Phil Holland Weapon Test

[Zeb B]

Really Jake? I know you're a colorist...and a good one, but let's at least be appreciative of the fact that Phil puts a heck of a lot of effort into these things, which he does for us btw, and rather than say he's doing something wrong, just be thankful. His grade, or the way he went about it, may not be your cup of tea, which is why grading is so subjective in the first place, but give him some credit. He did a great job and even provided the base image so colorists could gain what they needed to from that.

To know Jake is to love Jake. Don't confuse his passion for the subject and detail with disrespect for Phil's work ;-)

 

[Phil Holland]

I don't know exactly what you are going on about Jake. Which is strange because we see eye to eye on so many things.

If you are saying people shouldn't grade REDlogFilm to any video Gamma space that is beyond me. A great deal of people and studios globally do that. The majority of my LUTs I've been paid to create on the studio level have been based on RLF.

Again, the standards you mentioned are within the sample footage. As are my test grades. If you are telling my I should not grade my footage, well, okay. I haven't been a full time colorist for about 9 years, but I still very much do it for a living.

And in terms of practicality, a LUT like this could be used on set or in post.

If you are taking this secret sauce as anything more than a look I've applied to the footage, in this case developed from matching to the chart, I don't know what to say. Anybody can match their footage to a color chart.

I'm confused by what's actually happening here in this discussion.

 

[Vadim Bobkovsky]

5219 emulation looks tasty, I hope it's being used often, as it makes Red images appear even better. Very pleasing cinematic look.

 

[Corey_O]

What's a "finishing LUT" and where is the 5219 emulation LUT from? And finally, why?

Because it looks good and the client likes it comes to mind.

 

[jake blackstone]

I don't know exactly what you are going on about Jake. Which is strange because we see eye to eye on so many things.

If you are saying people shouldn't grade REDlogFilm to any video Gamma space that is beyond me. A great deal of people and studios globally do that. The majority of my LUTs I've been paid to create on the studio level have been based on RLF.

Again, the standards you mentioned are within the sample footage. As are my test grades. If you are telling my I should not grade my footage, well, okay. I haven't been a full time colorist for about 9 years, but I still very much do it for a living.

And in terms of practicality, a LUT like this could be used on set or in post.

If you are taking this secret sauce as anything more than a look I've applied to the footage, in this case developed from matching to the chart, I don't know what to say. Anybody can match their footage to a color chart.

I'm confused by what's actually happening here in this discussion.

As I said, if you're posting on behalf of Red, which you clearly do, you must be very careful about doing it. Using LUTs with "secret" sauce does nothing but furthers the notion, that Red company as a whole is a bunch of amateurs. By not using an industrywide standard curve- a Cineon and using instead a "secret" home-brew doesn't help to change this perception. Just use a Cineon gamma curve when you're using RLF and everyone will know where you're coming from, period. It may be nice to hear, that your LUT looks "tasty" and all, but to professionals around the world, that may need to work at different facilities doing dailies, editing, grading VFX, that means absolutely nothing. It is imperative, that everyone looks at the same image, like with... well you know who... I think, convincing Red to develop a set of Red approved LUTs for RLF with different OLPFs, that ANYONE in the world could download and use could be very useful...

 

[jake blackstone]

Really Jake? I know you're a colorist...and a good one, but let's at least be appreciative of the fact that Phil puts a heck of a lot of effort into these things, which he does for us btw, and rather than say he's doing something wrong, just be thankful. His grade, or the way he went about it, may not be your cup of tea, which is why grading is so subjective in the first place, but give him some credit. He did a great job and even provided the base image so colorists could gain what they needed to from that.

Chris.
You're clearly missing my point.
Imagine, after demonstrating a new film stock and after everyone stopped raving about it, Kodak casually mentions, that they decided to use some "secret" chemistry for just this demo and images you will get using this new stock will not be exactly the same as what they just showed. And if that wasn't enough, they also decided to abandon labs certification and allowing labs to make their own "tasty" chemistry. Yep, proprietary LUTs are the equivalent of the "secret" film chemistry. There is a reason why Red SDK exists, so every debayered image looks the same, regardless of who does the "developing".

