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 :)

RED - examples of natural, "filmic" color?

Thanks for that fantastically honest response, Graeme. First and foremeost I will email the colorist and engineer shortly and have them email you the speech they gave me when coloring. He did show me how on a lot of shots he used the secondaries to pull yellows back into balance and said he had never had to do that before. But I will have them clarify to you personally.

When I did my personal tests of Alexa vs Red M-X. It was the Alexa at 800ISO output to it's ProRes with log curve option vs Red Raw RC2/RedLogFilm. Then On both I just grabbed the gamma/gain/Lift and went to town trying all kinds of different looks to get a "feel" for how they reacted. Things in the red areas (like skin and roses I had in the shot) showed quite a difference. The roses in ALexa were a rich blood red, the roses in Red were a bit pink and lightly saturated. The blacks in the dark wheel wells of the car and T-shirt of the person looked rich and dark on the alexa and just "not so much" on the red stuff. That being said, After I did a bit of extra work I could get the Red stuff to look closer to Alexa, but it took a bit of fiddling with secondaries to grab reds, and grabbing other colors to get it to balance the same and look as rich.

On the new Davinici 8 color curves, I make a lum vs sat bell curve so that there is more saturation in the mids and the sat drops off in the highs and lows which seems to help the blacks and whites get a little cleaner on the ends while allowing me to get away with more filmy saturation where I want it. Also I mess with specific RGB S-curves to get a more "filmy" response from the RedLogFilm of course. In addition to the usual bump in sharpening to get the red footage to not have the fuzzy tone to it. So it has the "bite" of film stock.

I will now need to test the soft contrast filter to see what that does. Normally I hate filtration on set as I want the image captured as true as possible, but worth a test no less. Thanks for the feedback.

And heres a few spots from my first year in the Red adventure if anyone cares:
Chris Shot on RED
 
Graeme Nattress said:
If a colourist you know has an issue (any issue) with RED footage, they need to contact me and get me involved. It's no point them complaining otherwise. It could be as simple as an incorrect workflow or setting. Or it could be something wrong with how we're doing things, and in that case we fix it as we've done in the past.
Click to expand...

I don't have any "issues" per se. Like Chris, I see that different cameras look different, just as different film stocks look different. You can do some tricks to get one to look more like the other, but as I mentioned earlier in this thread, the natural tendency of a colorist is guided to a great degree by what the material defines itself as being. You would likely only choose to make one look like the other if you looked at them side by side, having shot the same scene, or intercut within the same scene. At that point, you'd decide which one is more appropriate and match accordingly. But your first grade, having not seen the two side by side, will be influenced by the camera's sensor characteristics, the color processing involved on the manufacturer's side, the color matrix used, and more significantly, the photography itself. None of this is good, bad, or otherwise. It just means that there are choices, and you choose based on the needs of the project.

Having said that, I also agree with Chris that the Alexa's natural tendency is to produce images that are a bit more (and I hesitate to use this term) "film-like", both in terms of colorimetry and "softness" (that's more experiential than technical) than Red, regardless of whether its' an MX Red One or an Epic. Once again, that's neither good nor bad. It just is.
 
Mike, you're right in that it's like stocks, and obviously Fuji and Kodak had their own unique looks are were used accordingly. And Mike, I know that if you had issues I'd hear rapidly enough and work with you on them :-)

As I mentioned, our aim is really neutral without building in a strong look, but, of course, even "neutral" is a look :-)

Graeme
 
I wonder by the introduction of ACES will render all these discussions useless, since its color that we are talking about here.

What do u think Mike ?

Rivai
 
One main color difference between Sony, Alexa, and Red cameras is where the IR cutoff point is.

Sony lets alot of deep red through.
Alexa cuts off most of the red.
R1MX and Epic is in the middle.

We'll have more options for the Epic filters coming soon.
 
