CS5 Workflow and color correction

[M Most]

But sadly, not Lustre...

Not yet.

 

[jake blackstone]

If they did say that, my guess is that it was a clip that they made prior to NAB, or the speaker was using an incorrect program name. The Mac version of Resolve is basically Splice Conform with a lot of other stuff, and it's being sold for $1000. It also can act as a "render node" for a full fledged Linux version of Resolve. As someone else mentioned, Splice was an add on for the 2K to allow quasi-nonlinear operation and access to file based material without the need for something like a Clipster. Since Blackmagic has effectively EOL'd the 2K, there is no need for Splice as a product.

Actually, according to Blackmagic, I was told again last week, that Resolve on a Mac is exactly the same as a Linux Resolve in every aspect, except of two or three instances, due to Mac OS and Mac hardware limitations. Otherwise it's indistinguishable from the real thing.

 

[jake blackstone]

Not yet.

I was disappointed, when I didn't see it at NAB, which would have made it a proper platform for the introduction. Now with Resolve on a Mac available in a couple of months, it makes even more difficult proposition. I just don't see Lustre on Mac available for $1k, or even $5-10k for that matter. May be $20k, like Smoke? So, I wonder, if we'll see the day, when just one of the color grading software could obtain dominant Photoshop-like status and the rest will cease to exist? That will be very sad development...

 

[shashbugu]

So you feel that in the future everybody should be able to do everything without investing any time, effort, or money into learning any of it.

No thats not how I feel.
I clearly said if you reduce the price of a product for the masses, they better be able to use it. That obviously encompasses, their willingness and ability to learn.

The High tools will always continue to exist as the needs for specific ingenious industry users arise. But from the day camera manufacturers like Sony lied to users that they could own a $3000 dollar VX1000 and create images their $150,000 cameras could create. The film industry changed, and as far as tools go it will continue to change and become cheaper. Today camera companies are creating products at $3000 that are better than the $150,000 cameras of those days, the users are creating high end content on those cameras but are not charging any less. The days of costs based on equipment are out the door to be replaced by higher fair market costs based on pure talent.

 

[shashbugu]

I was disappointed, when I didn't see it at NAB, which would have made it a proper platform for the introduction. Now with Resolve on a Mac available in a couple of months, it makes even more difficult proposition. I just don't see Lustre on Mac available for $1k, or even $5-10k for that matter. May be $20k, like Smoke? So, I wonder, if we'll see the day, when just one of the color grading software could obtain dominant Photoshop-like status and the rest will cease to exist? That will be very sad development...

As you know I am excited about the Davinci being at 1k, but I am also happy they still have the higher priced Linux version. Without the higher priced version the will be no demand from colorists for new innovate tools in Resolve.

As far as photoshop goes the high-end desktop publishing industry continues to grow driven by creative individuals, with no limitations created by the software.

 

[jake blackstone]

As you know I am excited about the Davinci being at 1k, but I am also happy they still have the higher priced Linux version.
As far as photoshop goes the high-end desktop publishing industry continues to grow driven by creative individuals, with no limitations created by the software.

My point is, regardless of talent, there is no other tool for high end photo manipulation available right now, exept Photoshop. Yes, there is Pixelator etc, but it's not a real Photoshop replacement and that is not a good situation. If Resolve manages to sell a ton of copies to all kind of users and in the process monopolizes the market for color grading, how are FilmLights, D-Visions and Quantels of the world are going to invest any money in R&D, if there is no way to make money? Autodesk can just walk away, as they have tons of other markets to serve. Just another example, Mac users had to wait all these years, before Adobe finally got around to release native Cocoa or 64 bit version of it's CS. Since Adobe managed to outlast or kill the competition, Photoshop essentially hasn't changed, except for some minor yearly updates. Is this is the future of color grading software? As a prospective user, I'm very exited to see $1k Resolve, but at the same time, I'm not sure it's a good thing in the long run...

Without the higher priced version the will be no demand from colorists for new innovate tools in Resolve.

Not sure I understand the meaning of this statement. What tools are you referring to?

 

[shashbugu]

My point is, regardless of talent, there is no other tool for high end photo manipulation available right now, exept Photoshop. Yes, there is Pixelator etc, but it's not a real Photoshop replacement and that is not a good situation. If Resolve manages to sell a ton of copies to all kind of users and in the process monopolizes the market for color grading, how are FilmLights, D-Visions and Quantels of the world are going to invest any money in R&D, if there is no way to make money? Autodesk can just walk away, as they have tons of other markets to serve. Just another example, Mac users had to wait all these years, before Adobe finally got around to release native Cocoa or 64 bit version of it's CS. Since Adobe managed to outlast or kill the competition, Photoshop essentially hasn't changed, except for some minor yearly updates. Is this is the future of color grading software? As a prospective user, I'm very exited to see $1k Resolve, but at the same time, I'm not sure it's a good thing in the long run...

