PDA

View Full Version : Low Light Optimised OLPF thoughts



David Battistella
11-10-2014, 02:42 AM
Just have done a couple of shoots with it since it came back from London. Will post stuff later but one was commercial jewellery and the other was doc work.

Here is how I would describe the differences to my friends.

Low-Light Optimised
-EPIC MX on steroids.
-Still have to be a bit careful with the highlights (compared to STH not so much MX)
-dig what you want out of the darks, the stops are there
-very clean to 2000 ISO (any beyond if you dare)
-with decent base exposure can be pushed a fair bit
-sharp clean high rez look

Skin Tone Highlight
-Treat like your favourite film stock
-let those highlights bloom
-don't expect to push a lot in Lower light (to 1280 if you are under)
-Rate it lower
-Really pleasant on skin and the texture you love from film (but a lot less of it than film)

Phil has already done all the charts and stuff that support this. I'm just giving first impressions and how I would describe the differences.

Cheers,

Battistella

Adrian Weinbrecht
11-10-2014, 03:04 AM
Thanks David

So just to clarify for the LLO, is the highlight rolloff much better then MX?

Best

Adrian

David Battistella
11-10-2014, 03:14 AM
It holds highlights much better than MX. Like, there is more information in there and that is because it is a superior sensor.

With the LLO it feels more familiar to MX, with the STH it feels more familiar to film.

With the LLO I might employ some filtration (like a 1/8th divi or locon) to give some of that highlight halation, where I would not do that with the STH.

Battistella

Akin A
11-10-2014, 04:47 AM
Thanks for the input.
What does MX on steroids mean (I never used MX so I'm unfamiliar w/ its characteristics)?

Also, would you equate the noticeable difference in shadow improvement of LLO vs STH to the difference in noticeable highlight roll-off improvement of STH vs LLO or is the highlight difference subtle?

David Battistella
11-10-2014, 04:54 AM
Thanks for the questions Akin.


Thanks for the input.
What does MX on steroids mean (I never used MX so I'm unfamiliar w/ its characteristics)?

More similar to shooting with MX but does everything just better (whereas STH is quite different from MX in response)



Also, would you equate the noticeable difference in shadow improvement of LLO vs STH to the difference in noticeable highlight roll-off improvement of STH vs LLO or is the highlight difference subtle?

Yes. Shadow performance improved, lives up to it's name, Low Light Optimised.

Battistella

Akin A
11-10-2014, 05:11 AM
Yes. Shadow performance improved, lives up to it's name, Low Light Optimised.
Battistella
Maybe I asked my question backwards, I'll clarify... Is the highlight improvement as noticeable as the shadow improvement? The tests I've seen showed very noticeable noise differences in shadows but the highlight differences looked minor.

Marcos Montenegro
11-10-2014, 06:55 AM
Love the LLO (v2). Got my Dragon back (I had STH before) and wow, amazing how I missed those 2 stops! Skin is a lot better than I was expecting too.

David Battistella
11-10-2014, 07:25 AM
Maybe I asked my question backwards, I'll clarify... Is the highlight improvement as noticeable as the shadow improvement? The tests I've seen showed very noticeable noise differences in shadows but the highlight differences looked minor.

I'd say yes, because I feel you can open up and get more image data in the shadows (with a little more texture as well) and the "blowout or clipping point" is further up the scale. If you are looking for pure DR and colour fidelity then STH is the way to go, but if you want the image favoured toward the shadows (with less texture in there) then you go LLO. In my tests when downsizing to 2K the STH gives amazing results as much of the "texture/noise" falls off, but this gets even cleaner in the bottom stops with the LLO.

Battistella

Jeffrey Loewe
11-10-2014, 09:03 AM
So basically what you're saying is that the LLO is very very close to the MX in terms of how it handles hilights?

I opted for the LLO when sending my camera in due to alot of natural and low light situations I shoot in. Thankfully we can always switch OLPF's, but I loved the thought of being able to shoot to 2000 ISO and get usable footage. My concern was during the daylight. This thread is comforting me a bit more to be able to use the LLO even during the daylight! Thanks!

