My Dragon Thoughts

[Liam Hall]

All good points Phil.

 

[Paul Harb]

Avid can handle R3D through AMA, a bit clunky but is getting better.

That said it doesnt matter if it does or not. It doesnt matter if FCPX or Premiere can or not either. The movie I am on right now for instance, all shot on Red, cut on Avid....(EDITORS CHOICE NOT ANYONE ELSES), there are two assistant editors, and two editors that need to be able to work all at the same time. We will then need to turn over to a sound house, a VFX house and a color house ect. The ONLY people that give a crap about resolution during the post process is on the very back end for finishing and VFX of course.....nobody else sees this as a good thing...in fact it would just get in the way due to major technical issues of trying to cut a feature this size on a SAN where multiple people are touching media. a colorist and VFX artist has no need to run quickly through tons off footage as they are just dealing with shots at a time.....VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE CREATIVE EDIT.

The fly in the ointment is resolution at this stage is a hinderance and does NOTHING I REPEAT NOTHING to make my life as an editor better. I really wish people here understood this simple FACT. This isnt old timers being old timers, this isnt about not wanting to change...this is about reality of this specific post process that wants nothing to do with 6k raw files during the creative editing process.

By the way, "shops" dont edit movies...editors do...we are independent contractors, we belong to no shops...we go from job to job and set up "shop" wherever the production decides to rent space, so your comments make no sense for the workflow that every movie you watch is adhering to at the moment. Post is not involved with choosing a camera, the director and DP and now more often the studios (digital is cheaper, this is all the studios care about....if it wasnt cheaper they wouldnt be moving to digital) are the ones who decide the camera.

I'll bite. If your NLE has native support for R3Ds, as well as myriad other file types - and - your hardware can manage 1/4 res debayer without a noticeable performance hit, why not? I contend they only care if it slows them down. The real fly in the ointment is usually a post infrastructure and workforce that revolves around AVID.

So if Paul's point is that many of the major shops are AVID based, therefore any format that doesn't have robust native AVID support is a fail, that's fair enough - as long as you don't mind letting post dictate your camera choice ;-). BTW, they also want ProRes not ARRIRAW, now that they're in charge and all.

Cheers - #19

 

[Corey_O]

Paul,

Why don't editors cut offlines in 1/8 res and do final conform in 6k?

What is the current workflow when shooting and editing 35mm neg?

 

[Nick Morrison]

Paul,

Why don't editors cut offlines in 1/8 res and do final conform in 6k?

What is the current workflow when shooting and editing 35mm neg?

I'm a promo producer at a major cable network, and we shoot RED all the time. Almost every promo shoot for History is shot on RED. There are 22 edit rooms here, running day and night. So 44 edits a day, involving over a 100 people (editors and producers), and if you count support staff that number could easily be much more.

We work in broadcast, so all we give a shit about is DNX 145 8 bit. That's what's good enough for air, our ISIS is already bursting at the seams (imagine how much footage is loaded here), and working natively off R3D's would shut this place down instantly. There isn't the space. We also need the SPEED to work natively in DNX, because that's what's best for the AVID's.

However, when we go to GRADE...we just spit out an EDL, hand it to the colorist with the shoot drive (containting R3D's), he conforms your sequence in under an hour...and BLAMO...we are grading off the native 5k/4K files right away.

I see no need at all to work natively off R3D's and create a new "workflow" for our engineers to deal with. We are already struggling with the reality that everything is SHOT 23.98, but broadcast is 59.94. I can't TELL YOU how many issues this causes (major internet and cinema publishers are NO LONGER forgiving of any interlacing or artifacting). So we are no essentially working SIMULTANOUSLY in 23.98 and 59.94 on all our projects, and it's already crazy. Adding native 4K right now would just make this place explode.

So I agree with Paul. Just cut with whatever codec is native to your NLE, and then grade at the end with raw shoot files. I see no need to bring them into the mix earlier, as no one will ever need their resolution or flexibility in these early stages of the creative process (where being able to layer 7 tracks of video, for example, is much more important, with nested effects, letterboxes, gfx, etc).

