Red to Film Output

[M Most]

So, how do you set Scratch for the render/playback swap? Which menu do I use to set it up?

In the Player (any module), under Settings there is a drop down on the left side labeled "Enable Output." If you pull that down, there's a selection called "Process on Play."

I'm going partly on memory here as I don't have a system in front of me at the moment.

 

[jake blackstone]

In the Player (any module), under Settings there is a drop down on the left side labeled "Enable Output." If you pull that down, there's a selection called "Process on Play."

I'm going partly on memory here as I don't have a system in front of me at the moment.

Cool, thanks for the info. Now, that I know what to look for, I'm I'll be able to find it. Will have to give it a whirl

 

[jake blackstone]

I doubt that any lab charges for such a thing as it's really just a matter of loading a different LUT in the Arrilaser. There is no separate conversion pass.

I think it all depends on what your primary deliverable is. If it's film, you're better off working in a film color space - achieved by a combination of log source and a print preview LUT on the viewing system - not only because it gives you overall ranges that are more appropriate, but because it gives you color results that are accurate, predictable, and proper. If, however, your primary deliverable is not film, it it not necessarily the best approach, because it does, by its nature, restrict the color pallette a bit (particularly in terms of saturation), and it also applies a toe and knee characteristic that may lead to a flatter image on video deliverables than one might like. That's one of the reasons why video deliverables from high end DI houses often go through a "tweak" pass after being processed with a film targeted HD LUT baked in. For those who want the images to "look like film," though, the log/print preview LUT approach does accomplish that. And there's always the option of using Redlog, but grading without a conversion LUT - which gives you, to some degree, the best of both worlds for a video deliverable, namely an undisturbed color pallette, but with a knee for highlight compression that can make for some nice, unclipped images.

Many choices.

Good points. Whenever my client is not sure about the future filmout, I suggest doing grading in LOG with the DCI to REC-709 LUT conversion at the end. This way, if later they do decide to do the filmout, it's already done and no color info is lost.

 

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

Mike - Jake

It seems that there are two ways of doing Film out color grading, the LOG and the Linear, when we say linear we mean REC709 color space with linear response. I know there is also Linear in the film color space... But its seems to be the norm with "non color managed workflow", as our colleague Andrew from DuArt says, they suggesting to grade linear in the REC709 color space. So when we say Linear, all the forum members around us, understands REC709... because is the only monitor setup that someone can find in a post production environment that does not need a color Calibration/LUT cycle.

Karilla and we (me, Mike, Jake) say that this workflow, Linear in REC709 color space, is a process that can't resemble the same level of "image quality" that the Log calibrated process can provide. That is regardless the film recorder and the film type (Camera negative/ Inter negative).

The approach, "Grade it in your REC709 monitor and we will fix it" is not in the equal level against the calibrated Log.

Log process can be from 25% better (if a percentage can describe the difference) to the point that we commonly say "Night and Day", that is because monitors, are not always accurately calibrated, since they don't use a 3DLUT to compensate the non linearity errors... additionally the white points are different (6500K against 5400K for film), the white level is much higher in the broadcast monitor (80cd to 100cd against 47cd for film) that last one gives a totally different feeling during color grading to the colorist. That alone is a trap that can lead him in the totally wrong way...

So I want to be clear on that...

LOG color grading with proper color management and a print 3DLUT specific for the used display device, is the best professional way to prepare a feature for film out.

Linear with REC709 can be an alternative, but be aware that this is NOT the best way to prepare a feature for film out. The result can be from acceptable to really bad.

If we compare a print from ARRILaser film recorder with a Linear workflow, against a print from Lasergraphics film recorder with a Log calibrated process, the lasergraphics print can easily outperform the ARRILaser big time...

So its not the machines, its how we do it...

 

[M Most]

Whenever my client is not sure about the future filmout, I suggest doing grading in LOG with the DCI to REC-709 LUT conversion at the end. This way, if later they do decide to do the filmout, it's already done and no color info is lost.

That's exactly what I recommend as well. Put the finished files - ready to go to a film recorder - on LTO3 or LTO4, put them on the shelf, and thus be prepared for a film recording with no further manipulations necessary.