Björn Benckert
11-10-2014, 09:10 AM
So basically what you're saying is that the LLO is very very close to the MX in terms of how it handles hilights?

I opted for the LLO when sending my camera in due to alot of natural and low light situations I shoot in. Thankfully we can always switch OLPF's, but I loved the thought of being able to shoot to 2000 ISO and get usable footage. My concern was during the daylight. This thread is comforting me a bit more to be able to use the LLO even during the daylight! Thanks!

No it got more range than MX so you got better chance to keep the highlights without underexposing the blacks. So in daylight the lowlight OLPF works just as good as the skinetone, you just need to stop downor ND 1.3 more than you would do on your skintone olpf.

David Battistella
11-10-2014, 09:12 AM
So basically what you're saying is that the LLO is very very close to the MX in terms of how it handles hilights?


Nope. Not saying that at all. What I am saying is that the LLO is a much more familiar image. It's like a natural progression and a much better version than EPIC MX sensor. More everything though, colour depth, latitude, etc.

If I wanted the LLO to look more like the STH, then I would probably add filtration to give me the halation the STH naturally does.

The LLO clips way beyond where it would with MX and with the STH you get even more in the highlights than you would with LLO (which is to be expected) since those clean low end stops do come at the expense of the highlights a bit (which I can now say because I have seen and tested them both in my shooting style.


Battistella

Jeffrey Loewe
11-10-2014, 09:51 AM
Nope. Not saying that at all. What I am saying is that the LLO is a much more familiar image. It's like a natural progression and a much better version than EPIC MX sensor. More everything though, colour depth, latitude, etc.

If I wanted the LLO to look more like the STH, then I would probably add filtration to give me the halation the STH naturally does.

The LLO clips way beyond where it would with MX and with the STH you get even more in the highlights than you would with LLO (which is to be expected) since those clean low end stops do come at the expense of the highlights a bit (which I can now say because I have seen and tested them both in my shooting style.



Battistella
Gotcha! Thank you for the reply. Curious to get it back and do some tests.

Brandon J.F.
11-10-2014, 09:56 AM
My concern was during the daylight. This thread is comforting me a bit more to be able to use the LLO even during the daylight! Thanks!

The LLO OLPF works great in daylight. I shot some stuff at ISO250 (w/ out ND) and was really pleased with the result. Very clean. With Dragon, choosing an ISO (or ISO range) is a big part of creating the look you want. For narrative film stuff I like 800 to 2000. Maybe even higher in certain circumstances.

Jeffrey Loewe
11-10-2014, 10:05 AM
The LLO OLPF works great in daylight. I shot some stuff at ISO250 (w/ out ND) and was really pleased with the result. Very clean. With Dragon, choosing an ISO (or ISO range) is a big part of creating the look you want. For narrative film stuff I like 800 to 2000. Maybe even higher in certain circumstances.
Good to hear! Thanks!

Jason L
11-10-2014, 11:31 AM
Love the low light olpf on the dragon. It's exactly what Red was talking about a year ago. You can shoot at 2000 ISO with no problem and even bump it up much more. With the abilities of 6k, clean 2000 ISO, and a lot more, the Dragon is easily the top camera out there.

Robert Ruffo New
11-10-2014, 12:10 PM
The low light OLPF (old version) I tested was awesome except for the pink orb around in-frame light sources issue.

I have not tested the new version of the low light OLPF.

There seems to be no real stress tests of how New LL OLPF handles this pink soft orb issue.

I wish there were some clear info about this somewhere - not vague statements and very forgiving test shots with dim or very small lights.

If I had clear info I would use Dragon more often, and maybe upgrade our camera. Even if that info did not per say "sell" Dragon. You need to know limits in a dry technical manner. How many stops over before it appears?

if anyone has properly tested this with the aim of learning exact limits please post your results.

There are no New LL OLPFs that I know of in Montreal, or I would test myself.

if anyone has a new LL OLPF in Montreal please PM me.

