PDA

View Full Version : RED Dragon vs. 65mm film...



Pages : [1] 2

Jannard
12-04-2012, 12:25 AM
OK. This is the final frontier.

The RED Dragon sensor needs to be directly compared to 65mm film.

The Dragon has more resolution than 65mm film when scanned at 4K.

The Dragon has more dynamic range than film... by a lot. 65mm film has about 14.5 stops. The Dragon has an easy 16 stops... without sweating.

The EPIC Dragon will shoot nearly 100fps. 65mm film cameras... not so much.

Cost to shoot the RED Dragon vs. 65mm film... ridiculously not close.

Dragon should never be compared to 35mm film. It should only be spoken in reference to 65mm film from here on out.

So you own an EPIC? You upgrade.

Have a nice day....

Jim

Jaume Jardí
12-04-2012, 12:27 AM
Yeaaaaaahhhh!!!!!

Bob Gundu
12-04-2012, 12:27 AM
oh oh... what about Scarlet?

"So you own an EPIC? You upgrade."

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 12:30 AM
Been running some tests lately, Jim?
Sounds like you're happy with what you see!

nJoy!

Adam Johnson
12-04-2012, 12:33 AM
Thats what I'm wondering too :(


oh oh... what about Scarlet?

"So you own an EPIC? You upgrade."

Phil Holland
12-04-2012, 12:33 AM
I really can't wait to do the standard "lad girl" and resolution tests with Dragon to demo for some film folks.

Erwin van Dijck
12-04-2012, 12:33 AM
oh oh... what about Scarlet?


Probably not for the Scarlet if you take Jim's post literally. Only time will tell, be patient, perhaps there is something for Scarlet owners but I haven't read much on that so far.

And if not, this will be the downside of choosing a 'cheaper' camera. Bad luck on the upgrade front but the Scarlet still shoots beautiful images!

Matt Ryan
12-04-2012, 12:34 AM
Ready for the sample screen grabs

Joseph Coleman
12-04-2012, 12:35 AM
I'm salivating.

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 12:37 AM
Ready for the sample screen grabs

Guess we're gettin' there

No more 3k for 3k. 6k for 6k sounds like fun, though...

Will be cool to see images now...

Perry Ho
12-04-2012, 12:40 AM
What another amazing news JiM! When can we just up to 70mm. Hehe...

KETCH ROSSi
12-04-2012, 12:46 AM
He he, I never tough of Dragon, as a 35mm alike, but more like a 35mm Killer, and a 65mm / 70mm IMAX comparable with simply a WORLD of advantages... ;)

We were just discussing this for an upcoming project, besides the simple fact of not EVER been allowed to record AUDIO on set when shooting IMAX cameras do to the absurd NOISE their cameras make and after getting past the absurd size and weight of the camera, there still remain so many other factor against 65mm Film Cameras, that it is simply no longer a choice of shooting Film, I choose Dragon...


So while we are now having crazy fun shooting Mr. Monochrome, M8 ready for an other trip to Cali at a moment notice Jim... ;)

Roberto Lequeux
12-04-2012, 12:49 AM
OK. This is the final frontier.

The RED Dragon sensor needs to be directly compared to 65mm film.

The Dragon has more resolution than 65mm film when scanned at 4K.

The Dragon has more dynamic range than film... by a lot. 65mm film has about 14.5 stops. The Dragon has an easy 16 stops... without sweating.

The EPIC Dragon will shoot nearly 100fps. 65mm film cameras... not so much.

Cost to shoot the RED Dragon vs. 65mm film... ridiculously not close.

Dragon should never be compared to 35mm film. It should only be spoken in reference to 65mm film from here on out.

So you own an EPIC? You upgrade.

Have a nice day....

Jim

Thank you Jim, for allowing me to find out how a teenage girl must feel while screaming front row at a Justin Bieber concert. :)

...16 stops.

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 12:53 AM
Thank you Jim, allowing me to find how a teenage girl feels while screaming front row at a Justin Bieber concert. :)

...16 stops.

Remember when they demoed HDRx?

Luke Neumann
12-04-2012, 12:56 AM
Thanks. That was my last pair of clean drawers.

Bob Gundu
12-04-2012, 12:56 AM
The fire truck in vegas shot?


Remember when they demoed HDRx?

Tim Whitcomb
12-04-2012, 01:00 AM
What Lenses currently available cover Dragon?

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 01:03 AM
The fire truck in vegas shot?

I was thinking more on the studio thing shooting charts with graeme, and veryfied by cioni.

Guess Graeme has been up to some sensor profiling lately...

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 01:04 AM
What Lenses currently available cover Dragon?


Amything from 35mm and upwards? :-)

Jannard
12-04-2012, 01:04 AM
Every lens works with Dragon. You just might have to select a slightly smaller resolution if you have a small image circle lens.

Jim


What Lenses currently available cover Dragon?

Roberto Lequeux
12-04-2012, 01:10 AM
Your lens works with Dragon. The question is how much of Dragon can your lens handle.

Gunleik, I do. The RED gang with eyes wide open looking at the chart, Cioni's confirmation. The firetruck followed shortly after.

But I bet I will remember all my life where I was standing tonight when I heard it was official.

RED has made the first sensor that beats film in every possible measurable way.

BRANDON JAMESON
12-04-2012, 01:11 AM
oh HELLZ, yeah!

Filip Orlandic
12-04-2012, 01:13 AM
Rentals should start investing in Leica summilux-c lenses. EPIC Dragon will be the most sophisticated camera.

Liam Hall
12-04-2012, 01:14 AM
Part of the look of 65mm is created by the format size. How does dragon shape up in that regard?

Sebastian Wiegärtner
12-04-2012, 01:16 AM
Every lens works with Dragon. You just might have to select a slightly smaller resolution if you have a small image circle lens.

Jim

does it mean 6K will be 35mm full frame, like we have w/ the d800 or 5d mark 3? that would be awesome!

6K = 35mm full frame
5K = APS-H
4K = super 35mm

Daniel Murphy
12-04-2012, 01:16 AM
Jim

Do you see physical upgrade process on EPIC as easy or difficult? Can we assume more than just a sensor swap is at hand?

Joseph Coleman
12-04-2012, 01:18 AM
he has already said that they are going to have to replace some internal boards

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 01:20 AM
Jarred has allready confirmed that some ASICS has to be swapped.

I still think we'll see two "dragons" the upgraded 16:9 dragon and a new superdragon with 4:3 sensor.

None will be stills FF... If they don't make the superdragon an 8k just for the kicks of it...

Peter Plevritis
12-04-2012, 01:21 AM
16 stops!

Can the Scarlets have the throwaways? You know the ones with 13.5 stops.

Brian Boyer
12-04-2012, 01:21 AM
The Dragon has more dynamic range than film... by a lot. 65mm film has about 14.5 stops. The Dragon has an easy 16 stops... without sweating.

This part makes me smile the most.

Harcharan Singh
12-04-2012, 01:22 AM
Hi,
This is big..so when is the big day...our M is ready to go under the knife.....

Thanks again.

Harcharan

Bob Gundu
12-04-2012, 01:23 AM
My guess is NAB.



Hi,
This is big..so when is the big day...our M is ready to go under the knife.....

Thanks again.

Harcharan

Petri Teittinen
12-04-2012, 01:26 AM
Money --> mouth. Pictures, please.

Justen Nguyen
12-04-2012, 01:32 AM
The future is now. Red will deliver. This is a game changer, yet again.

C.H.Haskell
12-04-2012, 01:34 AM
Jim I already compare to 65mm and IMax...now what will I compare to? ;)
My EPIC has been flagged for upgrade and I am standing by and ready...whats the new target release?

Martin Weiss
12-04-2012, 02:37 AM
Time for Deanan to fire up Photoshop for an update to this post on comparing the Epic to an Alexa:

http://reduser.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=10254&d=1292576289

RivaiC
12-04-2012, 02:42 AM
Jim. Can you clarify further about Dragon vs 65mm. As much as the resolution, but i believe FOV will be the one that makes the difference. Does the FOV same between Dragon and 65mm ?

Thanks
Rivai

Asif Limbada
12-04-2012, 02:47 AM
Waiting for the Dragon...

Marc Wielage
12-04-2012, 03:10 AM
I'll really believe the Dragon sensor can match the look of 65mm film when filmmakers like Chris Nolan, J.J. Abrams, and Paul Thomas Anderson use it. One great thing I can say about the Epic: as mechanically noisy as it is, it's not nearly as noisy as a fully-loaded 65mm film camera, which sounds like a pile-driver by comparison. All these filmmakers have admitted they couldn't use 65mm for intimate dialogue scenes in interiors, because the cameras were so noisy. That's not a problem that can be easily solved.

Rohan B
12-04-2012, 03:53 AM
OK. This is the final frontier.

The RED Dragon sensor needs to be directly compared to 65mm film.

The Dragon has more resolution than 65mm film when scanned at 4K.

The Dragon has more dynamic range than film... by a lot. 65mm film has about 14.5 stops. The Dragon has an easy 16 stops... without sweating.

The EPIC Dragon will shoot nearly 100fps. 65mm film cameras... not so much.

Cost to shoot the RED Dragon vs. 65mm film... ridiculously not close.

Dragon should never be compared to 35mm film. It should only be spoken in reference to 65mm film from here on out.

So you own an EPIC? You upgrade.

Have a nice day....

Jim

What is the measurable resolution of Dragon is like? over 5k when shooting 6k i guess?????????

Vadim Bobkovsky
12-04-2012, 03:57 AM
Well I guess if Red guys can cram so much latitude, resolution, sensitivity and better S/N ratio into S35 kind of sensor, it may be relatively easier to make cine full-frame, still 35mm full-frame / vistavision, full frame 70mm and dare I say 15 perf/70mm-sized Dragon (or should I call it Monstro) sensors after that. I know I'm dreaming right now, but if the DR is there already... just give a somewhat bigger (than the current Epic) 15/70 Dragon body to say Wally Pfister and ask him to try it and shoot something with it just for the sake of fun. Then you can place it side by side with scanned 15/70 IMAX footage and start the real discussion :). Oh, well I guess time will tell, but I'm all for bigger-sized sensors, I don't mind renting very certain glass for it, at all. I completely understand it's not the high priority right now.

KETCH ROSSi
12-04-2012, 04:13 AM
Well I guess if Red guys can cram so much latitude, resolution, sensitivity and better S/N ratio into S35 kind of sensor, it may be relatively easier to make cine full-frame, still 35mm full-frame / vistavision, full frame 70mm and dare I say 15 perf/70mm-sized Dragon (or should I call it Monstro) sensors after that. I know I'm dreaming right now, but if the DR is there already... just give a somewhat bigger (than the current Epic) 15/70 Dragon body to say Wally Pfister and ask him to try it and shoot something with it just for the sake of fun. Then you can place it side by side with scanned 15/70 IMAX footage and start the real discussion :). Oh, well I guess time will tell, but I'm all for bigger-sized sensors, I don't mind renting very certain glass for it, at all. I completely understand it's not the high priority right now.


Not dreaming at all, I actually have been thinking the same thing, were if this is what RED can do on a 35mm sensor, what will it become of the EPIC 645???

Most likely a Medium Format sensor that will be so far superior to 70mm IMAX that we'll blow our minds, and for me that will be my last camera, meeting all expectations for Large Print Photography and Cinema alike... Not that I am not happy now, or that Dragon will not be enough, just that having tasted 80MP MF sensors, I at times miss them, and with EPIC 645, I will no longer... ;)

Per von Koch
12-04-2012, 04:33 AM
Fantstic! Does it still have ISO2000 as a sweet spot?

Gabriele Turchi
12-04-2012, 05:56 AM
OK. This is the final frontier.

The RED Dragon sensor needs to be directly compared to 65mm film.

The Dragon has more resolution than 65mm film when scanned at 4K.

Jim

When you guy post the first images please posts multiples R3D shots , not just stills ... or edited compressed videos ..

thanks

g

craigjkharris
12-04-2012, 06:25 AM
RED and team...
You are great!

Martin Schneider
12-04-2012, 06:52 AM
The EPIC Dragon will shoot nearly 100fps. 65mm film cameras... not so much.




Arriflex 765 does.

Jason George
12-04-2012, 08:10 AM
Sounds great. When do we upgrade?

Michael AvMen
12-04-2012, 08:28 AM
Fantastic, But will it have low noise ISO?, like ISO 20,000 for Example.

Jeff Kilgroe
12-04-2012, 08:29 AM
Arriflex 765 does.

Sure, but lets see if you can name one advantage to actually shooting that 765... I can only think of one advantage myself and that is the film size is larger and you can gain some additional optical effects afforded by the larger imager and appropriate lenses to cover. Wider FOV's from comparatively longer focal lengths. If RED still comes through with their EPIC-645 system (and I sure hope they do), then that whole advantage goes right out the window. 645 format would put RED within about 10% of of the imager size of 15/70 IMAX. And I hope they do it with the same pixel density of Dragon, so we would probably be staring at roughly 11~12K frame sizes. ;)

Body to body, EPIC vs. 765 is like comparing a lunchbox to a boat anchor.

Sergio Perez
12-04-2012, 08:30 AM
The Dragon... Empty your mind ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ijCSu87I9k

Ryan Farnes
12-04-2012, 08:34 AM
Would have been great to have this for shooting the Hobbit. Then you could have named one of the EPICs "Smaug."

Heh. For pickups maybe?

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 08:35 AM
http://bit.ly/Xmur3Z

http://www.arri.com/camera/film_cameras/65_mm_film/arriflex_765.html

"there simply is no better image acquisition tool, especially for 4k workflows."

Martin Schneider
12-04-2012, 08:42 AM
...the film size is larger and you can gain some additional optical effects afforded by the larger imager and appropriate lenses to cover. Wider FOV's from comparatively longer focal lengths.


There you have it.



If RED still comes through with their EPIC-645 system (and I sure hope they do), then that whole advantage goes right out the window.


Hmm, will the Dragon we're talking about here be 645 Format?



Body to body, EPIC vs. 765 is like comparing a lunchbox to a boat anchor.


That's of course true :-)

mikeburton
12-04-2012, 08:45 AM
Is there any color science improvements that come with Dragon? Will their be a new Gamma / Color space when Dragon gets released?

