Baselight AVX Plug-in now available for MC

[MichaelP]

I've only see the demos, and just downloaded it myself - but for those looking to get more control over the image via color correction, give the 14 day trial a shot:
http://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/products/editions/range_ed/index_ed.php#BaselightAvid

Between the Symphony color correction, DaVinci Resolve, and now the Baselight plug-in; each of them will have advantages and disadvantages depending on the type work you do, turnaround time, integration with other tools, etc. Off the top of my head:

• Symphony: Quickest and most integrated due to the "relational" color correction. I would argue that the relational should be a property of the timeline and not a particular effect as the metadata to do this is part of the composition. But also has the least amount of control due to lack of shapes and such.
• Baselight Plug-in: Currently the most control over the image for an integrated color correction solution. I also like the fact that the BLT file can be transferred between the different baselight products to create collaborative workflows. Also the use of LUTs and color management that is lacking in MC. Unknown at this time, is whether the image is output to a broadcast monitor while in "effect mode". Testing and others can comment. Does support Avid Artist controller. User can save off presets to the bin and apply to other clips as needed.
• DaVinci Resolve: Best standalone for the price color correction that also has the ability to do dailies and manage LUTs and such in preparation for editorial. Allows MC to support file formats not yet available via AMA such as F65, ARRIRAW, (and RED, considering the forum) etc. Resolve 9 provides better AAF and round tripping compared to Resolve 8, and will continue over time. Supports use of a variety of panels to meet personal preferences. And at the entry level price point of $0 available on both Mac and Win, should be part of every system out there. Kind of like Wave Agent for BWF's.

Interested in hearing other's thoughts in this area.

Michael

 

[jake blackstone]

The beauty of Baselight plugin is it's power and simplicity. No need for conforming for grading, like Resolve. Basic grading can be performed and passed on to Nuke or Baselight, where it can be further manipulated. Once the final grade performed, it still can be changed, if needed, during the final assembly on Avid. Grades are passed around as XML metadata and it never need to be "baked in" until the final step. Yes, the image on the production monitor works, but it needs to be rendered for the playback, like any other effect. The best part, Filmlight did their best to create very realistic "Baselight" environment, so anyone familiar with Baselight operation will feel right at home. And don't forget the Baselight plugin for FCP 7, that had been out now for a year.

 

[MichaelP]

I agree, and I do like the fact that the grade can be passed between the different FilmLight products - but if you finish in BaseLight, it still assumes a conform, same as any other system, the benefit being having a great starting point as nothing got lost in that transition. Same as any system that support the same plug-in between apps - AFF describes the conform, and the individual plug-in passes along the parameters of the effect at that span in time. Just want to make sure there is a difference between the conform of a sequence and color values being passed as XML. And as I mentioned, this is one of the benefits of using BaseLight within Media Composer compared to the other two options.

Michael

 

[MichaelP]

Also to specify, I meant to say that Resolve 9 provides better conform compared to Resolve v8, not compared to BaseLight or any other third party application. In re-reading my original response, it reads differently than my intent. AAF conform is getting better all the time with third party systems - but it still a matter of what gets described on export, and what is supported on import. In my opinion, Avid DS is still the best AAF conform on the market as of now, but BaseLight and Digital Vision also do a great job. The Resolve 9 guide has a chart of what is supported as input and as round-trip. I am also seeing great strides in smoke 2013 and the development on the conform side is coming along very nicely.

Michael

 

[jake blackstone]

And don't discount the simplicity of passing the material to VFX, that uses Nuke. No need for transcoding to DPX or EXR. All R3D settings are past along to Nuke and back intact.
Obviously not all composited work can maintain Raw data during the roundtrip, but for something simple, like sky replacement type of work RAW material can stay RAW all the way to final grading.
But if given project can be edited and finished in Avid, then there is no need for conforming of any kind whatsoever. Quick a easy.

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

We've been beta testing the Baselight plug-in for a while now and it is AMAZING for folks that use AVID NLE software.

For my editors, it takes the color correction tools in Symphony 6 to another level that has to be played with to understand how cool this is.

In the last week or two they have done a number of upgrades and fixes that are making this plug-in IMPO one of the most elegant ways to turbo-charge your color corrections without having to round-trip in and out of applications.

Well done!!!!!
A+++

 

[MichaelP]

I am looking forward to doing more testing with the BaseLight plug-in - from a functionality standpoint, it certainly far surpasses the control of what is currently in either Media Composer and Symphony. Perhaps other vendors will provide similar cross-application plug-in for their color correction offerings as well. I wish/hope Avid provides the "relational" concept to all VFX used in a timeline, as that is a function of the composition to source metadata being used by the current Symphony color corrector, but no real reason to not allow that (other than coding it to do that) as an overall strategy for anything parameter of any type of effect to be applied as needed across different spans of matching metadata of your choosing.

Michael

 

[Steve Sherrick]

I should be able to test later this week.

