (remember when everyone was bitching about IR problems on RED and what it does to skin tones.

It's a whole bunch of things so it would be oversimplifying it to say that one has more ND over another. There is also a moire filter in there as well. What an OLPF seeks to do, and what this one does quite well, is eliminate problems in the optical path (moire, IR contamination) before it hits the sensor. Then calibration of the sensor is the next part of the equation.

There are many people here who understand this much better than I do (John Marchant, Phil, etc) but the fact is that it is a science and there are many pieces to the puzzle, everything you move creates a new set of problems. So, to think that it's just a bit of ND is oversimplification because it's a triangulation of things that produces a desired result.

There might be many who think that this is some kind of simple thing, but I think if it were simple the solution would be quite rapid.

FWIW, i think RED have a very solid OLPF in V2 and combined with the SW solutions happening this makes it FAR superior and more flexible imagining device than the V1 which was demonstrating problems that were carrying over from the EPIC MX, that big list of complains, Skintone, sensitivity, color accuracy, red dot noise, etc, that this OLPF just flat out eliminates.

OK, red dot shadow noise was a by product, which shows up at specific exposures, but there is a tool to turn that ON or OFF depending on your needs. Some might argue that makes the system weak, id say it makes it more flexible and allows you to extend creativity. Some want it "in camera", its clear its not needed on every shot. Many argued for sharpening in camera on the RED One and RED did not move on that (thankfully) so I sorta see this the same way.

Some want it for the video monitoring path (you are already getting a FULL debater of a 6K frame there so there shouldn't be too much "noise" leftover.

The modular idea is going to give people the chance to:

1. Install one OLPF and stick with it.
2. Swap to a specialized OLPF when called for.

I don't think many will be swapping OLPFs daily, but some people will.

As far as lowlight goes, there is a difference between V1 and V2, but that is becoming increasingly small as the SW tools and calibrations are quickly catching up and surpassing the V1.

Battistella

Jeremy Hildebrant
08-25-2014, 10:56 AM
r3d's of the same scene with both versions would be helpful

Blair S. Paulsen
08-25-2014, 11:32 AM
Without trying to define it in specific, V2 just plain has better color rendition. Full stop. To me, V1 was like a sneak preview of what Dragon is capable of, but with too many "veils" like the magenta blooms and the subtle color crosstalk they created, etc (plenty of threads about the specifics if you're on the due diligence track).

If RED comes out with the proposed swappable OLPF system and it includes a low light biased option, let's call it V1 with a few tweaks - V1.1 perhaps? - I'd love to have it in my kit for those times when the situation makes under-exposure unavoidable. Other than that, V2 all the way. I shot some footy yesterday that had 3 subjects in frame, all of whom had distinct skin tones, and each one was faithfully reproduced with the same global settings. Moreover, the transition of the skin tones into the rim light held hue beautifully with no discernible color casts.

V2 is the droid you're looking for.

Cheers - #19

Roger Viloria
08-25-2014, 12:43 PM
Jake, here there are r3d's from this quick test, nothing fancy. Similar situation/T stops.

OLPF V1
https://www.dropbox.com/s/km1td9dnyc558v5/OLPF%20V1%20A001_C007_082354.0000961F.R3D.zip?dl=0

OLPF V2
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6w1nnk7mow4p2yh/OLPF%20V2%20A001_C004_08142W.0000000F.R3D.zip?dl=0

Nick Morrison
08-25-2014, 12:46 PM
V2 is the droid you're looking for.

Love this.

Mark Pugh
08-25-2014, 02:44 PM
I really wish people would stop referring to the loss of 1.3 stops due to OLPF 2 as "Highlight Retention". It's rhetoric employed to sound like an increase in dynamic range is achieved. It's only highlight retention if there's too much light on set to deal with, and someone forgot to bring the ND filters (sorry - I mean Highlight Retention Filters).

Jake Wilganowski
08-25-2014, 03:42 PM
Jake, here there are r3d's from this quick test, nothing fancy. Similar situation/T stops.

OLPF V1
https://www.dropbox.com/s/km1td9dnyc558v5/OLPF%20V1%20A001_C007_082354.0000961F.R3D.zip?dl=0

OLPF V2
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6w1nnk7mow4p2yh/OLPF%20V2%20A001_C004_08142W.0000000F.R3D.zip?dl=0

Thanks. Thats definitely a significant difference in noise. Ive shot the v2 OLPF in a dark barn and got clean blacks, but I rated the cam at 250.

