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 :)

Prolost: What Should RED Do?

HI ,
I need to get up to speed with all of this knowledge ASAP , i have about a month to learn all the theory and then I am going to buy a system to treat R3Ds all the way to 2k (then 4k ) DPX's... Can you help! Where should I start? I am investigating the FCP studio route as the Apple Video "expert" tells me Studio 3 Color will have a .RAW tab built into it and he showed me a pretty good demonstration of what it can do currently ( the rest of the workflow after that ) There are not so many good books I can pay actual money for that can help! How about a workflow to get/acquire the knowledge to build your own workflow!?
Teach a man to fish ?
 
Stu,

Why use Redlog at all? Why not just use the raw linear sensor image as your gauge of exposure. So if you are viewing raw on the camera and setting your exposure with the false color display, it looks like you have something stable and repeatable, and you know it can't be changed. With the SDK out, and software starting to load R3Ds no one will use redlog, they will be working on pure linear sensor data from the R3Ds. This is how Scratch works now. I have been following your blog for awhile, and I know talk a lot about getting your files into and working in a true linear space, but you get that for free with the Red no converting. Is this not a good thing?
 
tab32 said:
Stu,

Why use Redlog at all? Why not just use the raw linear sensor image as your gauge of exposure. So if you are viewing raw on the camera and setting your exposure with the false color display, it looks like you have something stable and repeatable, and you know it can't be changed. With the SDK out, and software starting to load R3Ds no one will use redlog, they will be working on pure linear sensor data from the R3Ds. This is how Scratch works now. I have been following your blog for awhile, and I know talk a lot about getting your files into and working in a true linear space, but you get that for free with the Red no converting. Is this not a good thing?
Click to expand...

What I guess Stu wants from a digital cinema camera company is a way to view and encode the image so that no matter if the scene...

  • is high key
  • is low key
  • has objects with specularity
  • has fogged interiors
  • has super saturated colors

...it can be exposed in the same consistent way by either using a light meter or the electronic tools inside the camera. This consistency will ensure that the highlights and noise signature between a dark scene and a bright one will be the same. Even within a scene this could be an issue if there's a bright window in one setup and a black wall in another setup.

RedSpace will trick you into clipping the highlights if you expose using false color if you're used to exposing for film.

The beauty of Panalog is that it let's you see both the shadows and the highlights in the scene and at the same time give you the best encoding for post production using the same well proven tools that is being used for film scans.

Another problem with the S-curve of RedSpace is that it makes the image pop (to the joy of agencies, directors and producers worldwide) at the expence of throwing away valuable highlight and shadow information. The S-curve will limit any decisions downstream in colorgrading if RedSpace is baked into a DPX which will happen in all exsisting workflows except for Scratch.

I have been waiting for a discussion like this because I think it's a healthy one. The camera has matured but the workflows still needs massive improvements not just for editing, but for consistency and peace of mind for the cinematographer.
 
The Red camera's objective is to mimic the film negative in a digital realm. If you think of a RAW image as a negative it's much easier. Capturing the most amount of data without clipping highlights or crushing black detail for maximum grading capability after final assembly. As a post house (FotoKem), our position is to create a environment that filmmakers have gotten to know and love for the past several decades, that of color calibrated finishing suites and mathematically perfect filmout from any color space.
 
To me this seems like an opportunity for a 3rd party. I'm not sure why RED has to provide this. Even if there is not a standard workflow how just creating ONE right now while RED, and frankly RAW motion workflows are pretty young benefit everyone. Esp. as the RED market space is about to become much broader I don't see there is going to be a clear single color space and workflow solution. Scarlet users MAY want something more canned, EPIC users might want something wide open, with many usage patterns in between.

And much the opposite may be true for Scarlet (IE: lower budget) users. They might be super excited to NOT be locked into a fixed color space and workflow. Really, that to me is one of the core problems with ALL the prosumer cameras out there. They have various scene/look control methods etc. But, if you just want to go for the RAW data and work with that you cannot. Its a lot harder to experiment END to END. With that in mind why do we want to standardize on only "one flavor of results."