Paul Ellington
12-04-2012, 08:51 AM
From the bottom of my heart -- thank you for everything Jim & Jarred and the strong women behind both of you. Plus the bomb squad rocks -- especially Whitney Krapes ... Do whatever it takes to keep her please.

Brent, Graeme, Kris, and anyone else I forgot you rock too \m/ !

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 08:55 AM
Is there any color science improvements that come with Dragon? Will their be a new Gamma / Color space when Dragon gets released?

I guess "yes and no"

As the sensors are different, the matrix to linearise the raw aquisition will be different, as will color/lightresponse.

But,
After that equalizing step, there is not neccesarily a "new" colorscience...

But if the new ASICS mean true 16 bit aquisition (which would, as far as I have understood how things work - imply a + 16 bit AD) to a full 16-bit linear float or non-float signal, my guess is that the new dragons will feel as epic an upgrade in post as Epic did over R1MX.


And somehow, based on recent developments @ Sony and Aaton and Canon, I guess that is about where they're heading. (This is just wild speculations, mind you!)

As Graeme has pointed out a number of times that Sony with the F65 has gone 16-bit float on the post ad signal, with 12 bits for latitude and 4 for float maths overhead, and kinda has not spoken too generously about that solution, I guess RED is driving up another path.

But with the added info, expect to get faster media to have "all the fun"... Low compression, more dynamics and more pixels, usually means higher bandwith.

Maybe the new "red" ssd's are the baseline for a Dragonized Epic... Just thinkin' out loud here, but nevertheless...

Mike P.
12-04-2012, 09:00 AM
Pics or it didn't happen?...


...that's not gonna work, is it?

KETCH ROSSi
12-04-2012, 09:10 AM
Arriflex 765 does.

Martin, have you ever been next to that beast when shooing HFR????

Its as loud as a frisking JUMBO JET taking off, I literally freaked out form the noise and moved away I tough it was gone BLOW UP... ;)


Oh and... I forgot for how many seconds it can run on a Large Roll... ;)

Andrew Huse
12-04-2012, 09:11 AM
Jim please loan Roger Deakins a RED Dragon

Martin Schneider
12-04-2012, 09:16 AM
Its as loud as a frisking JUMBO JET taking off...

Oh and... I forgot for how many seconds it can run on a Large Roll... ;)


Both points true for the Arri and the 65mm Photosonics - but still, you could... :-)

BTW: 1000ft@100fps = 2:08 min

Michael Mayda
12-04-2012, 09:18 AM
"The Dragon has more dynamic range than film... by a lot. 65mm film has about 14.5 stops. The Dragon has an easy 16 stops... without sweating."

I'm sweating in anticipation...

Bill Anderson
12-04-2012, 09:19 AM
Move back from your computer screens, guys. RED might post Dragon images without warning.

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 09:27 AM
Move back from your computer screens, guys. RED might post Dragon images without warning.

Well... The warning came when they announced that Dragon would start shipping "before new year".
Usually that would mean something like dec 31st... :-)

I guess the spinning of new ASICS to unleash the Dragon has pushed it all back a bit, but judging from Jims posts, We can see images any animated moment. Problem will be to set them in a proper perspective. They will be juicy, we "know" that, but how to know what is "new" in them?

A/B with current Epic?

Ed David
12-04-2012, 09:32 AM
make the skin tones as nice. Don't forget skin tones. :)

Sean Cruser
12-04-2012, 09:42 AM
OH BOY OH BOY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeff Kilgroe
12-04-2012, 09:47 AM
Hmm, will the Dragon we're talking about here be 645 Format?

No. Not unless something totally amazing and unexpected happens. ;)


In the past, RED announced several models of EPIC and Scarlet brains with various sizes of sensors ranging from Super35 as we have now on up to 645 and even 6x17cm Panoramic. The two big guys, the 645 and 617 models would have definite uses. Both could easily serve as full IMAX replacements to start with. The use of the 617 model for commercial purposes, digital signage, interactive spaces, etc... I still salivate over the possibilities of these two cameras. Who knows when or if they will become reality.

Tom Lowe
12-04-2012, 09:59 AM
So, it seems like you guys upped the horsepower on the ASIC huh? :gun:

I love 96fps. I shoot nearly everything at that framerate. So stoked to get 6K at that speed.

Brian Pascale
12-04-2012, 10:06 AM
Looking forward to seeing it. A clean 2000 ISO would be very useful in so many ways. Even more dynamic range would make my live even easier than it already is. Shooting with my Scarlet is already amazing, just a huge improvement of regular HD. To have a camera with the power of a film camera has improved my ability to tell stories that are not only compelling, but also contain poetry. When I can afford a Dragon Epic I will get one. It is hard to imagine needing anything more than that. Would love if you could add internal ND though. Using matte boxes or variable ND on a lens gets in the way and slows you down. Plus, not all my lenses fit my matte box so some I can't easily use when ND is needed. I am guessing with the Dragon ND becomes more necessary.

Jeremy Torrie
12-04-2012, 10:29 AM
Maybe those slower, older zooms will have new life considering many are going to have to stop down anyway if we're talking about native ISO of 2000. And what of the built in ND's? Will that be happening?

Michael Dalton
12-04-2012, 10:31 AM
Interesting that Dragon is 100fps... did we not see a slip up from Jarred about frames per second on race day?? was that funny car our first glimpse at Dragon???

I was not thinking about upgrading anytime soon, but saying that Dragon is 65mm makes me think differently.

Jarred Land
12-04-2012, 10:41 AM
Interesting that Dragon is 100fps...

Jim said Nearly... we wont know till the exact FPS until the entire system is complete.

Andrew Huse
12-04-2012, 10:45 AM
Can Dragon do 3:1 compression at 24p at 6K?

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 11:00 AM
Jim said Nearly... we wont know till the exact FPS until the entire system is complete.

Thanks for the precission. Avoids noise... Even at 4000 iso... :-)

Eric Haase
12-04-2012, 11:11 AM
OK. This is the final frontier.

The RED Dragon sensor needs to be directly compared to 65mm film.

The Dragon has more resolution than 65mm film when scanned at 4K.

The Dragon has more dynamic range than film... by a lot. 65mm film has about 14.5 stops. The Dragon has an easy 16 stops... without sweating.

The EPIC Dragon will shoot nearly 100fps. 65mm film cameras... not so much.

Cost to shoot the RED Dragon vs. 65mm film... ridiculously not close.

Dragon should never be compared to 35mm film. It should only be spoken in reference to 65mm film from here on out.

So you own an EPIC? You upgrade.

Have a nice day....

Jim

Can't wait to see sample footage with this broader dynamic range! Are there any improvements in color and skin tone rendition?

Justin O'Neill
12-04-2012, 11:29 AM
As much as the resolution, but i believe FOV will be the one that makes the difference. Does the FOV same between Dragon and 65mm ?

Jarred said Dragon is: 30.7mm x 15.8mm. The current Mysterium-X sensor is 27.7mm x 14.6mm.

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?83937-Dragon-update&p=1050231&viewfull=1#post1050231

Jeff Kilgroe
12-04-2012, 12:09 PM
Current MX sensor's active area is 27.7x14.6, but the sensor's physical dimensions are 30x15. So now the question that really matters is what are the active area dimensions and exact resolution. I've seen people throw numbers out before, only to have Jarred say they were wrong. :)

...I guess we wait for the little tidbits of info to start coming out. Images soon! Yay!

PatrickFaith
12-04-2012, 02:24 PM
Every lens works with Dragon. You just might have to select a slightly smaller resolution if you have a small image circle lens.
Jim
Coolness ... I think some of my cinema lenses might need to be like 5.6k width, would be nice for this to be user entered (even within a lens line, sometimes the circle varies).

Justin O'Neill
12-04-2012, 02:29 PM
Current MX sensor's active area is 27.7x14.6, but the sensor's physical dimensions are 30x15. So now the question that really matters is what are the active area dimensions and exact resolution.

Jarred also says in that quote that Dragon is 10% bigger in both directions which would make Dragon's active sensor area 30.7mm x 15.8mm.

Pawel Achtel
12-04-2012, 02:48 PM
When it comes to shooting underwater, we are already there by a long shot :)

A combination of custom optics that is actually able to resolve 5k+ and a small bag of tricks, the images coming out of the Epic now are significantly sharper as compared to those acquired with 65mm mainly because the optical design used with 65mm format is limiting the final quality to less than 1k!

For example, this quality (http://achtel.com/DeepX/A004_R003_1119WH.001930.jpg)has never been possible in any format, not even on any still picture camera nor 65mm film. Nothing was this sharp - ever.

Can't wait for the Dragon :)

Mark Andersen
12-04-2012, 02:59 PM
Time for Deanan to fire up Photoshop for an update to this post on comparing the Epic to an Alexa:

http://reduser.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=10254&d=1292576289

The LCD/EVF on my Epic plugs in differently, what am I looking at?

Paul Harb
12-04-2012, 03:16 PM
Global shutter, better color rendering/skin tones, highlight protection, power and heat management, DR, and full frame. Id take these over 6k but thats me.

Nick Morrison
12-04-2012, 05:05 PM
Every lens works with Dragon. You just might have to select a slightly smaller resolution if you have a small image circle lens.

Jim

Awesome. Quick question. As Ryan De Franco has been quietly pleading over the past month or so, will there be a way to label resolutions by the common image circles they cover? For example, 5K S35mm, 3K S16mm, etc? Just so its super clear what lenses work at what resolutions?

Thanks!

Adam Pitchie
12-04-2012, 06:28 PM
Excited that the sensor is surpassing the DR of film...epic indeed.

Terry VerHaar
12-04-2012, 06:43 PM
Have a nice day....JimAnd to you as well, Sir!!!

Marc Wielage
12-04-2012, 07:12 PM
Global shutter, better color rendering/skin tones, highlight protection, power and heat management, DR, and full frame. Id take these over 6k but thats me.
Very hard to argue with that. I agree that those are far greater day-to-day issues and concerns than resolution alone.

Eric Santiago
12-04-2012, 07:17 PM
The LCD/EVF on my Epic plugs in differently, what am I looking at?

Hmmm that is different.

Liana
12-04-2012, 07:22 PM
The Dragon has an easy 16 stops... without sweating.


What is the dynamic range of your typical LCD TV (shamelssly marketed as "LED" TV) being sold to consumers these days at typical brightness levels? 10? 11?

While acquiring widest possible DR while shooting the footage is ideal, I wonder if content meant for TV might look better if people compress the dynamic range in post (bit like adjusting the curves). Otherwise the visuals might get that weak contrast "HDR" look.

Cinema should be okay, the Red projetors will hopefully have a better DR than modern LCD TVs.

Björn Benckert
12-04-2012, 07:43 PM
Global shutter, better color rendering/skin tones, highlight protection, power and heat management, DR, and full frame. Id take these over 6k but thats me.


we shot 25minutes takes this weekend for a feature with camera close to dialoge actors... first we had problems with the fan kicking in 15 minutes into the shots, then we changed the setting to 30% manual and the fan noise was fine... Compared to any film camera its more than fine. Compare it to cameras that has the same pixel count as my iphone is not fair I think. Shooting 5K almost quiet should be considered quite amazing I think.

Robert Cook
12-04-2012, 07:46 PM
I guess I'm going to have to change my signature.....Hehheee

Nick Morrison
12-04-2012, 08:04 PM
What is the dynamic range of your typical LCD TV (shamelssly marketed as "LED" TV) being sold to consumers these days at typical brightness levels? 10? 11?

While acquiring widest possible DR while shooting the footage is ideal, I wonder if content meant for TV might look better if people compress the dynamic range in post (bit like adjusting the curves). Otherwise the visuals might get that weak contrast "HDR" look.

Cinema should be okay, the Red projetors will hopefully have a better DR than modern LCD TVs.

Yeah but that DR is what you use to GRADE with. The graded DNX or PRO-RES quicktimes will look fantastic on broadcast from 6K and this much DR. I already notice the massive jump from 10 stops DR on DSLR to 13stops on Scarlet. Imagine what 16 will look like?

Peter Lyons Collister, ASC
12-04-2012, 10:31 PM
Jim & Jarred,

Pretty excited about Dragon.... But in the meantime I am happy to be shooting 3 Epics and generating 6 hours of dailies each day for the past 68 shoot days on "Arrested Development"

Living large my friends, living large

Gunleik Groven
12-04-2012, 10:34 PM
Jim & Jarred,

Pretty excited about Dragon.... But in the meantime I am happy to be shooting 3 Epics and generating 6 hours of dailies each day for the past 68 shoot days on "Arrested Development"

Living large my friends, living large

To me this is the best point ever.
There is so much good to be said about the current Epic.
The rest is just a bonus.

G

Marc Wielage
12-05-2012, 12:21 AM
Yeah but that DR is what you use to GRADE with. The graded DNX or PRO-RES quicktimes will look fantastic on broadcast from 6K and this much DR. I already notice the massive jump from 10 stops DR on DSLR to 13stops on Scarlet. Imagine what 16 will look like?
There is always the risk that this dynamic range will still have to be compressed for delivery. If the final monitor or projector on which the project is going to be seen by the mass market is only 8 bits and Rec709, compromises have to happen. But it certainly doesn't hurt to start with lots of signal -- what we used to call a thick negative -- in the original master.

Patrick Grossien
12-05-2012, 12:33 AM
The LCD/EVF on my Epic plugs in differently, what am I looking at?

It's an early version of the side SSD Module. The direction switched what felt like a couple of times during the prototype phase - probably that happened only once :)

Liam Hall
12-05-2012, 01:35 AM
Martin, have you ever been next to that beast when shooing HFR????

Its as loud as a frisking JUMBO JET taking off, I literally freaked out form the noise and moved away I tough it was gone BLOW UP... ;)



When have you stood next to one Ketch?

KETCH ROSSi
12-05-2012, 01:40 AM
When have you stood next to one Ketch?


I don't even remember what is that they were shooting, it was several years ago in a studios down in Burbank, back then I was still working in my Restaurant.

And some people don't really realize how big this camera is...

http://www.in70mm.com/news/2007/as_good/images/DSC03922.jpg

Danny Murray
12-05-2012, 06:22 AM
Dragon should never be compared to 35mm film. It should only be spoken in reference to 65mm film from here on out.