I always thought of Alexa and Red in same terms as Kodak and Fuji. They just different and that's all. Yes, I find Alexa just a tiny bit easier. But that simplicity comes at a price. Lets face it, an overwhelming majority of Alexa material today is Log-C Prores. That means, that white balance is baked in. And god forbid production uses something like Film Matrix ON during the shoot for Rec-709 deliverables. It can be difficult to reverse. It happened to me twice last week.
At the end of the day, it really makes no difference to me Alexa or Red. Both cameras produce stunning images with Red having more malleable images and Alexa... well looking like Alexa right out of the gate...
I don't exactly remember, but I'm pretty sure there are no secondaries adjustments on either Epic or Alexa shots.

Epic.jpg

Alexa.jpg
 
for me the the most important aspects of a cameras image are the color science, resolution and motion charactoristics, they are always there to be seen on the screen. The biggest difference between the red and Alexa is the color science, the reds on the Alexa have a deeper richer color. The skins tones on the Alexa are darker with more brown in them. I would say the red camera's color is more accurate to what the actually colors were like in reality but Alexa processes the colors to make them more like film. To make the red camera look more filmic like the Alexa it is just a case of adding a couple of secondries when grading and both cameras look almost identical except the Alexa has a softer look to it. This can look quite nice on mids and close ups but on wides it can just look a bit soft and of low resolution.
As Mike said a lot of colourists will go with the inherent colours from the camera when grading, sometimes whether it is due to time constraints or not having a different colour reference they wont play around too much with the secondries. Personally i would love if red came up with a new colour science option that veered away from matching the true colours from a scene and gave us one which mimics 35mm film's colour palette. This is the beauty of raw having the ability to pick a different look so easily. With so many more digital camera options out there red's massive advantage it is access to raw files that can be downloaded quickly, don't take up loads of space and can be viewed and manipulated on standard hardware and free software. Would love if the colour was refined even more.
 
Jake, what's the issue you have with Film Matrix ON for 709 deliverables? Are you talking about grading out the Log C as opposed to using luts to get the images to a Rec709 baseline?
 
I would like to say that I totally agree with Chris Smith's observations concerning RED and ALEXA's look. I have reached to the exact same conclusions.

I also agree with Most's statement that the RED look is what it is and it is not bad. The ONLY problem I have experienced is that the ALEXA footage looks instantly so good and 'filmic' that it impresses almost everyone during a shoot and builds a reputation of being the GO-TO camera for productions that are after a film look.

I don't think this is due to a soft contrast filter. In my opinion it is Alexa's particular colour science.
 
Chris Smith said:
Sorry if this has been covered as I rarely post here. I've shot spots on 35mm for the last 11 years. An agency forced me to use a Red last year against my will. I enjoyed it and switched to digital mostly using the Red M-X (Anyone want to buy my ARRI 235?). That being said, I've done my own tests between the ALexa and Red M-X (Not Epic since it wasn't out) and put it in my DaVinci. In a nutshell, I get a much cleaner, smoother, "Sexier" result from the Alexa (Blacks were richer, colors thicker and more true). That being said I kept shooting Red M-X. I have since purchased an Epic-M last June and have shot spots with it all summer. I haven't had a chance to A/B it to Alexa yet like I did the Red-MX. But when agency people ask me if I like the Alexa over my Epic, I have to tread lightly because I still think the Alexa looks like celluloid out of the gate far more than the Epic. I say, "Alexa looks like film, Red looks like Red". I really love my Epic and plan to use it all the time, but secretly I want it to look more like the Alexa. I've recently in DaVini Resolve 8 have used it's new advanced color curves to create LUTS I call "Alexa Look" and I put them as my first node before I color the rest of the Epic stuff. I know there are a ton of devout followers here and what I am speaking is blasphemy, but at the end of the day, a cam is a tool and I just want an honest discussion. You said, Alexa look is from a soft contrast filter built in. Is that only it? Can I stick a similar filter in the Epic matte box and get my dream of owning an Epic but looking like an Alexa? If so, then I'm happy and I can move on. But if it's something else, I would love to know what that can be to get to that dream point where I can have the Alexa look in an Epic body. I REALLY want to invest more into Red as I believe in the products and direction, but there seems to be a bit of arrogance (too strong?) on the part of Red and followers to deny that the Alexa simply looks closer to film and the Red always looks like a Red. I would love the option to switch between those preferences. I can watch spots on TV and have a hard time nailing all Alexa vs film challenges (like the recent Porsche ads) but you can always spot a RED spot a mile away. I would love to change that. Last thing I want to do is start a ridiculous war, just want to state my peace from a guy who really could almost care less about this camera war, I just want the best tool which is far as I can tell would be an Epic with the look of Alexa. (On another note, colorists all summer have been complaining about the out of control yellows in Epic, not sure what that implies).
Click to expand...