Not sure I understand the meaning of this statement. What tools are you referring to?

We are making the same point. I mean if resolve on Mac is only at $1000, the developers at Davinci will get lazy, but if they are still in the competitive high-end Linux market, they will continuously improve on the features and tool sets in Resolve.

I wish I could say the same thing with Photoshop, it continuously evolves with innovative time saving features at a crawling pace.

 

[Kujtim Ereqi]

and which company do you think adobe will buy next? :emote_popcorn:

Nobody knows for sure, but IMO the easest step (not necessarily the best one) would be Color Finesse, because it's already working inside both PP and AE (and it comes free with AE), if only Adobe can fix a bunch of things:
1- Masks and vignette inside Finesse.
2- Better keyframing, maybe from inside Finesse.
3- Better secondary room color selection.
4- A tracking solution
5- A simple timeline.
6- Some effect tools similar to Magic Bullet.

As about RESOLVE: The response I got from an email sent to Resolve team about a Windows version was:
"This is not a question we can answer, as BMD does not pre-announce product plans. If you had asked this question about the Mac version a week before NAB, we would have responded the same about that."

 

[Uli Plank]

The version that comes included with AE doesn't work in PPro. And then, do you really think that it will happen anytime soon to cure all those issues (and I consider all of them valid) ? Plus, Color is about 2.5 times faster than Color Finesse on the same hardware.

I'd rather think about one box for grading and another one for editing…

 

[Kujtim Ereqi]

Color finesse is a very good plugin, but they are waaaaayyy toooo sloooowww to update. An update every 5 years. With "Adobe time" that means 3 updates. As I said nobody knows for sure, what will be the next move of Adobe, but if they decide to buy Color Finesse, definitely things are going to change (even speed issues). As about "one box for grading", Finesse already works as a stand alone program; that could be the answer.
As about Synthetic Aperture (owner of Finesse) I don't think they will do anything to address those issues. They already announced Color Finesse 3, which introduces some improvements, but nothing special from version 2, IMHO. I think they like to keep Color Finesse as a CC tool for professional low-end market. Maybe their policy will change after the appearance of Resolve which costs only 400 $ more, software only. If they don't, we have to wait for 2015 (or 2012-the movie) whichever comes first. :violin:

 

[Rob Ruffo]

So you feel that in the future everybody should be able to do everything without investing any time, effort, or money into learning any of it. And, at the same time, all of these things should have the highest of high end capabilities and performance, and be constantly improved and updated. And the companies that provide these tools will somehow be successful and profitable enough to update and maintain them while they're giving them away for free. How exactly does all of that work?

A good interface focuses your time on the art and craft, not on figuring out clunky menu structures. I agree that one should commit time to learning everything one does, but no matter what amount of time one dedicates, that time is always limited and why waste it on kludge.

pricing is another story - software delivery costs $0 per unit (especially if you charge for support packages). So better 100 copies at $1000 than just 1 copy at $50 000. those 100 users will also provide valuable feedback

 

[Bérenger Brillante]

I would love a Lightroom styled CC software from Adobe...

 

[shashbugu]

A good interface focuses your time on the art and craft, not on figuring out clunky menu structures. I agree that one should commit time to learning everything one does, but no matter what amount of time one dedicates, that time is always limited and why waste it on kludge.

pricing is another story - software delivery costs $0 per unit (especially if you charge for support packages). So better 100 copies at $1000 than just 1 copy at $50 000. those 100 users will also provide valuable feedback

film and video software companies are slow or not business savvy enough to catch on to alternative ways of monetizing their products and services. The global business modules are changing fast and very quickly, if they were smart they would have been raking in billions, had the money for, support R&D and more and more new products. Its real simple too. Don't get me wrong the current module works for some companies.

 

[jake blackstone]

A good interface focuses your time on the art and craft, not on figuring out clunky menu structures. I agree that one should commit time to learning everything one does, but no matter what amount of time one dedicates, that time is always limited and why waste it on kludge.

pricing is another story - software delivery costs $0 per unit (especially if you charge for support packages). So better 100 copies at $1000 than just 1 copy at $50 000. those 100 users will also provide valuable feedback

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What you may consider a kluge, someone else may love and find indispensable. For example, I had never warmed up to the Scratch and FilmMaster interface, but I absolutely love Baselight and Lustre. Some may find it ironic, because I think, that Baselight interface, especially the background is just hideous to look at. But I'm sure, there are number of people, that would totally disagree with both statements. It's simply a personal choice. All you can do is to keep an open mind and decide for yourself, if it works for you. What are the criteria I normally like to explore, while looking at the new color grading interfaces. Does it help me to work fast, can I keep my eyes on the picture, while grading, how easy is to copy and paste selected layers and attributes to a single scene or a group, how easy is to decipher already applied corrections etc. There are many, many more, but that is just off the top of my head.
But regardless of personal preference or otherwise, there still is a steep learning curve and no amount of technology will turn the color grading process into just pushing a few preset buttons.

