Color Correction Film Vs TV vs WEB

[Zakaree Sandberg]

first question.. for a feature studio (or non studio) picture, do they color grade for film.. and then another grade for dvd/tv and then another grade for web?

or is it one grade and they call it a day?


second..

right now just uploaded my REC709 lut to my monitor.. it seems to work, as on one monitor i have a flat image ( the monitor is set to be flat) and the footage is redcolor 2 redgamma 2.. the min i slide the picture over to my rec709 monitor i get color in my picture (like what I would have seen on the panasonic 17'' while on set..

So.. is this what i should be grading in? or is there a better lut that is more neutral to all environments?

whats the general consensus on this?

 

[Ben Brainerd]

I don't work for a big studio, but I've done a few big-ish projects (Defined as things that have both a theatrical release and a DVD release) as well as had a number of chats about a similar subject with guys who *DO* work big studio releases.

The short answer is no, they don't do multiple grades. Given the cost of grading a film just once it'd be prohibitive. My experience on projects that have both theatrical and DVD release is that you do one of three things, depending on the budget and your post know-how:

1) Grade for your 'primary' delivery, usually the theatrical release, and let everyone else "deal with it". (I'm sad to admit that my first project went like this. The "deal with it" came from the producer when I wanted to make changes for the DVD release)

2) Find the happy medium. Try and get a grade that will look OK on everything. Problem being, a grade that does this is gonna be, well, OK. Never good.

3) The 'Official Way': LUTs, LUTs and more LUTs. My current multi-delivery workflow is pretty similar to what the 'big guys' use. Do the grade, then use LUTs to tweak it for your various deliveries. In my case, I grade to REC.709, since that's what my rig is calibrated for, then build a LUT/Overall correction to bring it to where I need to be for a projector, or the web, or whatever.

I'll admit my way may not be the "best", or the most efficient, but it works for me. And it's based on my impression of the multi-format workflow used by some of the big guns.

 

[jake blackstone]

Do a search on this blog. This subject was discussed number of times.

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

I know but i wanted to start a new one so i could get an answer + reignite the flame for people who might have the same question, or would like to know

ps. fan of your work

 

[Tim Whitcomb]

at the risk of oversimplification, for us on the Pablo, when preparing the master, you grade for one look and thats it. THEN its all about applying different LUT's for different deliverables, but a grade is a grade. You get your look and then do your best with the LUTS to make sure it "looks the same" across your deliverables. i.e. whether prnting on Kodak Vision stock or Fuji stock for film-out. that it looks the same as it does in REC 709 for HD, etc etc.

This is why people pay colorists like Jake to do the work - and they usually invest in color management platforms like Truelight or Light Illusion or Cineform or... without color management software and calibration, you are not really doing true color correction and grading.

 

[Craig Weeding]

All projects that Major Studios released on DVD and Blu-ray get some additional tweaking of the image done when it is Mpeg encoded to its release format PAL, NTSC, DVD and Blue-ray etc.

During the encoding process the operator monitors via the correct color space and makes adjustments as needed for the reduced resolution, dynamic range and color space of consumer delivery formats.

There can be huge differences in the quality of a Blu-ray or DVD encode. Much can be saved or much can be lost depending on the skill of the operator and the quality of the equipment.

One of the great things about Blu-Ray is its ability to playback 24P and avoiding the motion artifacts of converting to 25 and 30 for NTSC and PAL DVDs.

The best encodes I have seen came from 4K film scans and RED 4K. The added information available when encoding from a 4K source shows up both on Blu-ray and DVD. Never down res to SD and encode from a SD file. Always encode directly from the highest resolution source. You will see the difference every time.

Another great reason to shoot on a Red that can do 4K and more even if the release is only 1920 x 1080

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

Tim, What Lut would be used for film? is web basically the same as rec709?

where would one apply the lut? in the color program or final cut (after the grade)

I totally understand why there are pros that do this thing for a living.. but some of my stuff really has no money for that, so im just looking for the next best step

 

[Ido Karilla]

A few months ago the where remarks on this subject that hinted that people should grade Linear and let the Lab do the tweak for the film/DCP.

Is this really the way to go this days?

Please correct me, as far as I understand;

1. You grade to your primary delivery.

2. For that you work in Log (until higher bit depth monitors are around)

3. You use a viewing LUT to mimic the response of your target medium to the signal.

4. You apply (burn in if needed) different LUTs for your different secondary deliveries. ( If you have got "perfect" LUTs no tweaking is needed - I have never had the pleasure of working with "perfect" LUTs)

Thanks

 

[M Most]

A few months ago the where remarks on this subject that hinted that people should grade Linear and let the Lab do the tweak for the film/DCP.

Is this really the way to go this days?

Please correct me, as far as I understand;

1. You grade to your primary delivery.

2. For that you work in Log (until higher bit depth monitors are around)

3. You use a viewing LUT to mimic the response of your target medium to the signal.

4. You apply (burn in if needed) different LUTs for your different secondary deliveries. ( If you have got "perfect" LUTs no tweaking is needed - I have never had the pleasure of working with "perfect" LUTs)

Thanks

If the project in question is shot on film, everything you just said is true, except for the "perfect" LUT with respect to other deliverables. If the project is not shot on film, there are a number of other factors to consider, not to mention that film is not always the primary deliverable these days. Working with a log coded original image is valuable for film because that is its native state. With electronic capture, there are many alternatives, and going to log coding is not always the optimal choice. It really depends on the originating format, the post path that is designed for the project, and the primary deliverable target. I would say that in many cases, log coding for a digitally shot project is not necessarily something you want to do unless you're shooting with something like an F35 or an Alexa, which currently don't offer RAW recording (well, Alexa "sort of" does, but it really hasn't been fully delivered yet). With RAW recording, you have the option of either working directly from the RAW sensor data, or going to a linear light representation (which can be rather effectively saved in a floating point file format like Open EXR), going to a "video gamma" encoded format using gamma LUTs like Redgamma2 in the case of Red or Rec709 in the case of some others, or going to a lower bit depth log format. All of these approaches can be valid ones depending on the specific project and its needs.