Hope this sheds some light, at least on the broadcast side (as opposed to Paul's experience on movies).

 

[Kemalettin Sert]

show me some pictures!!!

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

I'd like to take a moment to speak about my impressions on the Dragon and Red in general. Some of you may recall my rather rocky introduction to this forum after I wrote a rather critical analysis of my working methodologies with the Red One for American Cinematographer magazine, pre Mysterium-X chip. I was in NO WAY a popular character among you here. If you doubt that, there were TWO separate threads flambéing me on here, calling me a hack, or just an idiot. Look them up, highly entertaining.

However, I felt I had thoroughly researched my issues and I stood by my accessment of the camera at that time. I STILL stand behind that article's stance for the camera as it existed at that time. In fact, the techniques I learned that enabled me to control the Red One's imagery still influences ALL of my exposure methodology for ALL of my digital photography.

It goes without saying that I demand the best from my cameras, but in turn I likewise feel it is my responsibility to really LEARN a camera inside and out. Otherwise, I really don't know WHAT the fuck I'm talking about at all, do I? Even within my hard look at the Red One, I freely admitted that I had produced some of my favorite imagery I have ever created with it. But then, first with the MX upgrade and then with the release of the Epic, Red took quantum leaps forward as a manufacturer and an innovator of ditigal motion picture imaging. And there was a step-function change in my mindset with Red cameras.

To say that I fell immediately in love with the Epic is an understatement. Which brings me to my point. I've been fortunate to spend some time with the Dragon sensor and I can enthusiastically say that Red has just advanced another order of magnitude yet again with this technology.

I have been equally fortunate that several of my top directors that I work with also happen to be huge advocates for Red cameras. So I get to shoot my Epic on almost every project with them. But even the highest level directors get pressured from agencies, clients, studios, whatever to shoot with the Alexa or whatever camera they feel is better suited than an Epic. We have had to go to battle many times trying to extoll the virtues of the Epic camera, only to get thrown, "Well we like the highlights on the Alexa better..." or "POST is requesting Alexa..." Really? What post person in their right mind would lobby for less resolution?

Today, ALL of those arguments end. The images I have tested, analyzed and will continue to rabidly shoot on the Dragon trump ANY camera on the market. Dynamic range, tonal reproduction, resolution, frame rates, form factor, weight, modularity... There is nothing that can touch this camera in ANY of those categories.

So you're bitching about Red taking their time to deliver what should be considered IMPOSSIBLE? Relax and give them the faith and respect that they very much rightly deserve... Go and try and gripe to the President of Sony... Let me know when that happens.

I have proven in public record that I don't blow smoke up someone's ass... In fact, I kinda put my neck on the chopping block calling Red out in the printed pages of one of the most esteemed journals of cinematography and could have earned their eternal mistrust for those actions. Instead, Red has shown great character in accepting me into their community knowing full well I could turn and bite that hand at any time.

My point: The Dragon is THE game changer... Stand back, be patient and take a deep breath because things are about to get real intense and you won't come up for air for probably a few years. This is clearly a case of be careful of what you wish for... You just might get it...

Mark my words.

I loved your post, and hold you in very high regard. What you say carries much more weight with me than the drooling words of a fanboy/sycophant. Now I am much more excited than before about Dragon, although as a businessman I hope it takes a while before they are available here in Montreal, as amortizing my Epic X kit has failed to happen yet - not because of anything to do with my talent or not as a cinematographer, but simply because clients often demand other cameras, and seeing how many days of prep the types of shoots we do require, I can't turn on profit on owning vs renting vs depreciation unless other people day-hire our camera - which has not exactly been booming here. Epic-X popularity is very low in the Montreal market, rightly or wrongly. People want Alexa, or they're broke and shoot DSLR, or they're older and/or ENG-style doc people and they shoot with something Panny/Sony. That describes 99% of prods here.

Hopefully Dragon will change that, and my 40K kit investment (I bought at 27.5 K body-only, not very long ago) will not be just flushed money anymore, even though I have to add 9.5K to it first.

