Properly graded...

[Richard Goodwin]

If there is a right workflow then the tools should guide the user to use that workflow; not just assume they are going to do the right thing. So REDCINE-X should have a User Interface that ensures that the default usage of the tools has the user go through this workflow. But to just provide a tool with a neutral interface and expect less advanced users to use it "right" is no going to work. That may mean there is an advanced mode and an basic mode in the software, it may mean splitting the toolset into a few tools. That is up to RED.

What has to change at core is that the technology and tools have to ensure that the majority of users get a solid looking footage. That is simply not the case right now. I'm not saying great Ridley Scott or David Fincher like footage; but it has to be a solid looking enough to use in final product with minimal work to get there. This is why Alexa, Canon, and other cameras are often chosen over RED; not because of superior technology but because of superior usability.

I realize RED and everyone on this board gets in a tizzy whenever its even hinted at that RED may not be doing something well or right (that alone is another part of the negative perception problem). So here come the baseball bats I guess. But, to RED and those on this board its time to own up to the FACT that RED has major perception problem in terms of post. Just giving tips and taking out adverts is not going to fix that on its own. The only thing that will fix it permanently is to make it much easier to get decent results (I say decent here not old master level). Well built tools guide users toward correct usage and ensure consistent experience. RED has to get to that.

 

[Yousuf Abbasi]

I too have seen a lot of crap on vimeo of bad color, bad exposure, everything. They are clueless about color and are not doing the camera justice, which fuels the "Alexa is better" argument. Epic is as excellent in every way as Alexa. But too many people don't understand the process. "This looks good enough" is their mentality, and end up exporting with ugly green skin tones thinking it looks edgy or something. I don't really know. I can link (but I won't) hundreds of examples of "lazy grades" of epic footage on vimeo or youtube. IF YOU CAN'T GRADE COLOR OR DON'T CARE TO, SHOOT WITH A 5D PLEASE. I feel your pain Jim.

It really boils down to understanding the R3D workflow, and necessity of RCX.

This is a quick shoot and grade totally out of RCX, literally spent 5 minutes on it in RCX tweaking flut, lum/rgb curves, and saturation -- then export to vimeo. In my opinion, even in this most basic example, RED shows nice skin tones, rich blue sky, green plants, everything the way it should. https://vimeo.com/47706572

I just don't get it when I see Vimeo's of green skin tones, weird colors, etc. -- RED is so easy.

 

[Richard Goodwin]

It really boils down to understanding the R3D workflow, and necessity of RCX.

This is a quick shoot and grade totally out of RCX,...

I just don't get it when I see Vimeo's of green skin tones, weird colors, etc. -- RED is so easy.

That is nice looking footage!

That is my question really you say (and have shown) "RED is so easy." But, why is it so difficult for many? Somehow that knowledge that makes it so easy needs to be embedded into the tools so that its "easy" for the vast majority of users. Right now getting good results is dependent on lots of built up knowledge. (Note: I'm not advocating against craftsmanship and artistry here. But, with digital tools general users expect decent out of the box results)

 

[Miles Heckendorn]

...there's never been a formal document or workflow diagram / efforts to assist newcomers to the workflow that is available to download or gives confidence to folks that this is the official RED way to get the most out of the camera and post workflow. So, you have a ton of owner operator and small/large post businesses all working and processing differently instead of to a standard.....

Bingo!

When my production house finally went RED this year we asked everyone we knew...."what is the best workflow from pre-production to post?". The answers varied so wildly that half my producers just gave up.

People were genuinely trying to help. But when it came down to it, we just had to go through a process of trial and error (I'm still not 100% sold on). While I think this is a great way to learn, my boss (and the bean-counters) would have loved it if we could have just hit the ground running.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