 

[jake blackstone]

Mike - Jake

It seems that there are two ways of doing Film out color grading, the LOG and the Linear, when we say linear we mean REC709 color space with linear response. I know there is also Linear in the film color space... But its seems to be the norm with "non color managed workflow", as our colleague Andrew from DuArt says, they suggesting to grade linear in the REC709 color space. So when we say Linear, all the forum members around us, understands REC709... because is the only monitor setup that someone can find in a post production environment that does not need a color Calibration/LUT cycle.

Karilla and we (me, Mike, Jake) say that this workflow, Linear in REC709 color space, is a process that can't resemble the same level of "image quality" that the Log calibrated process can provide. That is regardless the film recorder and the film type (Camera negative/ Inter negative).

The approach, "Grade it in your REC709 monitor and we will fix it" is not in the equal level against the calibrated Log.

Log process can be from 25% better (if a percentage can describe the difference) to the point that we commonly say "Night and Day", that is because monitors, are not always accurately calibrated, since they don't use a 3DLUT to compensate the non linearity errors... additionally the white points are different (6500K against 5400K for film), the white level is much higher in the broadcast monitor (80cd to 100cd against 47cd for film) that last one gives a totally different feeling during color grading to the colorist. That alone is a trap that can lead him in the totally wrong way...

So I want to be clear on that...

LOG color grading with proper color management and a print 3DLUT specific for the used display device, is the best professional way to prepare a feature for film out.

Linear with REC709 can be an alternative, but be aware that this is NOT the best way to prepare a feature for film out. The result can be from acceptable to really bad.

If we compare a print from ARRILaser film recorder with a Linear workflow, against a print from Lasergraphics film recorder with a Log calibrated process, the lasergraphics print can easily outperform the ARRILaser big time...

So its not the machines, its how we do it...

Those are all valid points and I agree, that there are number of different ways of accomplishing quality grade with LOG or LIN gamma settings.
A while ago I had two Filmlight engineers presenting me with two equally compelling cases of doing grades in LIN vs LOG for video finish. On film finish I just can't see any reason to do LIN workflow whatsoever.
Back to the point I was making earlier. It is very often, that people confuse color space with gamma. Color science can be very confusing as it is. Inevitably, while describing REC-709 gamma, it is widely understood, that REC-709 gamma is LIN, but it isn't actually linear at all. It's actually much closer to LOG than to true LIN as in native RED gamma. So, as I understand it:
REC-709 gamma 2.2 D-6500
DCI and Film gamma 2.6 D-5400
RED camera gamma 1 D-5000?
Agree?

 

[M Most]

REC-709 gamma 2.2 D-6500
DCI and Film gamma 2.6 D-5400
RED camera gamma 1 D-5000?
Agree?

No.

Rec709 is somewhat similar to a 2.2 gamma, but it is not really 2.2. For one thing, the lower portion of the curve is linear. So although it's often referred to as 2.2, and although for the most part it resembles 2.2, it's not really 2.2.

For the DCI spec, it's not that simple. The gamma is defined to be 2.6, but the white point is a different story, and depends on whether you are talking about the encoded white point or the projector white point. The projector white point (which is what you're probably thinking of) in a DCI spec reference projector has chromaticity coordinates of .314x and .351y, which is actually quite close to a color temperature of about 6300K. Film is different, and the white points of Xenon lamp film projectors vary widely, anywhere from about 5200K to 6500K. The midscale gamma for most print films is closer to 2.8 (as compared to the negative gamma of about .6).

For the Red, I agree with you.

 

[jake blackstone]

No.

Rec709 is somewhat similar to a 2.2 gamma, but it is not really 2.2. For one thing, the lower portion of the curve is linear. So although it's often referred to as 2.2, and although for the most part it resembles 2.2, it's not really 2.2.

For the DCI spec, it's not that simple. The gamma is defined to be 2.6, but the white point is a different story, and depends on whether you are talking about the encoded white point or the projector white point. The projector white point (which is what you're probably thinking of) in a DCI spec reference projector has chromaticity coordinates of .314x and .351y, which is actually quite close to a color temperature of about 6300K. Film is different, and the white points of Xenon lamp film projectors vary widely, anywhere from about 5200K to 6500K. The midscale gamma for most print films is closer to 2.8 (as compared to the negative gamma of about .6).

For the Red, I agree with you.