This is a hard decision. The DP in me says get V2 no question. But the practical business side of me says 1.3 stops cleaner is SO useful in lower budget stuff or practically lit environments.

Roger Viloria
08-25-2014, 04:03 PM
Welcome!
I swapped back to OLPF V1 until the Modular Dragon OLPF comes out.

Mark Pugh
08-25-2014, 05:39 PM
you can see where IR comes into play at ND 2.7 in the shadows and that's more or less the visual difference:
http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/photography/redEpicDragon_Kozmo/bigs/phfx_redDragon_NewOLPF_ChartDaylight.jpg


Nine stops of ND added and vulnerable clothing in daylight is needed to spot the improvement in color?
For now I'm with Roger.
The reduction of ability to dig into shadows with OLPF 2, unless you have tons of light (setting ISO low) is the real issue here, for the majority of challenging shots. Roger's example above makes that pretty clear.

I'm guessing there'd be an improvement in the new OLPF in rendering red traffic lights or a red neon source.
A post from John Marchant showing various OLPFs illustrated the strong cyan cast of the new one.
I guess that means the red channel clips less easily.
I'd love to see a comparison of the two OLPFs with subjects like these two.

Roger Viloria
08-25-2014, 06:18 PM
Thanks Mark

Will Keir
08-25-2014, 08:39 PM
For what it's worth. I'm thinking of going back to V1. Everything was beautiful back then. I've had some struggles with V2, but they are my struggles, not the OLPF. I don't have expensive lights, I'm shooting in the darkness which is why I'd consider it.

If you give the Dragon enough light, it's a killer camera.

Bohdan Klos
08-25-2014, 08:42 PM
For what it's worth. I'm thinking of going back to V1. Everything was beautiful back then. I've had some struggles with V2, but they are my struggles, not the OLPF. I don't have expensive lights, I'm shooting in the darkness which is why I'd consider it.

If you give the Dragon enough light, it's a killer camera.

There has been a few people saying the V1 is not available right now. This might be a sign a replacement is coming. I cant believe Red would manufacture more V1`s with the orb issues. Fingers crossed.

steve green
08-25-2014, 09:04 PM
Really? I'm a two camera Dragon shooter and I'm sick…….20K worth of upgrades and I've got a camera which was advertised as being the end all to end all. What I've got is two cameras which I need to sell and defend to producers (in the know) and DIT's (in the know). Red team, please help…Lets get this right. What we have here is a experimental camera with potential. We're a long way from it being what was hyped.

Matt Ryan
08-25-2014, 11:26 PM
Thanks Roger, (In these examples is v1 olpf not during daytime whereas version 2 is during daytime? Trying to get a handle on that window light in v2 vs. no window light in v1).)

The difference in low end info is immense. If you're shooting in dimly lit conditions, version 1 is for you. Remember to work around the orbs. The low end color on the "lowlight olpf" is far superior to the low end on the "highlight olpf." The highlight olpf version has a green tint in the low end where the lowlight olpf maintains a neutral color. As we all know, lowlight olpf is far superior for lowlight (just watch out for the artifacts), and the highlight olpf is king for daylight and bright settings. The in-between olpf is where it's at and most likely the sweet spot tradeoff between the two.

(right click, open in a new tab to view larger version)
http://matthayslett.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/OLPF1vs2.jpg

David Battistella
08-26-2014, 12:28 AM
Hi Matt,

I bet you could make a very acceptable image out of both of those r3d's without much effort. :)

Even with the moderate lowlight advantage, Whenever I ever think about old OLPF I just look at this test that Phil did. For me, and the situations I encounter, avoiding artifacts like this is far more important. But I appreciate that folks would rather stick with the older one for their style of shooting.

Battistella


http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/photography/redEpicDragon_Kozmo/bigs/phfx_redDragon_NewOLPF_FlareSun.jpg

Matt Ryan
08-26-2014, 12:42 AM
Hi Matt,

I bet you could make a very acceptable image out of both of those r3d's without much effort. :)

Even with the moderate lowlight advantage, Whenever I ever think about old OLPF I just look at this test that Phil did. For me, and the situations I encounter, avoiding artifacts like this is far more important. But I appreciate that folks would rather stick with the older one for their style of shooting.

