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 :)

Correct Gamma - Discussion about good communication practice in a production

jake blackstone said:
Using your driving analogy, your driver for some unknown reason to you doesn't downshift, when he brakes. Based on that observation, you decide, that the driver doesn't really know how to properly drive or, for that matter, even has a license. What you neglect to notice is the car has an automatic transmission:)
So, yes, you're wrong...
Click to expand...

No, you're misunderstanding what I wrote.

He's not saying the colorist doesn't know how to color.

He wants to ask others to make sure the colorist does. Because he's wondering and unsure.
 
Last edited:
OP just admitted, that there was a lack of communication on his part - "I screwed up, should have communicated better with post". Now he's trying to blame the colorist for blown out highlights after the fact, just because the colorist neglected to use the RLF gamma and even questioning his professional judgement. OP has no one to blame, but himself. Filmmaking is a collaborative process and being able to communicate is the key. As I said before, please discuss your concerns with the colorist directly and don't be a Monday morning quarterback.
And yes, do better next time:)
 
jake blackstone said:
Using your driving analogy, your driver for some unknown reason to you doesn't downshift, when he brakes. Based on that observation, you decide, that the driver doesn't really know how to properly drive or, for that matter, even has a license. What you neglect to notice is the car has an automatic transmission:)
So, yes, you're wrong...
Click to expand...

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! +1, JAKE
 
Jake you are a very knowledgable person. But in this thread you give yourself and your profession a disservice by being personal and rude. We all have come across mediocre cameramen, colourist and, what's even worse, directors. To inquire on a matter that may have a distinct influence on the result ist not back-seat driving but upgrading your self for a discussion that may arise. Brain is obviously curious about the work of this particular colourist. Instead of donating him some of your knowledge you blame him of being a back-seat driver and a complete failure when it comes to communication.

Your attacks here rise the imaginary wall between colourists and cameramen even further. How great is your knowledge as a cameraman? Why so thin-skinned?

Hans
 
This is an interesting discussion. I've worked with a few colourists before. As you guys might know, I spend some time in these forums and probably have read "millions" of posts and thread regarding workflows and best practices- as well as being an owner operator myself, experimented and worked on my own footage. The truth is, there is still a lot of misunderstandings about how to work optimally with Red footage in post production. There were occasions where what the OP described, of the Colorist not knowing about Redlog Film giving better latitude, happened to me, and after I insisted on changing to redlogfilm, highlights were saved. It is indeed, however, much quicker and efficient, in not so challenging shots, for experienced colourists to start on red gamma 4 to achieve a good look. I've worked in colourists in this scenario as well with positive results.

Bottom line is, the OP could have been right about a particular shot or 2 concerning red log film. Not knowing the colourist, though, I would assume that, if he had access to redline x, he could have seen the levels of the shot and seeing that it was irrecuperable, irrelevant of the gamma setting, and went for a specific "blown out" look....

The interesting thing is to know what do experience colourists think is best practice for RED footage? This could be a white paper to help both post houses and clients alike...
 
Gunleik Groven said:
Open.

Thanks for making me see I did the wrong choice

This is a good discussion!

Just keep it nice and to the point!
Click to expand...

Glad this is open again, it did not feel good to see this being closed...

My favorite starting point is RG2 with some level adjustment in RedcineX, 3 and 4 usually don´t match my personal taste (and way of lighting). YMMV.
 
RG2 is sorta a "compromise. Not log, but low contrast.

All but linear are made from RLF these days, so the highlights burning out isn't as much of an issue as it used to be (starting from any of the "rec-compliant gammas". Even good-old RedSpace is derived from RLF.

But I think the implicit theme of Jakes and Brians discussion is good (but possibly thorny).

How do we as DP's communicate with the post-guys in prep and what we have planned with the way we shot?

It is a thorny issue for a reason, because on smaller productions with many individuals in the image-chain, it is often NOT really a collaborative workforce, but rather a chain of "local kings" wo are "right and professional in their field".
That might well be true, but that very attitude scares away a bit of good conversations.