Jake, you mentioned it needs to be rendered to playback on monitor. Is this an absolute or system dependent? In other words, can a beefy system treat it as a realtime plugin? Also, does draft mode impact playability?

Looks like they have nailed a very impressive workflow, so if realtime viewing is possible then that really is incredible. The concept of being able to experiment with a real color tool in the NLE and then pass along that temp grade to a colorist on a Baselight system is pretty cool and I would think attractive for a lot of Avid editors. And for those who are skilled editors/colorists you could in theory do some jobs all in the NLE (given correct monitoring path).

 

[jake blackstone]

I should be able to test later this week.

Jake, you mentioned it needs to be rendered to playback on monitor. Is this an absolute or system dependent? In other words, can a beefy system treat it as a realtime plugin? Also, does draft mode impact playability?

Looks like they have nailed a very impressive workflow, so if realtime viewing is possible then that really is incredible. The concept of being able to experiment with a real color tool in the NLE and then pass along that temp grade to a colorist on a Baselight system is pretty cool and I would think attractive for a lot of Avid editors. And for those who are skilled editors/colorists you could in theory do some jobs all in the NLE (given correct monitoring path).

I'm basing my statement about need to render on, my tests of the plugin with FCP. Because of the FCP architecture with the need of YUV to RGB conversion and lack of any type of GPU acceleration, rendering was nessesary. I haven't had a chance to see, if this applies to Avid plugin.

 

[MichaelP]

My main system is a PC that has I/O, so I can only test in on my MBP. Waiting to hear on this one and how complex a correction can be done (layers and all) and remain real time playback in timeline. Perhaps Brandon editors have played with this scenario. The issue could be the AVX architecture between their UI passing back to the Avid playback engine.

Michael

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

My main system is a PC that has I/O, so I can only test in on my MBP. Waiting to hear on this one and how complex a correction can be done (layers and all) and remain real time playback in timeline. Perhaps Brandon editors have played with this scenario. The issue could be the AVX architecture between their UI passing back to the Avid playback engine.

Michael

Sure!

Please tell me what you would like us to test and I'll get it done.

We have Mac Pro/ Nirtris- DX Avid-built systems, running 6.0 on Snow Leopard.

 

[MichaelP]

The question is when using Baselight and making corrections, can you see the updated in real time on a REC.709 client monitor?

Thanks

 

[Martin Tlaskal]

I'm basing my statement about need to render on, my tests of the plugin with FCP. Because of the FCP architecture with the need of YUV to RGB conversion and lack of any type of GPU acceleration, rendering was nessesary. I haven't had a chance to see, if this applies to Avid plugin.

Hi Jake,

Baselight for Avid is much, much faster than our current Baselight for FCP release. It now has a GPU renderer, which makes a massive difference. Obviously, the exact performance will vary depending on your CPU/GPU/RAM etc, but I would expect very good performance on most modern Macs. You don't need to render just to view a basic primary correction.

-Martin

 

[Martin Tlaskal]

Hi Michael,

Nice to hear from you!

We support AVX2's client monitoring API, so we do support drawing to the video i/o card whilst the BL UI is popped up. How real-time it is is dependent on MC and the i/o card - we've noticed a fair bit of variability.

-Martin

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

Thank you Martin and the team at Fillight for creating a very cool opportunity for Avid owners.
Very appreciated!

 

[jake blackstone]

Hi Jake,

Baselight for Avid is much, much faster than our current Baselight for FCP release. It now has a GPU renderer, which makes a massive difference. Obviously, the exact performance will vary depending on your CPU/GPU/RAM etc, but I would expect very good performance on most modern Macs. You don't need to render just to view a basic primary correction.

-Martin

I guess, now, I have no excuse, but to revisit the BL plugin for Avid FCP plugin performance left me a bit underwhelmed.

 

[MichaelP]

Hi Michael,

Nice to hear from you!

We support AVX2's client monitoring API, so we do support drawing to the video i/o card whilst the BL UI is popped up. How real-time it is is dependent on MC and the i/o card - we've noticed a fair bit of variability.

-Martin

Hey Martin! Thanks for jumping in. I didn't have email contact for you anymore or I would have pinged you directly. Can you send me your contact details to michael[at]24p[dot]com?

Thanks!

Michael

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Martin, that's excellent news. Can't wait to test this.

 

[Martin Tlaskal]

I guess, now, I have no excuse, but to revisit the BL plugin for Avid FCP plugin performance left me a bit underwhelmed.

Fair enough. Once IBC is out of the way, we'll be shipping a GPU version of the FCP plugin for those who are sticking with that for now - that is even faster than the Avid plugin.

-Martin

 

[jake blackstone]

Fair enough. Once IBC is out of the way, we'll be shipping a GPU version of the FCP plugin for those who are sticking with that for now - that is even faster than the Avid plugin.

-Martin

Interesting. I wasn't aware, that this was even in the works. Thanks for the heads up Martin.