Ask Mike Most Anything

[danibam]

Recently ran into a problem in a project that backed up all data on LTO-4 tapes using BRU on Mac.

The tapes were sent abroad for restore and it was assumed they would be able to restore them there,
but their LTO drive was attached to a Windows system and apparently there is no BRU for Windows.

I guess my question is if going BRU was a wise decision ... and what is the Industry standard in this
regard. What software should be used for creating LTO back up?

This particular project was backed up to LTO-4 tapes using an LTO-5 drive. LTO-4 tapes were used
because that is what the client abroad could read. When discussing how data was going to be handled
all that was discussed was the type of LTO media to be used ... not the software used to make such
backup. I've now learned that a BRU backup can only be restored using BRU software, which only runs
on Linux or Mac. Is that the case? Any universal LTO format available or widely usedin our industry?

Daniel Perez

[Marc Wielage]

I'd also add that if you were shooting a TV series, with a ton of footage being generated, and the mandate was to make the female stars look as good as possible, saving any diffusion for the end of post wouldn't fly if you are going to be judged mainly by how it looks on the HD monitors on set and how it looks in dailies. By the time post is finished and the series goes to air, the DP may be long gone if he didn't make the female leads look good.

Very good point. Though I know a major, major 1-hour show that routinely shoots with only a little bit of diffusion during production, then does a ton of defocus on all the female actresses later on. Really, we mostly do it on the close-ups. (And I can think of one show still on the air where they do about a 7% vertical stretch in order to make the star look thinner. I refer to this as "the 7% solution," when dieting doesn't work.)

I agree that it makes sense to go for less filtration during photography, and then adding more later in post. At least this way, we can reduce it on wide shots or just confine it to skin tones. I've seen some really spectacular filters (like Tiffen Glimmer Glass) that does stuff we can't exactly duplicate in digital, so this makes a good case where an organic approach works better. And the advantage of that is, this is definitely a "what you see is what you get" approach.

How, witin the traditional telecine controls offered in systems like mystica/speedgrade (specifaclly those that do not have curves), is one suposed get fast and steep toe and shoulder compression that allows one to produce a really contrasty picture that keeps as much shadow and highligt details as possible?

I haven't used Speedgrade, but my gut feeling would be to maybe try pulling a highlight key and then exclude those details in order to save them from being compressed. This is one of those things that's easier to demonstrate than to explain.

Otherwise, just tell them to crush the mids as much as possible while trying to retain the whites and blacks. I bet there's a way to get close to this look with traditional controls. But in this specific case, no question, custom curves and/or an adjusted LUT would help make this process faster.

[Marc Wielage]

Recently ran into a problem in a project that backed up all data on LTO-4 tapes using BRU on Mac. The tapes were sent abroad for restore and it was assumed they would be able to restore them there, but their LTO drive was attached to a Windows system and apparently there is no BRU for Windows.

They can't just go out and rent a Mac for a couple of days?

I know of cases where LTO's have gone bad in less than 10 years. But it's still the most reliable backup format in the VFX industry (after 35mm negative, that is). I recently had a case where some DTF-2 backups couldn't be used, mainly because of the difficulty in locating working DTF drives. So it's not just the backup format or the operating system -- it's also the choice of drives.

Worst case, you could restore the LTOs to FAT32 hard drives, then send the hard drives to the company. Those will mount on all current versions of Mac OSX, Windows, and Linux, assuming normal DPX or R3D files.

[M Most]

Recently ran into a problem in a project that backed up all data on LTO-4 tapes using BRU on Mac.

The tapes were sent abroad for restore and it was assumed they would be able to restore them there,
but their LTO drive was attached to a Windows system and apparently there is no BRU for Windows.

I guess my question is if going BRU was a wise decision ... and what is the Industry standard in this
regard. What software should be used for creating LTO back up?