Now that is my way of reopening that part of the discussion… :)
 
Log foundation

Log foundation

I think it's worth noting that many of the best color grading toolsets are optimized for log encoded material - particularly DPX 10bit Cineon scans from 35mm negative film. Moreover, many of the best colorists have developed techniques that leverage the characteristics of log encoded source material in building the final look. RLF is a mathematical transform based on the Cineon curve that gives experienced colorists an image that behaves like a film scan. In most cases, that's the best way to achieve the intended look.

Cheers - #19
 
its an interesting discussion. Let's talk strategies.

Maybe next time. Or perhaps after reading this I would do the following.

If if I was DPing this.

1. Set looks in RCX with R&D sidecars that get delivered as a ballpark intended look
2. Send notes to colorist as scene notes or shot notes saying something like. "This is what I am going for here" or really basic notes like, "if you open this as RC 4. REDlog film, those highlights will be there"
3. Try to initiate this as early in the process as possible and maybe also include some snapshot references on the hard drive that is going to post.
4. A great relationship between colorist and DP is invaluable to a DP. A DP should always see a colorist as a luxury and an extra set of eyes. A person who sees and understands color and as a creative partner. Great colorists are a DPs best friend. It's a luxury to have your stuff graded by a good one, they can really make your images pop, which in the end makes your reel pop, which leads to more work, etc.

By the same token a colorist needs to be working to execute the overall vision and bring their knowledge and day in day out in calibrated environments. When shooting red, it's important to know how much experience that colorist has with red and how the lab is processing. One place might convert everything to DPX, exr, Prores conversions, another might be grading straight off the r3d.

Well lit lit stuff with good contrast ratios and well cared for negatives also make a colorists reel shine.

This is all important stuff for a DP to know because the notes might change and the looks you create can be effected by the workflow.

Interms of of the gamma space. If that is the starting point and the style that colorist likes and the look is what was intended then the gamma space is moot. If that is due to a lack of experience with red material, then it is relevant.

I believe the important thing is to not get into the, "oh, the colorist messed up my work" stuff. If that is the last person touching your work before the public sees it, then establishing a solid working relationship is quite important.

Battistella
 
Last edited:
I find it very indicative, that while some people are willing to jump all over someone questioning technical aspects of post, the moment discussion turns to something equally as important, as finding better ways to communicate and collaborate with the post team, working on the common visual language and immediately everyone's eyes just glaze over and all you hear is just crickets...
 
The op clearly intended it to be graded from log, period. Miscommunication or not, that is where this problem lies... DPs usually get there way, I told him in a PM make them regrade the problematic shots from log, its not that time consuming lets be honest..
 
Brian Merlen said:
The op clearly intended it to be graded from log, period. Miscommunication or not, that is where this problem lies... DPs usually get there way, I told him in a PM make them regrade the problematic shots from log, its not that time consuming lets be honest..
Click to expand...

So, despite OP himself said "I screwed up, should have communicated better with post" and, apparently, his and yours sincere belief, that RG4 is unsuitable for grading, you still feel, that the colorist here is at fault and "DPs usually get there way" and the colorist MUST redo the work?
BTW, how do you figure, that "The op clearly intended it to be graded from log, period"?
Just asking...
 
Hi Jake.

Let's not take stabs at the OP.

I was fiddling with a post here, and could see at least 3 "normal" ways productions can be done.

How would you say that this "should" be handled.
(nope. Not asking about the asking for advice on a forum under a session. You made your point.)

But:
When you get a production, how do you want the communication to be in advance?
 
Yeah.

I was reading this and thinking, "intention without communication could be problematic." Reading through this thread and not pointing fingers, it seems this would be a communication issue, or a failure to communicate.

That might be the bigger point here, don't make assumptions. The DP can not assume it's going to go a certain way without communicating and the colorist can't assume (or guess) the DP's intentions.