Battistella


http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/photography/redEpicDragon_Kozmo/bigs/phfx_redDragon_NewOLPF_FlareSun.jpg

Thanks David ;)

I agree, the artifacts killed the lowlight olpf for me. But if it didn't have those artifacts, look out. We wouldn't even be having this discussion.

Even with the lowlight olpf (referred to as the old olpf or olpf 1) the comparisons between Dragon and MX showed Dragon had more DR on both ends. I think for the majority of users that was the best case scenario. Now with the highlight olpf (also referred to as the new olpf or olpf 2) we gain a couple stops over MX in the highlights but lose a bit to the MX on the low end. Not to mention the increase in the red noise. While the increase in highlights is desirable for some (due to the fact it's got a more film like rolloff) to be honest I didn't think the roloff on the old olpf was that much worse. It was better than MX so that was good.

Anyways, we all could go back and forth till the end of time. Shoot what you want based on what you are looking for. I believe that is the key. I personally look forward to the inbetween olpf so we get back some low end and keep some extra stuff up top without the artifacts of either new or old olpf (I consider the excessive red noise with olpf 2 to be an artifact). If it has no red noise, no sensor pattern flare, no orb flares, and retains some more low end info, we will be set.

David Battistella
08-26-2014, 01:08 AM
Matt,

I think you nailed it. Shoot what you like. Everyone gets to choose and that is a good thing. I like that RED is responding by giving people a choice.

Your tests show that you can get very decent results with both and that bit of green in the V2 could easily have been graded out. You posted exactly what I did when I saw those two R3D's I loaded them both up and went through the range, up to about 3200ISO or 6400ISO (I might never push anything that much) they were about the same. When you get into that territory with any system you need to be considering NR anyway. So for me there is no huge advantage to V1.

What I like most about V2 is that I do not have to be SO concerned about highlights (the way I was on MX) and that the clipping point is "further away" than it used to be. You can open up a fair bit before the highlights "bite you" and when they did on MX it hurt. Now that rolloff in the top is smoother and it seems I want that filmic feel in many more shooting situations.

Battistella

Jake Wilganowski
08-26-2014, 07:53 AM
Hi Matt,

I bet you could make a very acceptable image out of both of those r3d's without much effort. :)

Even with the moderate lowlight advantage, Whenever I ever think about old OLPF I just look at this test that Phil did. For me, and the situations I encounter, avoiding artifacts like this is far more important. But I appreciate that folks would rather stick with the older one for their style of shooting.

Battistella


http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/photography/redEpicDragon_Kozmo/bigs/phfx_redDragon_NewOLPF_FlareSun.jpg

While this is awful, I'm not really concerned about the pattern thing on V1, because from what I hear it only happens at high f-stops, which I never use. I think the orb issue would rear its face more often.

scott devitte
08-26-2014, 08:09 AM
I am buying two Dragons. Would it make sense to get an old and a new? And could someone clarify if these will be usable in the new changeable mount?

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 08:24 AM
Agreed, Jake, you can lose those dots easily by using the tools available properly, and not shooting at T16?
Fighting low light levels with OLPF2 after the sun's gone might not be so easy.

The conditions in the stress tests seen in this thread that make the the OLPF1 produce artifacts/issues are not back-against-the-wall conditions (e.g. using T16, which is not ideal for almost any lens anyway; or adding 9 stops of ND to effect vulnerable fabrics).
Phil, unless I'm mistaken, your ND in this test is non-IR. Why would you ever need to shoot like that if IR glass would help avoid the pollution issue?
However, quickly tripling light levels when there's not enough light on set, to make OLPF2's density not adversely effect the shadows in a shot, is not always possible or desirable.
How do you justify choosing an OLPF that produces an 320 ISO camera, when a sudden creative thought comes to shoot at 120fps, and you have to say "No- we can't do that"?

scott devitte
08-26-2014, 08:38 AM
Agreed, Jake, you can lose those dots easily by using the tools available properly, and not shooting at T16?
Fighting low light levels with OLPF2 after the sun's gone might not be so easy.