 

[Levan Bakhia]

Well, I want to get back to the original question. It does not matter what the business model of the companies are, what matters is how to switch to SC5, and use the benefit of working with r3d files, and with dynamic link and still be able to do a decent color grading session.

To clarify more:

with final cut my workflow is a pain, I edit in proxies, then I move to color do the grading, render it (proress, dpx,whatever I need) and then some of the shots I have need some AE works, so I import rendered shots it to AE, do whatever I need and then render it once again, to import to final cut, and replace the shot that I have returned from color. not only I have then render the third time (from final cut) for final delivery, but the end result has some shots that are rendered twice and some that are render 3 times, because not all the shots are needing AE.

With CS5 what I like is that I edit, and finish everything without any rendering, I have access to R3D metadata. But this is missing the step of color grading, well of course I can export dpx and this I think is still better than 3 time rendering, but if there was a solution to maintain adobe workflow and be able to grade with r3D would be great. SO IS IT SOMEHOW POSSIBLE?

color finess, can it work with r3ds? what is the downside of finesse, I have never worked with it, is it slow? lack tools? should I consider that?

 

[Uli Plank]

Color Finesse is more than 2 times slower than Color and has no keyframing, masking, tracking or timeline in the full GUI. Why not use DPX series and an EDL to go into any serious grading system? They all support that, since it has been used as long as DI exists.

OTOH, in some cases you can do what you need with the regular color correction tools in AE, staying in 32 bit float and get excellent quality.

 

[shashbugu]

Almost everyone on this thread has at one time or another graded with AE. Its real difficult to grade non real time. Is there any reason you can't leave your R3D's behind and grade with different codecs?

 

[Uli Plank]

It all depends on individual workflow (first-light plus final grade or one step?) and deliverables (for HDTV/Blu-ray or the big screen?).

 

[Rob Ruffo]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What you may consider a kluge, someone else may love and find indispensable. For example, I had never warmed up to the Scratch and FilmMaster interface, but I absolutely love Baselight and Lustre. Some may find it ironic, because I think, that Baselight interface, especially the background is just hideous to look at. But I'm sure, there are number of people, that would totally disagree with both statements. It's simply a personal choice. All you can do is to keep an open mind and decide for yourself, if it works for you. What are the criteria I normally like to explore, while looking at the new color grading interfaces. Does it help me to work fast, can I keep my eyes on the picture, while grading, how easy is to copy and paste selected layers and attributes to a single scene or a group, how easy is to decipher already applied corrections etc. There are many, many more, but that is just off the top of my head.
But regardless of personal preference or otherwise, there still is a steep learning curve and no amount of technology will turn the color grading process into just pushing a few preset buttons.

In this sense I agree with you 100%.

 

[Henry Li]

Before going to question, let me tell you background

I am long time final cut user, even thou I am familiar with Adobe, and have experience with it, I have never thought of switching to it, but with CS5 and all improvements that are out there, I thought of switching.

Mostly what I like is that I use after effects a lot, and I like the dynamic link idea between the two, and it is great that I dont' have to render between final cut and adobe, but what happens with color corretion.

so imagine I have edited with r3d in premier, some parts needed some effects so I dynamically did some rotos, keys and etc, did some titles here and there and I am ready to finish. But I need to do color correction, and I dont' like to use tools that are in AE, I prefer to go with scratch or even with color. Now what happens here? does it mean that all this integrations, premier and after, the fact that I edit in r3d and etc, looses any sense? because now I have to expert my EDL and do grading somewhere else, than come back with dpx files to after effects? it is no better than editing in Final Cut with proxies, then color grading them and finishing in AE.

Or is there any better alternative?

thanks

I was wondering if the following would work for your needs (I haven't actually tried it yet..perhaps someone can shed some light on this):

1. Edit in Premiere Pro CS5
2. Export "Final Cut Pro XML" file
3. Import "Final Cut Pro XML" file into Final Cut Pro
4. From Final Cut Pro -> Send To -> Color
5. Do your color grading in 'Color'
6. Save your color grading
7. Then, back in Final Cut Pro -> Export -> XML
8. Import the above XML (from number 7) into Premiere Pro CS5 (this should contain the color graded material you did earlier, right?)
9. From Premiere Pro, you could export the project to various outputs (blu ray, etc.).

Anyone care to comment?