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 :)

HIGH GLOSS look

Zakaree Sandberg said:
trying to figure out how to get this type of color look
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVBsypHzF3U

from lady gaga telephone video..

It was shot on 35.. but i have never been able to get these kinds of color from apple color..

boosting saturation just gives a weird blown out saturation look..

any ideas on how to get the GLOSS look
Click to expand...

combination of wide angle lenses, 35mm, grain removal, heavy grading, art direction, makeup and very well lit sets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQvBjs9u5Hw&feature=player_embedded
 
Richard Foster said:
Zak - I'm with you about Photoshop. I've been using it since the 90s and it is very powerful and has an easy order to using the controls - levels, curves, etc. IF some one could just adapt it to motion files - Adobe are you listening?
Click to expand...

What's wrong with After Effects? I can't think of anything that's better in Photoshop compared to it color correction wise...
 
Can you make a look in RedCine export to SD card and upload to MX?
 
Funny that this was shot on 35 - I was thinking - Damn, this looks like Red Footage the whole time!

Anyway - A lot of it is curve adjustment and lighting.

The exteriors have strong grads.

As far as saturation and stuff - it's all about getting your white balance "correct" in terms of what the raw is getting - don't "starve" any channels if you want "white" light...

put the camera in raw and light it to look "as glamorous" as you want it to - this means "white balance" is done on the lighting side...

If you expose the raw in such a way that white, middle grey, and black are where you want it through lighting manipulation you will have a very glamorous image...

Don't take this as criticism, or a high and mighty tone either - just the method I would personally use to get that high gloss look you are after... the skin tones have to fall in just such a place in raw view that you can push the glamour edge...
 
I don't have much to contribute but wanted to say this is a great thread. A lot of good information here, very timely and relevant for me.
 
Richard Foster said:
Zak - I'm with you about Photoshop. I've been using it since the 90s and it is very powerful and has an easy order to using the controls - levels, curves, etc. IF some one could just adapt it to motion files - Adobe are you listening?
Click to expand...

It's already been done. Take a look at the FilmMater. It has every color control, that Photoshop has, if not more. That's one of the reasons why I chose it. Baselight and lustre are pretty close too.
 
Forgot to mention:

You can open the video file directly in, whaddyaknow, photoshop, and apply color correction to it using adjustment layers (direct adjustments only affect current frame).
 
time to play with a parabolic umbrella!

I believe you also need to skinny up the shutter...

which makes a HMI parabolic like the briese a handy tool..

other wise Im fighting for light in night time situations..
 
Lightroom is great, I love it but its controls are totally different to a professional motion picture grading suite.

This is why I use OnSet from Iridas as it totally replicates a "real" grading environment, download the trial and see!

As for lighting, well, a 3' source is way too small for beauty lighting, I usually work with 12' to 20' soft sources although I did shoot one hair commercial with a 12' * 72' soft source!
 
Jake,

I assume you mean Digital Vision's film master? Whats the cost on that(ball park)? just checking.. And yes I like this thread quite a bit as well.

j
 
Zakaree Sandberg said:
Thanks Geoff.. I just wanted to make sure this wasnt something I should be able to figure out.. was kinda hoping it took legit colorist to make happen (so i dont feel so shitty about not correcting properly)
I really wish i could just color a still in photoshop.. then somehow use all those settings.. save the file somewhere and upload it into a coloring program that applies the look to moving pictures. would make my life so much easier.. and really doesnt seem like it would be that hard to implement. I can get some fantastic looking colors in photoshop.. just not anything else made for video :/
Click to expand...

that's actually not a complicated process. there are plenty of options for doing exactly that, totally built in to photoshop. send me a message and we'll get you up and running.
 
album.php


http://reduser.net/forum/album.php?albumid=206&pictureid=869

okay, this is all you need to get started out immediately.
you can find it under file>automation>image processor

make sure you're saving tif (i like the lzw (wavelet ;) compression)
also, press the open first image button to apply your effect.
or even better, record a complex action! so simple> go to window>actions, new action. then hit record and do whatever you want to do! then stop it, then run that on all your images!

of course, you cannot at the moment import an .r3d in photoshop, not yet. so export tif, dpx, or exr out of redcine-x or the program of choice. if anyone needs any more specific or advanced help i'm happy to assist.
 
Jason H said:
Jake,

I assume you mean Digital Vision's film master? Whats the cost on that(ball park)? just checking.. And yes I like this thread quite a bit as well.

j
Click to expand...

Yes, it is DVision product. The cost is well over $100k depending on software options. But so was the Resolve couple years ago:-) Regardless of the price, FilmMaster works very much like Photoshop.
 
Tent lighting

Tent lighting

geoffboyle said:
As for lighting, well, a 3' source is way too small for beauty lighting, I usually work with 12' to 20' soft sources although I did shoot one hair commercial with a 12' * 72' soft source!
Click to expand...

When I mentioned a 3' soft source made from a 2K and gel it was given that the lights would also be 3' away from the subject, if you have the lights 10' away then they would need to be 10x10' for the same effect. Also having lights on both sides to combat Lambert's law/inverse square law as the fall off of the left light is balanced by the fall off of the right light.

To get a "no wrinkles" lighting you can use a trick used to photograph silverware for product shots, you put the subject in a white cloth tent and light all sides and the top of the tent evenly from the outside. The camera shoots through a hole in the front of the tent which is also filled with light from the camera side.

I guess to get the background in you could open the back of the tent, but have the sides of the tent close to the background, and put a light behind the subject to fill in the background's center.

When you light in a six sided tent, only the subject color is recorded, there is little shadow to give form to the subject, which is why I mentioned having the camera side a black drape with a hole to shoot through, that makes a 3 sided tent (left , right and top) with the front black and the back open to shoot the background. You still need a bright point source for the eye-light near the hole you shoot through to give the subject's eyes a point, if you use a ring light there you get Os in the eyes...

As for the bottom of the tent, you can put the subject and tent up on a glass floor and light under as well, of just put a white cloth on the floor and light it from small lights on the floor as well if the floor is not in the shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top