Andy White
11-11-2014, 10:23 AM
Agree that an 'orb' test on the new LL (V2) OLPF would be a great idea - maybe Phil has the time to do a test?

Currently awaiting a client paying up an invoice - if this happens soon, that's my upgrade to Dragon sorted... and I have to say, if the orb's are less visible now, LLO is the way I'd like to go (with the STH purchased as a second option 'just in case').

Andrew Usher
11-11-2014, 10:26 AM
Im looking forward to being able to get my Dragon back in for the swappable option as i really want to get my paws on the LL OLPF.

Nick Morrison
11-11-2014, 10:37 AM
Agree that an 'orb' test on the new LL (V2) OLPF would be a great idea - maybe Phil has the time to do a test?

Currently awaiting a client paying up an invoice - if this happens soon, that's my upgrade to Dragon sorted... and I have to say, if the orb's are less visible now, LLO is the way I'd like to go (with the STH purchased as a second option 'just in case').

I thought Phil did these tests? And it showed that the orb flares were much, much more controlled. It looked a lot like a "clean" version of the original Low Light OLPF.

His tests start here I believe (http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?122074-First-Look-Interchangeable-OLPF-on-Dragon&p=1421461&viewfull=1#post1421461):

Looks like RED took the time to fine tune the LOW LIGHT OLPF, which is very, very promising. Having what appears to be a new and improved 2000ISO Dragon is welcome news!

David Battistella
11-11-2014, 10:38 AM
What kind of tests do people want?

What should the shot/lighting setup look like?

Battistella

Matt Ryan
11-11-2014, 11:39 AM
What kind of tests do people want?

What should the shot/lighting setup look like?

Battistella

Maybe talent center stage, with some fresnels pointing directly into camera from behind (exposed for talent letting lights go hot, music video style). Then with camera, pan left to right to see when and if the orbs show up and varying focal lengths from wide to closeup of talent.

These are situations where the orbs would definitely show up if an issue. Like these conditions:
http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/JUNK/lights_dinettes.jpg
http://www.ragingindifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/1484162_10153511088095276_1333543298_n-360x240.jpg
http://www.notempire.com/images/uploads/AndrewDrozPalermo03.jpg
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.homorazzi.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F10%2Fgirls-aloud-lights.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.homorazzi.com%2Farticle %2Fgirls-aloud-something-new-song-full-version-music-video-comeback-single-leaked%2F&h=350&w=500&tbnid=93RbuPnymY3NsM%3A&zoom=1&docid=kIxJwp-NljHR8M&ei=6VZiVL3HKsGjyATgvoHADg&tbm=isch&ved=0CGoQMyhiMGI4ZA&iact=rc&uact=3&dur=705&page=5&start=160&ndsp=41
http://colourchorus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Colour-Bomb-2.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_udmZYXRkGg4/TOUZKJLvZUI/AAAAAAAAAJI/EWNPW1y8dKM/s1600/Lady%2Bgaga.JPG
https://i1.creativecow.net/u/110344/picture-1.jpg

Phil Holland
11-11-2014, 12:23 PM
There seems to be no real stress tests of how New LL OLPF handles this pink soft orb issue.

I wish there were some clear info about this somewhere


Not to hijack David's thread, but for people asking for it here are two of the more useful posts with many images regrading the new Interchangeable OLPFs and the history of the OLPFs during Dragon'a release:



I've been asked to make a big summary post by a user with all the useful test images in there as the Interchangeable OLPF System is now making it's way out into cameras.