 

[Ido Karilla]

If the project in question is shot on film, everything you just said is true, except for the "perfect" LUT with respect to other deliverables. If the project is not shot on film, there are a number of other factors to consider, not to mention that film is not always the primary deliverable these days. Working with a log coded original image is valuable for film because that is its native state. With electronic capture, there are many alternatives, and going to log coding is not always the optimal choice. It really depends on the originating format, the post path that is designed for the project, and the primary deliverable target. I would say that in many cases, log coding for a digitally shot project is not necessarily something you want to do unless you're shooting with something like an F35 or an Alexa, which currently don't offer RAW recording (well, Alexa "sort of" does, but it really hasn't been fully delivered yet). With RAW recording, you have the option of either working directly from the RAW sensor data, or going to a linear light representation (which can be rather effectively saved in a floating point file format like Open EXR), going to a "video gamma" encoded format using gamma LUTs like Redgamma2 in the case of Red or Rec709 in the case of some others, or going to a lower bit depth log format. All of these approaches can be valid ones depending on the specific project and its needs.

Most of the projects we get are shot on RED and the primary delivery is film.

What would you suggest as the best workflow?

1. working REDLOGFILM with a viewing LUT created by the LAB according to our monitor measurements using Cinespace..

2. Working LINEAR ON a REC 709 calibrated monitor and let the LAB do the adjustment.


Thanks.

 

[Zakaree Sandberg]

where do you apply the viewing lut?
On the monitor itself? or in your color program? or in fcp?

what is the best "LUT" or setting for the grading monitor?

 

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

Allow me to jump in...

I urge my clients that I teaching them how to calibrate their grading environment, if we talking about theatrical release (not just TV stuff), to a real film target (that is not an average abstract one) a target that we could easily be able tomorrow if needed to do a film-out. The reasons are two...

1. If you using a film target, the LUT behaves much more naturally and leads you to a better result. With a film target you work in Log and the way grading goes, allows you to play more freely in highlights, plus it gives you a certain punch on the resulted images. Also the LUT engraves to the digital images a filmic character, that is lot better if your film targets are coming from real camera negatives and not inter-negatives, which are very flat. For the resulted sequences, I usually supply or teach my clients how easily to create a conversion LUT's for all deliverable which are P3, XYZ, REC709, PAL, sRGB. Every deliverable is just a render...

2. Most of the time film festivals in nowadays, don't ask film copies, but instead DCI versions. That leads to a point the owner of the movie to have the asset only in the digital domain. An LTO or a disk can't be stored and ignored, as a 4K film negative can for decades or more than a century... So many times, we film-out movies just for archiving purposes... If you thing that what I say is nonsense read the Academy's digital delima report... or imagine an LTO after 50 years in a shelf or a SATA disk... would you be able to read it?

That's my two cents...

In my new web site I will offer a variety of consulting and supporting packages starting from LUT's for specific Mac setups to full DIT, Cinematographer or Post house class consulting... stay tuned... or send me PM...

 

[Ben Brainerd]

where do you apply the viewing lut?
On the monitor itself? or in your color program? or in fcp?

what is the best "LUT" or setting for the grading monitor?

If you're talking about appying a viewing LUT to a monitor, it sounds like you're using a computer monitor as a reference as opposed to a calibrated output display, which unless you're spending BIG bucks won't really need a LUT since it'll be a REC.709 display.

I 'Burn In' my LUTs for non-HD work on final render out of my grading program. Works differently in different programs. Color you apply a LUT and it acts as both a viewing and rendering LUT. FCP doesn't really have LUT support.

I hate to sound pedantic, but there's really no other way to say it: The "Best" LUT is the one that you custom build for your rig based on all the hardware and displays involved. That said, if you're working on the cheap, working towards a REC.709 look is usually not a bad choice.

 

[Steve Shaw]

Ok, real quick reply...

No two monitors are the same, so you HAVE to calibrate your display as a basic step 1.
This means using a good probe and software to check the display settings, and adjusting as required.

Most displays do NOT allow for accurate adjustment, so a LUT will be needed to get a setting that is accurate to a fixed standard - Rec709 for example. Even Rec709 displays sold as such rarely are accurate... and if you are using a non-broadcast display, the gamma and gamut will be well out, even if the display has a Rec709 setting.

Using inbuilt OS display calibration, or the likes of X-Rite EyeOne Match, will not work as Graphics Cards are limited to 1D LUTs - so no Gamut or cross-colour control.

After calibrating the display a deliverable LUT will be required, regardless of the source footage.

You can opt to work tv Gamma (not LIN, as that requires a different workflow) and let the lab or DCI deliverable company deal with things, but who's to say they will get the conversion right?

Moving from one colour space to another is a combination of technical requirement and creative...

In the end, the more control you have over colour and calibration the better the end result - always!