Properly graded...

[Gunleik Groven]

Gunleik,



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



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?




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?

Ok.

There's kinda 3 simple answers to this...

1.
Shoot, tweek in camera. Post mostly uncorrected from there.
As to dr and fidelity, the most limited, but if you get what you want, you get what you want.

2.
Wb on set to whatever lights you have, RLF that wb'ed image at whatever temperature and adjust iso/FLUT in post to get the expected levels and noise charracterristics. Post from there.

3.
Treat it as a daylight filmstock throughout.
Light for that, but if you cannot, still do not choose a wb below about 4400 or above 6000 in post, as those settings add some grain to the image. Post tools are better at ballancing images well without adding grain above and bellow those levels of wb. Do not expose with tungsten settings even when using tungsten lights, at that willeasilly make you underexpose the blue channel double.
Keep that philosophy throughout post to get the most noisefree image.
Low exposures are relly just fine, as long as you want tour image to be dark.

Get some contrast in there, whatever.


I am deeply into #3, but try to learn people to use 1 & 2 successfully a lot, because those are really easy, and give really great results for 95% of the scenarios...

Makes sense?

I have only one more geekything to do in my life, before becoming a full time artist, and that is to write an article on linear light and its implications for photographers and post people. Then I am done with my geeky me for good.
Most of my teaching at filmschools and in broadcast and film companies, go into understanding linear light.

The boring thing about that, is that it makes all digital cameras very similar in many ways. You just have to controll the optical path, too...

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Point is:
As long as you are consequent in your approach, many approaches can be successfull with Red...

G (really trying to stay out of geeky and tech conversations these days because I do not want to go there anymore because it only brands me as a geek) Groven...

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

Point is:
As long as you are consequent in your approach, many approaches can be successfull with Red...

G (really trying to stay out of geeky and tech conversations these days because I do not want to go there anymore because it only brands me as a geek) Groven...

ABSOLUTELY!!!

 

[Miles Heckendorn]

Tusen takk

.......Treat it as a daylight filmstock throughout.
Light for that, but if you cannot, still do not choose a wb below about 4400 or above 6000 in post, as those settings add some grain to the image. Post tools are better at ballancing images well without adding grain above and bellow those levels of wb. Do not expose with tungsten settings even when using tungsten lights, at that willeasilly make you underexpose the blue channel double.
Keep that philosophy throughout post to get the most noisefree image.
Low exposures are relly just fine, as long as you want tour image to be dark.......

.........Makes sense?

Ja, det gjør det.

In fact after our trail and error phase, we've been using only daylight balanced lights. But that is some very useful info about the WB. Thanks!

I guess for us it's not really the production phase where we have the bottleneck. It's more a post issue. This is were I find the most resistance from producers (not always, many are very happy start RED projects). And I just wish we had something "official" from RED that I could point at and say "this is proper way to do it....it's easy....now can we shot this on RED!?!".

 

[mikeburton]

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

This entire thread is dedicated to the lack of formal knowledge that exists from not only outside the REDUSER community but obviously after reading through the thread its safe to say inside the community as well. If educating the community has a small fee than so be it. However, if done right it will be both a fantastic free tool for the community and beyond as well as financially worth while for both RED and its owner/operators. Trust me on this.

 

[Richard Goodwin]

This entire thread is dedicated to the lack of formal knowledge that exists from not only outside the REDUSER community but obviously after reading through the thread its safe to say inside the community as well. If educating the community has a small fee than so be it. However, if done right it will be both a fantastic free tool for the community and beyond as well as financially worth while for both RED and its owner/operators. Trust me on this.

Well said.

The cost of improving the ease of use of the tool and its documentation, will be a fraction of the value of the benefit RED will get in the market place in terms of sales, rentals, and positive perception.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Tusen takk



Ja, det gjør det.

In fact after our trail and error phase, we've been using only daylight balanced lights. But that is some very useful info about the WB. Thanks!

I guess for us it's not really the production phase where we have the bottleneck. It's more a post issue. This is were I find the most resistance from producers (not always, many are very happy start RED projects). And I just wish we had something "official" from RED that I could point at and say "this is proper way to do it....it's easy....now can we shot this on RED!?!".

Wow!

Google translations?

)

 

[Mike P.]