Color Consistency

The color difference between the Low Light Optimized OLPF and the Skin Tone - Highlight OLPF is fairly minimal:

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_daylightCompareISO800.jpg (http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_daylightCompareISO800.jpg )

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_ISO800_indoorKnickKnack_L LO.jpg (http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_ISO800_indoorKnickKnack_L LO.jpg)

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_ISO800_indoorKnickKnack_S TH.jpg (http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_ISO800_indoorKnickKnack_S TH.jpg)

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_ISO250_daylightChipSample s.jpg (http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_ISO250_daylightChipSample s.jpg)


OLPF Texture Comparison

Below is a sample video showing the texture comparison between both the STH and LLO OLPFs:

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_textureCompare.jpg
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAvr_ard1R4)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAvr_ard1R4


There are a few 100% crops from that video here:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?122074-First-Look-Interchangeable-OLPF-on-Dragon&p=1420118&viewfull=1#post1420118

And here:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?122074-First-Look-Interchangeable-OLPF-on-Dragon&p=1423024&viewfull=1#post1423024

As well as some of the "pretty shots" here:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?122074-First-Look-Interchangeable-OLPF-on-Dragon&p=1420342&viewfull=1#post1420342


Notes on Improvements and Artifacts

The general concept is that the texture/noise/grain is 1 to 1.3 stops cleaner on the Low Light Optimized OLPF versus the Skin Tone - Highlight OLPF. Meaning the general "energy" and characteristics of the noise is about 1 to 1.3 stops better. So essentially if you like the Skin Tone - Highlight OLPF at ISO 400, you'd likely feel the same way about the Low Light Optimized OLPF at ISO 800-1000.

Red's recommended "cinema ready" ISO range is ISO 250-2000. However, I've found under some circumstances that ISO 4000-5000 is rather usable in certain situations with the Low Light Optimized OLPF:

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_LLO_CMOStreakNoStreak.jpg
(http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_LLO_CMOStreakNoStreak.jpg )


A note on potential artifacts.

The LLO OLPF produces this Red Dot Grid at smaller apertures like T16, which is similar to what Mysterium-X does:

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_smallApertureDots_ISO1600_DCRG4 _IOLPF_LLOwithDeb.jpg (http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_smallApertureDots_ISO1600_DCRG4 _IOLPF_LLOwithDeb.jpg)

Where as the STH OLPF eliminates the undesirable qualities of the Red Dot Grid with it's own unique look:

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_smallApertureDots_ISO1600_DCRG4 _IOLPF_STHwithDeb.jpg (http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_smallApertureDots_ISO1600_DCRG4 _IOLPF_STHwithDeb.jpg)


Additionally and occasionally on super hot sources pointed into the lens you may get Highlight Orbs around the source, which is almost like an extreme lens flare when it happens:

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_highlightOrbGlow_IOLPF_ISO2000. jpg
(http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_highlightOrbGlow_IOLPF_ISO2000. jpg)

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_LLO_HeadlightOrbs.jpg
(http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_LLO_HeadlightOrbs.jpg)


OLPF Swap Process

A quick overview of the OLPF Swap Process, which are now apart of my Dragon Data Sheets:

http://artbyphil.com/phfx/red/dragon/images/phfx_redDragon_interchangeableOLPF.png (http://artbyphil.com/phfx/red/dragon/images/phfx_redDragon_interchangeableOLPF.png)

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_changingOLPFs.jpg (http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_changingOLPFs.jpg)

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_InterchangeableOLPF_menu.jpg (http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_InterchangeableOLPF_menu.jpg)


So my overall assessment here. If you are interested in the "highest quality image" out of Dragon and understand the texture that comes along with the ISO ratings of the Skin Tone - Highlight OLPF it produces the best image. The Low Light Optimized OLPF has pretty damn good color and still fairly nice highlight roll-off, but with the potential to produce certain artifacts under specific conditions. If you are familiar shooting with Mysterium-X you'll be familiar when those artifacts arise and also get the benefits of having a cleaner image across your ISO range.

Phil Holland
11-11-2014, 12:25 PM
And the small story of how we got to here:


Cheers and thanks Bjorn. And just to chime in as I've been following this discussion as well as having some similar conversations in the last few months with other shooters.