Granted, my list is oversimplified, but you would agree, that REC-709 gamma anything, but LIN and it is is much closer to the LOG? To describe gamma in REC-709 as LIN gamma is misnomer...

 

[M Most]

Granted, my list is oversimplified, but you would agree, that REC-709 gamma anything, but LIN and it is is much closer to the LOG? To describe gamma in REC-709 as LIN gamma is misnomer...

It's incorrect, to be sure. But I think what has happened is that many people use it simply to differentiate between true "log" coding and non-"log" encoding. What has been mentioned here before (by Graeme, a number of times, as well as by myself and others) is that "linear" in the true sense of the term means "linear light" - that is, a gamma of 1. Anything else is, well, not linear.

But that, unfortunately, will not stop people from misusing the term.

 

[gbalaji]

I've couple of questions for people trying out Apple Color. The LUT management and flexibility in Color is not good. I dont find any scanner / recorder manufacturers provide LUT's for Apple Color.

Other than that the important aspects of Color Timing is with the colorist and nothing more. I've seen poor outputs from Baselight / Lustre.

 

[Andrew Young]

When we were doing some of the first Super 16 to 35 mm blow-ups for theatrical release in the 70s, 16 mm was still scoffed at by much of the feature film industry. ‘Not the way to get a theatrical print,’ many said back then (or so I’m told - I was trading baseball cards at the time). And yet the list of 16 and Super 16 features that drove the independent film movement is quite impressive. And many of them look fantastic too. And now, almost 40 years later, in the age of 4K digital, we’ve got a film like ‘Earth,’ which has grossed over 100 M worldwide and whose success is entirely based on it’s stunning imagery, and yet it was largely shot in lowly 720p. I’m not making an argument technical mediocrity here, all I’m saying is there’s more than one way to the big screen.

I would never suggest that a linear workflow is better when going to film, but in some cases it might be more practical. Yes, a color managed log workflow has its advantages, all things being equal (there you go Avangelos, you got me to say it!). Of course, all things are not always equal in this brave new world where filmmakers are employing tools like Red One and Apple Color to take control of more and more of the process. So if your already working in a linear environment such as Red native Quicktimes in Color, or ProRes HQ, and you’re not working in a color managed environment, getting good predictable results from Rec709 monitoring may be easier and more cost effective. It’s certainly easy enough to do a test and judge with your own eyes. Or, if you’re in this neck of the woods, stop by and see some examples. But to dismiss it off hand is to ignore an option that has worked very well for a lot of films.

If you’re seeing clipped whites and milky blacks then the conversion is not being done right. Or maybe someone left a legalizer on somewhere. We use the full 10 bit range available to go to film, not the studio range.

Someone asked what we use to monitor. Its a Sony BVM-32 - a 32” reference monitor which probably weighs in at about 150 lbs. We just bought two HP Deamcolors that we’ll be testing soon. If they work well, they will be a little more practical for off site work.

But I heartily agree with what others have said - that the talent of the colorist is one of the most important factors in a good filmout. And that’s one of the most important things we offer. Avangelos said it best, “it’s not the machines, it’s how we do it”

 

[Uli Plank]

I dont find any scanner / recorder manufacturers provide LUT's for Apple Color.

But Evangelos does!

 

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

Thanks Andrew for your very positive attitude...

Mike I agree with you about the technicalities... but I want to stress the bigger picture, in order to be understood by fellow REDuser's why LOG workflow is better, why color management and viewing environment are so critical in filmout process.

I've couple of questions for people trying out Apple Color. The LUT management and flexibility in Color is not good. I dont find any scanner / recorder manufacturers provide LUT's for Apple Color.

Other than that the important aspects of Color Timing is with the colorist and nothing more. I've seen poor outputs from Baselight / Lustre.

There are two types of LUTs, the conversion LUTs and the viewing LUTs.

The first type is depending on what you have to convert to which target, these LUTs, some times, are provided by the manufacturers, but the are only to go from A to B... the viewing LUTs are the most critical, because they are unique to each one of us, and they are depended on what is our current display environment so these LUTs are unique and can NOT be provided by the manufacturers.

