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 :)

BEST TRANSCODE SOLUTION FOR FINAL CUT PRO

Mark Toia

Mark Toia

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
4,142
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Could be anywhere in the world today.
Jannard said:
Most people should know this but we are surprised every day how many are starting out with a film LUT and burning DPXs to work with.

Jim
Click to expand...

This is the primary reason why RED is getting a bad name from clients when they see there images in an offline or grading suite for the first time.
I've been to 4 modern day (BIG) post houses in the last 3 months posting my jobs. (which I usually do in house but I've been Overseas posting in these cases)
The 4x I have walked in and seen my pictures I have just died!

What they did is transcode DPX's with on set LUTS from REDcolour or REC709 or something completely effected by burnt in Contrast/colours/whitebalances that was shot on set. etc.. which is very very hard to grade out.

The secret is to expell all that and start from the NEG base... ooops the R3D LOG base.
The same way we have done with 35mm for the last 20 years.
This thinking is what has saved me in POST. I pretend the R3D is NEG and post the same I have for the last 15 years. Problem fixed. If I have an issue with the shot, I go back to the R3D (like I would with the neg) regrade the info I needed from it. Same old system.. why change it, It wasnt broken.
The only problem is (alot) of people are not using the R3D's in this way. They are trying to grade what is already incamera graded. (like what ARRI LOGC PRORES are)

Post house and individuals transcode the same way for there AVID or FCP files with the same ugly looks generated on set.
They say they have been doing it this way for years!... It's no wonder people blame RED, when in fact is was just bad transcoding and nothing more.

So I call in all the POST techs and go through the best easiest way to get the best files from REDLOGFILM, REDLOG transcoding to all or any formats they require.

My method is this. Transcode everything to these settings . (Via baselight, RED CINE X. etc etc etc...
SET GAMMA to : REDLOGFILM, or REDLOG,
SET COLORSPACE to: to CAMERA RGB,
(to get even cleaner whites to start from, MAX out the SATURATION for viewing only, balance the kelvin control to get a (new) pure white balance, once happy with the balance then bring your saturation back to default. DONE.. PRESS RENDER and never look back.

All of a sudden the FCP & AVID guys are grading in the edit suites in pure LOG, The Flame guys have LOG, the Colorist can either grade these same log files or connect directly to the R3D's and have even more grading fun.
A lot of Colorists also don't set there grading tool settings to these settings, but if they do.. they will have the power and more.

I show every Post house I have gone to this method and all of a sudden, RED is AWESOME. There eyes light up!

Post production has always slowed the RED revolution. But all the tools are there to get the most from this camera.

LOGC PRO RES FILES is the only thing that saves Arr's arse in POST.
Once you export REDLOGFILM PRORES like I have just showed you and start grading, It smashes ARRI's LOG C exports.

There is many ways to POST RED. This is one that serves me well, I edit in real time, grade in real time, export in realtime.... I kill it.
Have fun guys.

Some demos:

http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/REDLOG_realtime_grading/Pro_res_in_real_time_(Car).mov
http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/REDLOG_realtime_grading/Pro_res_in_real_time_(Face).mov
http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/Dynamic_range/Dynamic range from a 4444 PRORES _ FROM RED.mov
http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/Dynamic_range/REDMX_latitude_test..mov
http://www.zoomfilmtv.com.au/ftp/FCP_3way_colour_correct/colour_key_RED.mov


EPIC X... where aaaaaaaaaaare youuuuuuuuuuuu......
 
You are absolutely right about this, Mark. I believe it comes from thinking about RED as a video camera, and expecting it to work as video cameras do. You do a great service by teaching those post houses how to approach RED footage. We should all do that a lot more often.
 
I continue to be impressed by the footage you produce with your REDs Mark.

This post brings up an issue I have regarding the various RED gamma settings.

While there have been great strides made over time with RED Color Science, I continue to feel that
the highlight response in the RED gamma modes are generally too high.
I believe Gunleik Grovan sort of bought this up as well in his RED MX vs Alexa article.

It's like the top end of the curves are set so high as to make footage look like it's blowing out much
earlier than it really is. Even REDlog Film still seems to do this though to a lesser extent compared to earlier
Color Science.

If one know's how to shoot and process RED footage this is not a problem since you know your scopes and the bounds of
RAW.

For those who lack this familiarity with the camera, it's quite easy to make DR challenged looking footage.
I particularly think this occurs in some of the camera tests performed with the RED.

It might be good if RED created a GAMMA setting that is even flatter particularly in the highlight portion of the image.
Would help both in onset monitoring and grading since it will give a more accurate indication of your highlights in production
as well as in post. Could also limit having to go back to R3Ds for retransfer.

Again, nice post Mark.