The conditions in the stress tests seen in this thread that make the the OLPF1 produce artifacts/issues are not back-against-the-wall conditions (e.g. using T16, which is not ideal for almost any lens anyway; or adding 9 stops of ND to effect vulnerable fabrics).
Phil, unless I'm mistaken, your ND in this test is non-IR. Why would you ever need to shoot like that if IR glass would help avoid the pollution issue?
However, quickly tripling light levels when there's not enough light on set, to make OLPF2's density not adversely effect the shadows in a shot, is not always possible or desirable.
How do you justify choosing an OLPF that produces an 320 ISO camera, when a sudden creative thought comes to shoot at 120fps, and you have to say "No- we can't do that"?

I am very interested in knowing too how much better off you would be with the old if you plan on doing a lot of 120fps

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 08:42 AM
A stop and a half better in the shadows, if you're up against the wall with light.

David Battistella
08-26-2014, 08:47 AM
Hey Mark,

I get what you are saying and your points are all valid. It's indeed a pretty lively discussion and has been for a while. The other side of this, of course, is when the producer (or someone eventually comes on here and says that the producer turned to them) and says, "the Alexa has better color, skin tone and more room in the highlights".

This is what came out of the "London tests" on the V1 OLPF.

So, the detractors would then be saying, "shit, we waited for a camera that does not compete with the Alexa on skin tone and in the highlights."

This discussion is a no win for RED. But, to their credit, they are developing a flexible solution in an effort to satisfy all their customers. There will also be those who say, "well, that is not good enough either because you (red) should build the OLPF that satisfies ever single possible situation. Of course that is what we all would like.

Making that happen maybe is not as simple as saying it.

As for getting after Phil (who has given an arm for the community). Maybe he shot that at T16 (which he exposed equally and fairly for both camera's) to show worst case scenario, highlight the old problem and show the improvement. I think that is fair.

Now, let me take your exact words to Phil and apply it to Roger's two R3D's posted here.

ORIGINAL "The conditions in the stress tests seen in this thread that make the the OLPF1 produce artifacts/issues are avoidable (e.g. using T16, which is not ideal for almost any lens anyway; or adding 9 stops of ND to effect vulnerable fabrics)."

SIMILAR "The conditions in the stress tests seen in this thread or Rogers "test" that make the OLPF2 produce artifacts/issues are avoidable (e.g. placing a camera on the floor of my office with no lighting, which is not ideal for almost any lens anyway; or shooting tests that aren't actually side by side)."

Anyway, you can see how this gets into semantics.

Bottom line is that people do get to choose their OLPF.

Battistella

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 08:48 AM
To put it another way, the problems that OLPF1 might produce are only occasional, avoidable, FIRST WORLD problems.

Jake Wilganowski
08-26-2014, 08:53 AM
I think I'm going with V1. But the more I think about this, I LOVE the switchable OLPF idea. It's decided.

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 09:01 AM
Hey Mark,
The other side of this, of course, is when the producer (or someone eventually comes on here and says that the producer turned to them) and says, "the Alexa has better color, skin tone and more room in the highlights".

This is what came out of the "London tests" on the V1 OLPF.


Can you point to the London test for me? I'd like to see it. I can't recall a big storm about the results.
The dragon was generally gaining momentum with a lot of praise before the issues of OLPF came out.

I've had real world shoots using Dragon with OLPF1 next to the Alexa, and found it pretty difficult to pick a difference.
I've never had a producer or anyone else complain about a problem induced by OLPF1, and it's the knly one that I've been shooting with, all year. However, Rogers's low light test shows results that might make one complain about OLPF2, for sure.

It's fine to talk about future solutions, but they are not here now. I'm talking about practical shooting today.

David Battistella
08-26-2014, 09:09 AM
http://blog.gunleik.com/2014/03/11/dragon-and-alexa-looking-at-resolution-part-1-preface/

http://www.cinematography.net/UWE/index.html

I don't recall a big storm about the results either, just that the Dragon did not match Alexa in the highlights.



Battistella

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 09:55 AM
No I'm definitely not saying that OLPF2 is unusable. For day exteriors it needs a little less wrangling to produce a great image. I'm saying that not having enough light when you really need it is a bigger drama than opening a lens a little to avoid dots around the sun. I haven't had highlight issues with OLPF1, as I'm happy creating a curve in camera that lifts shadows a little (noIse-free) which means that I can stop down a little.