Which brings me back to the 3rd party theme. With 6K+ REDs out there, and who knows how many Scarlet and EPIC cameras there is a good and growing market. There will be plenty of room for more than Apple and Adobe.

What I would like is something a lot less like Apple Color (and other Grading Solutions) and a lot more like Adobe Lightroom. Something that lets you manage, recolor, and do basic re-touching of your footage with a clear, and easy workflow. And, yes provide a solid, easy to use RAW engine (Adobe RAW) with predictable results which also allows users to exchange looks easily.

Develop a great solution that people want. It seems better to me to work out the kinks that way than to funnel a diverse user base into one solution. Digital Cinema is way to young for that. (I hope :))
 
tab32 said:
Stu,

Why use Redlog at all? Why not just use the raw linear sensor image as your gauge of exposure. So if you are viewing raw on the camera and setting your exposure with the false color display, it looks like you have something stable and repeatable, and you know it can't be changed. With the SDK out, and software starting to load R3Ds no one will use redlog, they will be working on pure linear sensor data from the R3Ds. This is how Scratch works now. I have been following your blog for awhile, and I know talk a lot about getting your files into and working in a true linear space, but you get that for free with the Red no converting. Is this not a good thing?
Click to expand...

Linear images suck for viewing and color correcting. Lots of blathering from me about this on ProLost.

-Stu
 
florianstadler.com said:
Standard Log to Lin LUT's work reasonably well with RedLog. I agree that a RedLog to Lin LUT should be created.
Click to expand...

I got the Lut from the scratch node zip file on red.com/support.

REDspace is popular with my clients.

I personally do not see the need for panalog for red since redspace and redlog seem to be working fine.
 
Michael.B said:
The Red camera's objective is to mimic the film negative in a digital realm. If you think of a RAW image as a negative it's much easier. Capturing the most amount of data without clipping highlights or crushing black detail for maximum grading capability after final assembly. As a post house (FotoKem), our position is to create a environment that filmmakers have gotten to know and love for the past several decades, that of color calibrated finishing suites and mathematically perfect filmout from any color space.
Click to expand...

You are the expert, you should understand that all Stu and the rest of us are asking for are a few setting whether in Redcode or REd, or alert or redcine that will give us starting points like the different color and exposure curves of filmstock. like i know the 500 ASA film stocks all have different color and luminance curves to choose from. So yes having presets will be key to more and more cinematographers clamming onto the red. Raw does not mean S**t if there is no official documentation. We are currently subjected to forum of experimentation.
 
ProLost said:
Linear images suck for viewing and color correcting. Lots of blathering from me about this on ProLost.
Click to expand...

In doing some messing around in After Effects (your favorite) with Redlog coded images - albeit a bit unscientifically - I've determined that a very simple LUT for converting Redlog images to a reasonable base setting is to use a Levels control, with Input Black set at 43 (based on 8 bits, it will change automatically to the corresponding 16 or 32 bit value in a 16 or 32 bit comp or project), Input White set at 180, and Gamma set at 1.02 (I saved these values as a preset). Because Redlog is such a mild log curve (much like Panalog in that regard), it lends itself to being used directly without log to lin conversion, provided you add contrast and use a negative offset - which is exactly what a Levels control set to the above values does. You can, of course, vary these values to taste to avoid losing information. Other programs have similar controls and could be used in a similar way.

Needless to say, you don't actually want to use an 8 bit comp for this, it's just easier to set up the values that way. This also assumes that you're not using color science based on a film target. It also assumes that you're trying to achieve a color correction that is a reasonable starting point for further manipulation, not a linear coded image for compositing purposes.
 
ProLost said:
Linear images suck for viewing and color correcting. Lots of blathering from me about this on ProLost.

-Stu
Click to expand...