So I get why someone might ask, "why not speak to the person you are working with"

image making hasn't gotten all that more complex, but if there is one thing this thread is teaching me its that talking to the people you are handing off to is a pretty essential step in the process. A phone call, email exchange, Skype, a few questions, a conversation, seems would be pretty solvable.

Battistella
 
I would say in general this speaks to the growing reality of production and post. It's very hard in this day and age to "control" how something will look as it moves down the post pipeline. Often it takes superb communication skills yes, but sometimes even these skills can be strained or put to the test when collaborators are meeting for the first time, or just don't have a "rapport". Generally speaking, communication improves as teams continue to work with each other. Working with a colorist for the first time isn't the same as having worked with him/her for several years. We start to learn each other's shortcuts.

So I can see all sides of this fence. For a DP, I imagine it's frustrating when one's "intent" wasn't understood, and on the other side...many post people (colorists/editors) are so used to working for clients that aren't even on set (ie producers, or post supervisors), that even "talking" to the dp/camera op would be a rare luxury. Most of the 100's of editors I've worked with in broadcast have NEVER, EVER met the DP that shot the footage they're working on!!! EVER. The closest they'll get is working with a client like me who was on set because we directed or produced/led the job....But even then, very few clients will be able to give them TECHNICAL answers about how things were shot. And yet these editors are often making ENORMOUS decisions about how things will look when footage hits air, and the DP would never, ever know!

I have personally tried to bridge this gap, by trying hard to understand the technical needs of my DP's and my EDITORS/COLORISTS...but in doing so I've also learned how DIFFICULT this IS.

We are in a new age. Workflows are fast, and DP's and EDITORS are often 1000's of miles apart within days of a job being delivered. Though this may be the "new normal", I'm also confident that as workflows mature...communication systems ideally will also adapt, and DP's may end up being able to give detailed notes WITHIN metadata, if that's not already possible.
 
Last edited:
Nick,

great points. It's a huge challenge for sure. I can see both sides.

Battistella
 
Over the years i had worked with many DOPs all over the world. Unsurprisingly, the best are the best communicators as well. They know exactly what they want, they do most of the work in camera, they very clear in their directions and most of all, they are a pleasure to be around (well, not all:). What they never do is micromanage. They tell you what they want and let you get there the best way you know.
Mostly I work in the commercial and short form projects. Again, the best DOPs know what they are trying to achieve well ahead of the grading session. Its always surprising, that many DOPs film a job, without having a clear idea on the final result.
For communicating the look to the colorist, the good ones will tinker with images in Photoshop or Resolve or they may provide the mood board from the production or in the absence of those, will provide a few commercials or stills pulled from internet.
For various reasons, especially in US, DOPs rarely attend the grading session and in that instance the director or the agency producer runs the session. In Europe DOP does participate much more often and in that case, usually, everyone in the room takes a back seat to him/her.
So, lets discuss the case where DOP is unable to participate. Sometimes we'd run a quick pre-grading session with just a DOP. I have done it remotely as they are running to the airport:) This session can be done before the edit is finished. And it can even be done, while DOP is in his/her hotel room. In that case we'd use something like Team Viewer. DOP can talk to me and immediately see the result. Modern iPads or MacBook Pro have surprisingly good screens with decent calibration out of the factory. We'd get a few key looks and often the agency will use that as a guide. This way DOP is part of the process, which I feel is extremely important.
But the bottom line, the relationship between DOP and the colorist doesn't have to be adversarial, like I can see in this forum. It just mystifies me, that even though everyone understands the importance of great gaffer, DOP wouldn't spend a few hours finding a couple of good colorists they'd like to work with. I understand, often DOP has nothing to do with the choice of colorist, but when you do, who do you call?
Regardless, even if you're not participating in actual grading session, get the name and the phone of the colorist, call him/her, discuss the project and make sure you tell him/her your ideas, send them looks you'd created, give them feedback, if you want something changed. After all, you are the Director of the visual storytelling and every colorist I know realizes that. They are there to help you to tell your visual story. Just communicate...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top