I've been exceptionally fortunate to see Dragon along it's way. Big thanks to Jarred and Mr. Probst for getting that real, real early look. I still think back to that first day out in the harsh sun pointing that prototype Dragon at a junkyard car with the sun glaring right off the windshield with a heavy shadow coming off to one side. I looked real closely at that image. That particular moment was where I saw that Dragon was different than Mysterium-X in the ways that I was hoping it was.

Then along the way seeing it a couple of times leading up to being able to shoot "It's Just Paint" things became a bit clearer. That shoot I did lots of things that weren't ideal and was trying to hit Dragon with some skin, texture, shadow, clipping, etc.... This was back during the V1 OLPF. The images I got out of it were gorgeous.

http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/cinematography/2013_redDragon_ItsJustPaint_CineGrade_Stills/bigs/phfx_ijp_cineMaster_UHD4K_4125.jpg
- click for UHD 4K resolution (http://www.artbyphil.com/cgi-bin/phfxview.cgi?image=cinematography/2013_redDragon_ItsJustPaint_CineGrade_Stills/4Ks/phfx_ijp_cineMaster_UHD4K_4125.jpg)

That V1 OLPF is what many of the early Dragon shooters had and it was giving us the cleaner higher ISO performance we were impressed by. Breaking into some uncharted territory if you remember some of the other guys test footage. ISO 3200 and even 4000 were very reasonable, heck further too. The color was there, the dynamic range was a pretty tremendous, the highlight roll-off was smooth, and of course the resolution and sensor size was there for those who wanted to explore 6K. The added benefit of not needed additional IR cutting when using Neutral Density Filters was also tremendous from a practical shooting perspective.

However, some folks wanted a bit more in terms of wrangling some of the optical artifacts that the V1 OLPF produced, which were/are some similar artifacts that many of us experienced Mysterium-X shooters were also shooting around.

The V2 OLPF, which is also what we now call the Skin Tone - Highlight OLPF became the gold standard as it produced the "highest quality image" out of Dragon. However, the greater protection against those artifacts using either coatings or layers chewed up some of that amazing low light performance we were getting.

However, the Skin Tone - Highlight OLPF for those who understand it's strengths produces some of the best (if not the best) color I've seen out of a digital cinema camera:

http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/cinematography/2014_BeyondUHDRedDragonWorkshop/bigs/phfx_SK_UHDRDW_SKGrabs_0013.jpg

http://www.artbyphil.com/phfx/photography/redEpicDragon_Kozmo/bigs/phfx_redEpicDragon_gnomonSummer_sej03.jpg


Having the Skin Tone - Highlight OLPF was "enough" for some, but not for all. Some yearned for what "was" with the V1 OLPF. And I personally think Red came through in a unique way with the Interchangeable OLPF concept. And it was a bit surprising to see that the V1 graduated into a very slightly improved Low Light Optimzed OLPF Filter. That nets us about 1 to 1.3 stops "cleaner" texture with a hair more highlight detail retention when compared to the Skin Tone - Highlight OLPF.

The good news is there's no really big visual color difference between both of those OLPFs. Meaning the calibration/profile for both of them is fairly matched. So we're still getting that pretty damn good color with very good skin tones, which is to me one of the best things about Dragon:

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_daylightKinoCompareISO800 .jpg

http://www.artbyphil.com/temp/reduser/phfx_redEpicDragon_IOLPF_daylightCompareISO800.jpg


The good news for Mysterium-X shooters is that MX rocks and has/will make some tremendous images for years to come. However, I've shot my share of footage on Scarlet and Epic Mysterium-X. I know personally what I was looking for in terms of getting "more" out of the overall image quality. Dragon has that. The resolution/format relevance is pretty crucial for some using Super 35mm lenses, where 5K lands that is. The Dynamic Range and Highlight Roll-Off really impressed the hell out of me. But for day to day shooting it's the color and IR performance that really push Dragon into the realm of something I prefer. I also do like the size of 6K and using that as a capture format. Big fan of larger formats in general. Having the option to go between those formats in one camera is wonderful to me.