Well said Chris. I'm of the school of Epic and Alexa as just being two different film stocks with their characteristics, but this healthy discussion is something for which this forum is worth coming back to. Thanks for bringing that up.
 
And which CS on the Alexa would that be - the original one without matrix, the new one, or the even newer one, and for the new and newer one, with "film matrix" or without? All look different....

Graeme
 
Colm O'Rourke said:
...The biggest difference between the red and Alexa is the color science, the reds on the Alexa have a deeper richer color. The skins tones on the Alexa are darker with more brown in them. I would say the red camera's color is more accurate to what the actually colors were like in reality but Alexa processes the colors to make them more like film....Personally i would love if red came up with a new colour science option that veered away from matching the true colours from a scene and gave us one which mimics 35mm film's colour palette....
Click to expand...

I think think this is a flawless summary of my request as well. Just like Vinyl had a sound that wasn't true, it had a characteristic that was still pleasing. Film may not be "true" but I don't care, it looked beautiful. I wouldn't mind a film simulation science as an option. An option I would probably default to. I could tell in my own Alexa V Red tests that Alexa was adding a "look". But my eye liked it and all I had to do was add in some contrast and set the saturation in the pocket and I was done. I believe I have read statements from Red to the effect of film look is dead - this is the new look (please correct me if i didn't read this a few years back). I get that and that is fine, but for the rest of us, I would love an honest stab at a color science that still cheated a bit to create a celluloid look out of the gate and not be so "sciency" about it not being pure ;)

I would like to stop telling people who ask my opinion , "Red is a film killer because of it's engineering and convenience....Alexa is a film killer because it was the first digital cam to capture it's look".
 
I would add to the discussion the following:
- Epic M and Red OneMX produce the best results for me when processed RedlogFilm/Redcolor or Redcolor 2 (depending on project look) at 320ASA but shot at 800. It creates a beautiful strong, sharp picture with great highlight rolloff. I have had to use secondaries a lot when working with saturated Reds: In a Honda spot with a Red car and in a St. Louis Cardinals spot with the Red shirts. Both came up more magenta than the real thing.
-Red should develop a LUT that can be imported into various grading systems that "gets you there" from RedlogFilm/Redcolor @ 320ASA like Alexas LogC to Rec709 LUT. Makes life easy.
-I own a RedMX, Epic X (soon I hope) and an Alexa and have a Resolve so I get to see them side by side quite a bit (shot A cam Alexa and B Cam epic last week as a matter of fact). Why own both camera systems? Both have their own inherent look. Like different Film stocks. Their strengths and weaknesses. I want to exploit those creatively rather than being bound by owning only one system and making the format decision from my pocketbook.
 
Doug Shannon said:
Jake, what's the issue you have with Film Matrix ON for 709 deliverables? Are you talking about grading out the Log C as opposed to using luts to get the images to a Rec709 baseline?
Click to expand...

To answer this question I better use a quote from one of ARRI guys, who had to create a reverse LUT for me to get rid of FilmMatrix.
"You should NEVER use the filmmatrix; only if you want to intercut with 35mm footage scanned with a ARRISCAN in order to use the Print Emulsion LUTs on both kinds of footage.
Never.
Never.
Ist a dumb idea to implement it that way."