If RED started charging for RCX I think a lot of people would bail out. CinemaDNG is open standard and coming up fast... Sure it's more mb/frame, but again, it's open... Not only that, but its 'processing tools' are exactly the same as RAW stills which are (comparatively) tried and true (recovery, fill, clarity, etc.) It's as good a format as r3d in most ways, except size, which most would gladly give up just for the freedom of being able to bring it in to whatever-software they wanted without having to worry about compatibility issues or required updates or workarounds or just general proprietary-ness. So, Brandon if you're suggesting that people should have to pay to use (essentially mandatory) software or worse, pay for documentation for that software, you're out of your mind...

Let me put it another way; you know how a lot of people are currently using Alexas even though they cost more, they often record to an inferior baked in format (prores), they have less resolution, and a more cumbersome size/weight and raw implementation (codex-box), etc? Imagine how many more people would jump ship if RED said, "if you want to actually get good with our mandatory software, you're going to have to pay for the privilege!" You see the problem with your mentality right? The industry is already willing to pay more for less, solely because of convenience, and you're suggesting that RED introduce even MORE barriers to entry? That doesn't even make sense.

 

[Miles Heckendorn]

Wow!

Google translations?

)

haha!
Er min norsk så dårlig?!?
Jeg bør faktisk i norge. Men, jeg er fra USA. Kona mi er norsk.

Scandinavian women..... I'm powerless to resist.

 

[Eric Haase]

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?

Davinci Resolve (Lite) is free. Have a look at its manual. It is incredibly comprehensive, with examples and real world scenarios where one might use certain features and controls.

Some might consider RCX Pro part of the camera they purchased for $30,000+.

Seems like it would take someone about 2 or 3 days to write a real, comprehensive manual for RCXPro given that they fully understand the intricacies of ALL the features and their implications on any given post workflow. For starters, a best practices guide would be useful- you could start with when or when not to check 'restrict SMPTE range' when transcoding to Prores, DnxHD Quicktime, or MXF. Haha. I would guess 90% of redusers wouldn't know the implications of this option on each of these formats and a lot of us have been dealing with red footage for a long time. To me it has proven that while I would love to tell everyone working with Red footage is so easy, uncomplicated, etc. the reality is that this is not the case and there are many 'gotchas' along the way. I think there is a lot of room for improvement - in terms of documentation and simplifying the user interface and endless options.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

haha!
Er min norsk så dårlig?!?
Jeg bør faktisk i norge. Men, jeg er fra USA. Kona mi er norsk.

Scandinavian women..... I'm powerless to resist.

Norsken din er perfekt.
Bare ventet ikke å finne den her...



Cheers

G

 

[Yousuf Abbasi]

Some might consider RCX Pro part of the camera they purchased for $30,000+.

ABSOLUTELY. To me, RCX is the primary way to view and adjust fundamental RAW attributes. It's definitely a big part of the camera.

 

[Rob Lohman]

Thanks for the passion and all the feedback guys. Love it!

 

[Dave Blackham]

If I do have a criticism then its the lack of clear instructions. The other issue is a proxy module to support a QT or DNX file, yep I know this flies in the face of the whole ethos but would be good if this can be available soon. The cameras and software are best available other than that.

 

[Dr. Sassi]

I think in a nut shell no one talks against any workflow, as long as it produces the results wanted.

A workflow that generates not the best results is not really a workflow; It is that simple.

The initial idea of this thread sounded to me:
Set the quality measurements at least with the results that you as a DP can get out of RCX.

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

If RED started charging for RCX I think a lot of people would bail out. CinemaDNG is open standard and coming up fast... Sure it's more mb/frame, but again, it's open... Not only that, but its 'processing tools' are exactly the same as RAW stills which are (comparatively) tried and true (recovery, fill, clarity, etc.) It's as good a format as r3d in most ways, except size, which most would gladly give up just for the freedom of being able to bring it in to whatever-software they wanted without having to worry about compatibility issues or required updates or workarounds or just general proprietary-ness. So, Brandon if you're suggesting that people should have to pay to use (essentially mandatory) software or worse, pay for documentation for that software, you're out of your mind...

Let me put it another way; you know how a lot of people are currently using Alexas even though they cost more, they often record to an inferior baked in format (prores), they have less resolution, and a more cumbersome size/weight and raw implementation (codex-box), etc? Imagine how many more people would jump ship if RED said, "if you want to actually get good with our mandatory software, you're going to have to pay for the privilege!" You see the problem with your mentality right? The industry is already willing to pay more for less, solely because of convenience, and you're suggesting that RED introduce even MORE barriers to entry? That doesn't even make sense.