To be fair, I think RED has made some progress in providing information on RED.com. For example, something like this. http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/color-cast-tutorial or this http://www.red.com/learn/red-101/red-camera-exposure-tools . This was not the case in the early days and perhaps RED got off to a bad start in that area. Admittedly, I think it could stand to improve further. For example, Arri has a long list of whitepapers on how to work with Alexa footage, for example they have one on how to handle Alexa footage in Davinci Resolve (which may need some updating for V9). RED has done this too with FCP whitepaper. I think it's just a matter of keeping up with everything. RED keeping up with industry workflows and industry people keeping up with RED. In fairness to post-production professionals, they are dealing with tons of formats/codecs, and trying to make this all work with shrinking budgets. Defining standards is not always easy in this current environment. Think about the way people are consuming their media, it's all over the place, which opens up all kinds of standards issues. So education and information sharing are important aspects of this process both on the part of the camera manufacturer and the people who are using the cameras and processing the footage. Two way street. If one side isn't holding up their end of the bargain, it can become a problem. In this case, RED needs to make sure the information necessary for endusers to work with RED tools is readily accessible and the endusers (camera owners, DITs, AC's, DOPs, editors, colorists, assistant editors, facility managers, etc) do their part to educate themselves so they can effectively do their jobs when dealing with RED cams and footage.

 

[Richard Goodwin]

For those of us who have been working with the cameras since the beginning we have had time to figure out and discuss best practices and we probably all visit this site enough to get a general consensus on best post practices but its way past time RED have a qualified document that industry folks can refer to and be guided so that newcomers to the format and workflow don't do more damage than what's already been caused.

RED needs has been way too assuming that every user would just know to come to reduser and sift through tons of pages to find "correct usage".

RED should fund outside people to write a series of books on usage and best practices and give away or provide low cost digital copies of those (similar to how Adobe has its line of books for instance). Get a few top DITs, ACs, Colorists to document best practices and make it readily available to users. Note: this should be the viewpoint of real world users and not just RED (there needs to be some level of independence so that whoever writes this documentation feels they have a voice). Note this could also be a course of training videos. Separate web site etc.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Bingo!

When my production house finally went RED this year we asked everyone we knew...."what is the best workflow from pre-production to post?". The answers varied so wildly that half my producers just gave up.

People were genuinely trying to help. But when it came down to it, we just had to go through a process of trial and error (I'm still not 100% sold on). While I think this is a great way to learn, my boss (and the bean-counters) would have loved it if we could have just hit the ground running.

There are some simple answers...
And frankløy it depends on how much time you want to spend. The last 5% are allways the costliest.
Thus I am for difrensiated workflows depending on production ambition and budget.

Jim is right. The DR in the images exceeds what you see on set (and thus on untouched rushes), starting a grade from there is often a bad choice from a technical POV.

Then... Imagery is much more than technical perfection...
Also:
technically challenging solutions, aren't a good choice without the competence at hand. If you don't know what to look for in an image, elaborate workflows can easily become just that, and not gain the production with any production value.

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

If there is a right workflow then the tools should guide the user to use that workflow; not just assume they are going to do the right thing. So REDCINE-X should have a User Interface that ensures that the default usage of the tools has the user go through this workflow. But to just provide a tool with a neutral interface and expect less advanced users to use it "right" is no going to work. That may mean there is an advanced mode and an basic mode in the software, it may mean splitting the toolset into a few tools. That is up to RED.

What has to change at core is that the technology and tools have to ensure that the majority of users get a solid looking footage. That is simply not the case right now. I'm not saying great Ridley Scott or David Fincher like footage; but it has to be a solid looking enough to use in final product with minimal work to get there. This is why Alexa, Canon, and other cameras are often chosen over RED; not because of superior technology but because of superior usability.

I realize RED and everyone on this board gets in a tizzy whenever its even hinted at that RED may not be doing something well or right (that alone is another part of the negative perception problem). So here come the baseball bats I guess. But, to RED and those on this board its time to own up to the FACT that RED has major perception problem in terms of post. Just giving tips and taking out adverts is not going to fix that on its own. The only thing that will fix it permanently is to make it much easier to get decent results (I say decent here not old master level). Well built tools guide users toward correct usage and ensure consistent experience. RED has to get to that.

The motion picture industry has always prided itself on technicians who combine technical expertise with creative and practical experience to get "professional results".

It is highly disheartening and incredibly insulting to imagine that professional tools and equipment be required to "dumb-down" for the masses.

The reason that so many folks on here complain that their images look like crap is because they KNOW crap about what they are doing.

ANY crew member, from a brilliant DP, Director, Gaffer, Grip, Colorist,Cam OP, DIT or Make-Up Artist has the same level of understanding and expertise of their craft as a brain surgeon has for his skill and ALL professions would be compromised if amateurs took control of either.

Just because you can buy a professional piece of gear and plug it in doesn’t mean you can make it work.
Actually, most of the time, it just makes you dangerous.