Brian Timmons
BRITIM/MEDIA
 
Camera RGB? I find there are some really solid profiling and a couple nifty tricks from Graeme going on with REDcolor2, like colour channel mixing that cleans up a lot of problems with blown highlights and underexposed blue channel noise. Why do you prefer Camera RGB?
 
Ive never had blown out hight lights in 2 years... Not sure how people are getting them? Seriously must not be looking at the shot they are shooting. I don't even look at the histograms.

If you grading directly from the R3D's and using REDGAMMA 2 then all is good.

I'm trying to make people look at a REDLOGFILM or REDLOG option and start from the beginning when grading. Just like we did with 35mm film.

So fast, so easy...
watch my first few mov files in my links. A fully graded image in less than 5 seconds of effort, and you can dictate, color, contrast, information, highlights everything... SIMPLE.
 
Brian Timmons said:
I continue to be impressed by the footage you produce with your REDs Mark.

This post brings up an issue I have regarding the various RED gamma settings.

While there have been great strides made over time with RED Color Science, I continue to feel that
the highlight response in the RED gamma modes are generally too high.
I believe Gunleik Grovan sort of bought this up as well in his RED MX vs Alexa article.

It's like the top end of the curves are set so high as to make footage look like it's blowing out much
earlier than it really is. Even REDlog Film still seems to do this though to a lesser extent compared to earlier
Color Science.

If one know's how to shoot and process RED footage this is not a problem since you know your scopes and the bounds of
RAW.

For those who lack this familiarity with the camera, it's quite easy to make DR challenged looking footage.
I particularly think this occurs in some of the camera tests performed with the RED.

It might be good if RED created a GAMMA setting that is even flatter particularly in the highlight portion of the image.
Would help both in onset monitoring and grading since it will give a more accurate indication of your highlights in production
as well as in post. Could also limit having to go back to R3Ds for retransfer.

Again, nice post Mark.

Brian Timmons
BRITIM/MEDIA
Click to expand...

REDLOGFILM will do this for you. It's as flat as a pancake... with Camera RGB setting is even better.
 
thnaks MArk.
thanks a great help, you're awesome compliments.

Luigi
 
Mark Toia said:
REDLOGFILM will do this for you. It's as flat as a pancake... with Camera RGB setting is even better.
Click to expand...

The highlight portion always seemed high and steep to me in the various RED gammas particularly when monitoring.

I must admit though, I never underexposed quite as far as you have to protect the highlights and you are getting some nice results.
I still have to break some habits learned using the old Mysterium sensor as such underexposure would risk noise.
The MX is truly a different beast.

Brian Timmons
BRITIM/MEDIA
 
Mark,

When you underexposed as much as you did in your demos did the histogram show you were in the noise or were you still 'between the goal posts'?

Thanks,
Daniel
 
Hi Mark,
Is it too much to ask you to upload 1-2 sec of R3D files for those footage, either one prefer Face.
Omkar
 
Mark Toia said:
This is the primary reason why RED is getting a bad name from clients when they see there images in an offline or grading suite for the first time.
I've been to 4 modern day (BIG) post houses in the last 3 months posting my jobs. (which I usually do in house but I've been Overseas posting in these cases)
The 4x I have walked in and seen my pictures I have just died!

My method is this. Transcode everything to these settings . (Via baselight, RED CINE X. etc etc etc...
SET GAMMA to : REDLOGFILM, or REDLOG,
SET COLORSPACE to: to CAMERA RGB,
(to get even cleaner whites to start from, MAX out the SATURATION for viewing only, balance the kelvin control to get a (new) pure white balance, once happy with the balance then bring your saturation back to default. DONE.. PRESS RENDER and never look back.
Click to expand...

Another part of the problem is that we are getting conflicting information from people like you trying to do a service by educating people on the "proper" way to do things, and from the RED team. Everyone at RED has been hammering into our brains that you should be using RedColor 2 for grading and here you are telling us to use camera RGB...

So... which is it?
 
Jake Bastian said:
Another part of the problem is that we are getting conflicting information from people like you trying to do a service by educating people on the "proper" way to do things, and from the RED team. Everyone at RED has been hammering into our brains that you should be using RedColor 2 for grading and here you are telling us to use camera RGB...

So... which is it?
Click to expand...
It's whatever works best for you and your situation. Mark is deciding to essentially remove some of the tweaks RED has done with Redcolor2 and starting from scratch, arriving at his own color. Obviously, it works for him. But Redcolor 2 can be just as effective and so really, I'm not sure there is a wrong answer. If you are viewing in a proper environment to judge color, you will arrive at what works best for you. If you need to work fast, and don't want to do the steps Mark is mentioning, maybe Redcolor2 is the way to go.