David Battistella
08-26-2014, 10:04 AM
I was kinda happy to see those legacy MX things disappear with dragon v2. I can't speak for Phil but I doubt he'd be shooting much at t16 in bright sun.

Battistella

Blair S. Paulsen
08-26-2014, 10:38 AM
There are folks who really wanted clean 2000ISO imagery without an additional processing step and feel ripped off that V2 is noisier than V1 in low light. Fair enough. That said, let's not rewrite reality and ignore the reasons RED - and the majority of the user base - canned it for V2.

V1 had both the obvious red dot issue AND subtle magenta blooming around in frame light sources. Moreover, I had a few shots at wider apertures with diffuse red orbs that weren't nearly as obvious, but still made global (primary) grading problematic.

In a Bayer CFA based CMOS camera the optical path is intimately co-dependent with the decoding algorithm. RED has publicly stated that further development of their Dragon based systems will be V2 only (at least until there is a swappable OLPF system extant). My analytical left brain tells me that's the horse to bet on, as further optimization - based on my experience with RED cams and other similar tech - will yield benefits in performance (like DEB) over time that will ameliorate many of the current issues. My right brain just looks at the color rendition of V2 and it's game over.

I realize it's not viable for everyone, but with a noise reduction pass in finishing I would feel confident I could kill all but the most extreme noise issues. YMMV.

Cheers - #19

Roger Viloria
08-26-2014, 11:12 AM
Thanks Matt. These examples were taken in different days and time. Each OLPF version offers specific attributes that I wish to be combined into a single new OLPF V3, avoiding the swapping technique, specially in not optimal environmental situations.

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 11:23 AM
Although of course i'd love OLPf1 to have the benefits oh OLPF2, I'm interested in what's the best general purpose solution for shooting today. Not so much about future development priorities, future modular OLPFs, and relying on someone to do noise reduction in an online ( which won't get back shadows that are gone)...

OLPF1's "obvious red dot issue" is only an issue if you don't know what you're doing.
Driving a sports car really fast is only a problem if you're doing it despite the road conditions. Just because driving around everywhere at 140MPH will eventually lead to a crash doesn't mean that that the car is a lemon. It means that you need to know how to drive, and to use your head in the conditions.

Happy shooting, everyone.

David Mullen ASC
08-26-2014, 11:26 AM
To put it another way, the problems that OLPF1 might produce are only occasional, avoidable, FIRST WORLD problems.

One could make that argument about either OLPF...

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 11:30 AM
P.S. Blair, most of the user base did not "can OLPF1 for OLPF2". Most of the user base never recieved or used a Dragon with OLPF1.

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 11:37 AM
One could make that argument about either OLPF...

I'd just like to see some examples posted of actual shoots where OLPF2 really saved the day. I can think of a few that I've done where the extra speed of OLPF1 was really beneficial... I just don't lie awake at night worrying about red dots. Mild orbs have only enhanced the feeling of the sun's heat. No-one's ever raised an issue, or wasted money trying to grade them away.

David Mullen ASC
08-26-2014, 11:44 AM
You can't make the argument that the deficiencies of one OLPF can be avoided with a little effort but then say that the same argument can't be made for the other OLPF...

Thomas Koch
08-26-2014, 11:50 AM
Any chance we can get an OLPF that fixes the orb issue but doesn't lose 1.3 stops of light? I'm ok with the skin tones and color of the v1, and I absolutely NEED higher clean ISO for my shooting needs.

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 12:02 PM
You can't make the argument that the deficiencies of one OLPF can be avoided with a little effort but then say that the same argument can't be made for the other OLPF...

Sure i can. I'm saying that adding a lot of light to make up for OLP2's deficiencies might be a LOT of effort, or impossible in the situation, and relying on someone to add noise reduction in post after I've gone (noise reduction won't get back lost detail) is not a solution that I want to rely on.
I'm also saying that OLPF1's issues seem occur in fewer situations day to day, and are less of a deal breaker. Who needs to shoot regularly with 9 stops of non-IR ND on the lens, or at the sun with the iris jammed at f22?

