Baselight

[Luis Otero]

Missing a specific forum for this system. So let's try to see if this works to open a new "Mother Thread"...

 

[Frank Cueto]

Are there that many Baselight requests around here? Truth be told, I do see a lot more threads about baselight than Scratch...

 

[Luis Otero]

Compatriota,

I open this just to provide the space for another REduser that posted a question about Baselight using the Davinci thread. I use Resolve, not baselight.

Regards,

 

[Frank Cueto]

Oh, like the bubble blower's thread? Got it.

 

[Luis Otero]

:emote_rainshower:

 

[Marc Wielage]

Baselight is a terrific system, and the support people in LA are stellar. I haven't yet used the new control surface, but the old one was quite serviceable. There are aspects of Baselight I much prefer over Resolve -- particularly the ability to run two separate moving images from timelines side-by-side for comparison -- but you pay for this power and flexibility.

Filmlight has brought down their prices to stay more competitive with Resolve and other companies, but it's still not cheap. Mike Most has a reasonable comparison of Baselight with competing systems at this link on his website:

http://mikemost.com/?p=204

but bear in mind it was accurate a couple of years ago, not so much today. Luis, if you're considering installing a Baselight system, you could probably contact the Chicago office, which I believe services Orlando (though the brochure also references LA).

http://www.filmlight.ltd.uk/contacts/locations/locations.php

It'll be interesting to see how the high-end color-correction systems (Resolve, Baselight, Mistika, Lustre, and Pablo) will survive over the next few years.

 

[Nick Shaw]

…but bear in mind it was accurate a couple of years ago, not so much today.

Very true. Probably worth noting that of the four "cons" he gives for Baselight, two are no longer the case, and one is not as true as it was at the time.

1. Tracking is still implemented as a point based tracker. Although accurate, it is not as versatile nor as fast as an object based tracker.

No longer true. Baselight 4.3 has an object based tracker.

2. There is no paint tool.

Still true.

3. There are no software based video style scopes, as there are in some of the competing products (there is a real time histogram).

No longer true. Baselight 4.3 has software scopes.

4. All Baselight systems are sold turnkey and are somewhat more expensive than some of the systems described here (not all, though).

While still fundamentally true, FilmLight's pricing has dropped (like pretty much everybody's) and the introduction of the Baselight Editions range makes the Baselight toolset available within desktop NLEs and compositing systems at (IMHO) a very reasonable price.

 

[Peter Moretti]

Serously, let's give Baselight a forum!

 

[Frank Cueto]

In the Spirit of being truly accurate, the new tracker is not an object based tracker. It is a planar tracker, similar in function to the one in Monet, but not as powerful since it can't do perspective or skewing, yet.

 

[M Most]

In the Spirit of being truly accurate, the new tracker is not an object based tracker. It is a planar tracker, similar in function to the one in Monet, but not as powerful since it can't do perspective or skewing, yet.

Filmlight calls it an Area Tracker, which is an accurate desciption. It's very similar to the tracker in Resolve, more accurate than Resolve 8, but roughly equivalent to Resolve 9, but Filmlight has always had plans to evolve it into, well, something more than that.

I find DaVinci's description of their tracker as a "3D" tracker very misleading, as the three dimensions it's referring to are really height, width, and scale, which have nothing to do with the more traditional use of the term 3D, which implies identification and tracking of objects in the scene.

 

[M Most]

Very true. Probably worth noting that of the four "cons" he gives for Baselight, two are no longer the case, and one is not as true as it was at the time.

Correct. That post was written at least 1 1/2 years ago. I should probably do an update of that entire evaluation, as a lot of people still seem to refer to it. I'll try to find some time over the weekend to do that.

 

[Frank Cueto]

Filmlight calls it an Area Tracker, which is an accurate desciption. It's very similar to the tracker in Resolve, more accurate than Resolve 8, but roughly equivalent to Resolve 9, but Filmlight has always had plans to evolve it into, well, something more than that.

I find DaVinci's description of their tracker as a "3D" tracker very misleading, as the three dimensions it's referring to are really height, width, and scale, which have nothing to do with the more traditional use of the term 3D, which implies identification and tracking of objects in the scene.

Is there a difference between an "Area Tracker" and a "Planar Tracker" ? Also, I am glad you cleared up my doubt about the "3D" tracker on the resolve, for a while I always thought they had some Boujou like tracker available and I was kinda jealous

There have been some new things added to the AT on BL4.3M1 (latest one?). So now we have less need of tracking shapes in a assist system. I look forward to more development in that area from them.

 

[M Most]

Is there a difference between an "Area Tracker" and a "Planar Tracker" ? .

In my mind, yes. A planar tracker knows about perspective and can change its shape based on the angle of the "plane" with regard to the lens. An area tracker only understands that there is information contained within a certain portion of the image and tracks position and scale, not perspective. Sometimes that's a minor distinction, sometimes it's a very major one.

 

[Frank Cueto]

Hence why I found the AT to be missing that skew and perspective option!

 

[jake blackstone]

Most of the time Resolve tracker doesa good job tracking very demanding images. The difference between 3D tracker and area tracker can be easily seen, for instance, when subject turns face away or towards the camera. Resolve requires a good deal of key framing, where Mocha actually understands perspective and it's tracking requires no manual interaction. It's actually quite impressive. I wish Resolve had this capability as well.

 

[Frank Cueto]

Jake, do as we do, render the matte in AE using Mocha for AE. Get an assist on it

-F

 

[jake blackstone]

Jake, do as we do, render the matte in AE using Mocha for AE. Get an assist on it

-F

No need for AE. Mocha Pro does it all by itself. Version 3.1 even supports R3D natively.

 

[Frank Cueto]

No need for AE. Mocha Pro does it all by itself. Version 3.1 even supports R3D natively.

Just giving a cheaper alternative since everyone (or almost everyone) has AE.