From my perspective the color, dynamic range, and IR Cut performance was worth the upgrade. For me it's a different medium in that way and it's allowing me to create images I couldn't capture with Mysterium-X. That's not going to be the answer for everybody however. And that's totally okay.

Outside of all this craziness and more from an image maker's perspective I want tools that can help me capture beautiful and vibrant images. I'm getting that with Dragon. I'm certainly excited for what the next few years may have to offer and I can think of a couple handfuls of things that can improve/advance the DSMC system further. But right now Dragon technology is state of the art and it's performing extremely well in the categories that I value the most.

I recommend all who grab the new Interchangeable OLPFs to test them out. I've now swapped them over 50 times, which is nuts but that's the nature of stress testing. David's findings are pretty much exactly in line with what I've found. I'm outside of the honeymoon stage of testing the hell out of them and back to the happy shooting marriage stage over here :)

Nick Morrison
11-11-2014, 12:32 PM
Thanks Phil as always!!

best

Jim Hoffman
11-11-2014, 12:35 PM
I guess the good news is swapping them out isn't a killer in terms of cost. I am getting ready to send in for an upgrade before the price increase and am going to try the low light. I think that one of the things that catches my eye in Phil's test is the way the noise looks in the shadows - even with bad vimeo compression the Low light seems to hold a bit better at high ISO. It seems to pull a bit greener but that seems easily graded out. The orb issue os my only concern but we can always swap if we need to. I'd like that extra sensitivity push.

Love to see whatever tests anyone is willing to shoot.

Nick Morrison
11-11-2014, 12:46 PM
Swappable OLPF's oozes flexibility, and has the potential to be a breakthrough moment for RED. It's essentially like getting multiple cameras for price of one:

Want an OLPF with superb colors and ideal for shooting outdoors (rated 320)? Skintone is AWESOME.

Need an OLPF with more depth in shadows for lowlight (Rated 800-2000)? Lowlight is AWESOME.


And to think...there are MORE OLPF's ON THE WAY! The possibilities are truly inspiring...


As a side note - I don't think the 320 ISO of the SKINTONE OLPF gets enough kudos for how it simplifies a lot of shooting outdoors.

Consider - most cameras are trending towards LOWLIGHT. Meaning their "native ISO" is inching ever higher towards 800 to 1280. For bright shots outdoors, the ND requirements are starting to get more and more complicated as these sensitivities are pushed.

Having a camera system that can easily jump between 320 ISO and 800/2000 is clearly a huge boon for production.

Much like 4K and RAW workflow have become industry standard 7 years after the RED ONE came out, I can see OLPF swapping becoming "standard" in several years as well.

OLPF swaps appear to exist with Sony cameras now too (http://www.dvinfo.net/article/acquisition/sony-f5-f55-optical-low-pass-filters.html), but that seems more of a "minor" adjustment to the image (ie sharpness at 2K vs 4K) - not a sizable leap in ISO and sensitivity (ie a brand new camera).

I have a feeling many of us may look back at this OLPF SWAP as a watershed moment in RED's development, and possibly the industry's too.

Andy White
11-11-2014, 01:16 PM
Thanks for the links Phil - and pointing out some info Nick. I was in a hole for most of September and Oct doing a CGI project (that ended up in a 3 week crunch with literally 48 hours on and 4/5 hour off in the last week), so I'd missed a lot of this info.

Maybe a sticky is called for to make it easier to find? The results look great and push me towards Low light (and skintone as a second option). The orbs were a big issue in quite a few things I'd seen, but I have to say, after watching the Knick recently, the show looked great and the orbs were really minimal, so they can be controlled.

I presume there's been a bit of Red tinkering on the LLO OLPF that's part of the interchangeable system, so things are certainly progressing :)

Jason L
11-11-2014, 01:18 PM
Much like 4K and RAW workflow have become industry standard 7 years after the RED ONE came out, I can see OLPF swapping becoming "standard" in several years as well.


This is interesting. If olpf swapping can be integreated into cameras, where it can be changed with the switch of a button, like switching the ND on an ENG camera.