What REALLY has to change AT THE CORE, is the notion that lower price-points, which now allows a more "democratic" access to professional tools, ALSO requires a shorter or any less rigorous amount of education,commitment to your craft and practical experience.

That mindset is ludicrous.

RED and any professional instrument can never be nor should it be "point and shoot", there are plenty of options for those looking for an easy way to make acceptable pictures.

There WILL be substantial learning curves for any and all hard and software that goes into any professional endeavor, and by definition, that's what distinguishes the expert from the amateur.

The amount of sheer laziness of some users of this forum, who imagine that they can ask the same questions over and over without even scanning the forums first or be 'spoon fed" a professional's savvy and skill set through a post or two, amazes me.

Time, education and practical experience are the ONLY way that adding your unique innate creativity will matter in the least to achieving “professional” results.
As with any skilled trade, you will only get as good you are willing to give.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Agreed Brandon... to some extent.

The fun thing about the RED stuff is that it can be used in a very simple straightforeward videoish way, end then on a more technical demanding scale.

Thing is just not to confuse these two approaches and expectancies. If one are clear on which path one are, both can give excellent (but not equal) results.

 

[Brian Boyer]

It seems to me the dilemma is this:

Dear RED, we love that you think and design products differently than Sony, Arri and Panasonic. But, could you please be different in a way that's more like what we're used to from Sony, Arri and Panasonic?


I try to cut RED some slack because they're at the forefront of the second wave of digital cinema cameras. The first wave of digital cinema cameras were actually digital video cameras along with the resulting videocentric post processes.

Unless you were scanning film or rendering CGI into DPX, EXR or similarly robust files, people were using cameras that were generating video formats. Most still do. Post houses had a long time to standardize on that.

RED came along and pushed past video standards with an emphasis on a suitable replacement for film. This meant higher resolution, wider color gamut and wider dynamic range. For them, it also meant the flexibility of a RAW workflow.

These advancements require that certain changes in methodology, mindset and equipment be made. There is no getting around that. CDs don't play in cassette tape players or on turntables. You have to go out and buy a CD player or computer.

While it's not RED's fault that people remain stuck on what is essentially HD video for higher end feature and TV work, they do share the responsibility of accommodating, where appropriate, existing workflows when they don't conflict with the paradigm and philosophy that RED has established for themselves and their products.

RED isn't perfect. Up until NAB of this year their website was abysmal for a major player in the industry. It's getting better, btw.

Many of you have made some valid points they should take into serious consideration.

But...if, given what RED cameras can do, RED's recommendations are indeed a better way of doing things, shouldn't they be adopted if you make the decision to shoot on them?

I see a lot of people wanting to strip away what makes an Epic an Epic and then complain that RED's workflow is too complicated for what they're left with.

That's a tough spot to be in.

 

[Eric Haase]

RED footage has a TON of dynamic range. That pre-suposses that it is graded properly.

There are a million ways (apparently) to screw it up. It amazes me what some post houses can do to crush and clip RED footage.


Jim

Jim, with all due respect, RedcineX is a great app but lacks proper documentation. Here is an exmaple:

I've been shooting RED for a few years - had a RED One and now an Epic, probably 1 or 2 shoots a week. We've been delivering MXF files from RCX for awhile now. But it took a post house coming to me with a levels issue to prompt me to test and discover that we needed to check the 'restrict SMPTE range' box in the OPTIONS tab of the export setting in order for scopes in RCX to match scopes on Avid output. SO for a long ime, MXFs that were delivered were looking crushed and more contrasty than the look we dialed in with the Rocket and RCX. We don't also have an Avid with video card on set to verify transcodes. Yet there is NO documentation about this from you guys. It's a major deal for me to deliver footage that doesnt match the look I set. So, it is in fact VERY easy to crush/clip red footage completely unintentionally.

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

Jim, with all due respect, RedcineX is a great app but lacks proper documentation. Here is an exmaple:

I've been shooting RED for a few years - had a RED One and now an Epic, probably 1 or 2 shoots a week. We've been delivering MXF files from RCX for awhile now. But it took a post house coming to me with a levels issue to prompt me to test and discover that we needed to check the 'restrict SMPTE range' box in the OPTIONS tab of the export setting in order for scopes in RCX to match scopes on Avid output. SO for a long ime, MXFs that were delivered were looking crushed and more contrasty than the look we dialed in with the Rocket and RCX. We don't also have an Avid with video card on set to verify transcodes. Yet there is NO documentation about this from you guys. It's a major deal for me to deliver footage that doesnt match the look I set. So, it is in fact VERY easy to crush/clip red footage completely unintentionally.

