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 :)

Baselight color grading plugin for finalcut pro "seriously"

shashbugu

shashbugu

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,542
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Not that exciting to me since I'm an Adobe fanboy. No adobe version. "Whatever" But for you FCP bums here goes---:nopity:

Sophisticated colour grading functional within Final Cut Pro
Same interface and menus as Baselight colourist are familiar with
Option to export grades as an XML file for completion in a Baselight system
Compatible with Avid ‘Artist Colour & Transport’ control panels
Expected release fall 2011
Under $1000.00

http://www.baselight-tutorials.com/cms1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=143&Itemid=57
http://www.baselight-tutorials.com/cms1/images/stories/pdf/BaselightforFCPLaunch-Filmlight.pdf
 
Interesting. Running on which version of FCP? Hehehe
 
Well it wont be released till the fall. So I guess they would have caught up. Or they may even make a faster version for ADOBE!!!!!!
 
I think this is fantastic. For Indy colorists that would be huge blessing, as this would eliminate the conform step. Said that, I have reread the announcement and it left me scratching my head. I can't figure out the functionality of the plug in. First I see, that the whole Baselight's timeline is missing. In Baselight it is used for displaying correction layers. In FCP they are obviously missing. Would operator have to endlessly scroll up and down the effects tab to see what had been used? Correction, I think I just saw them at the bottom of the effects window. What about the still frame store? etc. There is a reason why Baselght has a display chock full of information. I can't imagine any support for Truelight. But will there be support for any type of LUT? How about RAW, RR and GPU support? etc. Will the editor be able to edit with Prores and then just switch over to RAW for BL plugin grading or FL knows something, that we don't ? GPU acceleration and RR support for FCP?:-) Come to think of it, if FL has to wait for the new FCP 8 functionality, then fall release makes perfect sense... Happy to see the Artist series panel support. It just makes sense, as it is supported by FCP already and I despise the Wave. All in all, knowing FilmLight company engineering prowess, I'm very optimistic, that the final product will be top notch. I guess, this will be my first stop at NAB...
 
jake blackstone said:
I think this is fantastic. For Indy colorists that would be huge blessing, as this would eliminate the conform step. Said that, I have reread the announcement and it left me scratching my head. I can't figure out the functionality of the plug in. First I see, that the whole Baselight's timeline is missing. In Baselight it is used for displaying correction layers. In FCP they are obviously missing. Would operator have to endlessly scroll up and down the effects tab to see what had been used? Correction, I think I just saw them at the bottom of the effects window. What about the still frame store? etc. There is a reason why Baselght has a display chock full of information. I can't imagine any support for Truelight. But will there be support for any type of LUT? How about RAW, RR and GPU support? etc. Will the editor be able to edit with Prores and then just switch over to RAW for BL plugin grading or FL knows something, that we don't ? GPU acceleration and RR support for FCP?:-) Come to think of it, if FL has to wait for the new FCP 8 functionality, then fall release makes perfect sense... Happy to see the Artist series panel support. It just makes sense, as it is supported by FCP already and I despise the Wave. All in all, knowing FilmLight company engineering prowess, I'm very optimistic, that the final product will be top notch. I guess, this will be my first stop at NAB...
Click to expand...

Uhh, Jake, it's a plugin to an editing product. You already have a timeline and a rather unlimited "still store" because you're in an editing program. You also don't need special format support because it will get it's image from the host program, and thus inherit any format support the host provides. If you want a grading program, there's, well, Baselight. Filmlight is not turning a Final Cut Pro station into a Baselight system, they're providing some grading features to Final Cut, just like things like Colorista do, except in a rather more sophisticated way and with specific export capabilities.

Personally, I think this is a very clever way for Filmlight to widen their market in a way that's fundamentally different than what Blackmagic did. By providing some of their functionality within a host program, they can "safely" ship a low end, software only product that has value, but without cannibalizing their flagship product or confusing the market. It will likely also whet the appetite of some users for a "real" Baselight product that won't seem quite so foreign to them anymore. I'm not sure I agree with the notion of bringing corrections done on Final Cut to a Baselight colorist, but time will tell on that one and I'm certainly willing to see how that might go.
 
I agree, that this is a plugin and that is why I'm confused. When they say, that XML can be exported for finishing in BL, it implies a full built in functionality of the plugin. Which means, that there are no limitations to the operations, that can be performed with the plugin. Yes, it is similar idea to the Colorista, but then, conceivably, editor/colorist would now have no limitations, unlike with use of Colorista II, as to what can be performed, including tracking, stabilization, sophisticated masking, keying etc. I know there have to be some type of limitations for the plugin and that is what, I guess, really curious. And I do agree, that the notion of someone bringing a color session, so "all you'd just do a few tweaks" is pretty scary:-)
 
jake blackstone said:
I think this is fantastic. For Indy colorists that would be huge blessing, as this would eliminate the conform step . I guess, this will be my first stop at NAB...
Click to expand...