 

[Phil Holland]

As I said, if you're posting on behalf of Red, which you clearly do, you must be very careful about doing it. Using LUTs with "secret" sauce does nothing but furthers the notion, that Red company as a whole is a bunch of amateurs. By not using an industrywide standard curve- a Cineon and using instead a "secret" home-brew doesn't help to change this perception. Just use a Cineon gamma curve when you're using RLF and everyone will know where you're coming from, period. It may be nice to hear, that your LUT looks "tasty" and all, but to professionals around the world, that may need to work at different facilities doing dailies, editing, grading VFX, that means absolutely nothing. It is imperative, that everyone looks at the same image, like with... well you know who... I think, convincing Red to develop a set of Red approved LUTs for RLF with different OLPFs, that ANYONE in the world could download and use could be very useful...

First and foremost this test is something I produced on my own dime. Mainly for 3 entities who have requested such "narrative focused" footage, REDusers, DPs, and few a couple of Directors who have asked for it. My "secret home brew" is targeting a rec.709 area. The color is matched to chart, which is a very standard thing to do. In this instance to match these specific lighting conditions and test variance between the OLPFs, because this was a test. I'm not around every set making LUts for everybody under ever lighting condition. This was a look test when it comes to those custom LUTs.

The standard LUTs you are referring to for RED to offer are built into the camera and into the SDK and "ANYONE in the world" has those. Those are the unique profiles for each individual OLPFs and the Color Spaces and Gamma Spaces. Those would not be the custom LUTs I made here for these specific lighting conditions.

If you are looking for me or RED to publicly release 3D LUTs that convert REDlogFilm to say REDgamma4, that's a whole other topic. I guess I could zip up a pack of those and sell them if desired. Wouldn't be a massive undertaking.


The standard are in the test footage. I've said my piece and don't fully get the rub here.

Here's some other LUT exploration based on DC2/RLF I was doing while working on this footage:

 

[jake blackstone]

The standard LUTs you are referring to for RED to offer are built into the camera and into the SDK and "ANYONE in the world" has those. Those are the unique profiles for each individual OLPFs and the Color Spaces and Gamma Spaces. Those would not be the custom LUTs I made here for these specific lighting conditions.

Great, where do i download those Red issued RLF to BT-1886/Rec-709 Standard/LLO/STH OLPF LUTs, that are, apparently, ""ANYONE in the world" has"? I'd like to have it too:smiley:
Yes, I'm looking to the Red equivalent to something like this:
https://www.arri.com/camera/alexa/tools/lut_generator/lut_generator/

 

[Phil Holland]

Great, where do i download those Red issued RLF to BT-1886/Rec-709 Standard/LLO/STH OLPF LUTs, that are, apparently, ""ANYONE in the world" has"? I'd like to have it too:smiley:

If you are looking for them in LUT form that's one thing and those can be created. They are available in the RED SDK. 709 existing in a few flavors/approximations in the form of the current REDgammas:

By being in the SDK they are available in any 3rd party software that supports the .R3D workflow.

I know you know all of this though. And I understand you are merely goading for officially released LUTs.

The OLPFs are profiled in camera and effect the recorded image. They are all tuned and calibrated to the same approximate target from my understanding. In doing the rather precise OLPF ISO Texture tests in this footage they are tuned spot on as far as I'm concerned in terms of value. Slight color variation is to be expected however.

 

[jake blackstone]

If you are looking for them in LUT form that's one thing and those can be created.