Jim
the first rule of fightclub is! You never talk about fightclub

Shane Daly DP
12-05-2012, 08:37 AM
No louder than the film cameras I used to shoot dialogue with.

Shane
shanedaly.info

Roger Valdes
12-05-2012, 09:57 AM
Still needs 65mm sensor to be compared to 65mm film imo.

Rocco Schult
12-05-2012, 10:17 AM
He he, I never tough of Dragon, as a 35mm alike, but more like a 35mm Killer, and a 65mm / 70mm IMAX comparable...

Just don't confuse 70mm IMAX with 6k…
A 70mm IMAX has roughly 10 times the surface area of 35mm academy and is close to 4:3 aspect.
Even IMAX DMR is scanned at 6k, way below its capacity, which in turn contains much more info than 6k, 1:1.91, non-debayered imagery.


Global shutter, better color rendering/skin tones, highlight protection, power and heat management, DR, and full frame. Id take these over 6k but thats me.

No, not just you.

Elsie N
12-05-2012, 10:54 AM
Jim & Jarred,

Pretty excited about Dragon.... But in the meantime I am happy to be shooting 3 Epics and generating 6 hours of dailies each day for the past 68 shoot days on "Arrested Development"

Living large my friends, living large

I hope that eventually winds up on ODEMAX as a paid download. Bet it would be a fun movie to watch, especially with additional content (BTS).

KETCH ROSSi
12-05-2012, 11:02 AM
Just don't confuse 70mm IMAX with 6k…
A 70mm IMAX has roughly 10 times the surface area of 35mm academy and is close to 4:3 aspect.
Even IMAX DMR is scanned at 6k, way below its capacity, which in turn contains much more info than 6k, 1:1.91, non-debayered imagery.



Yes I know... ;)

Rocco Schult
12-05-2012, 11:07 AM
Yes I know... ;)

:wink5:

Patrick Scheller
12-06-2012, 07:13 AM
What's the size of the Dragon sensor? I have not seen this posted yet.

Max Nguyen
12-06-2012, 08:04 AM
What's the size of the Dragon sensor? I have not seen this posted yet.

I believe the sensor is the same size and crop factor as the MX. The main difference is the photosites are much smaller, so we will get greater resolution and a lot more. Correct me if I'm wrong anybody.

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 08:13 AM
I believe the sensor is the same size and crop factor as the MX. The main difference is the photosites are much smaller, so we will get greater resolution and a lot more. Correct me if I'm wrong anybody.

If I have read posts correct, photosites are smaller and sensor is bigger...

John Marchant
12-06-2012, 08:23 AM
I believe part of the intention was to bring 5k to bear on the S35 frame, to resolve a solid 4k from traditional focal lengths. I may be mistaken of course, but that would seem to make sense to me.

Jeff Kilgroe
12-06-2012, 08:27 AM
Exact specs have not been posted in terms of active area and resolution. We have approximates. In a nutshell, the active area is probably around 30mm wide and 15.5mm high. We know that it's "6K" and we know that the pixel or photo site size is 5 microns (0.005mm). "6K" is technically 6144 pixels wide, but we don't know what pixel dimensions are actually being used. Could be a bit more, could be a bit less. Every time I've seen someone throw out a guess, Jarred has said they were wrong. ;)

I'm not too worried about lens coverage. I'm betting most lenses that cover 5K on the MX sensor will do just fine. Some of the shorter focal lengths could have some coverage issues -- the 18mm RPP will most certainly vignette at 6K, I think. It's already showing some black in the corners at 5KFF...

One positive thing is that with the reduction of pixel size, we should be able to shoot 5K, or very close to it, on Dragon within the standard S35 window!

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 08:30 AM
OK. This is the final frontier.

The Dragon has more dynamic range than film... by a lot. 65mm film has about 14.5 stops. The Dragon has an easy 16 stops... without sweating.

Jim

You mean without HDRX chief?

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 08:41 AM
Is there any color science improvements that come with Dragon? Will their be a new Gamma / Color space when Dragon gets released?

There is an improvement already, just much people are not aware of it.. Try the combo REDCOLOR 3 - REDLOG in REDCINEX with all settings to default. Perfect skin tones!.

Elsie N
12-06-2012, 08:42 AM
You mean without HDRX chief?

Just a guess, but since Dragon will be data rate intensive I wouldn't be surprised if HDRx will no longer be available.

mikeburton
12-06-2012, 08:59 AM
There is an improvement already, just much people are not aware of it.. Try the combo REDCOLOR 3 - REDLOG in REDCINEX with all settings to default. Perfect skin tones!.

That is no trick or magic you stumbled upon. I and many others have been using REDLOGfilm and many of the other color/gamma science implementations over the years. There is still room for improvement and I would absolutely say that although I am not quite as critical of RED skin tones as some I do see quite a bit in the color science that could use improvement to truly be a "film killer" IMO. It's still a concern and something RED should continue to work towards. I remember hearing that REDOne then Epic was the film killer stick around here long enough and you'll hear lots of things :)

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 09:07 AM
Mike... Pablo said RedLog, not rlf...

Dunno if that was a typo, but I guess it was not.

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 09:30 AM
That is no trick or magic you stumbled upon. I and many others have been using REDLOGfilm and many of the other color/gamma science implementations over the years. There is still room for improvement and I would absolutely say that although I am not quite as critical of RED skin tones as some I do see quite a bit in the color science that could use improvement to truly be a "film killer" IMO. It's still a concern and something RED should continue to work towards. I remember hearing that REDOne then Epic was the film killer stick around here long enough and you'll hear lots of things :)

Did you say REDLOGfilm?.. I said REDLOG only.. there is a difference between the two..

Here is an HDRX image set to "Magic Motion", with the settings above..

http://i1352.photobucket.com/albums/q648/pm709/small_zps751f84ec.jpg

chommavong somphane
12-06-2012, 09:45 AM
Time for Deanan to fire up Photoshop for an update to this post on comparing the Epic to an Alexa:

http://reduser.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=10254&d=1292576289

Now does Deanan works for Arri ?

Joel J. Feigenbaum
12-06-2012, 09:57 AM
Dragon will rock our cinema world. Thank you Jim. Thank you Jarred. Thank you all at RED.

Brant Hadfield
12-06-2012, 10:08 AM
Jim please loan Roger Deakins a RED Dragon

Don't loan it to him. Buy it for him, deliver it to his house, personally, with a Lexus bow on top of it.

If you get a smoother highlight roll-off than the current sensor has, to go with that dynamic range, it might be hard for him to resist. He would like a bit more resolution from Alexa than he has now, but he couldn't care less about "K"s.

Medavoym
12-06-2012, 10:28 AM
Dear Jim,

Have you managed to see THE MASTER (P. T. Anderson) projected in 70mm?
I'm curious what you think - i.e. the comparison between 65mm film and the new Dragon sensor.

This is not an ironic question, quite the contrary! I enjoyed THE MASTER a lot and I found the image absolutely stunning. I would be very happy if Dragon matches it.

Mike M

k.wasley
12-06-2012, 10:43 AM
Dear Jim,

Have you managed to see THE MASTER (P. T. Anderson) projected in 70mm?
I'm curious what you think - i.e. the comparison between 65mm film and the new Dragon sensor.

This is not an ironic question, quite the contrary! I enjoyed THE MASTER a lot and I found the image absolutely stunning. I would be very happy if Dragon matches it.

Mike M

This is the perfect example to bring up i think. The Master in 70mm looked incredible. No digital camera comes even close to my eyes in terms of the 'look' of film as seen in The Master, which as i understand it also didn't have a DI.

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 10:43 AM
Yup Pablo, then we're on the same page...

When I have time, I play around a lot with the gammas, and redlog is still a favourite and very lownoise startingpoint for a lot of images.

When I batch through hours of firstlights and need full controll/integration and colorintegrity/consistency for VFX and final grade, redlogfilm is the safe haven.

But when time or multiple departments are not involved in finnishing the same image in parallell, redlog has a lot of beauty to it and to my eyes often give better skintones and less noise in the darks.

For larger workflows/signalchain, the cineon compliamt rlf is my best friend, though...

Joe Taylor
12-06-2012, 10:47 AM
Where has anybody except a very select few seen the Master projected in 70mm? I thought it was a digital release only.

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 10:48 AM
My prior replier said that there is not "magic trick" on this, but actually there is; when is about to work with Raw files. I could extracted successfully the sky details from the image below and still keep the buildings well exposed, using the A frame only, thanks to the fact that the image was shot a little underexposed, no HDRX.
What this means?, the information is there, in the raw data, you just have to find the right way to use it.. Only imagine what can you do with a Dragon..



http://biz77.myvnc.com/raw.jpghttp://biz77.myvnc.com/hdrx.jpg

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 10:52 AM
One more redlog skintone originated thingy...

Btw, both these are shot at 3200 iso/tungsten. They are underexposed quite a bit from the getgo...

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 10:53 AM
Pablo, that last example looks allmost a bit hyperreal...

Michael Zoyes
12-06-2012, 10:55 AM
Sign me up. We are really looking forward to the 16 stops of range. What type of lenses will cover the 6k sensor?

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 10:57 AM
One more redlog skintone originated thingy...

I told you!, perfect skin tones.. That's what we need!

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 10:59 AM
Now does Deanan works for Arri ?

Deanan is an independant consultant afaik these days.

Miss him here.

A lot.

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 11:04 AM
I told you!, perfect skin tones.. That's what we need!

It is quite possible.

I found the M sensor to be much better on skintones thanthe MX in R1. When exposed within its limits, of course.

For skintones, I actually find the R1 more allowing than the Epic, but as an overall tool, the Epic rules. These are Epic, BTW.

I hope that there will be "enough" computing headroom to accomodate the Dragon. The talk of new ASICS pretty much point in that direction, though.

I was initially a bit sceptical to add a sensor that "can more" to a hardware that would then be stretchwd.

Seems that won't be the case.

mikeburton
12-06-2012, 11:15 AM
Did you say REDLOGfilm?.. I said REDLOG only.. there is a difference between the two..

Here is an HDRX image set to "Magic Motion", with the settings above..

Full size: http://biz77.myvnc.com/large.tif (http://biz77.myvnc.com/large.tiff)


http://biz77.myvnc.com/small.jpg

Yes, my apologies, REDLOG not REDLOGfilm. I used to output and grade R3D from REDLOGfilm to our DI applications that weren't established with the RED SDK as it wasn't available yet. But, regardless, I still see and believe there are many improvements to be made in the RED color science. I think RED creates a beautiful image no doubt but I do have my own personal taste and preference and trust my eyes and my eyes tell me there is more than just Grain or Texture lacking in the images I work with almost everyday with R3D files. Maybe Dragon will solve this, maybe it won't, maybe Graeme will have a new color space for us to work with called "film killer", only time will tell.

For narrative work I have a slight issue with seeing "more" into the image, and i think Stu Maschwitz recently summed it up really nicely in an interview he did by more or less saying "Filmmaking is the process of removing information". He is specifically speaking to HFR here but i think it applies to the overall discussion we are having. With RED there is a ton of information that suddenly we are revealing to an audience that might not have been seen before or wanted to be seen for that matter. 4K, 5K and 6K with all its added detail and smooth texture is not adding to the illusion IMO, its slightly taking away from it. This is where I would shoot film if i had that opportunity, for narrative work. That said, there are a lot of other scenarios where I want all that detail and smooth texture ie car commercials, beauty, fashion, etc. I think RED fits in nicely here. And, speaking for myself, I feel that RED could potentially fill part of that narrative void for me as a viewer with better color rendition but maybe in time it will. That said, I don't think I would want to see a film like "On the Road" shot on RED. I think it would not do the story or time period justice as much as film would and for that I hope there is never a film killer. I hope the two live in harmony for a long time!

Elsie N
12-06-2012, 11:17 AM
I told you!, perfect skin tones.. That's what we need!

Heh, heh... Pablo, these things you are just discovering have been poured over in great detail for the last four or five years on this forum. But it's good to see new enthusiasm.

Felix K.
12-06-2012, 11:22 AM
The Dragon has more resolution than 65mm film when scanned at 4K.


Jim


"When scanned at 4k" ... isn't that a bit like saying: "This 250 hp Merc is faster than this 650 hp Formula 1 car, that's driven within speed limits."?
Can't you get more resolution out of 65mm film?

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 11:25 AM
Yes, my apologies, REDLOG not REDLOGfilm. I used to output and grade R3D from REDLOGfilm to our DI applications that weren't established with the RED SDK as it wasn't available yet. But, regardless, I still see and believe there are many improvements to be made in the RED color science. I think RED creates a beautiful image no doubt but I do have my own personal taste and preference and trust my eyes and my eyes tell me there is more than just Grain or Texture lacking in the images I work with almost everyday with R3D files. Maybe Dragon will solve this, maybe it won't, maybe Graeme will have a new color space for us to work with called "film killer", only time will tell.

For narrative work I have a slight issue with seeing "more" into the image, and i think Stu Maschwitz recently summed it up really nicely in an interview he did by more or less saying "Filmmaking is the process of removing information". He is specifically speaking to HFR here but i think it applies to the overall discussion we are having. With RED there is a ton of information that suddenly we are revealing to an audience that might not have been seen before or wanted to be seen for that matter. 4K, 5K and 6K with all its added detail and smooth texture is not adding to the illusion IMO, its slightly taking away from it. This is where I would shoot film if i had that opportunity, for narrative work. That said, there are a lot of other scenarios where I want all that detail and smooth texture ie car commercials, beauty, fashion, etc. I think RED fits in nicely here. And, speaking for myself, I feel that RED could potentially fill part of that narrative void for me as a viewer with better color rendition but maybe in time it will. That said, I don't think I would want to see a film like "On the Road" shot on RED. I think it would not do the story or time period justice as much as film would and for that I hope there is never a film killer. I hope the two live in harmony for a long time!