David Battistella
11-11-2014, 01:33 PM
Thanks for posting in here phil. It's a great help and your work gives a ton of examples and context.

Battistella

Jake Wilganowski
11-11-2014, 01:47 PM
This is interesting. If olpf swapping can be integreated into cameras, where it can be changed with the switch of a button, like switching the ND on an ENG camera.

LOVE THIS IDEA

Andrey Nikolaev
11-11-2014, 01:49 PM
Does the LLO OLPF have this issue:
http://i.imgur.com/42azk4S.jpg

Bob Gundu
11-11-2014, 02:39 PM
Thats not an OLPF issue. It's a sensor one.

Nick Morrison
11-11-2014, 05:22 PM
This is interesting. If olpf swapping can be integreated into cameras, where it can be changed with the switch of a button, like switching the ND on an ENG camera.

Jason I think you envisioning a very likely future yes. This is one of MANY reasons I find the swappable OLPF system so interesting. In a couple of years, we may all be owning "multiple" cameras for the price of one. And camera manufactures may soon become judged not just on their sensors - but also the quality and range of their OLPFS (much like DSLR's are judged on their sensors, and lens availability...ie Nikon glass vs Canon glass, etc).

Jeffrey Loewe
11-11-2014, 09:24 PM
What kind of tests do people want?

What should the shot/lighting setup look like?

Battistella
I'll have the LLO OLPF in my camera when comes back at weeks end. I'll try to get on a mountain to shoot on the snow with it during a sunny day ASAP!

Daniel Kelly Brown
11-11-2014, 09:31 PM
Do the OLPF filters work with the motion mount?

Andrey Nikolaev
11-12-2014, 02:01 AM
Thats not an OLPF issue. It's a sensor one.
I experienced this issue on 3 different Dragons, does it mean all of them have defective sensors? Is it a known issue?

David Battistella
11-12-2014, 02:05 AM
I experienced this issue on 3 different Dragons, does it mean all of them have defective sensors? Is it a known issue?


Has been discussed here.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?119944-Horrible-magenta-flare-caused-by-highlights

Battistella

Mark Toia
11-12-2014, 02:14 AM
I'm in two minds about both OLPF's...

The Low Light I personally prefer only because it gives me what I need in most conditions... dark, light etc...

The high light OLPF is great I consider this a OLPF if I wanted to get a bit more artistic with fashion, accurate colour, beauty etc....

It is a bummer that the High light OLPF can't be pushed past 2000 iso, because that would be my ultimate setup if it could.

Im sure RED would if they could... so it must mean they are at the limit of Dragons sensor technology. So I'm sure a better sensor wont be to far away.

But till then... Im more than happy with having the choice of both in my kit.

David Battistella
11-12-2014, 03:19 AM
I like that there are options and those options let you tailor a look. That's taking things one step beyond "normal" filtration.

battistelka

Nick Morrison
11-12-2014, 09:11 AM
I'm in two minds about both OLPF's...

The Low Light I personally prefer only because it gives me what I need in most conditions... dark, light etc...

The high light OLPF is great I consider this a OLPF if I wanted to get a bit more artistic with fashion, accurate colour, beauty etc....

It is a bummer that the High light OLPF can't be pushed past 2000 iso, because that would be my ultimate setup if it could.

Im sure RED would if they could... so it must mean they are at the limit of Dragons sensor technology. So I'm sure a better sensor wont be to far away.

But till then... Im more than happy with having the choice of both in my kit.

Mark I believe RED are in development of a THIRD OLPF, which way well end up giving you the performance you seek...(ie an OLPF that splits the diff btw Lowlight and Skintone)...

Jan Reiff
11-12-2014, 02:45 PM
got my 2nd Dragon today, this 2nd is with Low Light OLPF ...

here are some dirty fast tests in ultra low light, i just throw it in

http://we.tl/yf8smNQnac

my conclusion: especially when you see it in motion, underexposed footage looks actually cleaner with the low light OLPF.

it´s a good back up for some extreme situations, saying that, i had never a problem in controlled light with the "standard" OLPF but if there will be some shots when a scene needs higher ISO (higher framerates for example) it´s nice to have this in the back ...

i will keep one Dragon with the Standard and one with the low light OLPF, think this is a perfect package for all what will come ...