Yes, theoretically they CAN be created, but they SHOULD be created by Red and distributed to everyone though the official channels. This way someone working with Weapon material, shot with STH OLPF with RLF gamma in Oklahoma will have an identical image to someone doing VFX in Pretoria, South Africa. ARRI, SONY, CANON, Panasonic all have official LUTs, but not Red...
Frankly, if you just used ACES, this would have been a non issue:wink5:
And while we're at it, Red acts like a hoarder. Isn't it time we lose all those RedLog, PDLog 685, PDLog 985, RedSpace etc. No one uses those any more... And how many Gammas do we need? RedGamma, RedGamma 1, RedGamma 2, RedGamma 3, RedGamma 4...

 

[Phil Holland]

Yes, theoretically they CAN be created, but they SHOULD be created by Red and distributed to everyone though the official channels. This way someone working with Weapon material, shot with STH OLPF with RLF gamma in Oklahoma will have an identical image to someone doing VFX in Pretoria, South Africa. ARRI, SONY, CANON, Panasonic all doing it, but not Red...

Because it works seamlessly within the SDK and various importers.

Perhaps this foot stomping will produce some results and I have seen you mention it in the past. But seriously man, the way you got to this specific point in this particular thread has left me dumbfounded.

 

[Robert Berger]

Yes, theoretically they CAN be created, but they SHOULD be created by Red and distributed to everyone though the official channels. This way someone working with Weapon material, shot with STH OLPF with RLF gamma in Oklahoma will have an identical image to someone doing VFX in Pretoria, South Africa. ARRI, SONY, CANON, Panasonic all have official LUTs, but not Red...
Frankly, if you just used ACES, this would have been a non issue:wink5:
And while we're at it, Red acts like a hoarder. Isn't it time we lose all those RedLog, PDLog 685, PDLog 985, RedSpace etc. No one uses those any more... And how many Gammas do we need? RedGamma, RedGamma 1, RedGamma 2, RedGamma 3, RedGamma 4...

Frankly, if you just used ACES, this would have been a non issue!! I hope we can start a new Thread on ACES!:smiley:
I have been at a socialmeeting on the Nederlands Film Festival (dutch film Festival) this sept. 2015 witch was also sponsert by Arri,Red,Sony enz 2 get ACES better in the market.
There are is so little information on the web and we have this ACES choice-button on our RED camera's...... maybe you can help us? Find the right info on the web.

best regards
Robert

 

[jake blackstone]

Because it works seamlessly within the SDK and various importers.

Perhaps this foot stomping will produce some results and I have seen you mention it in the past. But seriously man, the way you got to this specific point in this particular thread has left me dumbfounded.

Well, because may be I don't understand this test. Was it a creative or a technical test? If it was creative, then why all this technical info? If it was a technical test, then why use of a proprietary "creative" LUTs? I just trying to understand what is going on, sorry...

 

[jake blackstone]

Because it works seamlessly within the SDK and various importers.

It clearly doesn't, because there are no common official LUTs, that everyone can use. People prefer to use RLF and the moment they do, the seamlessness goes out the door and, unfortunately, ACES workflow is not well understood yet. Can RCX even use ACES? On top of it, even ACES is not that simple anymore. Now there is a BMD interpretation of ACES, which is called RCM (Resolve color management) and there is FilmLight interpretation, which is called TCS (Truelight Color Spaces). In part they are based on ACES, but they are not the same. For example FilmLight's TCS allows working in ARRI wide color gamut with Photometric Display Render Transform or ACES RRT or Sony S-Log or Panasonic V-Log etc, even though you may grade the Red camera material.
Anyway, I can go on and on about it, but I think I managed to derail this thread too much already.
My apologies Phil

 

[Phil Holland]

Well, because may be I don't understand this test. Was it a creative or a technical test? If it was creative, then why all this technical info? If it was a technical test, then why use of a proprietary "creative" LUTs? I just trying to understand what is going on, sorry...

Both.