Well said brother!, Red is going to Rock!, is just a matter of time..

mikeburton
12-06-2012, 11:26 AM
My prior replier said that there is not "magic trick" on this, but actually there is; when is about to work with Raw files. I could extracted successfully the sky details from the image below and still keep the buildings well exposed, using the A frame only, thanks to the fact that the image was shot a little underexposed, no HDRX.
What this means?, the information is there, in the raw data, you just have to find the right way to use it.. Only imagine what can you do with a Dragon..



http://biz77.myvnc.com/raw.jpghttp://biz77.myvnc.com/hdrx.jpg

Pablo, we were talking about color rendition and skin tones, not the lattitude of HDRx imagery. No one is saying that there is no magic to HDRx. Sure, you can pull out detail in the skies of a RAW file if it has been exposed. But with all due respect, I've been working with RED files day in and day out conforming, coloring and studying the images very carefully and speak from my experience. What you appear to be just now finding out is somewhat out of context to our original discussion. And, "Perfect Skin Tones" mean something different to the two of us, obviously. But like Elsie said, I like your enthusiasm :)

mikeburton
12-06-2012, 11:28 AM
It is quite possible.

I found the M sensor to be much better on skintones thanthe MX in R1. When exposed within its limits, of course.

For skintones, I actually find the R1 more allowing than the Epic, but as an overall tool, the Epic rules. These are Epic, BTW.

I tend to agree with you on this Gunleik

Rocco Schult
12-06-2012, 11:33 AM
...these things you are just discovering have been poured over in great detail for the last four or five years ...

..but not yet solved.
More than worth pointing out, bud.

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 11:36 AM
Heh, heh... Pablo, these things you are just discovering have been poured over in great detail for the last four or five years on this forum. But it's good to see new enthusiasm.

You are problably right, but what is confusing, is the fact that you see many blockbuster movies shot on Red, and the colorists, (that are supposed to be the best in the world), seems not to pay much attention to the skin tone rendering, Which is in my opinion, an important fact, so, I am sorry, but, I am going to keep pushing on this, until is corrected. (somebody has to). Red can beat film big time. Just lets find the way to do it.

mikeburton
12-06-2012, 11:43 AM
You are problably right, but what is confusing, is the fact that you see many blockbuster movies shot on Red, and the colorists, (that are supposed to be the best in the world), seems not to pay much attention to the skin tone rendering, Which is in my opinion, an important fact, so, I am sorry, but, I am going to keep pushing on this, until is corrected. (somebody has to). Red can beat film big time. Just lets find the way to do it.

I think its better to say that RED has the potential to beat film in many different markets and in time it is likely that there won't be an argument due to film being extinct. That said, when it has been proclaimed here that "film is now officially dead" it is important to address the work still left to be done to make that statement correct. But, everyone has there own aesthetic choices and opinions and there is no right or wrong with this. Its all about having choices which luckily we still do.

Elsie N
12-06-2012, 11:53 AM
.... But, everyone has there own aesthetic choices and opinions and there is no right or wrong with this. Its all about having choices which luckily we still do.

Bingo!

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 12:11 PM
Pablo, we were talking about color rendition and skin tones, not the lattitude of HDRx imagery. No one is saying that there is no magic to HDRx. Sure, you can pull out detail in the skies of a RAW file if it has been exposed. But with all due respect, I've been working with RED files day in and day out conforming, coloring and studying the images very carefully and speak from my experience. What you appear to be just now finding out is somewhat out of context to our original discussion. And, "Perfect Skin Tones" mean something different to the two of us, obviously. But like Elsie said, I like your enthusiasm :)

Probably I wasn't clear enough, what I meant is, that in the same way you can find new things, just by manipulating the raw files latitude, you can also find new ways of reproducing the color. In my opinion, the sky is the limit, and, I am not questioning your knowledge in this, since I have seen your posts for quite sometime now, even before I signed up to this forum, so I know that you are very experienced person in this matter. My apologies.


I think its better to say that RED has the potential to beat film in many different markets and in time it is likely that there won't be an argument due to film being extinct. That said, when it has been proclaimed here that "film is now officially dead" it is important to address the work still left to be done to make that statement correct. But, everyone has there own aesthetic choices and opinions and there is no right or wrong with this. Its all about having choices which luckily we still do.

I agree on everything you are saying except one thing: When is about what the average people's eye like, there is always a "right" no "wrong", and you have to remember, that you are a mass communicator, so you have to go with the rest, in order to cope, of course, without compromising too much your own point of view, and also what you know. (I am sounding like a politician now, I'll better shut up!)

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 12:25 PM
Enthusiasm is always a good thing.. Probably I wont feel the same tomorrow..

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 12:27 PM
Keep it up Pablo!

Elsie N
12-06-2012, 12:29 PM
... When is about what the average people's eye like, there is always a "right" no "wrong", ...
Pablo, I think you are discounting the differences in human nature. It's true that every human brain has a right, but not always is that "right" the same as the person in the seat next to them. Let me give you an example. Your Avatar is very colorful and eye-catching... yet I cannot look at it but for a millisecond because then it becomes garish (to my eyes... no offense intended). But my own Avatar is very pleasing to me while to you it very likely is rather bland. What I'm saying is there is no perfect standard (thank goodness because then some govt. body would try to impose that on everything visual).

I used to take photos of people I encountered, whether behind the counter of a deli to the sacker who loaded my groceries, to the waitress who brought me coffee. I retouched each of their photos before printing them to make the individual look moure aesthetically pleasing. Not one complained that it didn't look like their real self. Many thought I was a great photographer because I made them look better. And that often involved changing their skin tones somewhat.

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 12:34 PM
It is quite possible.

I found the M sensor to be much better on skintones thanthe MX in R1. When exposed within its limits, of course.

For skintones, I actually find the R1 more allowing than the Epic, but as an overall tool, the Epic rules. These are Epic, BTW.

I hope that there will be "enough" computing headroom to accomodate the Dragon. The talk of new ASICS pretty much point in that direction, though.

I was initially a bit sceptical to add a sensor that "can more" to a hardware that would then be stretchwd.

Seems that won't be the case.

I just watched this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94-S_JK2g0o&feature=youtu.be), shot in 2008 with R1, and I agree, is one of the best sensors ever..

dennys bisogno
12-06-2012, 01:25 PM
Perhaps not Dragon or not fora while - but lets keep in mind none of RED advertisement of their cameras being upgradable exclude Scarlet. So it they stay with what advertise, they will need to come up with some upgrade to Scarlet. Note I am not specifying sensor type, just saying some Hrd upgrade to move it closer to current Epic specs? Time will tell :-)

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 02:35 PM
Would make sense to unlock "Epic MX" features to Scarlet, once the Dragon program is out.
Unsure if that is a viable option, though...

Eryc Tramonn
12-06-2012, 02:45 PM
Would make sense to unlock "Epic MX" features to Scarlet, once the Dragon program is out.
Unsure if that is a viable option, though...

Not sure what you mean by "unlock," I don't think they are throttling the program. As a matter of fact, Jarred wrote in another thread that they are attempting to work out an upgrade path, but it sounds like it might be too cumbersome to upgrade in a physical sense. They are weighing the costs.

I have a strong feeling RED may offer some type of trade-in path to EPIC.

roryhinds
12-06-2012, 02:50 PM
Brilliant, I can't wait to upgrade.
Is the 16 stops calculation with HDRx?

Jeremy Torrie
12-06-2012, 02:53 PM
Pretty sure Jim said 16 stops without HDRx.

Eryc Tramonn
12-06-2012, 02:56 PM
Brilliant, I can't wait to upgrade.
Is the 16 stops calculation with HDRx?

I understood the statement as native DR. HDRx will merely up the ante.

Jarred Land
12-06-2012, 02:56 PM
Pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx...

Eryc Tramonn
12-06-2012, 02:57 PM
Pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx...

Nice. :yesnod:

Makes sense.

Justin O'Neill
12-06-2012, 02:58 PM
What's the size of the Dragon sensor? I have not seen this posted yet.

Jeff Kilgroe and I disagree a bit on this. My guess is from Jarred's quote below that the active sensor area for Dragon will be exactly 30.7mm x 15.8mm.

Jarred Land: "10% larger both ways is a good ballpark... 30.7mm x 15.8mm". http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?83937-Dragon-update&p=1050231&viewfull=1#post1050231

Nick Morrison
12-06-2012, 03:00 PM
Pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx...

WOW. All I can think about right now is how to use it though!!! What kind of shot would demand 20 stops of lattitude? Some Kubrik-inspired madness I'm sure.

Matt Ryan
12-06-2012, 03:00 PM
Pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx...

But please keep HDRX for those rare cases we may need it for fun.

Justin O'Neill
12-06-2012, 03:02 PM
Pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx...

NO!!! We still need simultaneous frames with different shutter speeds for all kinds of applications! Sharp stills with smooth motion...sharp frames for motion tracking etc. I have been desperately looking forward to what we will be able to do with Dragon's 3 extra stops and the faster shutter speed on the X frame!

Gunleik Groven
12-06-2012, 03:07 PM
Not sure what you mean by "unlock," I don't think they are throttling the program. As a matter of fact, Jarred wrote in another thread that they are attempting to work out an upgrade path, but it sounds like it might be too cumbersome to upgrade in a physical sense. They are weighing the costs.

I have a strong feeling RED may offer some type of trade-in path to EPIC.

I know.

Unlock was a bad word.

Cannot help thinking tat when they pull out asics and sensors for the epic to dragon update, something is left for the scarleteers.

THAT is what I meant

Joseph Ward
12-06-2012, 03:14 PM
Pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx...

What would HDRx do with Dragon? Or how many stops more for DR with Dragon and HDRx together?

Wait Dragon without HDRx can do 18 plus stops of DR?

Eryc Tramonn
12-06-2012, 03:21 PM
NO!!! We still need simultaneous frames with different shutter speeds for all kinds of applications! Sharp stills with smooth motion...sharp frames for motion tracking etc. I have been desperately looking forward to what we will be able to do with Dragon's 3 extra stops and the faster shutter speed on the X frame!

I thought the same...but didn't go there because I would have to read into his statement too much. "Killed it" could be used in the figurative...as in, "you won't need it given Dragon's DR." Or it could mean, "Not only will you not need HDRx, but there's no room for it."

Too much speculation. I figure they will dole out the information when they can.

But I completely hear you, sir. I would prefer to keep the functionality, if possible.

Jeremy Torrie
12-06-2012, 03:32 PM
Pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx...

So does this mean no more HDRx? And what about the 512GB cards...will they be the defacto standard going forward? Will it unlock additional framerates?

Jason L
12-06-2012, 03:57 PM
Awesome stuff. With the sensor possibly being bigger, just wondering if lenses will have trouble covering it.

I also bet the upgrade path for Scarlet is the Epic-MX. Sounds like too much needs to happen to the Scarlet for the upgrade.

Zach Swena
12-06-2012, 04:09 PM
If Dragon killed HDRx, then that could be due to a several factors.

1. There is no longer need for it - doubtful since they have stated 16 stops of DR, vs 18 for MX with HDRx
2. Increased data rates are not worth it at 6k, possible

or

3. They have moved to global shutter, which makes HDRx impossible. At the beginning they did not expect to need to make a new ASIC for Dragon, however after the Sony announcement, during the price reduction posts they revealed that Dragon now requires a new ASIC.

Hmm...

Just speculation though, don't get your hopes up. Would it be possible to have an option of rolling or global shutter as a menu option? Would that be desirable?

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 04:10 PM
What would HDRx do with Dragon? Or how many stops more for DR with Dragon and HDRx together?Wait Dragon without HDRx can do 18 plus stops of DR?The fact is that digital cameras (any of them), it doesn't matter, they don't blend nicely from darks to highlights, even an Epic with Dragon, is inherent on any digital sensor, so even if you have 20 stops you'll probably still need HDRX, but I could be wrong, so I'll accept any corrections from the experts in this...



EDIT: Unless of course, Dragon does, "pipelining", ( exposure during red out ), like this one (http://www.cmosis.com/products/standard_products/cmv12000)..

Eryc Tramonn
12-06-2012, 05:02 PM
Awesome stuff. With the sensor possibly being bigger, just wondering if lenses will have trouble covering it.

I also bet the upgrade path for Scarlet is the Epic-MX. Sounds like too much needs to happen to the Scarlet for the upgrade.

Exactly, that's my bet regarding the "upgrade" path...which would actually amount to more of a "trade-in" program. But who knows. That's speculation.

And it seems there shouldn't be any issue with most lenses covering Dragon...I recall Jim writing that.

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 05:22 PM
The Chief said: "The Dragon has more resolution than 65mm film when scanned at 4K".

A little confusing. If you scan at 4K, then, obviously that's your final resolution, 4K right?, you can't go beyond that. But, what is the actual resolution of 65mm film, without been scanned (or projected straight from film?), and after that, how can that be compared to Dragon??

Max Nguyen
12-06-2012, 05:50 PM
The Chief said: "The Dragon has more resolution than 65mm film when scanned at 4K".

A little confusing. If you scan at 4K, then, obviously that's your final resolution, 4K right?, you can't go beyond that. But, what is the actual resolution of 65mm film, without been scanned (or projected straight from film?), and after that, how can that be compared to Dragon??

That confused me a bit, too. I am not privy to the goings on at Red Studios, but I assume they are testing the heck out of things. My mental exercise assumes that they take footage off of the Dragon and project it at 4k on a 40 foot screen and then take 65mm footage scanned at 4k (Because there are no 4k+ scanners? Correct if I'm wrong) and project it on the same screen as well. They compare, laugh maniacally and then kick us in the nuts by building up our eager anticipation with a hint of the results. Well played Red Team, well played.

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 06:15 PM
That confused me a bit, too. I am not privy to the goings on at Red Studios, but I assume they are testing the heck out of things. My mental exercise assumes that they take footage off of the Dragon and project it at 4k on a 40 foot screen and then take 65mm footage scanned at 4k (Because there are no 4k+ scanners? Correct if I'm wrong) and project it on the same screen as well. They compare, laugh maniacally and then kick us in the nuts by building up our eager anticipation with a hint of the results. Well played Red Team, well played.

You have a point.. What I believe, after rethink the whole thing for a while, is that, (visually speaking), Jim states that Dragon projected at 4k, looks way sharper than 65mm film scanned and projected at the same resolution. This way makes a lot of sense.

EDIT; of course, I know is hard to visually judge the resolution of film because the grain..

IAN SUN
12-06-2012, 06:59 PM
NO!!! We still need simultaneous frames with different shutter speeds for all kinds of applications! Sharp stills with smooth motion...sharp frames for motion tracking etc. I have been desperately looking forward to what we will be able to do with Dragon's 3 extra stops and the faster shutter speed on the X frame!