 

[paulherrin]

Until the next major breakthrough (where is the depth mapping and a depth channel mentioned a while back?) I see the Dragon setting the plateau.

i think we're just getting started guys, this stuff is on the way and more - now that we're getting incremental updates on resolution, dynamic range, low light, etc (i.e. the foundation is well established for the fundamentals), i think we're going to see more R&D going to helpful tools that change the way we work on set and in post. i really like listening to michael cioni and the guys at lightiron - they're charging forward with this kind of full circle thinking.

The ONLY people that give a crap about resolution during the post process is on the very back end for finishing and VFX of course.....nobody else sees this as a good thing...in fact it would just get in the way due to major technical issues of trying to cut a feature this size on a SAN where multiple people are touching media. a colorist and VFX artist has no need to run quickly through tons off footage as they are just dealing with shots at a time.....VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE CREATIVE EDIT.

i absolutely am going to have to disagree. that may be the status quo, but i think it's going to be essential to the filmmaking of the future that post is no longer an afterthought, but something that is thought about creatively from DAY ONE. that's the only thing that makes short schedules work, that's what makes for better quality, that's what reduces costs, that's what gives your actors something to work with which is conducive for better performances which is less time *ing around trying to get everybody on the same page on a greenscreen - it just makes sense. watch.

we have everything we need to pull that kind of production off, and some of the big boys are already moving forward with it. it just takes the knowledge and then the will to do what's right and better for everyone. vfx folks are stirred up and they will not rest until they teach directors, cinematographers, art directors, screenwriters, PRODUCERS, and everybody else making major decisions a better way. watch.

basically, all you have to do is set up a theatrical performance, let it run, shoot it - and you're already halfway there for post... then you can fine tune it as much as you want. multiple channels, etc etc. it just makes sense. it's simple. it's happening. watch.

 

[Paul Harb]

Please explain in clear detail why a feature editor would want to cut in 6k. To say that this is the status quo but its going to be essential in future to edit features this way is saying nothing....explain why in the post process for a feature this matters to the creative editing process??? Post is NOT an after thought in my world...which is EXACTLY why nobody is cutting a big feature using R3D files. What "big boys" are you talking about....name productions please. What is CREATIVE about cutting in 6k? The resolution means squat to the creative editing process minus needing to reframe from time to time. Nothing you are stating makes any sense. What does the creative editing process have to do with an actor in front of a green screen? Youre saying VFX artists are now going to dictate the editing process? Huh??? WHERE IS THIS HAPPENING??? NAME A NAME PLEASE....WHO IS CUTTING A BUDGETED FEATURE USING R3D's????

My god it is thick around here...

i think we're just getting started guys, this stuff is on the way and more - now that we're getting incremental updates on resolution, dynamic range, low light, etc (i.e. the foundation is well established for the fundamentals), i think we're going to see more R&D going to helpful tools that change the way we work on set and in post. i really like listening to michael cioni and the guys at lightiron - they're charging forward with this kind of full circle thinking.




i absolutely am going to have to disagree. that may be the status quo, but i think it's going to be essential to the filmmaking of the future that post is no longer an afterthought, but something that is thought about creatively from DAY ONE. that's the only thing that makes short schedules work, that's what makes for better quality, that's what reduces costs, that's what gives your actors something to work with which is conducive for better performances which is less time *ing around trying to get everybody on the same page on a greenscreen - it just makes sense. watch.

we have everything we need to pull that kind of production off, and some of the big boys are already moving forward with it. it just takes the knowledge and then the will to do what's right and better for everyone. vfx folks are stirred up and they will not rest until they teach directors, cinematographers, art directors, screenwriters, PRODUCERS, and everybody else making major decisions a better way. watch.

basically, all you have to do is set up a theatrical performance, let it run, shoot it - and you're already halfway there for post... then you can fine tune it as much as you want. multiple channels, etc etc. it just makes sense. it's simple. it's happening. watch.