There is a sub category in the viewing LUTs that I call them "Generic viewing LUTs" typically these are the LUTs that you find in many high end applications preinstalled... these LUTs are made with certain assumptions, that our every day display environment is not always following... that can go from a little off to way off...

So Color does give three basic conversion LUTs, which I don't ever use, and it doesn't provide the "generic viewing LUTs" which I believe from my experience are useless...

So I have to repeat...

1) As I said and everyone is agree, its not the machines, its how we do it.

2) Since colorist's are the talents, it is paramount to them, to work on a reference viewing environment. For example, we grading for film out, that means we are in totally dark room with gray walls, the interface monitor of Color in our case, if its on default setup then its around 150cd and 6500K, on the other hand we have the calibrated film monitor at 47cd and 5400K. Because of the high brightness and white point of the interface monitor, granted that typically is very close to colorist face, the differences of the two monitors, will create an optical illusion that will mislead him to thing that the image on the film monitor is too dark and too yellow... so you will end up having in the projection, a blueish, burned, high contrast image... that can happen with Lustre with Pablo... with everything...

3) The reference coloring environment can't be archived without a color managed calibrated workflow. Its not optional, its compulsory... Of coarse you can do it without, but you have to understand the drawbacks and the possible pitfalls.

4) if you want to do it in the REC709 NOT color managed way, have in mind that it will be needed a second pass color grading within the DI lab that you choose... that will introduce an extra cost...

5) If there is a way to do LOG color managed workflow it will always end up being much better in the big screen.

I hope all that will help to understand what you dealing with when you try a Film out...

 

[Evangelos Achillopoulos]

But Evangelos does!

Yep we do

We at Motion FX, we do offer complete color management LOG workflow for film out, to all Apple Color users (and Scratch users) in order to do the Color grading in there post facility, that includes consulting and know how transfer for a very low one time fee and we offer calibrated film out services.

At the end we receive the DPX files perfectly graded for our film recorders and we sending back the printed copy, from our experience in this service until now, the result are always perfect.

We don't accept everyone thought, for this offering for two reasons, its not everyone that has the skills to follow the color management route, and second we like our accredited partners to be able to capitalize their investment. So as long as there are openings we accept new partners. In example in Israel is Karilla and he has another year exclusivity, his done one movie now he is finishing his second and they are many more to come... In Germany there is opening in Netherlands still there is an opening in Boulgaria if the don't run they will lose it... Demographics, city of operation and experience is what dictates who gets into the accreditation process. The lock down period is 18 months after that a second partner or a third can enter.

It is our commitment to enable all you guys to be able, to do proper high quality Log film outs from your post house... as our partners around the globe are doing with great success the last year...

 

[jake blackstone]

It's incorrect, to be sure. But I think what has happened is that many people use it simply to differentiate between true "log" coding and non-"log" encoding. What has been mentioned here before (by Graeme, a number of times, as well as by myself and others) is that "linear" in the true sense of the term means "linear light" - that is, a gamma of 1. Anything else is, well, not linear.

But that, unfortunately, will not stop people from misusing the term.

Yes, it's difficult to change the wrong terminology, once it's been used for a while, but I still prefer LOG, LIN and Video gamma. Or, if you prefer Film, Video and Red gamma
BTW, thanks for the tip on "Process on Play." It's exactly where you described it and it works. Very cool...

 

[Alex Ferrari]

We're doing the same thing right now. Our workflow is as follows:

1. Conform with Clipfinder to 2k using whatever aspect ratio you want (16x9, 2:1, etc)
2. Color off of the proxies and output to whatever format you prefer (or have harddrive space for, we're going with proresHQ, dpx for vfx shots)
3. Render and send to FCP, layin finished audio
4. Export Full-Res Quicktime for your film out and you're done!

Coloring off the proxies is not the way to color a film coming off the RED. You lose all the wonderful metadata that the R3d file has to offer. You would be cheating yourself. I work in Color as well and have done multiple film outs for indie features. This is what I do to maintain the quality and keep a workable workflow (just a side note the feature film "The Knowing" staring Nic Cage did there DI Color grading in this fashion and also did it in 2k (4k is major overkill):

Work Offline Using ProRes; Finish Using RED QuickTime Media for Film out or HD Mastering

This workflow describes transcoding to ProRes for efficient offline editing, then reconforming your edited sequence to reingested RED QuickTime media for final mastering and color correction using Color.