Here Here, HDRx is awesome, + 1 for pulling stills is a keeper, even if it is only available at sub 6K.
Congrats RED Team.

Max Nguyen
12-06-2012, 07:30 PM
of course, I know is hard to visually judge the resolution of film because the grain..

Too true. However, I doubt they would try to use an 800 ASA film stock to do the testing. Once more, the mental exercise. They use fine grain stock like 50 ASA and then shoot the Dragon in the same circumstance. These guys are engineers as well as artists, we must not forget. There is a lot of science to it and I doubt they would shoot fast, high grain stock film as the controlled comparison.

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 07:34 PM
Too true. However, I doubt they would try to use an 800 ASA film stock to do the testing. Once more, the mental exercise. They use fine grain stock like 50 ASA and then shoot the Dragon in the same circumstance. These guys are engineers as well as artists, we must not forget. There is a lot of science to it and I doubt they would shoot fast, high grain stock film as the controlled comparison.

I respect that..

Casey Green
12-06-2012, 10:46 PM
NO!!! We still need simultaneous frames with different shutter speeds for all kinds of applications! Sharp stills with smooth motion...sharp frames for motion tracking etc. I have been desperately looking forward to what we will be able to do with Dragon's 3 extra stops and the faster shutter speed on the X frame!

+1 on this. I'm looking forward to still having the option for several of the applications Justin listed.

Jannard
12-06-2012, 11:20 PM
This is easy stuff to understand. Film does NOT like high ISO. It blocks in the shadows. And grain inhibits resolution as compared to digital.

Digital has, in the past, been down on dynamic range when compared to film. As of the Dragon... that is no longer the case.

To recap... the Dragon has more dynamic range, less noise, no blocking and high ISO capability. And it is an upgrade!

Digital is finally better than film in every way. The Dragon. Not available at a store near you.

Jim

Sean Cruser
12-06-2012, 11:22 PM
thank you sir for laying down the gauntlet.

Pablo Moreno
12-06-2012, 11:27 PM
Pablo, I think you are discounting the differences in human nature. It's true that every human brain has a right, but not always is that "right" the same as the person in the seat next to them. Let me give you an example. Your Avatar is very colorful and eye-catching... yet I cannot look at it but for a millisecond because then it becomes garish (to my eyes... no offense intended). But my own Avatar is very pleasing to me while to you it very likely is rather bland. What I'm saying is there is no perfect standard (thank goodness because then some govt. body would try to impose that on everything visual).


I used to take photos of people I encountered, whether behind the counter of a deli to the sacker who loaded my groceries, to the waitress who brought me coffee. I retouched each of their photos before printing them to make the individual look moure aesthetically pleasing. Not one complained that it didn't look like their real self. Many thought I was a great photographer because I made them look better. And that often involved changing their skin tones somewhat.


I understand what you are saying, but in normal situations, there are always standards. Your avatar looks more pleasant to me than mine, I agree, why?, because it is already genetically imprinted in our brains as something pleasant, a little cute animal.. and no matter how hard I try to explain to you, that my avatar is a computer model of the Fibonacci sequence spiral , found everywhere in nature, even in far galaxies, and is beautiful, you are not going to like it a bit more, so I agree. Now, 100.000 people right now will agree with me that this (http://vimeo.com/10217446) $600 camera, it has the best movie-looking-life-like-skin-tones ever, even when we all know, that is a low end DSLR, is not a cinema camera, doesn't have a full frame sensor, or high dynamic range and high frame rates, and most important, is not even a 2K sensor camera. that's why I am saying, There are always standards. I love the bleach bypass effect on movies, but I know that even when I am looking at pallid green faces, it originally came from something natural, that was already there, and there is no way to fool the brain with something diferrent. There are some standards, is all I can say..

EDIT: Maybe not 100.000 but close..

Andrew Julian
12-06-2012, 11:38 PM
No. Not unless something totally amazing and unexpected happens. ;)


In the past, RED announced several models of EPIC and Scarlet brains with various sizes of sensors ranging from Super35 as we have now on up to 645 and even 6x17cm Panoramic. The two big guys, the 645 and 617 models would have definite uses. Both could easily serve as full IMAX replacements to start with. The use of the 617 model for commercial purposes, digital signage, interactive spaces, etc... I still salivate over the possibilities of these two cameras. Who knows when or if they will become reality.

I wonder if a format similar to the Hasselblad X pan has ever been considered for a future digital camera. A 24x65mm Dragon sensor would be amazing! And totally out of my budget.

It would give the guys in the market for the 617 something to shoot with while they wait/dream.

Jannard
12-06-2012, 11:40 PM
I have no idea what you just said. I guess I'd ask if you understood everything I said.

Jim


I understand what you are saying, but in normal situations, there are always standards. Your avatar looks more pleasant to me than mine, I agree, why?, because it is already genetically imprinted in our brains as something pleasant, a little cute animal.. and no matter how hard I try to explain to you, that my avatar is a computer model of the Fibonacci sequence spiral , found everywhere in nature, even in far galaxies, and is beautiful, you are not going to like it a bit more, so I agree. Now, 100.000 people right now will agree with me that this (http://vimeo.com/10217446) $600 camera, it has the best movie-looking-life-like-skin-tones ever, even when we all know, that is a low end DSLR, is not a cinema camera, doesn't have a full frame sensor, or high dynamic range and high frame rates, and most important, is not even a 2K sensor camera. that's why I am saying, There are always standards. I love the bleach bypass effect on movies, but I know that even when I am looking at pallid green faces, it originally came from something natural, that was already there, and there is no way to fool the brain with something diferrent. There are some standards, is all I can say..

EDIT: Maybe not 100.000 but close..

Adam Johnson
12-06-2012, 11:52 PM
Best. Quote. Ever!


The Dragon. Not available at a store near you.

Jim

Adam Johnson
12-06-2012, 11:59 PM
hahahaha

Jim - plain and simple there is a certain faction of people in this world that will NEVER be happy with anything digital....to them film is like some sort of unattainable holy grail....afterall "it has some sort of magical warmth about it that just can't be described, but you know film when you see it." Total BS. I am in the camp that believes digital has already surpassed film. In my mind, everything from here on out such as Dragon (which will be the best in the land!) will continue to revolutionize the medium and push technology forward.

oh yeah...and then there are spiral galaxies or whatever he said ;)


I have no idea what you just said. I guess I'd ask if you understood everything I said.

Jim

Pawel Achtel
12-07-2012, 12:01 AM
Is there going to be Dragon Monochrome?

Emmett Stang
12-07-2012, 12:10 AM
Ace!

Congrats RED team, you guys keep kicking arse and taking care of your own. As if shooting on Epic wasn't fun enough!

Joseph Coleman
12-07-2012, 12:20 AM
I agree that there will always be a group that doesn't think digital is as good as film. Personally, I love digital and I love digital even more when its shot Anamorphic. I really hope that Red is still developing a FF 35 sensor (dragon tech) to better accommodate 2x anamorphic lens. I think if red could develop a set of anamorphic lens's to go along with that FF35 sensor they would make a killing. I know they are extremely hard to develop and cost a lot of money. But if anyone can do it Red can. I can't wait to see what red's doing behind the scenes with their lenses. I know something is cooking back there.

Michel Hafner
12-07-2012, 12:29 AM
The Chief said: "The Dragon has more resolution than 65mm film when scanned at 4K".

A little confusing. If you scan at 4K, then, obviously that's your final resolution, 4K right?, you can't go beyond that. But, what is the actual resolution of 65mm film, without been scanned (or projected straight from film?), and after that, how can that be compared to Dragon??
It means Dragon has a higher MTF than 65mm upto 4K (and probably some more). Between 5 and 6K MTF goes to zero (or aliasing takes over) while 65mm goes on some higher. Modern 65mm has more than 4K resolution and is usually scanned at 8K. If you have seen Samsara in 4K it was obvious that 4K was a compromise and did not provide the full detail of 65mm.

KETCH ROSSi
12-07-2012, 12:38 AM
Is there going to be Dragon Monochrome?


Yes.

Roger Valdes
12-07-2012, 12:44 AM
We all know Jim likes making bold claims for markerting / hype reasons. :-)

I haven't seen any sensor come even close to beating 35mm in terms of image quality, skin tones, colors and so on.

Gunleik Groven
12-07-2012, 12:48 AM
We all know Jim likes making bold claims for markerting / hype reasons. :-)


We all know we stay here because Jim and Jarred occationally gives a bit of info.
Of course this is REDs main marketing channel.

But all the camera manufacturerers I know do that.

Actually it looks like some try to copy the "drumroll for suspence" philosophy, by announcing things well in advance of delivery...

N_Villers
12-07-2012, 03:37 AM
I understand what you are saying, but in normal situations, there are always standards. Your avatar looks more pleasant to me than mine, I agree, why?, because it is already genetically imprinted in our brains as something pleasant, a little cute animal.. and no matter how hard I try to explain to you, that my avatar is a computer model of the Fibonacci sequence spiral , found everywhere in nature, even in far galaxies, and is beautiful, you are not going to like it a bit more, so I agree. Now, 100.000 people right now will agree with me that this (http://vimeo.com/10217446) $600 camera, it has the best movie-looking-life-like-skin-tones ever, even when we all know, that is a low end DSLR, is not a cinema camera, doesn't have a full frame sensor, or high dynamic range and high frame rates, and most important, is not even a 2K sensor camera. that's why I am saying, There are always standards. I love the bleach bypass effect on movies, but I know that even when I am looking at pallid green faces, it originally came from something natural, that was already there, and there is no way to fool the brain with something diferrent. There are some standards, is all I can say..

EDIT: Maybe not 100.000 but close.. Ugggh OHHH FilmMaker's Gang is back. LOL

Gunleik Groven
12-07-2012, 03:47 AM
Ugggh OHHH FilmMaker's Gang is back. LOL

That actually made me LOL!

Elsie N
12-07-2012, 07:33 AM
hahahaha

... plain and simple there is a certain faction of people in this world that will NEVER be happy with anything digital....to them film is like some sort of unattainable holy grail....afterall "it has some sort of magical warmth about it that just can't be described, but you know film when you see it." ...

IIRC, it was around the middle of 2007 when Graeme posted how much he liked listening to old vinyl records, saying the music had a certain warmth to it. I still remember that post and often wonder how this man could be so dedicated to analog and yet, be the driving force in helping digital become dominate? Of course, it's probably nostalgia that keeps him connected to analog music. And I'm sure nostalgia is what causes people to cling to film... Tarentino as an example.

Newer generations likely don't have that nostalgic connection and are probably better equipped to judge any viability of digital over film. And of course you have certain famous directors and DPs who can think outside of the nostalgic box and have chosen digital when they could have shot film. I guess I'm making excuses for people who are defending film, as being a product of their times for the most part. In the end they will be stuck at a certain level while those who embrace the future will be able to progress.

mikeburton
12-07-2012, 08:39 AM
IIRC, it was around the middle of 2007 when Graeme posted how much he liked listening to old vinyl records, saying the music had a certain warmth to it. I still remember that post and often wonder how this man could be so dedicated to analog and yet, be the driving force in helping digital become dominate? Of course, it's probably nostalgia that keeps him connected to analog music. And I'm sure nostalgia is what causes people to cling to film... Tarentino as an example.

Newer generations likely don't have that nostalgic connection and are probably better equipped to judge any viability of digital over film. And of course you have certain famous directors and DPs who can think outside of the nostalgic box and have chosen digital when they could have shot film. I guess I'm making excuses for people who are defending film, as being a product of their times for the most part. In the end they will be stuck at a certain level while those who embrace the future will be able to progress.

I respect your opinion but don't see it that way. I think there are plenty of us that aren't just nostalgic but actually truly love working with film because there is a different approach to it, a discipline to it if you will. I'm not just about the process of film though, I love the simplicity and convenience of digital. I just think they both have there strengths and weeknesses for different creative opportunities. That said, after using, working and posting both formats for a while now I wouldn't categorize myself or some of the other guys I know who love film as not being able to adapt to the new technologies. But, we can still enjoy one medium over another if we so choose especially if we are true to the story that is being told. Will I be sad when film is gone. Of course. I actually hope all of you are. That just means you have one less creative choice. But, will I embrace and continue to work with new formats...of course I will as will most. Because our passion goes beyond the sensor or the celuloid, and at its core is about the stories being told for our children to grow up with and be inspired. To me, that's what's important and I think I speak for quite a few guys who love film in this business who I know feel the same.

Nick Morrison
12-07-2012, 08:47 AM
Digital is clearly transforming the industry while also making it more democratic. But film will always have an organic quality, and a disciplined methodology, that must always be respected. Its one of many creative choices we have. There's no harm in that.

In the meantime, I'm grateful that RED is unleashing cinema quality cameras and workflows that let us all dream...we can change the world.

There's no harm in that either.

Elsie N
12-07-2012, 08:55 AM
I respect your opinion but don't see it that way. I think there are plenty of us that aren't just nostalgic but actually truly love working with film because there is a different approach to it, a discipline to it if you will. I'm not just about the process of film though, I love the simplicity and convenience of digital. I just think they both have there strengths and weaknesses for different creative opportunities. That said, after using, working and posting both formats for a while now I wouldn't categorize myself or some of the other guys I know who love film as not being able to adapt to the new technologies. But, we can still enjoy one medium over another if we so choose especially if we are true to the story that is being told. Will I be sad when film is gone. Of course. I actually hope all of you are. That just means you have one less creative choice. But, will I embrace and continue to work with new formats...of course I will as will most. Because our passion goes beyond the sensor or the celluloid, and at its core is about the stories being told for our children to grow up with and be inspired. To me, that's what's important and I think I speak for quite a few guys who love film in this business who I know feel the same.

Mike. Just one (rhetorical if you prefer) question. Were you exposed to film first (no pun intended) '-) or was your first jobs in digital? Maybe nostalgia doesn't apply to you and you could fit into the category I referred to as someone who can put aside their imprinted preference and can judge things on their own merit. That sounds like the case and if so, good on you.

Gunleik Groven
12-07-2012, 09:04 AM
To me, "film is dead" is not really relevant. What I can do with tools that I can access for films I wanna make, is.
.

