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 :)

How to successfully use the "Sizing" information contained on the XML...?

Luis Otero

Luis Otero

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
1,130
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Orlando, FL
Hello everyone,

We have unsuccessfully tried to use the sizing information contained on the XML to make it working correctly within Resolve. I will present a real case scenario, and if someone has had any success using it before, or has any suggestion, it will be welcomed if it is shared with us.

I will try to elaborate just enough so you can understand the magnitude of having this function to work correctly. And yes, we have tried to work with BMD support, but apparently this is either to easy, or too hard, that they have not been in a situation before to try to troubleshoot this function with any previous user. So, here we go with the facts:
  1. We completed the editing and grading of a 115 min feature shot on Red One - MX at 4.5K resolution.
  2. We followed the same workflow we have successfully established for all previous projects, and edited the film using the _M proxy (in FCP).
  3. As we all know, Resolve uses the original 4.5K R3Ds for the grading purposes, and scale it down to our projector and monitors resolution (1920X1080 in our case).
  4. Since it is about 115 mins in length, it has six reels.
  5. It will be theatrically released during last week of February/2012
  6. Due to the film's market, it will be printed in both, film and electronically (DCPs).
  7. We will be performing the transcoding as 2K DPX sequences per reel.
  8. Due to the fact stated in item #6, we will be obviously be generating the two "versions" needed: the one with the film stock emulation LUT burned in for the DCP, and another one without the fully calibrated stock emulation LUT for film printing.
  9. There is about 10% of the shots that have some type of re-framing, rotation, added movement, etc.
  10. Such information is contained on the XML, technically now we can use it during exporting by taking advantage of the software new feature that can use it to apply it to the shots it was used on, so the exported files will already have such corrections.
  11. Previously it was needed to export all the clips as shot, and during conforming, the changes made during editing needed to be "translated" into the new files. I call it "translate" since by virtue of using a different resolution during editing than the one of the final product, it cannot just be copied as an "Attribute". It does not have a 1:1 relationship, so some calculation or "eye-balling" was used.
Now, the big question: is there any right or magical combination of settings that should be played within Resolve so we can take advantage of this feature during final transcoding of the footage? I mean, it it was added as a function to the software, there must be a way to make it to work.

Please, feel free to make any suggestion so we can confirm if we have tried it before without success. It will be greatly appreciated...!!! Remember, six reels, with dual conformance since it will be used for print in film and to generate DCPs. So, if it is usable, the conforming should be a breeze...

Respectfully,
 
OK, I want to post this just as an update to my question based on responses directly from BMD. As of today, it seems it will work perfectly fine if the size of the material you are grading is the same as the material you edited. If you use Proxies, or even are transcoding before grading, and the dimensions are not the same, the system does not have a calculation function to equalize the two sizing differences.

The advise that I received was to "do a manual by eye comparison in the conform page with an offline video of the finished edit since the development team is committed to other areas for improvement", and cannot add this feature in a fast-track fashion. Also, it was pointed to me that potentially the "Scale to Sequence" function in Final Cut may add another layer of complication to this calculation.

So, we are doing it fully manually, just as before the new function was added as part of the upgrade.

​
 
This was also a problem with previous DaVincis and also the Pogle Pandora. Sizing and Power Windows would not always be correct between standards, or if you color-corrected in 1080 and output in 2K (2048x1556). Usually it was a global problem, but it required extremely careful checking to make sure nothing accidentally slipped through at the last minute.

In the "old days," the editor would send along a low-res QuickTime movie or something for us to use as a match-to source, and we'd double- (or even triple-) check all repos, comps, titles, and so on, usually as a split-screen with the high-res original. (This is easily done with Baselight and Pablo, but a simul reference comparison can only be done with stills in Resolve. At worst, you could take the offline edit, export that as a medium-res file, then take the 2K deliverables, and export those as the same-size file. Do a split on those on an editing system. You'll know immediately when a title is wrong, a repo is the wrong size, an effect is missing, an image is flopped (or needs to be flopped), etc. Dynamic repos are particularly critical, making sure the stop and start are on the precise frame.

I've had clients get tripped up at the last minute, particularly with textless versions, foreign versions, TV versions, and other deliverables that somehow did not get checked as much as the original theatrical version. This is all part of the granular nature of post: you have to keep track of all the little pieces.
 
That is what we have always done, Marc. However, the thread and question came after the introduction of the "Use sizing information contained in XML" as part of the upgrade. We wanted to take advantage of this new feature to expedite our conformance, but even the BMD were not aware that it works as intended only if both sides of the operation (editing and grading), are done at the exactly same size.

Being this site dedicated to 4-5K footage, this becomes more relevant since it will never work as implemented since the graded data always uses the original size R3Ds, which almost nobody uses for offline editing.
 
Yeah, I've seen some hitches with XML data, even during simple conforms. I think it's still a dodgy area.

What happens when you A/B the files? Are you seeing consistent sizing changes? It seems to me if that were so, even the "normal" size material might not be in the right place.