It clearly doesn't, because there are no common official LUTs, that everyone can use. People prefer to use RLF and the moment they do, the seamlessness goes out the door and, unfortunately, ACES workflow is not well understood yet. Can RCX even use ACES? On top of it, even ACES is not that simple anymore. Now there is a BMD interpretation of ACES, which is called RCM (Resolve color management) and there is FilmLight interpretation, which is called TCS (Truelight Color Spaces). In part they are based on ACES, but they are not the same. For example FilmLight's TCS allows working in ARRI wide color gamut with Photometric Display Render Transform or ACES RRT or Sony S-Log or Panasonic V-Log etc, even though you may grade the Red camera material.
Anyway, I can go on and on about it, but I think I managed to derail this thread too much already.
My apologies Phil

I respect the desire to standardize things and in certain places it's happened to a degree. There's more advancements coming. But often when I read certain things it makes me wonder how we've been making all these lovely motion pictures for the last decade and a half if it's all a chaotic soup, and it really isn't. The side of the fence I'm on looks at charts, does tests, creates look tests, etc..... I did the chart stuff here. It's what's actually needed from a captured image perspective. Locking down post standards and whatever the future holds has nothing to do with this particular test. Though technical and creative marks were targeted here.


Off to bed now.

 

[Christopher Probst]

Phil, I tend to agree with Jake on this one. Applying custom color grade tweaks on personal projects is one thing, but presenting it as part of a sensor/camera evaluation adds a whole other layer of confusion/obfuscation that should definitely try to be avoided in a methodical analysis of a camera.

For me, this test as a stand alone has less value than if it compared Epic Dragon and Epic MX... People want to see/evaluate where we came from and where we are moving towards in the Red image creation evolution. It certainly is more work that way, but how many of these test have been done, and then the test perameters are called out for skewed or limiting workflows favoring one camera/process over another to the detriment of one camera and the advantage of another...

Jake's call for a standardized handling/process rings true and should be looked into more in depth.

When I received my Weapon I did not have time to thoroughly test the camera... I have been shooting with them almost exclusively since May on various projects and have drawn my conclusions based on the various scenarios I've placed the cameras in on those projects, so while I welcome the efforts to do a clinical study, for the reasons I listed above about comparing generations of cameras, and Jake's concerns I think the jury is still out on a definitive scientific analysis.

Perhaps in the future some of us SoCal-based camera geeks can pull together resources and take another crack at it....

 

[DJ Meyer]

Looking forward to Jake's test.

 

[Zeb B]

Phil, I tend to agree with Jake on this one. Applying custom color grade tweaks on personal projects is one thing, but presenting it as part of a sensor/camera evaluation adds a whole other layer of confusion/obfuscation that should definitely try to be avoided in a methodical analysis of a camera.

For me, this test as a stand alone has less value than if it compared Epic Dragon and Epic MX... People want to see/evaluate where we came from and where we are moving towards in the Red image creation evolution. It certainly is more work that way, but how many of these test have been done, and then the test perameters are called out for skewed or limiting workflows favoring one camera/process over another to the detriment of one camera and the advantage of another...

Jake's call for a standardized handling/process rings true and should be looked into more in depth.

When I received my Weapon I did not have time to thoroughly test the camera... I have been shooting with them almost exclusively since May on various projects and have drawn my conclusions based on the various scenarios I've placed the cameras in on those projects, so while I welcome the efforts to do a clinical study, for the reasons I listed above about comparing generations of cameras, and Jake's concerns I think the jury is still out on a definitive scientific analysis.

Perhaps in the future some of us SoCal-based camera geeks can pull together resources and take another crack at it....

Agreed, not sure why there is such resistance to doing an straight up A/B test with Dragon/Weapon. I get the differences will be nuanced but it's vital to understanding the trajectory of RED sensor color science development. For me an A/B of RC at different fps is of most interest. High frame rates are what separates RED from many other cameras. What has been done with Weapon to improve on high frame rate image quality? Show me . . .

 

[Bobby Farokhzad]

Is it possible to see the R3Ds Phil? 3 R3Ds, one from each OLPF with the same lens under identical lighting condition... that would be more than enough for me to draw my own conclusions.

 

[Peter Strietmann]

Maybe just some low light comparison tests?