I'd actually love to shoot film if I get the chance one day.
But i don't sit down and NOT work, while I wait for that day.

Tools, of any kind, are generally liberating, not limiting. They do not guarantee quality, but they give you access to new ways of expression.

We can allways wish for "more" and over time we will get that.

But after recently having cleaned out my house of 15 years and trying to see what I want to keep, I see that I have collected 300m2 of "more" and mostly unused opportunities that I have collected and ditched on the drive for "more".

At some points, it is of some importance to ask oneself: what more do you want?
An to me, that is images and storytelling. If I "have to do" with an Epic MX, I am actually not that bad off.
If i can do it with a Dragon at a later stage, cool.
And maybe film one day.

But if I cannot do half decent images with the tools at hand, there isn't really anything wrong with the tools....

And if i one day get the option to shoot on film, I guess it won't be limiting, and I guess I am glad that it isn't "dead". I love films shot on film, so why should I wish it a sudden death?


Ok...

Being philosophical here.

Mods if this doesn't fit... Just remove....

mikeburton
12-07-2012, 09:23 AM
Mike. Just one (rhetorical if you prefer) question. Were you exposed to film first (no pun intended) '-) or was your first jobs in digital? Maybe nostalgia doesn't apply to you and you could fit into the category I referred to as someone who can put aside their imprinted preference and can judge things on their own merit. That sounds like the case and if so, good on you.

It's a good and very valid question. I started shooting super8, then 16mm, then 35mm. Never shot 65mm unfortunately. But, film has always been extremely expensive to shoot with and at the same time was shooting Super VHS cameras and then into the MiniDV era. I feel I have a preference on a per job basis. Although I mostly do post color and finishing work now I see more than ever the impact different formats have on the end result of a project. And I've made my own creative mind up as to a personal preference in cameras versus "the story". Mind you I owned a RED camera and it was beautiful for what I used it for which was primarily commercials, music videos. It brought a level of clarity unmatched at that time with a workflow that was very similar to a film workflow with access to the RAW / digital negative. And although many don't feel the same and which I completely respect I don't love it for narrative feature film. However , many do and I've colored many RED films and appreciate everything it has done for independent filmmakers who otherwise would still be trying to raise capital to get their movies made. And the fact that it has given that opportunity to filmmakers is a wonderful thing.

Pablo Moreno
12-07-2012, 10:29 AM
I have no idea what you just said. I guess I'd ask if you understood everything I said.

Jim
I guess I wrote too many words for my limited English, ha ha, my apologies.. But I understood everything you said, except for the 65mm film resolution, how can that be compared to Dragon?, can you explain a little more..

Gunleik Groven
12-07-2012, 10:33 AM
Whithout attempting to be Jim, 4k is the current highest end displayong resolution available for cinemas. And this 65mm is often (but not allways) scanned at that rez.

Dragon has a better signal to noise charracter than 65mm scanned at 4k.

But I may be off...

Eric Haase
12-07-2012, 10:33 AM
Digital has, in the past, been down on dynamic range when compared to film. As of the Dragon... that is no longer the case.

To recap... the Dragon has more dynamic range, less noise, no blocking and high ISO capability. And it is an upgrade!

Digital is finally better than film in every way.

Jim

Can you tell us about improvements in color and skin tone rendition? Do you feel that Dragon is superior to film in this way as well? Really looking forward to seeing images!!!!!!!

Pablo Moreno
12-07-2012, 02:11 PM
Can you tell us about improvements in color and skin tone rendition? Do you feel that Dragon is superior to film in this way as well? Really looking forward to seeing images!!!!!!!

I dug a little bit more about it, and here's what I found: (please don't shoot the messenger!).
There is not one concrete answer when is about to compare resolution of film against digital, because film doesn't have to bother with pixels.
But if all you want to do is count pixels, here are the facts:


First of all, film can resolve insanely fine details.


With film, the image is continuous in all three dimensions: x, y, and z (intensity).


With film, you get the same resolution at color transitions (green/magenta, for instance) as you get for light/dark transitions.


With film, you have complete R, G, and B resolution at every point.


Film is rated to resolve 160 lines per millimeter. This is the finest level of detail it can resolve, at which point its MTF just about hits zero.


Each line will require one light and one dark pixel, or two pixels. Thus it will take about 320 pixels per millimeter to represent what's on film.


320 pixels x 320 pixels is 0.1MP per square millimeter.


35mm film is 24 x 36mm, or 864 square millimeters.


To scan most of the detail on a 35mm frame, you'll need about 864 x 0.1, or 87 Megapixels. (lets call that: 9.3K)


each film pixel represents true R, G and B data, not the softer Bayer interpolated data from digital camera sensors. A single-chip 9.3K digital camera still can't see details as fine as a piece of 35mm film.


Since the lie factor from digital cameras is about two, you'd need a digital camera of about 87 x 2 = 175 MP (18.6K) to see every last detail that makes onto film.


Its natural response is similar to our eyes.






The good news is: according to the experts, the average human eye can't resolve more than 10K at ANY distance, so that will be the end of the pixel count race.

Pawel Achtel
12-07-2012, 03:48 PM
Pablo,

I'm not sure where all this data is coming from, but if you could point me to the source where you quoting that film has 160 lp/mm (or 320 ln/mm). Also, if you could clarify if these numbers are for negative or print or both?

Thanks.

Vadim Bobkovsky
12-07-2012, 05:23 PM
Of course, it's probably nostalgia that keeps him connected to analog music. And I'm sure nostalgia is what causes people to cling to film... Tarentino as an example.

There's a subjective and objective part of loving or preferring film to digital to this date. Subjective part is quite obvious, really. Some people love the processing, even doing everything themselves by hand. Some love the rhythm of shooting film or it's behavior they've used to. I can't say it's nostalgia or not, but they all agree with the look of film, which brings us to part two. Objectively, until very recently film were giving the fattest, richest neg to work with, it handles some overexposure nice, handles colors and particularly flesh tones so well in most conditions. While most critical analog people just call digital in fashion of Burt Reynolds' character from Boogie Nights "it's shit, baby. it looks like shit, sounds like shit, it's shit", majority of serious no-bs professionals talked about comparison between first-gen Raw cameras and still color reversal film (in terms of latitude, detail and contrast). I've seen enough Red footage to think MX is probably better than that already. Modern sensors are getting closer and closer to the holy grail, which is highlights and wide color gamut. The goal is, I believe, to have sensor you can expose like film negative in any possible situation, then extracting even more good stuff from highlights and shadows in some insane contrast scenes without getting much grain. With clean RGB channels and all the color information captured you would apply a film LUT if necessary or start grading from clean canvas. Objectively this will be the point, where you could say the digital image can give you more options in every field without any excuses like stopping down to save some highlight information or things like that.

Of course you can't win QT with this, but even Nolan said, in the future he'd like to see something to beat film in every possible way, visually speaking. With guys like him and Pfister you can't give them something, that almost like film, or good enough, or kinda on par with film. To convert those guys you need to destroy their minds with something, that deliver a way superior digital negative. Something wonderful.

Terry VerHaar
12-07-2012, 05:37 PM
We all know Jim likes making bold claims for markerting / hype reasons. :-)

I haven't seen any sensor come even close to beating 35mm in terms of image quality, skin tones, colors and so on.

Yeah - despite his personal expertise and many years of dedication to digital cinema, not to mention his history as a successful and honored businessman, I am sure he is just yanking our chains.

Come on, some opinions are better and more informed than others. In this case, I'll go with Jim's. He has seen what you haven't. :nono:

Keith Walters
12-07-2012, 07:58 PM
hahahaha

Jim - plain and simple there is a certain faction of people in this world that will NEVER be happy with anything digital....to them film is like some sort of unattainable holy grail....afterall "it has some sort of magical warmth about it that just can't be described, but you know film when you see it." Total BS. I am in the camp that believes digital has already surpassed film. In my mind, everything from here on out such as Dragon (which will be the best in the land!) will continue to revolutionize the medium and push technology forward.

oh yeah...and then there are spiral galaxies or whatever he said ;)
The painful reality is, for every person who has actually MADE something that people have paid to watch, (or paid to screen on TV whatever) there are thousands who have never done anything but talk about it and clearly have no intention of ever doing anything else.
Even the shit commercials I used to shoot on 3/4" tape 30 years ago, still took a bloody lot of work, so I have nothing but respect for anybody who has actually completed a project, and even more so one that people thought was good enough to pay money for!
When even the most basic professional video production equipment cost an arm and a leg, there was always the excuse that equipment to [the barstool producer's] "standard" (usually film) was sadly out of their reach.
Not so now! You can do perfectly acceptable broadcast quality with a cheap DSLR and any number of Freeware editors. I can't believe the image quality you get out of a lot of mobile phone cameras these days. You don't get any control over depth of field, and the dynamic range is a bit suss, but, whaddya want from something that's only an accessory on a phone!
Bottom line, guys, you don't really need film, Pro video cameras are good enough. You're fresh out of excuses :nopity:

Keith Walters
12-07-2012, 08:21 PM
IIRC, it was around the middle of 2007 when Graeme posted how much he liked listening to old vinyl records, saying the music had a certain warmth to it. I still remember that post and often wonder how this man could be so dedicated to analog and yet, be the driving force in helping digital become dominate? Of course, it's probably nostalgia that keeps him connected to analog music. And I'm sure nostalgia is what causes people to cling to film... Tarentino as an example.

Newer generations likely don't have that nostalgic connection and are probably better equipped to judge any viability of digital over film. And of course you have certain famous directors and DPs who can think outside of the nostalgic box and have chosen digital when they could have shot film. I guess I'm making excuses for people who are defending film, as being a product of their times for the most part. In the end they will be stuck at a certain level while those who embrace the future will be able to progress.
Graeme also likes Valve (Tube) amplifiers!
Somewhat off-topic, check out this web site http://www.vase.com.au/index.php
Vase was Australia's #1 manufacturer of Guitar Amplifiers for many years but closed down decades ago.
I have Vase Trendsetter 60 I bought second-hand back in 1976. I've still got it, and a couple of years ago I started looking at restoring it. I did a web search for any information on Vase amps, and Lo and Behold a successsful Audio engineer and Vase fan has resurrected the company, and is busily turning out Tube Amps identical to the ones they made back in the 60s/70s!

My amp had a loud hum which I thought might be due to a dried-out 40 year old electrolytic capacitor. I wiggled one of the preamp tubes in its socket, and that was all it was. Not bad for a 40 year old amp that I hadn't used for 15 years! Tubes are So-o-o unreliable, yeah, right!

Emanuel A.
12-07-2012, 08:27 PM
(...) Now, 100.000 people right now will agree with me that this (http://vimeo.com/10217446) $600 camera, it has the best movie-looking-life-like-skin-tones ever, even when we all know, that is a low end DSLR, is not a cinema camera, doesn't have a full frame sensor, or high dynamic range and high frame rates, and most important, is not even a 2K sensor camera. (...)That aliasing seems a perfect bitch! : ) To whom is right now in Moscow to shoot the last wide shots for a feature movie entirely shot on DSLRs made by filmmaker's gang factory, there's nothing significant more to say ;-)

Rob Castiglione
12-07-2012, 08:30 PM
I am very conflicted about the whole film/digital thing. I love my valve preamps and I love the look of film. Some people are doing right in right the sound world - it all depends upon the interface between the analog - digital conversion. Dan Lavry is an example. I only hope that the engineering is being tempered by other considerations. If any one can do it, Red can.

Michel Hafner
12-08-2012, 12:29 AM
Film is rated to resolve 160 lines per millimeter. This is the finest level of detail it can resolve, at which point its MTF just about hits zero.

That's with ideal conditions that are very rarely reached when shooting in the real world.


Each line will require one light and one dark pixel, or two pixels. Thus it will take about 320 pixels per millimeter to represent what's on film.

No. Each line is one pixel. You confuse lines and line pairs. Modern 35mm is more or less equivalent to 4K, not 8 or 9 K.

Jannard
12-08-2012, 12:39 AM
Keith... how are you doing? We haven't butted heads for quite some time.

I hope all is well with you.

Jim


Graeme also likes Valve (Tube) amplifiers!
Somewhat off-topic, check out this web site http://www.vase.com.au/index.php
Vase was Australia's #1 manufacturer of Guitar Amplifiers for many years but closed down decades ago.
I have Vase Trendsetter 60 I bought second-hand back in 1976. I've still got it, and a couple of years ago I started looking at restoring it. I did a web search for any information on Vase amps, and Lo and Behold a successsful Audio engineer and Vase fan has resurrected the company, and is busily turning out Tube Amps identical to the ones they made back in the 60s/70s!

My amp had a loud hum which I thought might be due to a dried-out 40 year old electrolytic capacitor. I wiggled one of the preamp tubes in its socket, and that was all it was. Not bad for a 40 year old amp that I hadn't used for 15 years! Tubes are So-o-o unreliable, yeah, right!

Keith Walters
12-08-2012, 01:07 AM
Keith... how are you doing? We haven't butted heads for quite some time.

I hope all is well with you.

Jim

I'm afraid the life has pretty much gone of cinematography discussion over the past couple of years. There was a time when you could get really useful information on forums like Cinematography.com, (as well as endless opportunities to take the piss out of loudmouth know-nothing nobodies trying to pass themselves off as Industry players).
But now the peabrains have mostly retreated back to whatever planet they were expelled from, and even if we say something positive about your products, the usual suspects still slide out of the woodwork calling us nasty names, which means they don't even read our posts.
I was tossing up whether to start a thread about you new Redray/projection/distribution systems, but the last two I started on that subject ended up getting closed, and I never really learned anything useful anyway.
If I post on here, threads have a habit of disappearing without a trace, or I get banned but I've never been able to figure out exactly what I said to warrant it (I've learned keep to keep screen grabs as a reference).
I guess I've moved on.

Peter Karlsson
12-08-2012, 01:08 AM
Pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx...

I hope that your comment was only a comparision between the Mysterium-x HDRx amount of stops and the Dragons native amount of stops, and not actually killing HDRx as a feature for the Dragon sensor since HDRx for the Dragon makes more sense than for the Mysterium-X? HDRx for the Dragon would be more usefull for HDRI environment post light, and the X track would be much more pleasant to work with in 3D tracking since the noise floor would be less (Mysterium-X X-tracks are in many situation a little hard to work with).