Or is it a percentage slippage, like when you do a 10% blow-up, what you get is 12% (or worse)? I seem to recall when we had this HD/2K problem with the old DaVinci 2K, it was X number of pixels off. We also had issues with blanking on occasion, even going from HD to 525.

I think the only answer for now would be to eye-match everything, and keep a list of all repos just to verify that they wind up in the right relative position.
 
Marc Wielage said:
Yeah, I've seen some hitches with XML data, even during simple conforms. I think it's still a dodgy area.

What happens when you A/B the files? Are you seeing consistent sizing changes? It seems to me if that were so, even the "normal" size material might not be in the right place.

Or is it a percentage slippage, like when you do a 10% blow-up, what you get is 12% (or worse)? I seem to recall when we had this HD/2K problem with the old DaVinci 2K, it was X number of pixels off. We also had issues with blanking on occasion, even going from HD to 525.

I think the only answer for now would be to eye-match everything, and keep a list of all repos just to verify that they wind up in the right relative position.
Click to expand...


Marc,

You just nailed it ALL the way through...!!! Right now, if you activate the XML sizing feature, the immediate reaction is to zoom it in, even if the clip size, pan, tilt, or rotate have not been manipulated at all. So, you got it, sir.


Edit: So, that is why this feature will not be an easy cookie to bake to make it work 100% perfect. There will be, at lease, two calculations needed to happen under the hood, so it can work just right: the first is the ratio of size of editing material size vs graded material size, and second, the effect of "Scale to Sequence" when applied to the off-line size material.
 
From Davinci Resolve 8 manual:
"Effects Processing in Round-Trip Workflows
In workflows where you want to send a project back to an NLE after grading for final finishing, adding titles and other effects before to final delivery, Resolve handles different effects in different ways.
Unsupported effects do not appear in Resolve. However, the effects data is preserved, invisibly, and when you export an XML file to send back to Final Cut Pro, the effects all reappear, this time applied to the color corrected media that you rendered out of DaVinci Resolve.

Speed effects, composite modes, opacity settings, and transitions are handled differently. Even though these effects are visible in Resolve while you work, they’re not “baked” into the final media that you render in preparation for sending back to Final Cut Pro. Instead, the portion of each media clip that’s used in your project is rendered as an individual file, and the XML file that you export from Resolve contains all the effects information necessary to reassemble the rendered media into a timeline that uses Final Cut Pro effects applied to Resolve-graded media."

According to this my plan is to roundtrip to FCP quicktime uncompressed files rendered from Resolve and from FCP export an xml and with automatic duck (that now it's free) import to After Effects and export the final sequence from there (dpx for dcp, prores 4444, etc.) from there. In this way I think we should keep all the effects applied during the editing.
 
It's Basically so that the step from EDL:s to something more solid ended up in something quite messy called XML... That's what I tell my clients.

I think the best would be to separate the two until XML is a fixed format and the editing tools and the grading tools are all in synk. Im sitting in my flame and most of my work is actually correcting errors in the XML files and doing stupid eye match sessions against an offline quicktime to see that it's all correct.

It would be great if XML2.0 or such was introduced ant that it was an edit decision list that had correct:

Transformations.
LUT grading.
Time warps.

Right now the above is not kicking... Can not see why there is no such standard.
 
Luca,

The main advise here: do not count on the "sizing" information contained in the XML. If the size of the edit proxy/transcode, and the grading file are different, it will be all wrong (sizing wise).
 
I haven't been using XML sizing for stated reasons. Version 8 was a good first step in including the sizing info, but obviously, it's not quite ready for production settings. Fine...
BUT, how about at least enabling PTZR while we're in conforming window? This business of using still for sizing is BS. Using a still is a workaround at best. At worst, it's totally unusable, if there is anything more extensive to repo, than simple pan, scan and zoom. In Scratch, FilmMaster, BL, Lustre... well, virtually EVERY other grading software you can easily have your offline copy playing happily side by side with the conformed timeline. And, no, there is no need to change the TC for the offline copy. In Resolve it will not even show up, if the TC is different from your timeline TC.
I see all this new stuff- the free Resolve, Windows Resolve. It's all fine. But how about fixing all this screwy stuff for your existing customers? Seriously, almost two years into Mac Resolve program and there is still no way to paste grade to multiple events? Come on guys!
And while we're on the subject of PTZR. How about we call it for what it actually is- sizing, geometry, pan and scan etc, but not PTZR...
 
Actually I would like to ask another question from fellow Resolve users. I just can't figure this one out. I prefer to grade with RedFilmLog settings. But so far, only once I had see the camera metadata set to RedFilmLog. Most of the time it's RedColor 2. So, does anyone knows how to change all metadata from RedColor 2 to RedFilmLog while keeping the camera metadata intact?
 
Jake,

On my way to the teatre, so will post something once I am back.
 
I am back from the theatre, and I think I just enjoyed Meryl Streep's best performance ever, IMHO. A very polarizing figure, but presented in a manner that you can still continue to either love or hate the person she is portraying.