Phil Holland
08-26-2014, 12:14 PM
Sure i can. I'm saying that adding a lot of light to make up for OLP2's deficiencies might be a LOT of effort, or impossible in the situation, and relying on someone to add noise reduction in post after I've gone (noise reduction won't get back lost detail) is not a solution that I want to rely on.
I'm also saying that OLPF1's issues seem occur in fewer situations day to day, and are less of a deal breaker. Who needs to shoot regularly with 9 stops of non-IR ND on the lens, or at the sun with the iris jammed at f22?

You can see the color enhancements without that 9 stops of ND. That indeed was just one of many, many stress tests. That one in particular is something that can be clearly seen in a web browser. For me the highlight roll-off is more appealing on the V2, but that's me. I do shoot things like flashlights in frame and fire elements, so the V2 makes a lot of sense for a guy like me.

The V1 wasn't a deal breaker for me at all. It's the right solution for many shooters.

No worries. There's options to have either installed in your camera. Red is working on the Modular OLPF device as well.

Blair S. Paulsen
08-26-2014, 12:19 PM
You're right Mark, most of the user base never shot with V1. I still stand by my assertion that V2 is an improvement, but point taken.

I like David's perspective on how each OLPF option has it's own "personality", each of which can be "managed" per circumstance. To me, the logical progression of this leads to the swappable OLPF program RED is exploring. In the meantime, I'm really loving the color purity of V2 and consider it the most critical attribute of the image. YMMV.

Cheers - #19

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 12:26 PM
I do shoot things like flashlights in frame and fire elements, so the V2 makes a lot of sense for a guy like me.




Phil, how many people make a living out of shooting fire elements?
... Also, If you're shooing a fire as an element, you don't need to overexpose, so artifacts should be pretty controlled, right?

Bob Gundu
08-26-2014, 12:37 PM
It's pretty clear that the OLPF is very subjective. RED chose the OLPF V2 as the standard because they felt colour rendition and Highlight rolloff was where the biggest improvements were needed. If you were content with the old one, well you have an option to get V1. For me personally, I will take the colour and highlight path hands down. No need to state one is better than the other, just different strokes for different folks.

Jake Wilganowski
08-26-2014, 12:42 PM
Yes the more and more I think about it swappable olpf's is a great idea. UNLESS WE CAN HAVE OUR CAKE AND EAT IT TOO! Maybe one day..

David Battistella
08-26-2014, 12:48 PM
Nobody has to "win" in this discussion.

There's two options now and there will be more in the future.

Its a good time to be a red owner, but when hasn't it been since 2007, :)

battistella

Gunleik Groven
08-26-2014, 12:54 PM
hahaha
in 2007.... :-)

Stacey Spears
08-26-2014, 01:11 PM
Thomas, and even Matt, I think the big unknown is how much of what filters out the orb is responsible for the loss in the low end.

Assuming there is a Dragon-X sensor in the future, hopefully this on going discussion leads to better color filters at the sensor level so that the OLPF does not have to filter red as much as it currently does.

have not seen a lot of posts on DEB lately, are people happy with it overall? I assume a lot of the initial feedback has gone into further refining it.

having had all three OLPFs, low light, highlight in backwards, and highlight, I am overall happy with the highlight OLPF for much of my work. With that said, I do hope we see a more balanced OLPF coming and that RED takes their time before it's released.

Jake Wilganowski
08-26-2014, 01:14 PM
Is DEB out? I thought I had the latest redcine but I don't see it

Bob Gundu
08-26-2014, 01:19 PM
Is DEB out? I thought I had the latest redcine but I don't see it

Beta version of Redcine.

David Battistella
08-26-2014, 01:28 PM
DEB is in the beta of Redcine and it's basically cleaning up any problem shots in a very effective way.

Looking at at the samples posted in the thread earlier with DEB on it pretty much evens out both OLPFs. To me there only a very slight edge to lowlight but were talking about images you'd probably not present on your demo reel.

Battistella

Matt Ryan
08-26-2014, 02:27 PM
have not seen a lot of posts on DEB lately, are people happy with it overall? I assume a lot of the initial feedback has gone into further refining it.


I caught quite a few errors and sent Graeme images as well as R3D's to illustrate the issue. Happy to report those bugs have been fixed and we should see an updated beta RedcineX soon.

