Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

2K, 2.35:1 aspect ratio, ProRes 4:4:4:4 - A sane approach?

Julian Gerretsen

Julian Gerretsen

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
North East England
After almost 2 decades of assorted commercial photography and videography (including short films), I am finally (at last!) embarking on my first independent feature on a Red One (still to be hired/purchased).

My intended workflow practices will be as follows:

- Film in RED 4K 16:9 (for maximum resolution, greater cropping options)
- For the most part, Nikon 35mm primes and the odd zoom.
- Down-render Redcode to ProRes 4:4:4:4 2K 16:9
- Edit in FCP7 running a 2048 X 872 frame (2.35:1)
- Use ProRes 4:4:4:4 as the working compressor in the timeline
- Color for grading

For the most part I intend to use the 4K frames from the Red "as is" scaled down to fit the 2K frame horizontally and with the inherent vertical cropping. Occasionally I will crop/zoom in on a full 4K frame, but never beyond 100% scaling. Where I do any cropping/reframing, I will re-render source 4K original as appropriate.

I love the wider Panavision style 2.35:1 aspect, but don't want to overcomplicate things and go down the anamorphic route. In any event, due to budget constraints, anamorphic lenses are not even a distant option.

In this I am kind of following Robert Rodriguez's guidance whereby he has shot Sony HD (non-anamorphic) at 1920X1080, but crops down the vertical from 1080 to 818 (physically losing 262 vertical pixels) by putting black bars above and below the frame to gain the 2.35 aspect ratio.

I guess my main concerns are whether:

a) The chosen frame size is "correct"
b) ProRes 4:4:4:4 is of sufficiently high a quality standard to be acceptable for a final print out for theatre release (haha!) or 2K digital delivery
c) If 2K as a delivery format with vertical cropping (as specified) is acceptable for theatre projection.

If Sony HD 1920 X 1080 (and sometimes vertically cropped) delivered more than acceptable picture quality on theatre screens (StarWars etc.) am I correct to assume that a slightly bigger frame, 2048 X 872 will deliver similarly good results (lighting, lenses, colour management and other issues aside)?

Is this a sane approach?

Your comments and advice will be appreciated! Thank you.
 
I'll keep it simple:

A) I don't see anything wrong with that, people have cropped 4k raw to 2.35 before, but as Jaime said, 4.5k 2.4:1 is available now, so that will give you a higher-quality finish.
B) Prores 422 is used very frequently for theatrical releases, so 4444 would be even better.
C) 2k digital, and printed 2k are very common formats for theatrical release, so there's no roadblock there. But as jim has said, keep your 4k "negative" it may open up future possibilities.

None of your thinking seems to be wrong in any way, except that you should consider shooting in 4.5k. Hope that helps.
 
Show's you how up to date I keep with the speed that Red moves at! Yes, 4.5K at 2.4:1 looks like a good bet in terms of increased raw footage quality and extra resolution to work with. I'll be like a kid in a candy store with all those pixels to choose from.

... good call chaps!

I have heard that ProRes 422 is actually used as the native editing format for quite a few prime time tv shows... I had no idea it was actually used for theatrical releases. Kenneth, do you have some recent examples? I hope I am not being too dense about this, but I do actually mean where the final output was an actual ProRes 422 file... I don't mean that the 422 was just used as a proxy just for the edit.

As you say though, 4444 should then be significantly better as it should utilise almost the full bit depth of the original Red source footage.

Thanks! Julian.
 
Julian Gerretsen said:
I have heard that ProRes 422 is actually used as the native editing format for quite a few prime time tv shows... I had no idea it was actually used for theatrical releases. Kenneth, do you have some recent examples? I hope I am not being too dense about this, but I do actually mean where the final output was an actual ProRes 422 file... I don't mean that the 422 was just used as a proxy just for the edit.
Click to expand...

I did mean that it was principally as a proxy format, but there have been cases where it was used for the final output. I know Apple used to have an info page with some of this information, but I'm having trouble finding it at the moment.

Of course ideally you'll be using R3Ds for your final conform, but I know that there have been some cases where prores fed into the final product.
 
Maybe I misunderstood, but why are you choosing not to use the R3Ds for final grading in Color? Even if you are 4444, you have baked in parameters and reduced the space in which you can play. Now if you do a first light correction and you are more than happy with temperature/tint then by all means go the Prores-all-the-way route. But when Red bring out the brilliant new toys like FLUT and it finally makes it into a Color plugin, going Prores at the begining of your workflow loses you the upgradability...

Of course I am having a hell of a time with bugs with R3Ds in Color (frozen frames, crashes), but theoretically it is superior! :smash:
 
I agree that you're on the right track.
The only suggestion I would have is that you crop your Pro Res files to 2:35 so you don't have to render them in FCP.
 
First up chaps, I have to admit that I am not overly clued up on the technicalities of Redcode and lookup tables etc. I am more of a director/storyteller who will be doubling up as a cinematographer with the help of an experienced cameraman (who has no experience of RED, helpfully). As in the past, I will be doing all my own editing on FCP

I have worked a lot with Nikon RAW in the past with the photo side of my photo/video business so understand the principles of being able to "pull" good images from "not ideal" digital negs.

IAN: On the above note, thanks, yes I agree, first light correction before creating a 4444 file as a rough overall correction to each clip would be a good approach. The 4444 file should then have enough play in it to allow for subtle corrections/enhancements? And as you say, I really want to avoid the grief that you are experiencing with the Red files.

CRAIGJKHARRIS: Ulp! Apologies for being an ignoramus, but could you elaborate a bit more. i.e. How would I generate the 4444 without bringing the redcode into FCP, re-scaling/re-framing and re-rendering?

I am not trying to be obtuse or obstinate about using 4444, it just seems from what I have read that it offers sufficiently good quality and bit depth to be able to put together a good looking movie, within a native Apple working environment and with minimum fuss. If there is a better way of doing it without adding massive amounts of work then of course I am open to going down that route.

Thanks!
 
On the above note, has anyone put up any test RED 4.5K footage or know of any links to any native RED 4.5/4K footage?

I would love to download a short clip (even if only a few seconds), just to get a feel for what it looks like and how it can be scaled, manipulated within FCP (I've upgraded to the newest version of FCS)

Regards,

Julian
 
Julian: I seem to be an exception rather than rule (and may be homing into where my problems lie, which are possibly due to one conform too many). As a photographer, you know very well the wonderful power the RAW workflow brings (and why I still want even more control in RAW processor apps like Lightroom, bibble Pro 5 is looking good here, local edit early in the image path!). There are many people using very successfully the Ingest -> Proxy > Edit > Send/Conform R3D to Color, and they are future proofing their workflow (i.e. if you need a larger size out, a radical reintepretation of the white balance etc.). I think the Color plugin will be updated soon. So even though i've personally been burned by the full RAW workflow (again I'm more an exception than a rule), I'd probably still do it again this way.

Jim on his hints and tips page shows how setting a slightly off white balance can clearly clip a channel and lose a little information that would never be available again even in a 4444 file for example:

http://reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=540713&postcount=17

I don't have any 4.5K footage, but if you want some 4K 2:1 R3ds to play with PM me.
 
IAN: Hhmmm... point taken, especially on that white balance issue.... I suppose I should really go down the proxy editing route then... I'll have to get more clued up on this then. With only working in at best HDV till now, you kind of get used to the limitations of the 8bit colour space and not having to worry about having 12 bits of info per channel to play around with.

It's another complication (for a very small crew), but one worth taking, I guess. Oh well, better beef up on the processes involved!

On that note, I am just about to PM you regards some 4K test footage!

Cheers,

Julian
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top