Are you KIDDING????

CINEMA DNG has NO workable work-flow!!!!

You cant do a thing with it without a seriously dopey set of steps that make no sense at all....

Try importing timecode why dontcha??

If you TRULY believe that folks who pay +50,000 for a camera and then another 100K for glass, etc etc etc, won't invest in post software...then you might as well step off the train right now.


(You DO know that shooting RAW with ALEXA costs a small fortune to upgrade the camera and purchase the deck to handle it, dont you?)


SERIOUSLY?????

Cinema DNG????.

ROFL.

Because it is free????

 

[Miles Heckendorn]

I think in a nut shell no one talks against any workflow, as long as it produces the results wanted.

A workflow that generates not the best results is not really a workflow; It is that simple.

The initial idea of this thread sounded to me:
Set the quality measurements at least with the results that you as a DP can get out of RCX.

And I agree, but most of the time the problem lies outside of our control.

For example: Joe Blow editor takes a crack at r3ds, screws up something in the pipeline because of lack of information. He then goes back to the producer "this workflow is too complicated....I'm going to need some extra time". What is the producer going to do? He/she going to wonder if RED is the cheapest/easiest workflow next time around. Maybe the producer will badmouth the workflow to others.

And it shouldn't be that way. Especially when the workflow isn't that difficult. It's just a lack of information getting out to the everyday post house. Jim's info in the first post is exactly what is needed.

By the way, that example is NOT what I'm encountering on a daily basis. Most of the people I work with love RED. I just want everyone to love it! And a little basic info wouldn't hurt, would it?

 

[Björn Benckert]

Are you KIDDING????

CINEMA DNG has NO workable work-flow!!!!

You cant do a thing with it without a seriously dopey set of steps that make no sense at all....

Try importing timecode why dontcha??

If you TRULY believe that folks who pay +50,000 for a camera and then another 100K for glass, etc etc etc, won't invest in post software...then you might as well step off the train right now.


(You DO know that shooting RAW with ALEXA costs a small fortune to upgrade the camera and purchase the deck to handle it, dont you?)


SERIOUSLY?????

Cinema DNG????.

ROFL.

Because it is free????

Well Brandon.. Cinema DNG is a widely used format, in post. I do not think we are speaking about DP's that invest in a deskside computer here it's post houses where you chain large number of computers to a SAN and so on then DNG is widly used just as DPX, you can in that land not work with R3D files since you leave all the 3D packages out and they need to use the exact same files as the compositors so before any 3D work can take place you need to leave R3D it's that simple...

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I'll say the exact same thing I've said since the first month that the REDOne was released and there was less than 100 cameras out in the wild:

"The reason people keep screwing up RED footage is because the tools practically encourage people to do it. Defaults make all the difference. UI makes all the difference. If this many people are doing something wrong, they aren't doing anything wrong, the tools are to blame."

There needs to be a tool that just batch converts R3D files to DPX or EXR. It should be painfully stupid/easy to use. It should have two settings: "ISO" and "Daylight or Tungsten".

It can then have one more checkbox: "Offline" with a couple preset drop downs (h264, ProRes, DnxHD115) to also output an offline proxy.

I really like where REDCine-X is going but you can't trust people. People are stupid and need to be protected from themselves. Give people the tinker toys edition and they can be safe.

 

[BRANDON JAMESON]

I'll say the exact same thing I've said since the first month that the REDOne was released and there was less than 100 cameras out in the wild:

"The reason people keep screwing up RED footage is because the tools practically encourage people to do it. Defaults make all the difference. UI makes all the difference. If this many people are doing something wrong, they aren't doing anything wrong, the tools are to blame."

There needs to be a tool that just batch converts R3D files to DPX or EXR. It should be painfully stupid/easy to use. It should have two settings: "ISO" and "Daylight or Tungsten".




It can then have one more checkbox: "Offline" with a couple preset drop downs (h264, ProRes, DnxHD115) to also output an offline proxy.

I really like where REDCine-X is going but you can't trust people. People are stupid and need to be protected from themselves.

Very cool, Gavin.

Develop it and sell it...I'll buy one.