Jannard
12-08-2012, 01:19 AM
There is probably a knee-jerk reaction to your posts given our history. You are a smart guy that has a lot to offer as long as you keep your dark side to a minimum.

I don't hold grudges. I'd love to see you post productive info... which you are certainly capable of.

Jim


I'm afraid the life has pretty much gone of cinematography discussion over the past couple of years. There was a time when you could get really useful information on forums like Cinematography.com, (as well as endless opportunities to take the piss out of loudmouth know-nothing nobodies trying to pass themselves off as Industry players).
But now the peabrains have mostly retreated back to whatever planet they were expelled from, and even if we say something positive about your products, the usual suspects still slide out of the woodwork calling us nasty names, which means they don't even read our posts.
I was tossing up whether to start a thread about you new Redray/projection/distribution systems, but the last two I started on that subject ended up getting closed, and I never really learned anything useful anyway.
If I post on here, threads have a habit of disappearing without a trace, or I get banned but I've never been able to figure out exactly what I said to warrant it (I've learned keep to keep screen grabs as a reference).
I guess I've moved on.

Rainer Fritz
12-08-2012, 01:26 AM
Can't wait to see a sample image.... pse share one with us.... :)
15 stops DR right out of the box sounds amazing. with the meizler hooked up it will define the future standard again.
Will we see a tuned redrocket for 6k ??

Thibaut de Chemellier
12-08-2012, 01:54 AM
How better will be rolling shutter issue with Dragon ? ...doing a fast pan with actual cmos sensors just make me sick.

Matthew Scott
12-08-2012, 01:58 AM
There is probably a knee-jerk reaction to your posts given our history. You are a smart guy that has a lot to offer as long as you keep your dark side to a minimum.

I don't hold grudges. I'd love to see you post productive info... which you are certainly capable of.

Jim

Saving your last two posts (to 8000) for something of a fire breathing nature?

Keith Walters
12-08-2012, 02:11 AM
There is probably a knee-jerk reaction to your posts given our history. You are a smart guy that has a lot to offer as long as you keep your dark side to a minimum.

I don't hold grudges.

Jim

Unfortunately I do, although it's not really what people normally understand the term to mean.
Essentially, people or tings just fade into the background noise and become irrelevant.


I'd love to see you post productive info... which you are certainly capable of.


(Not referring to anybody in particular) I'm afraid saying somebody is 100% talking with a megaphone stuck up their ass is never regarded as productive, even when one is 100.0000% correct in saying that.
There's apparently some sort of hard-wired inhibitory reflex that stops most people saying that sort of thing, but it doesn't appear to have ever been switched on in my brain.
I am not a corporate whore, never was, never will be.
I'm afraid you will have to live with that.

Gunleik Groven
12-08-2012, 02:14 AM
I do remember with some fondness, the exchanges between you two guys...

Will Keir
12-08-2012, 03:54 AM
Keith, I admire your boldness.

I believe Jim is a different type of CEO then those you are used to. You are a warrior, Jim is a leader, there is a reason you butt heads. Just remember, were playing for the same team and there is work to be done in this world. If we spend all our energy squabbling, then we'll have to live with the world we passed on when our children inherit our mess.



I am not a corporate whore, never was, never will be.
I'm afraid you will have to live with that.

Emanuel A.
12-08-2012, 05:09 AM
I'm afraid the life has pretty much gone of cinematography discussion over the past couple of years. There was a time when you could get really useful information on forums like Cinematography.com, (as well as endless opportunities to take the piss out of loudmouth know-nothing nobodies trying to pass themselves off as Industry players).
But now the peabrains have mostly retreated back to whatever planet they were expelled from, and even if we say something positive about your products, the usual suspects still slide out of the woodwork calling us nasty names, which means they don't even read our posts.I guess you're not referring who invited you several times to come and list here your thoughts addressed to this community, rather than into the inner circle aka usual suspects in someone's else dictionary. Because that industry you're talking about is only a fiction inside someone's head. There isn't one sole industry but several of similar kind in the same industrial sector, yes (as for instance, I don't watch blockbusters anymore since my 20s when I started to literally be used to sleep during the screenings) as same as many departments in the motion picture business(es).

Whether any one still wants to believe in the geocentric model, whether not. It is useless to pretend that the 16th century never existed, because it happened anyway, despite the efforts of whoever to deny it.

Nathaniel Opgenorth
12-08-2012, 04:02 PM
Dragon should never be compared to 35mm? Is that marketing hype or a serious statement? If its marketing hype then I'm okay with that...Until it has a 65mm sized sensor or even just an 8-perf VistaVision style sensor I'm going to compare it....I think it would be wise that others compare it as well. I DO respect both RED Digital but I think its sort of closed minded to think that 35mm can't compare to Dragon...that said I'd love to have Wally Pfister with Chris Nolan do a demo as I know they are hardcore film guys and if Chris Nolan had a short story it could only make the image look better combined with Pfisters experience. Roger Deakins is sure to be interested...I know he likes Alexa but if Dragon exceeds film DR you gotta be interested. Film has allot of numbers and science in it no doubt but inevitably it is an art form that is in the eye of the beholder. (I'm super excited for this though!).


I agree that there will always be a group that doesn't think digital is as good as film. Personally, I love digital and I love digital even more when its shot Anamorphic. I really hope that Red is still developing a FF 35 sensor (dragon tech) to better accommodate 2x anamorphic lens. I think if red could develop a set of anamorphic lens's to go along with that FF35 sensor they would make a killing. I know they are extremely hard to develop and cost a lot of money. But if anyone can do it Red can. I can't wait to see what red's doing behind the scenes with their lenses. I know something is cooking back there.

I'm an anamorphic fanboy so what I say is liable to be ridiculously biased and full of excitement. RED Please make some anamorphic optics! Part of the film look that I love so much is anamorphic artifacts (not that all film is anamorphic, I just prefer anamorphic to flat). Also It adds resolution (some debate this) when done right but without giving you the headache of more physical pixels...flat 2.35:1 is decent but true anamorphic scope is magical filmic bliss (yeah I said that!)!!


How better will be rolling shutter issue with Dragon ? ...doing a fast pan with actual cmos sensors just make me sick.

I think this is important. I really like the Alexa's mechanical shutter option and Sony's Global Shutter concept (even if I'm not a fan of everything Sony...)..I think less rolling shutter is going to make it so we don't have to carefully watch out for our action scenes turning into Jello ;P


Can't wait to see a sample image.... pse share one with us.... :)
15 stops DR right out of the box sounds amazing. with the meizler hooked up it will define the future standard again.
Will we see a tuned redrocket for 6k ??

I think its sort of strange that the REDROCKET can't handle the B&W RED footage...I can understand 6K "exceeding" its ability but I can only hope RED will make a better future proof REDROCKET in the future...its not even the issue of buying new ones every time they get updated or slower workflows without its help its just sort of point of principle I suppose. I mean I guess you could downsample to 4K in post and be able to use the REDROCKET? Is that possible? I know in REDCINE you can export to custom resolutions but can you export REDCODE out of REDCINE? I know it sounds stupid but I'm curious...not that Ill be editing footage thats over 4.5K anytime soon as my computer is the bottleneck of things at the moment.



There's apparently some sort of hard-wired inhibitory reflex that stops most people saying that sort of thing, but it doesn't appear to have ever been switched on in my brain.
I am not a corporate whore, never was, never will be.
I'm afraid you will have to live with that.
No comment on the other stuff but I do have to say we need more people like this even if we are considered "combative" or "arrogant" or "a**holes"! I guess people often don't understand the difference between simple constructive confrontation and baseless snipes or criticism leading to useless arguments.

Keith Walters
12-08-2012, 04:20 PM
I guess you're not referring who invited you several times to come and list here your thoughts addressed to this community, rather than into the inner circle aka usual suspects in someone's else dictionary. Because that industry you're talking about is only a fiction inside someone's head. There isn't one sole industry but several of similar kind in the same industrial sector, yes (as for instance, I don't watch blockbusters anymore since my 20s when I started to literally be used to sleep during the screenings) as same as many departments in the motion picture business(es).

Whether any one still wants to believe in the geocentric model, whether not. It is useless to pretend that the 16th century never existed, because it happened anyway, despite the efforts of whoever to deny it.

Sorry, somebody on Cinematography.com said the 16th century never happened? Who was that? How would they know?
And how would that get onto a cinematography forum anyway? I think all they had then was the Camera Obscura..

Well it doesn't matter; the world ends on Dec 21st anyway.

Did you know that the square root of 2012 is about 44.9, which is frighteningly close to the estimated size of the "cubit", the unit of length most used in the Bible?
So a square cubit is almost exactly 2012 square centimeters! What more proof do you need?!
The Book of Eli was really a prophecy, and it was shot with a Red camera...

Elsie N
12-08-2012, 04:27 PM
Sorry, somebody on Cinematography.com said the 16th century never happened? Who was that? How would they know?
And how would that get onto a cinematography forum anyway? I think all they had then was the Camera Obscura..

Well it doesn't matter; the world ends on Dec 21st anyway.

Did you know that the square root of 2012 is about 44.9, which is frighteningly close to the estimated size of the "cubit", the unit of length most used in the Bible?
So a square cubit is almost exactly 2012 square centimeters! What more proof do you need?!
The Book of Eli was really a prophecy, and it was shot with a Red camera...

Oh great! Now he tells us we gotta build an ark before December 21st. A little more headsup woulda' been nice, Keith.

(You don't happen to have a cubit measure on your tool belt, do ya) '-)

Matt Ryan
12-08-2012, 04:34 PM
Not sure how we got into a biblical discussion, but pretty sure the bible says no one will know or predict the end of the world. There are signs, but there have been since the beginning of time.

Back to Dragon, if we have 16 stops native DR, with HDRX does that give us 22 stops?

Elsie N
12-08-2012, 04:38 PM
Not sure how we got into a biblical discussion, but pretty sure the bible says no one will know or predict the end of the world. There are signs, but there have been since the beginning of time.

Back to Dragon, if we have 16 stops native DR, with HDRX does that give us 22 stops?

Jarred didn't say definitively that there would be no HDRx, but his implications were that it is not going to be included when the Dragon awakes.

Matt Ryan
12-08-2012, 04:40 PM
Jarred didn't say definitively that there would be no HDRx, but his implications were that it is not going to be included when the Dragon awakes.

I thought he just said Dragon effectively killed HDRX?

Wouldn't that just imply that the latitude was like HDRX so you probably wont need it? I hope it's still there for several reasons, stills, really high DR scenes if we want to capture really bright lights, etc. Would be fun to use 22 stops total to see what it looks like.

Gunleik Groven
12-08-2012, 04:43 PM
I thought he just said Dragon effectively killed HDRX?

Wouldn't that just imply that the latitude was like HDRX so you probably wont need it? I hope it's still there for several reasons, stills, really high DR scenes if we want to capture really bright lights, etc. Would be fun to use 22 stops total to see what it looks like.

There is this slight question of SSD's vs compression/bandwith at 6k and possibly higher bitdepth in the images and implication for datarates...

Matt Ryan
12-08-2012, 04:49 PM
There is this slight question of SSD's vs compression/bandwith at 6k and possibly higher bitdepth in the images and implication for datarates...

very true, but hope HDRX isn't lost. It was a great invention in the camera's.

Emanuel A.
12-08-2012, 07:11 PM
Sorry, somebody on Cinematography.com said the 16th century never happened? Who was that? How would they know?
And how would that get onto a cinematography forum anyway? I think all they had then was the Camera Obscura..

Well it doesn't matter; the world ends on Dec 21st anyway.

Did you know that the square root of 2012 is about 44.9, which is frighteningly close to the estimated size of the "cubit", the unit of length most used in the Bible?
So a square cubit is almost exactly 2012 square centimeters! What more proof do you need?!
The Book of Eli was really a prophecy, and it was shot with a Red camera...Well, last time I checked, cinematography.com forums were opened to all departments of this "industry"... besides, here's a good line to say that this story began long time ago or am I missing anything...? :X On the XVI century analogy, I forgot they (analogies) are usually on screenplay or shooting script but, if people don't pay attention to all the lines or between the lines ; ) there's no way how to get the right line :P I guess, not the case of well-known performers though ;-)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebtj3gDaE64&feature=player_embedded

Who mentioned (blockbuster-)signs? :D

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-A6k8_7SbqR4/UIKPaJ3cO7I/AAAAAAAALlk/HT2rK8YuxSg/s1600/NicolasCage-vampiro.jpg
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/nicolas-cage-vampire-letterman-ghost-rider-289323

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-B-bDr6bnVeY/ToXNZG_DxqI/AAAAAAAAO7g/8d5M81sBAvw/s1600/john+travolta+vampiro.jpg
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/john-travolta-time-traveler-nicolas-cage-vampire-242608

Hey, wait :bigear: but that's hollywood reporter! :001_rolleyes:

Max Nguyen
12-08-2012, 08:03 PM
Well it doesn't matter; the world ends on Dec 21st anyway.

Did you know that the square root of 2012 is about 44.9, which is frighteningly close to the estimated size of the "cubit", the unit of length most used in the Bible?
So a square cubit is almost exactly 2012 square centimeters! What more proof do you need?!


The end of the world story has been with us since the beginning. We like to see full narratives. The scientific method is basically a narrative. Observation, hypothesis, etc... Then conclusion. Bam. You solved a problem that helps the species survive. This built in need for the conclusion is what fuels the end of the world thing.

I am thinking that the end of 2012 marks the destruction/evolution of the world as we knew it. There are a lot of things going on in the world of science and the Geo-political, but let's stick to the world of cinema, since we are on a cinema forum. Odemax and Redray could well be the Armageddon of the established tradition. I don't now how it's gonna turn out, but hot d**n, these guys sound like they are on to something.

Dan Frenkel
12-08-2012, 08:41 PM
ANYONE thinking its the end of the world on here and you wanna sell your EPICS or whatever, I'll take them from you....Just sayin!! I plan on stayin around for a bit, fuck the MAYANS!!

Nathaniel Opgenorth
12-08-2012, 09:03 PM
Sorry, somebody on Cinematography.com said the 16th century never happened? Who was that? How would they know?
And how would that get onto a cinematography forum anyway? I think all they had then was the Camera Obscura..