 

[paulherrin]

My god it is thick around here...

indeed. what's with the belligerence? ease up. i have a different perspective from you and i'm trying to share it. you're welcome?

look, i didn't once mention anything about resolution or 6k, i don't care what process editors use to tell stories if they want to print everything to film and cut it with scissors and then reconform that to original files that's fine - who cares? just do whatever works best. there are established workflows with avid that nobody seems to want to give up, but editing r3d's is essentially resolution independent, you just set you're quality wherever you want it. everybody can post however they want, do a bunch of transcodes, i don't care - but it significantly helps the color/finishing/fx process to have resolution and color information at some point. the ONLY reason not to use that is to save money/time on rendering costs and upgrading machines/infrastructure to be powerful enough to handle the throughput. that's it. it's backwards to claim that editing in standard definition is somehow superior to working directly with what the audience is going to be viewing. not a lot of productions have committed financial resources to pipelines for 4k+ post yet, probably because these are difficult times for the industry and it's not exactly adapting well, but they're chugging along with what they've got, what's established - that's great. some of the big guys i'm talking about in regards to integrating effects/art early and bringing post on set are jackson & cameron, and probably more that i don't know a lot about. for post, look at lightiron - they're spearheading this thing and proving it right now. but who cares if anybody even is doing anything right now - if you don't want to think about what's to come and what's a better way - now that building infrastructure like i'm talking about is here - that's fine. but don't try to establish some creative high ground for antiquated ways of working. those ways are fine, if it works and you like it, do it... there's so many ways to get there? who cares? i'm not trying to say there's some effects takeover, i'm saying if everybody is relying on effects and post production to make their stuff happen, they're going to eventually wake up and realize they need to know what they're doing a lot more than they do now. vague 'fix it in post' working philosophies are wasteful, needless revisions are wasteful, the lack of education about the details of post-processing/production that many directors/dps/producers have is WASTEFUL of time, money, talent, artistry - it's not sustainable, it's stupid. i'm also saying that the vfx artists will do what's in everyone's best interests, including their own, both creatively and financially, to make a sustainable process that just works better. the reason to edit in the highest res you are able in realtime is to SEE what you're looking at. that's pretty much what cinema is about. creatives will break down unnecessary barriers between pre and post production, between what is seen by those making and consuming... pretty simple stuff. fx plates before you shoot greenscreen, digital characters to interact with rendering in realtime on set, basic color going into or updating alongside the edit, everything linked together, everyone working together. it's about having the vision of the creatives coming together in real time all at once so everyone is looking at the same stuff instead of vaguely trying to imagine everything based on a text and a green void. simple stuff. if you don't think i have a thoughtful view on where we're going that's fine, watch from the sidelines and see what happens.

 

[Christopher Probst]

How did this turn into a thread about editing?

 

[Paul Harb]

Oh man, that was painful to try and read. Paragraphs are our friends. Paul i dont mean to come across as abrasive but unfortunately forums dont convey nuance very well.

So you want to spend resources on VFX shots and coloring before the creative edit is locked? Im not sure how to respond.

indeed. what's with the belligerence? ease up. i have a different perspective from you and i'm trying to share it. you're welcome?

look, i didn't once mention anything about resolution or 6k, i don't care what process editors use to tell stories if they want to print everything to film and cut it with scissors and then reconform that to original files that's fine - who cares? just do whatever works best. there are established workflows with avid that nobody seems to want to give up, but editing r3d's is essentially resolution independent, you just set you're quality wherever you want it. everybody can post however they want, do a bunch of transcodes, i don't care - but it significantly helps the color/finishing/fx process to have resolution and color information at some point. the ONLY reason not to use that is to save money/time on rendering costs and upgrading machines/infrastructure to be powerful enough to handle the throughput. that's it. it's backwards to claim that editing in standard definition is somehow superior to working directly with what the audience is going to be viewing. not a lot of productions have committed financial resources to pipelines for 4k+ post yet, probably because these are difficult times for the industry and it's not exactly adapting well, but they're chugging along with what they've got, what's established - that's great. some of the big guys i'm talking about in regards to integrating effects/art early and bringing post on set are jackson & cameron, and probably more that i don't know a lot about. for post, look at lightiron - they're spearheading this thing and proving it right now. but who cares if anybody even is doing anything right now - if you don't want to think about what's to come and what's a better way - now that building infrastructure like i'm talking about is here - that's fine. but don't try to establish some creative high ground for antiquated ways of working. those ways are fine, if it works and you like it, do it... there's so many ways to get there? who cares? i'm not trying to say there's some effects takeover, i'm saying if everybody is relying on effects and post production to make their stuff happen, they're going to eventually wake up and realize they need to know what they're doing a lot more than they do now. vague 'fix it in post' working philosophies are wasteful, needless revisions are wasteful, the lack of education about the details of post-processing/production that many directors/dps/producers have is WASTEFUL of time, money, talent, artistry - it's not sustainable, it's stupid. i'm also saying that the vfx artists will do what's in everyone's best interests, including their own, both creatively and financially, to make a sustainable process that just works better. the reason to edit in the highest res you are able in realtime is to SEE what you're looking at. that's pretty much what cinema is about. creatives will break down unnecessary barriers between pre and post production, between what is seen by those making and consuming... pretty simple stuff. fx plates before you shoot greenscreen, digital characters to interact with rendering in realtime on set, basic color going into or updating alongside the edit, everything linked together, everyone working together. it's about having the vision of the creatives coming together in real time all at once so everyone is looking at the same stuff instead of vaguely trying to imagine everything based on a text and a green void. simple stuff. if you don't think i have a thoughtful view on where we're going that's fine, watch from the sidelines and see what happens.