Now, Jake, I will explain what is my workflow, and why I think that the camera metadata is still maintained despite using RedLogFilm, and achieving a Cineon-like image as a starting point.

First, as Graeme has said in the past, the RedColor2 and RedFilmLog combination yields an equivalent of a Cineon (I am not 100% sure you agree on this based on previous conversations). But, based on such premise, I use that settings combination as the Project Settings.

Then, in the LUT tab, I apply an emulation LUT as a Monitoring one, which represents a set of negative-positive emulsion characteristics that in the event of a film out, by using such combination to get the final print, it gets exactly what I graded since, again, I am using it as a Monitoring one, so it will not be burned on the DPX sequence. However, if it is going to be put through the DCP route, then I "burned-in" such LUT. So, instead of using it as a Monitoring one, I selected it as a Output LUT, hence, the DPX sequence contains exactly what I graded, and is transformed by the DCP software from RGB to XYZ without any issue.

Now, going to your basic question, and to support my previous opinion that the metadata is preserved under such initial settings, if I go to any individual clip in the timeline, and open the "Red Settings", I can modify such settings, and the image still reacts accordingly. Hence, such parameters have been preserved as metadata, even if I created as a starting point the Cineon-like images via project settings. To further support this position, if in the same scene differents shots have been acquired for example, with different Red Settings (such as ISO), you can see that they react completely differently even before applying the emulation LUT. But such differences are very much pronounced after applying the LUT.

Again, this is my experience, and the way I have graded all my projects. A caveat here is that if the footage is not RAW R3D, and it is comming from a "sh@!*# DSLRs", I just apply a Lin-to-Log_2.2Gamma LUT we developed for such type of footage, but as an Input one, which brings such image to the Cineon-like footage, and then proceed as I decribed above.

I hope this either answer your question, or at least it helps to generate an enlightning discussion.

Regards,

EDIT: When I am using the terma "Input", "Monitoring" and "Output" LUTs, I am reffering to the 3D ones. I think it is obvious, but I wanted to clarify it to avoid any confussion.
 
Luis.
All I want is to change RedColor 2 to RedFilmLog for the whole timeline without changing any camera metadata. On any other grading software I can do that by selecting the whole timeline and just changing the gamma space. I do not believe, that by applying an inverse LUT to RedColor 2 you'll get the proper RedFilmLog. And that is why I do not want to use an inverse LUT to achieve this. All Resolve has to do is to allow the gamma selection in camera metadata settings tab. Right now it is disabled. Unless I'm missing something...
 
jake :
in the color page , select all the shots (select the first , hold shift , select the last one ) ,
than open the R3D tab , ma ke the GLOBA adjustments you want to make (redlogFilm and Redcolor2) , click apply settings (not applying all (that should apply all the metadata settings of that particular shot )

let me know

g
 
Regarding the original post: wouldn't it then make sense once your offline edit is complete to conform it to the full size proxies so that your ramps and scales proportions are maintained within the nle before going to grading? you'll have the full-size timeline to use to export an XML for davinci. The question remains whether your nle supports full-size proxies however.
 
Gabriele Turchi said:
jake :
in the color page , select all the shots (select the first , hold shift , select the last one ) ,
than open the R3D tab , ma ke the GLOBA adjustments you want to make (redlogFilm and Redcolor2) , click apply settings (not applying all (that should apply all the metadata settings of that particular shot )

let me know

g
Click to expand...
Yes, Gabriel you're correct. If you select just "Apply changes" it will just apply that selection (gamma) and will leave the rest of metadata intact. But if you select "Apply to all" metadata from that shot gets copied to all shots. So, funky Resolve English strikes again:-)
Thanks Gabriel!
 
Sid Idris said:
Regarding the original post: wouldn't it then make sense once your offline edit is complete to conform it to the full size proxies so that your ramps and scales proportions are maintained within the nle before going to grading? you'll have the full-size timeline to use to export an XML for davinci. The question remains whether your nle supports full-size proxies however.
Click to expand...

Sid,

By doing so, I think it will be the same issue, but in FCP, if I am not mistaken. We will try it, if we have not done it already (I need to go through all the notes of the different ways we tried before). But from what we have leaned, and what we have discussed with BMD, the XML sizing information saves the data related to the original footage dimensions. That is why either "scale to sequence", or any other way to force it to scale it to another resolution will not be translated adequately.

On the other hand, we need to see if it is feasible to re-conform it to 4-5K, and if it is beneficial from the business perspective (time-wise). Will try, and report back...!
 
jake blackstone said:
Yes, Gabriel you're correct. If you select just "Apply changes" it will just apply that selection (gamma) and will leave the rest of metadata intact. But if you select "Apply to all" metadata from that shot gets copied to all shots. So, funky Resolve English strikes again:-)
Thanks Gabriel!
Click to expand...

Jake,

Now I understand your initial intention. So, sorry for my long posting...

Regards,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top