You are talking about a FREE application.

How much are you willing to pay to get an unpgrade in software and tutorials that match a pay-for play application like Speedgrade?

 

[Miles Heckendorn]

Gunleik,

There are some simple answers...
And frankløy it depends on how much time you want to spend. The last 5% are allways the costliest.

True, and I personally don't mind the extra time/cost, but my producers do.

Jim is right. The DR in the images exceeds what you see on set (and thus on untouched rushes), starting a grade from there is often a bad choice from a technical POV.

Of course, I have no doubt about that. I've been able to pull some fantastic images from .r3ds but I've also seen what happens when someone got a step wrong in the pipeline. Wouldn't it be better to have a white paper with the correct basic steps to eliminate that? At least something I could hand to the producers so they aren't scared away from the workflow?

technically challenging solutions, aren't a good choice without the competence at hand. If you don't know what to look for in an image, elaborate workflows can easily become just that, and not gain the production with any production value.

Again, I agree. But sometimes we have to ship footage out of house and I don't have control of who is working on it down the line. Wouldn't it be better to have an established workflow, so if problems did arise we could at least eliminate those variables from the equation?

 

[Richard Goodwin]

The motion picture industry has always prided itself on technicians who combine technical expertise with creative and practical experience to get "professional results".

It is highly disheartening and incredibly insulting to imagine that professional tools and equipment be required to "dumb-down" for the masses.

I agree with the deep necessity of craftsmanship to produce superior work. But as a business, the vast majority of production of "motion content" is done on "dumbed down" cameras such as ENG style, Canon of various ilks etc. This is because its relatively easy to get solid looking results in a consistent manner. And it is is relatively easy to quickly bring that footage into a simple workflow.

What REALLY has to change AT THE CORE, is the notion that lower price-points, which now allows a more "democratic" access to professional tools, ALSO requires a shorter or any less rigorous amount of education,commitment to your craft and practical experience.

That mindset is ludicrous.

How do you figure the Alexa into this notion of "democratic" and ludicrous mindset? It is a much more expensive camera then RED but it is dominating in Episodic television and has a major hold in higher end "independent" production (a place where RED should be dominating, esp with Scarlet). While its price may not be democratic its ability to quickly flow into more established post models and into existing post tools makes it a viable choice.

Again I'm not against craft - I love it. But, as in any "business" you are going to have varying levels of expertise. In addition craft takes time. And that is something a lot of productions (which are focused on quick turnaround) don't have. There is just a big demand for "out of the box" results. The market that demands that is vast and a great product like RED should be able to fully compete there. I'm simply suggesting they are having problems competing there because of a lack of providing a "decent" out of box usage experience. (Again "decent", because sadly that is what the market demands).

Note I'm not saying that the RED is not not a great camera; and it's likely technically superior where it counts. I'm saying that the current global market for motion capture cameras balances technical superiority with the ease of use. On that latter front RED is having issues that can be fixed.

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

I agree with the deep necessity of craftsmanship to produce superior work. But as a business, the vast majority of production of "motion content" is done on "dumbed down" cameras such as ENG style, Canon of various ilks etc. This is because its relatively easy to get solid looking results in a consistent manner. And it is is relatively easy to quickly bring that footage into a simple workflow.



How do you figure the Alexa into this notion of "democratic" and ludicrous mindset? It is a much more expensive camera then RED but it is dominating in Episodic television and has a major hold in higher end "independent" production (a place where RED should be dominating, esp with Scarlet). While its price may not be democratic its ability to quickly flow into more established post models and into existing post tools makes it a viable choice.

Again I'm not against craft - I love it. But, as in any "business" you are going to have varying levels of expertise. In addition craft takes time. And that is something a lot of productions (which are focused on quick turnaround) don't have. There is just a big demand for "out of the box" results. The market that demands that is vast and a great product like RED should be able to fully compete there. I'm simply suggesting they are having problems competing there because of a lack of providing a "decent" out of box usage experience. (Again "decent", because sadly that is what the market demands).