 

[Paul Harb]

It tends to do that when i respond to people talking about cutting R3D files on big projects. Didnt mean to derail your thread Chris.

How did this turn into a thread about editing?

 

[Christopher Probst]

I see very little reason to cut in 6K...

 

[Paul Harb]

Ya

Ya

Apparently to see.

I see very little reason to cut in 6K...

 

[Robert Ruffo New]

Please explain in clear detail why a feature editor would want to cut in 6k. To say that this is the status quo but its going to be essential in future to edit features this way is saying nothing....explain why in the post process for a feature this matters to the creative editing process??? Post is NOT an after thought in my world...which is EXACTLY why nobody is cutting a big feature using R3D files. What "big boys" are you talking about....name productions please. What is CREATIVE about cutting in 6k? The resolution means squat to the creative editing process minus needing to reframe from time to time. Nothing you are stating makes any sense. What does the creative editing process have to do with an actor in front of a green screen? Youre saying VFX artists are now going to dictate the editing process? Huh??? WHERE IS THIS HAPPENING??? NAME A NAME PLEASE....WHO IS CUTTING A BUDGETED FEATURE USING R3D's????

My god it is thick around here...

Indeed. I completely agree with you. Even budgeted music videos, the off-line process just needs files good enough to more or less check focus. That's it. The online happens later, referring to the original R3Ds if/as needed. Online/VFX are lower down the food chain from editors and dictate nothing.

I also groan at this imaginary 4K demand, people saying they need 4K monitors, etc. For who? For what REAL projects this year? Other than a tiny handful of features, there is NO 4K delivery market, and I see none on the near horizon, in the real world - not in the world of doing self-financed indy features all by myself with my brothers in a garage in Maine with no distribution model except posting it on Vimeo.

There is NO SUCH THING as a music video, commercial, web promo, corporate etc client that actually wants delivery in 4K. I have never met one. I have never heard of one. The only thing I heard of ONCE was an in-store promo on special monitors in 4K. That's ONE GIG amongst all of what we do ourselves and all the other people we know do.

Maybe in two years there will be - even then it's incredibly easy to see what a 4K shot will look like on a 1080p monitor - most viewers can hardly tell the difference between 1080p and 4K at most seating differences, so I'm sure you can judge if a shot looks OK and color grade it and so on, let alone do your offline edit. If you can't do all your work on a 1080p monitor there's something terribly wrong.

The real professional world is nothing like what many of you here seem to think it is. The real professional world does amazing things amazingly fast - dare I say on the whole better than your average no-budget indy. They're not idiots, they know what they are doing. Learn from them why don't you!

 

[Phil Holland]

Not derailing at all here, but I just want to add a quick thought on the edit front.

Editing in native .R3Ds is common. As is working with transcoded proxies. Both workflows exist, work fine, and have their distinct advantages. Pipelines, deadlines, hardware, individual preference, project scale, etc. all come into play here. There isn't a real right or wrong answer.