The most important thing to take away from this is that Mark is getting quality footage using a method that is very easy and straightforward. Sometimes, due to a number of factors, people make it more difficult than it needs to be or compromise the image too early on, giving RED a bad name. He's just showing that it doesn't have to be that way. And he's also pointing out that if you watch your exposure, you can get great results with the methodology he is using. Hard to argue with the results.
 
Steve Sherrick said:
...I'm not sure there is a wrong answer...

...The most important thing to take away from this is that Mark is getting quality footage using a method that is very easy and straightforward. Sometimes, due to a number of factors, people make it more difficult than it needs to be or compromise the image too early on, giving RED a bad name. He's just showing that it doesn't have to be that way. And he's also pointing out that if you watch your exposure, you can get great results with the methodology he is using. Hard to argue with the results.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I've seen Mark's results and think they're amazing. I just think that getting conflicting workflows from various (reputable) sources adds to the confusion. Not even RED's own Final Cut Studio Whitepaper has been updated to reflect what they are telling everyone on the boards here:

"None of the available presets either dictate or limit your projectʼs display or output compatibility, and any of the available settings can be monitored on a Rec. 709 calibrated display, although each will require different adjustments depending on the stylistic look youʼre trying to accomplish. Assuming youʼre grading native RED QuickTime media, the settings that are best for your project are a matter of personal preference, although the REDgamma and REDcolor settings have been designed to strike an excellent balance between accuracy and visual appeal, with emphasis on flattering skin tone and wide latitude for further adjustment."

At this point, I'm honestly inclined to go with what Mark is recommending in spite of the fact that I've tried to adhere to RED's recommendations as simply going into old projects and changing my color space from RedColor 2 to CameraRGB seems to give the actors a more pleasing skin tone... I appreciate the training Mark is trying to offer and it's nice to have all the options, but all the conflicting info is making it hard to find a base from which to explore the options...
 
Looks like there is a bit more saturation from the start with Redcolor 2. Mark, what do you see as the benefit of starting with cameraRGB rather than Redcolor 2?
 
Jake Bastian said:
Looks like there is a bit more saturation from the start with Redcolor 2. Mark, what do you see as the benefit of starting with cameraRGB rather than Redcolor 2?
Click to expand...

Right on...

I am all with you Mark, but for the convenience of habbit, I have a hard time going CAM RGB these days...

we're over RedSpace by now... :-))
 
I remember being helped by a thread called Proxie Editing & ONLINE and waaay back there was Big T's Red Alert Heaven.
Now this one ... thanks once again Mark
 
Hi Mark
Far to often I hear complaints about the DR or general usability of Red footage but know there is more information contained in the footage than most people bother to access. I wish I could say there is an easy solution to this contradiction but at this stage it demands a cultural shift in the way post thinks about the treatment of digital footage industry wide. As mentioned already the "we have been doing it this way for years" syndrome is commonplace and will normally delay new procedures or methods from being adopted.

Personally I think that using/viewing in post with a log correction will be to radical a change for most established post houses to accept or be able to work with strait away. In the mean time I am very happy that Redgamma and Redgamma2 came out, as they are fair compromises. Hopefully in the not to distant future we can get post houses to adopt a "back to scratch" (no pun intended) work flow and work from the flattest image possible alla' Redlogfilm or what ever will come out soon enough. Because I am sorry to say that most houses will transcode to either DNxHD or PRORES and leave it at that through to finishing. Then for more heavy compositing shots they may pump out DPX versions using god knows what gamma corrections and colour spaces.

I am now working on a show that is using a well established multi national post house and I went in one day to look at the pipe line they were using. It went basically like this: Pull data onto server, transcode-using clipster into DNxHD + ALE, copy as per server space allocation to Avid suit - QC, copy to edit assist station and edit.
Note that the QC was done on the transcoded DNxHD files and I don't know yet whether they will conform to R3D on their Baselights or use the DNxHDs. I am not sure what colour space or gamma correction was used during the clipster transcode either but a quality check of transcoded files does not reflect the true quality contained with in the recorded data. Though the footage that will eventually be broadcast will be transcoded and compressed to a degree so arguably it may be a truer quality check than that of the raw file. It still sets a quality perception of less than what Red has to offer.

Either way I think that if we all continue to try and constructively help various parts of the industry reform they’re thinking we will eventually see grades done off raw files or at their flattest settings. Well done on being able to ask for a change in work flow for your shoots in those houses.
 
Nir Shelter said:
Personally I think that using/viewing in post with a log correction will be to radical a change for most established post houses to accept or be able to work with strait away.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? How do you think ALL film DI had been done for the last 10 years? It's done with Log DPX scans...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top