Great! Once you get to their booth at NAB, make sure you let them know Adobe users would happily pay for a version. Let them know we already have advanced GPU accelaration, Red Rocket support, up to 10k resolution, Epic support etc. At$1000.00 it will be a great complement to CS5.
 
The more choices the better, it seems that for $1k or less you can really get into some high end color capabilities. I wonder if we will see better finishing at the low end instead of everything getting pushed through MB Looks.
 
shashbugu said:
Great! Once you get to their booth at NAB, make sure you let them know Adobe users would happily pay for a version. Let them know we already have advanced GPU accelaration, Red Rocket support, up to 10k resolution, Epic support etc. At$1000.00 it will be a great complement to CS5.
Click to expand...

First I need to understand what it is. Knowing the capabilities of BL, I'm more interested in the limitations of the BL plugin. I'm still trying to wrap my head around it. The more i think about, the more questions pop up...
And I can't imagine FL porting this plugin for PPro, Avid, Vegas etc... Smoke, Storm?Come to think of it, plugin for Storm doesn't sound half bad:-)
 
Aaron McLane said:
The more choices the better, it seems that for $1k or less you can really get into some high end color capabilities. I wonder if we will see better finishing at the low end instead of everything getting pushed through MB Looks.
Click to expand...

Not trying to sound like a broken record, but lack of inexpensive high end grading tools is not why people keep using MB Looks. Resolve for $1k had been out for exactly a year, but the amount of cringe inducing type of finish hasn't diminished. The reason had been and always will be disinterest and lack of caring, inexperience and most important, absence of creative talent combined with steep learning curve. No plugin can fix that...
 
jake blackstone said:
Not trying to sound like a broken record, but lack of inexpensive high end grading tools is not why people keep using MB Looks. Resolve for $1k had been out for exactly a year, but the amount of cringe inducing type of finish hasn't diminished. The reason had been and always will be disinterest and lack of caring, inexperience and most important, absence of creative talent combined with steep learning curve. No plugin can fix that...
Click to expand...

Really harsh but true. Stop dissing us Jake we are trying to find time to learn. Its easier for us to always just hire a colorist.
 
Anyhow... I'd be surprised if this was really useful for RED workflows... That is if FCP doesn't start to accept rocket-acceleration & metadata editing of the RAW files including curves, before hitting the coloring stage...
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Anyhow... I'd be surprised if this was really useful for RED workflows... That is if FCP doesn't start to accept rocket-acceleration & metadata editing of the RAW files including curves, before hitting the coloring stage...
Click to expand...

yep ...let's don't forget how buggy and slow FCP is ....

Unless the new FCP will be a brand new dream... a plugin for color for FCP can only be considered "nothing serious " ... just a little addition , probably useful for those project that cannot afford a colorist or a conforming ...

g
 
I personally have two issues with the BL plugin, at least as far as the information currently available:

1) The UI in the screenshots looks *PAINFUL*. Like they basically took the BL interface and crammed it, unchanged, into the FCP FX window. That's going to be almost impossible to use unless you're running FCP on a pair of 30"+ monitors.

2) They say it has hardware panel support. I would *LOVE* to know how they managed that one. Mainly because (According to my research when I was looking into building a low-cost color panel) FCP plugins *CANNOT* talk to external hardware.
 
Ben Brainerd said:
…FCP plugins *CANNOT* talk to external hardware.
Click to expand...



FXScript plugins can't talk to external hardware. FXPlug plugins are coded in Objective C, and are free to do pretty much whatever they want!
 
Ben Brainerd said:
Isn't FXPlug basically depreciated though?
Click to expand...

No, I wouldn't say so. You could say that FXScript was depreciated when FXPlug came out. Still waiting to see of course whether FXScript and/or FXPlug will be supported in the new FCPx.
 
better explained

http://filmlight.ltd.uk/baselight4fcp

still does not talk about the limitations or versions. Many of us not familiar with Baselight wont know the difference, but alas wont ship for a while.

moving on..............
 
shashbugu said:
Really harsh but true. Stop dissing us Jake we are trying to find time to learn. Its easier for us to always just hire a colorist.
Click to expand...

I think that both are benefiting. Colorists can create their own set ups easier and struggeling productions companies can create theirs. It's just like with editing. The need for professionals is still there, but it has opened the door for more possibilities to make your own production.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top