'nuff said:-)
 
Last edited:
Sulekh Suman said:
Philip Bloom did an interesting short-Great Wooden Boats on Eric Kessler's Epic M using day light. The skin tone is nice(bit biased towards blue). He graded it with Magic Bullet Looks 2.
http://vimeo.com/26287132
He has all the specs in his blog below.
http://philipbloom.net/2011/07/11/my-first-red-epic-short-film-great-wooden-boats/
Click to expand...
Yes, it was done a while ago and, as always, it was beautifully photographed. Unfortunately he decided to grade it with Magic Bullet Looks. Looks.
It creates a LOOK, which has nothing to do with with subject of this discussion of natural "filmic" images.
 
Florian Stadler said:
-Red should develop a LUT that can be imported into various grading systems that "gets you there" from RedlogFilm/Redcolor @ 320ASA like Alexas LogC to Rec709 LUT. Makes life easy.
Click to expand...

Well, actually Arri has already "sort of" done that for you. If you use their online LUT creator and make a LUT to go from LogC to Rec709 with no matrix, it pretty much does "get you there." It may not be exact, but it's very, very close - close enough that I use it fairly regularly.
 
There are so many factors here, I don't know where to begin. :-)

First, when comparing Alexa, are we talking about RAW or Log-C ProRes?

Focusing on RED now. VERY important. It starts on set. I have seen some egregious color temperatures coming from light fixtures on set and had to bring it to DP and gaffer's attention. Always a good idea to make sure that color temp is what you're expecting. Mixing color temps is an art and requires some experience. Yes, RED is RAW. But there are ways to ensure you are getting the color temp and tint right on set. This can have such a huge impact on skin tone. I know it sounds like a basic thing to say but I wonder how many images have been processed with incorrect color temps and tint.

Filtering. Don't be afraid to filter the RED. Soften it, color it, enhance it. Get your look in camera as much as possible. RAW will still help you manipulate later on if you want to. Be brave, don't always be at the mercy of post.

Post. If the images come into post looking pretty good already, colorists have a much better chance of achieving the goals of the project. Come in with shoddy work hoping RAW will save it, end up with less shoddy images. Speaking of which, employing a great colorist on your project will certainly help achieve a lot of goals.

Now having said all that, RED is not film. It is not Alexa. It is not Panasonic and it is not Sony. There will be an inherent look to it, not only because of color but because of resolution, bit depth, compression options, OLPF, etc. What Bruce is asking is, is it possible to get skin tones on RED Cam that look similar to how they look in real life. In order to answer that, one has to test, taking into account everything I just mentioned. How much is a free lunch (what the camera sees without any external aids) and what needs to be done to get the images to what one considers natural. Maybe it's adding some 80C filtering to a tungsten source, maybe it's adding a net on the back of the lens, etc.

I think Bruce's request here is less about achieving a look (which can often mean artificial) and more about natural response of an imager.

Anyway, this is a good discussion. Doesn't even have to be Camera A vs Camera B. Can focus exclusively on the camera he is talking about.
 
Oh, and don't underestimate makeup. Speaking with a makeup artist recently, she said there is some nasty stuff being used out there. Always do makeup tests with the talent when skin tones have to be spot on.
 
Sorry Jake. That was my first post on the forum. I didn't realize the thread had come this far.
Danish post House Zentropa created a special look for Academy Award Winner for Best Foreign Film, Susan Bier's " In A Better World"-2011(Red One)
"They came up with something that more resembled the characteristics of Kodak's VISION2 5201 50 daylight stock"-Morten Soborg

Great insights from Morten Soborg, DP and collaborator on the project.
http://www.videography.com/article/108284

Resolution alone won't help fuzzy ideas-Compare Thomas Vinterberg's The Celebration-1998(Shot on Sony DCR-PC7E on mini DV) with Soderberg's Contagion 2011 (Red MX).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top