Well it doesn't matter; the world ends on Dec 21st anyway.

Did you know that the square root of 2012 is about 44.9, which is frighteningly close to the estimated size of the "cubit", the unit of length most used in the Bible?
So a square cubit is almost exactly 2012 square centimeters! What more proof do you need?!
The Book of Eli was really a prophecy, and it was shot with a Red camera...
While I love The Book of Eli I gotta say I laughed a bit XD



Back to Dragon, if we have 16 stops native DR, with HDRX does that give us 22 stops?
Abandoning HDRX would be a mistake...the whole bandwidth issue doesn't seam to be an issue if the camera can do 6K at more than 48fps..if I'm wrong I will gladly take HDRX at 4.5K even. Thing of all the new possibilities that 22 stops could give you? You could potentially avoid graduated filters in absurd lighting, etc. I'm so excited about it I can't even think of examples of the times I've wanted to pull highlights and shadows out of the death!


There is this slight question of SSD's vs compression/bandwith at 6k and possibly higher bitdepth in the images and implication for datarates...
Gunleik I gotta say your quite the sharp guy when it comes to allot of areas...any guestimations on the need to potentially increase bit depth? I find this stuff fascinating as well as important to the art form.

ANYONE thinking its the end of the world on here and you wanna sell your EPICS or whatever, I'll take them from you....Just sayin!! I plan on stayin around for a bit, fuck the MAYANS!!
Agreed if anyone wants to hand me an Epic, Scarlet or even R1MX I will gladly take the inferior product off your hands :D :D

Max Nguyen
12-08-2012, 09:05 PM
ANYONE thinking its the end of the world on here and you wanna sell your EPICS or whatever, I'll take them from you....Just sayin!! I plan on stayin around for a bit, fuck the MAYANS!!

Lol. Guess we are gonna have a bidding war. Since we are talking about the Mayans, they excavated a dwelling that had stuff written on the walls that looked like calender stuff. They surmised that it was a scribe's dwelling. Guess what? He was working on the calender past 2012.

Keith Walters
12-08-2012, 09:33 PM
Jarred didn't say definitively that there would be no HDRx, but his implications were that it is not going to be included when the Dragon awakes.
There is no lens ever made that's going to give an optical image with a range of 22 stops, so it would be a trifle pointless.

Keith Walters
12-08-2012, 09:42 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebtj3gDaE64&feature=player_embedded


Well if it comes from the mouth of Julia "There will be no carbon tax" Gillard, we can be pretty sure it won't happen!:sarcasm:

Pawel Achtel
12-08-2012, 11:32 PM
There is no lens ever made that's going to give an optical image with a range of 22 stops, so it would be a trifle pointless.

True, but using HDRx or similar temporal aggregation method there is no such limitation. :hand:

You can record 100 stops using a lens that may have "only" 20 stops or whatever. You can tade temporal resolution for dynamic range just as you can trade temporal resolution for spacial resolution and vice versa.

So, I welcome 16 stops and respectfully disagree with Jarred :biggrin:

Max Nguyen
12-09-2012, 12:48 AM
There is no lens ever made that's going to give an optical image with a range of 22 stops, so it would be a trifle pointless.

I'm going to make a bold statement here. We have been constrained by our silicon constructs for a while now. We could not move beyond glass. Now we are starting to get into nano-materials and all that. Mark my words. There will be something beyond that limitation within 5-7 years.

Vadim Bobkovsky
12-09-2012, 03:18 AM
I'm going to make a bold statement here. We have been constrained by our silicon constructs for a while now. We could not move beyond glass. Now we are starting to get into nano-materials and all that. Mark my words. There will be something beyond that limitation within 5-7 years.

Oh yeah, I hope I'm still around when they'll come up with some crazy future optics and stuff. I imagine some uber-futuristic lens, which behaves like organic eye and goes far beyond... Okay, back to 2012 and my tiny lil set of vintage mechanical preciouses, lol ;)

Ale Houston
12-12-2012, 04:25 PM
Hi guys! being 12/12/12 and all that BS.. and being 2012 the year of the Dragon (chinese horoscope and all that BS).. how about you letting loose a couple of stills from the Dragon so we can appreciate the beauty of this beast??.. talking about footage here, not pics of the actual bad guy... really sorry for being so pushy with this, but I guess you understand the anxiety we all feel about this..

Rolf Kestermann
12-12-2012, 07:41 PM
I dug a little bit more about it, and here's what I found: (please don't shoot the messenger!).
There is not one concrete answer when is about to compare resolution of film against digital, because film doesn't have to bother with pixels.
But if all you want to do is count pixels, here are the facts:


First of all, film can resolve insanely fine details.


With film, the image is continuous in all three dimensions: x, y, and z (intensity).


With film, you get the same resolution at color transitions (green/magenta, for instance) as you get for light/dark transitions.


With film, you have complete R, G, and B resolution at every point.


Film is rated to resolve 160 lines per millimeter. This is the finest level of detail it can resolve, at which point its MTF just about hits zero.


Each line will require one light and one dark pixel, or two pixels. Thus it will take about 320 pixels per millimeter to represent what's on film.


320 pixels x 320 pixels is 0.1MP per square millimeter.


35mm film is 24 x 36mm, or 864 square millimeters.


To scan most of the detail on a 35mm frame, you'll need about 864 x 0.1, or 87 Megapixels. (lets call that: 9.3K)


each film pixel represents true R, G and B data, not the softer Bayer interpolated data from digital camera sensors. A single-chip 9.3K digital camera still can't see details as fine as a piece of 35mm film.


Since the lie factor from digital cameras is about two, you'd need a digital camera of about 87 x 2 = 175 MP (18.6K) to see every last detail that makes onto film.


Its natural response is similar to our eyes.






The good news is: according to the experts, the average human eye can't resolve more than 10K at ANY distance, so that will be the end of the pixel count race.

One thing to consider in Your math is that Film is made of color layers and that the grain itself is composed different for each frame, which again moves within the gate for
each frame, and does so for all the printing and projection steps in motion picture, plus its not 36X24 but smaller than 24 by something.

Taylor F.
12-14-2012, 03:54 PM
Say... you guys aren't really gonna make us wait til xmas to put a little Dragon footage in our stockings, are you?

Marc Wielage
12-14-2012, 04:21 PM
And ironically, it appears that all the films most likely to get Oscar nominations for Best Cinematography this year were shot on film:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/why-argo-dark-knight-rises-400866

Django Unchained
The Dark Knight Rises
Les Miserables
Anna Karenina
Lincoln
The Master
Beasts of the Southern Wild
and (most of) Argo

I personally thought Avengers, Skyfall, Life of Pi, and The Hobbit were worthy of nominations as well, but we'll have to wait and see what actually makes the final vote.

Rick Dorrington
12-14-2012, 04:22 PM
Not sure if this has been adressed but, if we are waiting to buy an Epic once dragon is released are the Epics just going up 6k (in price)?

Kemalettin Sert
12-14-2012, 04:24 PM
And ironically, it appears that all the films most likely to get Oscar nominations for Best Cinematography this year were shot on film:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/why-argo-dark-knight-rises-400866

Django Unchained
The Dark Knight Rises
Les Miserables
Anna Karenina
Lincoln
The Master
Beasts of the Southern Wild
and (most of) Argo

I personally thought Avengers, Skyfall, Life of Pi, and The Hobbit were worthy of nominations as well, but we'll have to wait and see what actually makes the final vote.

because cinema is about storytelling and acting than camera itself.

Stacey Spears
12-14-2012, 04:53 PM
Not sure if this has been adressed but, if we are waiting to buy an Epic once dragon is released are the Epics just going up 6k (in price)?

Unknown at this point. When the RED ONE started selling with the MX chip in it, it was more expensive than the ugprade price.

Rodrigo Lizana
12-15-2012, 10:06 AM
For digital to be superior than film in every aspect, it must show a gigantic progress in color and also a way better skin tones reproduction and highlight handling. Is this all going to happen within the next sensor ?. Please let me remain skeptic until I can see the images with my own eyes.

Chosei Funahara
12-15-2012, 10:36 AM
Pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx...

I'm so glad that HDRx will be gone, I never use it and I won't use it, I hate it from its invention.
Same as I don't drive a turbo charged engine car, I only drive a naturally aspirated engine car.
REDONE had two FPGA, I have no idea that Epic's internal ASIC layout, adding more FPGA is cumbersome but will work any size of sensor upgrade.

THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

Pablo Moreno
12-15-2012, 04:29 PM
For digital to be superior than film in every aspect, it must show a gigantic progress in color and also a way better skin tones reproduction and highlight handling. Is this all going to happen within the next sensor ?. Please let me remain skeptic until I can see the images with my own eyes.


Let me join you in your skepticism, even when I am very impressed today with the work they did with "THE HOBBIT", (honestly!).


Also, it looks like people still don't realize this fact, about Red and HDRx either, so I'll say it again:


"Images coming from digital camera sensors, any of them, it doesn't matter, even from the Dragon sensor, they don't blend nicely from dark to highlights in only one shot, in particular situations. You either will end up with a normal image with blown highlights somewhere, or one that is too dark. Is inherent in any digital sensor", that is a fact.


How are you going to deal with such a latitude, (Dragon's 16 stops) without HDRx?.


Probably Jarred Land wasn't realizing this fact when he said, that "is pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx"... or... He knows something, that we don't..


And for you Mr. Funahara, I am posting this HDRx magic motion blend image again, together with the original "A" frame, so you can see that is impossible to accomplish this without HDRx..


The "A" frame:


http://i1352.photobucket.com/albums/q648/pm709/small2_zps54dc5f04.jpg



HDRX magic motion blend:


http://i1352.photobucket.com/albums/q648/pm709/small_zps751f84ec.jpg

Sergio Perez
12-15-2012, 05:11 PM
Today I finally had the opportunity to see the LG 84" Ultra HD display. It was using 4K timelapse shots to showcase the screen. I was blown away. Everything looked stunningly 3 dimensional, even without stereoscopic 3D. I think Red is absolutely correct in going up in resolution. If we could get that same impact I had when watching the LG screen on the Big Screen- I've only seen 4K projection in probably not optimal conditions- I can see this as a much more viable future than even current stereoscopic 3D. An eye opener, and I really, really want that TV and Redray!

Phil Holland
12-15-2012, 05:14 PM
Bingo Sergio. That's the true allure of 4K delivery and display. It takes you away from where you are and sucks you into the image.

Chosei Funahara
12-16-2012, 06:29 AM
How are you going to deal with such a latitude, (Dragon's 16 stops) without HDRx?.
Probably Jarred Land wasn't realizing this fact when he said, that "is pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx"... or... He knows something, that we don't..

And for you Mr. Funahara, I am posting this HDRx magic motion blend image again, together with the original "A" frame, so you can see that is impossible to accomplish this without HDRx..


Fortunately, I have worked the sensor technology and also worked this industry since 1974. (I had some detour a few years)
Some people like the way of the look of "High dynamic range imaging" (HDR), and some people love high ASA digital for night shoot.
My case is different, I rely on more man's talents and their creativity than newer technologies.
Many people include myself, to me high ASA on night scene looks like daytime, and HDR in motions are somehow that it limited.
If we have problem of dynamic range (blown out highlights whatever), we use artificial light to compensate and balance out the latitude.

The EpicRed is my personal choice of the camera, but I can choose whatever I want, regarding motion/image capture sensor technology.
For example, the newer Foveion sensor technology and a few other new sensor technology researcher/developer that without HDR, be able to capture those blown out highlight.
Those new high dynamic range capture sensors are on a way to the market.
Yes, the world is not perfect, and be patient.

Vadim Bobkovsky
12-16-2012, 06:46 AM
http://biz77.myvnc.com/small.jpg

If I will get THAT without luma keying or any post trickery, just with default in-camera gamma/color settings, what else do you need? Improved noise floor levels? Duh. Film is still film, obviosuly, but DR is King, man.

Elsie N
12-16-2012, 06:55 AM
Let me join you in your skepticism, even when I am very impressed today with the work they did with "THE HOBBIT", (honestly!).


Also, it looks like people still don't realize this fact, about Red and HDRx either, so I'll say it again:


"Images coming from digital camera sensors, any of them, it doesn't matter, even from the Dragon sensor, they don't blend nicely from dark to highlights in only one shot, in particular situations. You either will end up with a normal image with blown highlights somewhere, or one that is too dark. Is inherent in any digital sensor", that is a fact.


How are you going to deal with such a latitude, (Dragon's 16 stops) without HDRx?.


Probably Jarred Land wasn't realizing this fact when he said, that "is pretty safe to say that Dragon killed HDRx"... or... He knows something, that we don't..


And for you Mr. Funahara, I am posting this HDRx magic motion blend image again, together with the original "A" frame, so you can see that is impossible to accomplish this without HDRx..


The "A" frame:

http://biz77.myvnc.com/small2.jpg

HDRX magic motion blend:

http://biz77.myvnc.com/small.jpg

Maybe an ND filter would have given the same results.

Gunleik Groven
12-16-2012, 07:28 AM
Maybe an ND filter would have given the same results.

My thoughts exactly.

There isn't really too much dr in that image, just a bit of optimistic exposure, the lows are pretty high, so Disn't really the issue...

Doesn't really prove any point IMHO...

I like having the HDRx option, but admittedly, 9 out of 10 times I have selectd it whenrecording, I have ended up not using it, and sometimes it actually creates issues.. If Dragon has 16 stops of latitude (not engineer-measured DR), I think we can do fine without it. But I would prefer those stops to come at least partly in the top range compared to the MX.

Those ND's can be heavy to carry...

I don't need all the extras in the dark...

Really with Chosei on lighting.

And to be honest, I think that is a huge part of photography. To master light.
That's what gives you controll.

Not the ability to hit record under "any" condition.

Wasn't like that on film either...

John Marchant
12-16-2012, 07:46 AM
With Gunleik on that HDRx shot above - what shadow detail of relevance is the A frame preserving? Nothing that makes it to the blended frame, so I'd just call it overexposed...

Exposure bracketing and hence HDRx are only valuable if you bracket the scene brightness that benefits you correctly.

I hope HDRx is only figuratively dead - I use it to aid motion tracking in scenes, and for stills extraction. Its unparalleled for that, if not for its headline use case.