Note I'm not saying that the RED is not not a great camera; and it's likely technically superior where it counts. I'm saying that the current global market for motion capture cameras balances technical superiority with the ease of use. On that latter front RED is having issues that can be fixed.

I use BOTH cameras often and in the simple ALEXA scenario, it spits out 1080p, look "baked-in" footage, which is lovely, but NOT what RED does in ANY way shape or form.


If you choose to shoot ARRI-Raw , the workflow is actually very similar to RED, if not more annoying because you have to contend with a CODEX box.


IMPO, perhaps you need a simple ENG camera and a simple work-flow and perhap you bought your camera without thinking it all the way through.

 

[Richard Goodwin]

You are talking about a FREE application.

Yes it is FREE. But, because REDCODE is a proprieritay codec, RCX is also the reference software for how to grade and process RED footage. Like it or not it serves as an entry point for many users in the handling of RED footage. In that sense it is also a sort of documentation of process and workflow for grading RED footage.

Also, because it is free it serves as the entry point for many users initial experience with RED Post. Which takes us back to the perception problem. RCX can do everything well, but it does not make it clear via its User Experience how to do the generally "right" thing to get you going. So, either the UI of the software needs improving, or the documentation surrounding its usage or both.

The people developing the RED software have done an awesome job btw. I'm just suggesting that the User Experience could be improved to guide users toward good baseline results.

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

Yes it is FREE. But, because REDCODE is a proprieritay codec, RCX is also the reference software for how to grade and process RED footage. Like it or not it serves as an entry point for many users in the handling of RED footage. In that sense it is also a sort of documentation of process and workflow for grading RED footage.

Also, because it is free it serves as the entry point for many users initial experience with RED Post. Which takes us back to the perception problem. RCX can do everything well, but it does not make it clear via its User Experience how to do the generally "right" thing to get you going. So, either the UI of the software needs improving, or the documentation surrounding its usage or both.

The people developing the RED software have done an awesome job btw. I'm just suggesting that the User Experience could be improved to guide users toward good baseline results.

How much are you willing to pay for that?

 

[mikeburton]

RED needs has been way too assuming that every user would just know to come to reduser and sift through tons of pages to find "correct usage".

RED should fund outside people to write a series of books on usage and best practices and give away or provide low cost digital copies of those (similar to how Adobe has its line of books for instance). Get a few top DITs, ACs, Colorists to document best practices and make it readily available to users. Note: this should be the viewpoint of real world users and not just RED (there needs to be some level of independence so that whoever writes this documentation feels they have a voice). Note this could also be a course of training videos. Separate web site etc.

Speaking of Adobe, i work quite closely with Adobe TV which is dedicated to educating their current and future customer base on all Adobe tools. tv.adobe.com - It would be interesting to have a site like this for RED so as their product line grows so could their education for the community. But, this would need a couple Key advertisers budgets to keep the small RED TV crew working and updating videos with industry professionals and RED team members. I think its an interesting idea for RED to explore and if done right wouldn't cost them much of anything financially. See the Adobe TV method.

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

Speaking of Adobe, i work quite closely with Adobe TV which is dedicated to educating their current and future customer base on all Adobe tools. tv.adobe.com - It would be interesting to have a site like this for RED so as their product line grows so could their education for the community. But, this would need a couple Key advertisers budgets to keep the small RED TV crew working and updating videos with industry professionals and RED team members. I think its an interesting idea for RED to explore and if done right wouldn't cost them much of anything financially. See the Adobe TV method.

Are you willing to pay an MSRP similar to Adobe products for that?

 

[Richard Goodwin]

How much are you willing to pay for that?

I'd say personally up to 1K (or simply utilize a DIT or post person who was equipped with that). But, again I'm talking perception here of why people find RED footage "difficult" to deal with.

RED's business model is up to them. But if RED is going to produce a reference implementation of how to deal with RED footage then they are going to have to ensure that the reference implementation provides a very positive perception of using RED. It is not doing that right now. And, that damages RED's reputation.

A lot of the problem here is RAW itself. RED is clearly at the forefront of that for motion capture. But to make it succeed the toolset (free or paid) is going to have to be very easy to use. Adobe has succeeded with that in the still world with products like Camera RAW, lightroom etc. It is very easy to get solid results from a still RAW image. If RAW in motion (and REDCDOE) is going to broaden its usage base the tools are going to have to be equally easy to use.