Robert Ruffo New
11-12-2014, 03:43 PM
Does the LLO OLPF have this issue:
http://i.imgur.com/42azk4S.jpg

Unfortunately all Dragon variants have this problem, MX Red products do not. There is hope this can be fixed via firmware or SDK.

Robert Ruffo New
11-12-2014, 03:45 PM
Maybe talent center stage, with some fresnels pointing directly into camera from behind (exposed for talent letting lights go hot, music video style). Then with camera, pan left to right to see when and if the orbs show up and varying focal lengths from wide to closeup of talent.

These are situations where the orbs would definitely show up if an issue. Like these conditions:
http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/JUNK/lights_dinettes.jpg
http://www.ragingindifference.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/1484162_10153511088095276_1333543298_n-360x240.jpg
http://www.notempire.com/images/uploads/AndrewDrozPalermo03.jpg
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.homorazzi.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F10%2Fgirls-aloud-lights.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.homorazzi.com%2Farticle %2Fgirls-aloud-something-new-song-full-version-music-video-comeback-single-leaked%2F&h=350&w=500&tbnid=93RbuPnymY3NsM%3A&zoom=1&docid=kIxJwp-NljHR8M&ei=6VZiVL3HKsGjyATgvoHADg&tbm=isch&ved=0CGoQMyhiMGI4ZA&iact=rc&uact=3&dur=705&page=5&start=160&ndsp=41
http://colourchorus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Colour-Bomb-2.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_udmZYXRkGg4/TOUZKJLvZUI/AAAAAAAAAJI/EWNPW1y8dKM/s1600/Lady%2Bgaga.JPG
https://i1.creativecow.net/u/110344/picture-1.jpg

yes please - this is exactly what I would want to see.

Aria Khosravi
11-14-2014, 07:45 PM
Does the LLO OLPF have this issue:
http://i.imgur.com/42azk4S.jpg

As others have said, it's a sensor issue and is going to be there. However, after my first day with the Low Light Optimized OLPF, I think it's safe to say that the color of the streaks is more neutral as opposed to the pink/magenta streaks you get with the STH OLPF.

For what it's worth, I know for a fact that the MX sensor had the CMOS streaking problem too. Maybe it wasn't quite as bad, but the first time I set up my Scarlet in 2012, it was the very first thing I noticed, pointed against some windows with venetian blinds.

All CMOS cameras exhibit the artifact to some degree. I have a Sony A7 I use for stills and it has this artifact much worse than the Dragon does. Haven't tested with the higher end Sony cinema cameras but it's possible that they exhibit it too.

Thomas Koch
11-15-2014, 09:59 AM
I wish I could give my thoughts, but they put in the wrong OLFP when they did the upgrade. Now there is no ETA on when I can get one I requested shipped. :(

EDIT: I requested LLO OLPF.

Andy White
11-15-2014, 10:08 AM
Wrong sensor or wrong OLPF - wrong sensor would be a worrying occurrence!

Thomas Koch
11-15-2014, 10:27 AM
Wrong sensor or wrong OLPF - wrong sensor would be a worrying occurrence!

Unless they wanted to give me a new super secret sensor!

Nikhil Kamkolkar
11-22-2014, 12:08 PM
I wish I could give my thoughts, but they put in the wrong OLFP when they did the upgrade. Now there is no ETA on when I can get one I requested shipped. :(

EDIT: I requested LLO OLPF.

How did you figure out you got the wrong one? Is there some visual indication or something in the camera menus you looked at?

David Battistella
11-22-2014, 02:23 PM
The OLPF have the words written on them

LOW LIGHT OPTIMISED or

SKINTONE HIGHLIGHT

you just have to look into the sensor area and it in written on the interchangeable OLPF itself.


battistella