• Advantage — Editing with ProRes 422 media is less processor-intensive than editing using RED QuickTime files. After you reconform, you can work in Color at higher quality with access to all of the raw image data in the R3D file, as Color can bypass QuickTime and use the RED framework directly.
• Disadvantage — Reconforming is an extra step that requires good organization.

Stage 1 — Ingest Using ProRes, and Perform an Offline Edit
1. If it’s necessary to edit your program at offline quality for efficiency, transcode the
archived RED media to ProRes 422 or ProRes 422 (HQ) using the Log and Transfer
window in Final Cut Pro. (For more information, see “Transcoding to ProRes 422.”)
2. Edit your project in Final Cut Pro as you normally would.

Stage 2 — Reconform Your Project to RED QuickTime Media
1. Once your edit is locked, prepare your edited sequence to be media-managed by moving all video clips that aren’t being superimposed as part of a compositing operation down to track V1. This makes navigation and grade management much easier once you start working in Color, and may eliminate unused clips from the Timeline, reducing the amount of media needing to be reconformed.

2. If you haven’t already, create a “RED Using ProRes” sequence preset in Final Cut Pro. (For more information, see “Creating a RED Using ProRes Sequence Preset in Final Cut Pro.”) You’ll use this preset to media-manage your edited sequence.

3. Right-click the edited sequence in the Browser, and choose Media Manage from the shortcut menu to open the Media Manager. The recommended settings are:
• Media pop-up menu – Create Offline
• Include render files – off
• “Set sequences to” pop-up menu — “RED Using ProRes” (the name you gave the sequence preset you created)
• Include master clips outside selection – off
• Delete unused media from duplicated – off
• Use Handles – off
• Include affiliate clips outside selection – off
• “Base media file names on” pop-up menu – existing file names
• Duplicate selected items and place into a new project – on
• Include nonactive multiclip angles – off

4. Next, click the Browse button in the Media Destination area and choose a location to save the media and the new offline sequence you’re creating, then click OK.

5. When the Media Manager operation finishes, you need to change the ingest options of the Log and Transfer window before you begin to actually ingest media:

5.1. Open the Log and Transfer window, and choose Preferences from the Action pop-up menu (the menu with the gear icon).

5.2. When the Import Preferences sheet appears, choose Native from the
“Transcode to” column corresponding to the RED Plugin.

5.3. Close the Log and Transfer window when you’ve finished.

6. Lastly, right-click the new offline sequence that’s been created, and choose Batch Capture from the shortcut menu. When the Log and Transfer window appears, reingest all necessary footage from your archived RED media directories.

Stage 3 — Grade Your Program Using Color
1. Prepare the sequence for sending to Color. Clips with effects or using media that is incompatible with Color (including clips with speed effects, still images, freeze frames, and multicam clips) should be prerendered as described in the “Moving Projects Between Final Cut Pro and Color” chapter of the Color User Manual. Export each clip that needs to be prerendered as either ProRes 422 (HQ) or Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2, and edit the resulting .mov file into your Timeline to replace the original, unsupported clip.

2. When you’re finished, right-click on your sequence in the Browser, and choose Send To > Color to send the prepared sequence to Color for grading.
Once in Color, you’ll find that you have access to each clip’s camera setting
metadata via the Red tab in the Primary In room. You can use the RED image data as is, or make adjustments as necessary. Please note, clips that have been transcoded to ProRes 422 (HQ) lose the ability to access these camera settings, as they no longer contain the native RED raw image data.

Stage 4 — Render Out of Color

1. When you’re ready to render the color-corrected project, you have two choices:
• Option 1 – Render to DPX for film printing. As with the digital intermediate workflow
described in the Color User Manual, Pan & Scan effects are rendered within Color when you select DPX or Cineon as your Render File Type, and dissolves are rendered by Color when you use the Gather Rendered Media command to assemble the final consecutively numbered image sequence for film output.

• Option 2 – If you’re planning to output to SD or HD video (for example, if you’re rendering a second version of your program for video mastering), set the Render File Type to QuickTime, and set the QuickTime Export Codec to either ProRes 422 (HQ) or Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2. After you’ve rendered the project, send it back to Final Cut Pro.

Happy Coloring!