I know linear sucks for viewing you should always use a display lut. I am curious about what you said about color correcting. Are you saying you would rather grade a Log file over a linear file with a display lut?

Here is something you wrote in a past ProLost, blog and one of the reasons for my original post:

"When you convert an image to linear space, your subsequent image processing operations better match real-world physical properties of light. If you are accustomed to processing perceptually encoded images, you will probably find that switching to g1.0 processing will make your familiar effects look more organic"
http://prolost.blogspot.com/2005/02/using-elin-color-model-in-floating.html#_jmp0_

Not trying to be a jerk, just looking for some clarification in this ever changing world of color.
 
It seems as though Stu is asking for one curve. An easy curve if you will but that already seems to exist with redspace and redlog. I'd rather choose than be stuck with one curve. Horses for courses.
 
Ariana said:
It seems as though Stu is asking for one curve. An easy curve if you will but that already seems to exist with redspace and redlog. I'd rather choose than be stuck with one curve. Horses for courses.
Click to expand...

Or maybe it seems like Stu is asking for this:

the ProLost post said:
Don't dispense with the infinite flexibility of RED Alert, but give us a solid default setting that faithfully represent the best of what RED's cameras have to offer.
Click to expand...

-Stu
 
tab32 said:
I know linear sucks for viewing you should always use a display lut. I am curious about what you said about color correcting. Are you saying you would rather grade a Log file over a linear file with a display lut?

Here is something you wrote in a past ProLost, blog and one of the reasons for my original post:

"When you convert an image to linear space, your subsequent image processing operations better match real-world physical properties of light. If you are accustomed to processing perceptually encoded images, you will probably find that switching to g1.0 processing will make your familiar effects look more organic"
http://prolost.blogspot.com/2005/02/using-elin-color-model-in-floating.html#_jmp0_

Not trying to be a jerk, just looking for some clarification in this ever changing world of color.
Click to expand...

Check this article:

http://prolost.blogspot.com/2006/06/know-when-to-log-em-know-when-to-lin.html

Linear color space is good for visual effects and very simple color corrections like exposure adjustments. For more creative, telecine-style color correction (such as what you might do with SCRATCH or Color or Colorista), you want log or video images. Most TV shows are corrected in video space without a LUT, and most movies are color corrected in log with a filmout LUT.

-Stu
 
ProLost said:
Or maybe it seems like Stu is asking for this:



-Stu
Click to expand...

That depends on what you're shooting. For straight delivery to clients, faster turn around work, redspace gives me the best image with no work.

When I'm doing commercials or feature work, I use redlog because the that gives my post guys the fattest 'neg' to push around.

I'm not a tech head but it's alot simpler than I think people make it out to be.
 
ProLost said:
Most TV shows are corrected in video space without a LUT, and most movies are color corrected in log with a filmout LUT.

-Stu
Click to expand...

You seem to be arguing against yourself. Use the right space for the job. The easy button can potentially get people into more trouble than it's worth.
 
Ariana said:
When I'm doing commercials or feature work, I use redlog because the that gives my post guys the fattest 'neg' to push around.

I'm not a tech head but it's alot simpler than I think people make it out to be.
Click to expand...

I agree, but when you "use redlog" you could be doing something very different than when I "use redlog." It doesn't mean only one thing, and it does not guarantee that the full dynamic range of the camera is preserved.

There should be a "redlog best practices" setting that grays out all the EV/ISO/color/matrix/curves controls and guarantees consistent and full-range results every time.

Use it or not, that's up to you, but if you do everyone will know exactly what to do with it.

Cineon log has stayed around for so long and won a SciTech award because is consistent and well-documented, holds the entire dynamic range of a scanned neg, and has a "correct" value for middle gray.

-Stu
 
Ariana said:
You seem to be arguing against yourself. Use the right space for the job. The easy button can potentially get people into more trouble than it's worth.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely right. The current argument I am having with myself is "why do I bother posting anything here?"

Bye,

-Stu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top