Anyways, DEB will be solid soon so that is a viable option. Although it would be nice not to have to use it at all...

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 02:52 PM
Can someone show me a comparative example of how DEB might save Rogers's A/B shot posted above, keeping all the shadow detail?

Graeme Nattress
08-26-2014, 03:14 PM
Matt, that's why we put many eyes on it. The other testers found different artifacts throughout development, or supplied useful footage to help me refine it before anyone got to see it at all. I also had people at RED look for artifacts as part of the process, and they found a few too.

Graeme

Matt Ryan
08-26-2014, 03:19 PM
Matt, that's why we put many eyes on it. The other testers found different artifacts throughout development, or supplied useful footage to help me refine it before anyone got to see it at all. I also had people at RED look for artifacts as part of the process, and they found a few too.

Graeme

Good to hear Graeme!

Matt Ryan
08-26-2014, 03:19 PM
Can someone show me a comparative example of how DEB might save Rogers's A/B shot posted above, keeping all the shadow detail?

I used DEB in my samples, so you can see there's still a difference between v1 and v2... V2 would have had much more noise without DEB

Mark Pugh
08-26-2014, 03:35 PM
Which samples, Matt? Thanks...

Matt Ryan
08-26-2014, 03:46 PM
Which samples, Matt? Thanks...

The comparison I posted in this thread...

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?120784-OLPF-v1-and-v2&p=1408148&viewfull=1#post1408148

Matt Ryan
08-26-2014, 03:55 PM
Here's DEB on vs. off on the olpf 2 sample:

http://matthayslett.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/DEBonOFF.jpg

Stacey Spears
08-26-2014, 04:31 PM
Matt, glad to hear the problems you found have been addressed. The larger the audience, the more variety of issues that will be found. Given the turn around time on 3rd parties implementing SDK updates, DEB really needed lots of coverage before being incorporated.

Were the issues of the red blood vessels in the eye taken care of? Assuming that is what they were.

Graeme, thank you for continuing to refine everything.

Matt Ryan
08-26-2014, 06:07 PM
Matt, glad to hear the problems you found have been addressed. The larger the audience, the more variety of issues that will be found. Given the turn around time on 3rd parties implementing SDK updates, DEB really needed lots of coverage before being incorporated.

Were the issues of the red blood vessels in the eye taken care of? Assuming that is what they were.

Graeme, thank you for continuing to refine everything.

It was different issues from the blood vessels. The images of eyes I have don't show any issues with the updated DEB. But I don't have anything with really irritated or bright veins in the eyes to test out, just normal everyday eye veins and those are untouched by DEB now.

Stacey Spears
08-26-2014, 06:42 PM
Just find so someone in Washington or Denver to shoot, they are bound to have some red eyes.:)

Matt Ryan
08-26-2014, 07:38 PM
hahaha true! But I don't own a cam so I'd have to take a mental picture haha

David Battistella
08-27-2014, 01:45 AM
Sometimes I like to step back from pixel peeping and appreciate what I have. :)

Just for a bit of perspective. I was migrating some data yesterday and came across some night frames from the old (original RED ONE M sensor, pre MX)

12800 ISO has come a long way, no?

http://www.f8films.com/stills/toronto_night.jpg

Bohdan Klos
09-25-2014, 05:22 AM
There has been a few people saying the V1 is not available right now. This might be a sign a replacement is coming. I cant believe Red would manufacture more V1`s with the orb issues. Fingers crossed.

As myself and others speculated/hoped. The Orb issue was lessened in a new batch of V1 olpfs. Great news. Really.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?122074-First-Look-Interchangeable-OLPF-on-Dragon&p=1421461&viewfull=1#post1421461

Bob Gundu
09-25-2014, 05:56 AM
Sometimes I like to step back from pixel peeping and appreciate what I have. :)

Just for a bit of perspective. I was migrating some data yesterday and came across some night frames from the old (original RED ONE M sensor, pre MX)

12800 ISO has come a long way, no?

http://www.f8films.com/stills/toronto_night.jpg

Traffic in Toronto is a lot worse now! No progress there. LOL.

David Battistella
09-25-2014, 11:49 PM
Already resolved in new version of RCX.


battistella