This particular project was backed up to LTO-4 tapes using an LTO-5 drive. LTO-4 tapes were used
because that is what the client abroad could read. When discussing how data was going to be handled
all that was discussed was the type of LTO media to be used ... not the software used to make such
backup. I've now learned that a BRU backup can only be restored using BRU software, which only runs
on Linux or Mac. Is that the case? Any universal LTO format available or widely usedin our industry?

Unfortunately, there is no universal standard, and this fact is very widely misunderstood. The most common format is "standard" Unix tar format, which has the advantage of being both widely deployed and open, but the disadvantage of not being very flexible. Going forward, LTFS is quickly achieving wider use. It has the distinct advantages of being open and flexible, easily appended, and effectively random access, allowing individual file saving and restoring, and interactivity through standard operating system file tools. My personal belief (and hope) is that LTFS emerges as the consensus standard. BRU is popular in the Mac community for a number of good reasons, but the primary one is that it is tailored to OS X and being a commercial product, tends to simplify the process of backup and restore. But being commercial, it is not open. The BRU people are wisely adopting LTFS as an option, so it remains a good option for OS X users going forward.

[M Most]

Otherwise, just tell them to crush the mids as much as possible while trying to retain the whites and blacks. I bet there's a way to get close to this look with traditional controls. But in this specific case, no question, custom curves and/or an adjusted LUT would help make this process faster.

IMHO, crushing the mids is a sure ticket to a lack of detail and definition and a very unnatural image, especially with digitally originated material. You're better off leaving the mids alone and crushing blacks but with proper color balance. This will often yield more "apparent" detail because the lower midrange will be preserved.

Once again, only my opinion.

[Marc Wielage]

IMHO, crushing the mids is a sure ticket to a lack of detail and definition and a very unnatural image, especially with digitally originated material. You're better off leaving the mids alone and crushing blacks but with proper color balance. This will often yield more "apparent" detail because the lower midrange will be preserved.

It depends on a lot of factors. I'd have to see the actual material and know what I was dealing with to say for sure. I'm not sure there are any universal truths here, because of all the variables. There's also a difference between crushing the mids somewhat, vs. crushing them to death.

This would definitely be a case where log and linear adjustments might yield different results -- even both used together. But I have zero experience with Speedgrade, and don't know how far you can push it before things get ugly.

[Michael Lindsay]

I don't have any real experience with Mistika, so I can't offer any specific suggestions on that. Some programs - Scratch comes to mind - have S-curve controls that offer a continuously variable S-curve, which would to a great degree accomplish what you're looking for.

Yes that would work if Mistica has this control.. Also the other option is a low soft and high soft setting (as davinci has in the soft clip tab). This would allow us to hard push but not clip. Even though not as powerful as a curves this would probably work. We def need compression at both the top and bottom. Hopefully we'll find a way. Powerwindows are more tricky in 3d and less suitable for the the material I have...

thank you for your response

Michael

PS anyone know where I can download the Mistica manaul?? thank you!

[Marc Wielage]

Yes that would work if Mistica has this control.. Also the other option is a low soft and high soft setting (as davinci has in the soft clip tab). ...PS anyone know where I can download the Mistica manaul?? thank you!

The manual doesn't appear to be on their website (www.sgomistika.com). You may want to contact the UK head of sales, Geoff Mills, at gmills@sgo.es. I suspect because of Mistika's open architecture, there may be a plug-in that could get the look you want. I also get the impression that because this is such a new product, they probably have the ability to add features relatively quickly. Custom curves is a pretty basic feature that's been around for over a decade (more like 15 years), so I bet they could work this out.

Mistika is a very interesting company, and it'd definitely be one I'd consider if I was starting a big facility from the ground up. (I almost said "if I was starting from scratch," but that would be confusing.)

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

Michael I can provide you with LUT's for Mistika... if you want it...

Also about Film Log and Linear REC709 debate I have made a thread explaining my position:

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread....-Linear-REC709

[Michael Lindsay]

Michael I can provide you with LUT's for Mistika... if you want it...

[/url]

Hi Evangelos

Thanks for the offer... We got through the session. I may take you up n your offer next week when I go back in for some tweaks.

kind regards

Michael