It's sort of choose your own adventure on that front and that's what's important.

 

[Phil Holland]

I also groan at this imaginary 4K demand, people saying they need 4K monitors, etc. For who? For what REAL projects this year? Other than a tiny handful of features, there is NO 4K delivery market, and I see none on the near horizon, in the real world - not in the world of doing self-financed indy features all by myself with my brothers in a garage in Maine with no distribution model except posting it on Vimeo.

There is NO SUCH THING as a music video, commercial, web promo, corporate etc client that actually wants delivery in 4K. I have never met one. I have never heard of one. The only thing I heard of ONCE was an in-store promo on special monitors in 4K. That's ONE GIG amongst all of what we do ourselves and all the other people we know do.

Maybe in two years there will be - even then it's incredibly easy to see what a 4K shot will look like on a 1080p monitor - most viewers can hardly tell the difference between 1080p and 4K at most seating differences, so I'm sure you can judge if a shot looks OK and color grade it and so on, let alone do your offline edit. If you can't do all your work on a 1080p monitor there's something terribly wrong.

The real professional world is nothing like what many of you here seem to think it is. The real professional world does amazing things amazingly fast - dare I say on the whole better than your average no-budget indy. They're not idiots, they know what they are doing. Learn from them why don't you!

Different markets demand different things. As do different business models and how you market yourself. Largely the perspective you share is your own localized one. Even if a production isn't finishing in 4K, there are other advantages, such as VFX considerations.

While I understand that the "mass market" isn't 4K heavy yet, do understand that there's a portion of the market that is. And more is on it's way. Some prefer to be on the early adopter train, some seek out comfort in the tried and true bus route that they take everyday. While I'm mostly a realist, I do have high demands for the work I do in the real world and that is reflected in the footage and format choices I make. However, I come from and work in a world that was primarily Super 35mm based. So that's my own localized experience.

But remember this critical point. From the get go the 1080p standard and 2K in general were born out of compromise from where I come from which in effect trickled down to everywhere. 4K is literally doing the same thing. And the place I come from tends to contain the ones paving the road for the future of visual entertainment and who demand more from their image quality. Technological advancement and adaptation are a part of life and career. This industry is built on this concept.

 

[Paul Harb]

I feel bad, i jacked the thread...sorry Chris. Anyone excited to upgrade to Dragon? I am!

 

[Peter Moretti]

I have to say that of the Dragon footage that I've seen around here, there is certainly a qualitative difference between it and all the other digital cinema cameras.

I believe it has to do more with high resolution, low noise and 16-bit from start to finish pipeline than it does with highlight protection, JMHO.

It seems that the Dragon image has exceptional detail and smoothness. I suspect that that is a result of noise not muddying up the image. And the fact that 6K can allow for subtle spatial variations that would otherwise be aggregated into a larger spatial block.

BRAVO to the Red team!!! And to Chris for standing up for what he believes is the truth, regardless of if it earns him enemies or friends. WTG!

 

[John Marchant]

I also groan at this imaginary 4K demand, people saying they need 4K monitors, etc. For who? For what REAL projects this year? Other than a tiny handful of features, there is NO 4K delivery market, and I see none on the near horizon, in the real world - not in the world of doing self-financed indy features all by myself with my brothers in a garage in Maine with no distribution model except posting it on Vimeo.

There is NO SUCH THING as a music video, commercial, web promo, corporate etc client that actually wants delivery in 4K. I have never met one. I have never heard of one. The only thing I heard of ONCE was an in-store promo on special monitors in 4K.

Your clients are not everybody's clients... We've delivered as many 4k jobs as HD in 2013. We're supporting a production right now that absolutely requires a 6K plus image width. Two pitches and one tech consultation this week have been for client requested, essential-to-concept, 4K delivery.

Digital signage, specialist exhibition, large screens at corporate events, and cross-purposed stills/motion work all require 4K plus, and that's what we do. Our clients are not, for the most part, entrenched in the traditional production landscape. We have the capability, so we pursue the opportunities it creates commercially, rather than complaining about how it doesn't benefit what we used to do.