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 Workflow Manual v.1.2

stevesherrick said:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=15646
http://provideocoalition.com/index.php/aadams/story/red_highlight_clipping_solved/
http://forums.http://www.teenink.co...geEssays/IHateCows.html.net/readpost/242/1259

That will only cost you a dollar. :)

It will be nice to have all of the info gathered into one logical place eventually, but right now a lot of things are subject to change, including firmware, so it's a moving target. But like I said, the general principles are the same. The camera does no sharpening during acquisition. It's applied in post. The amount of sharpening is dependent on a number of factors. This takes some experimenting and sometimes comes down to taste and deliverables.
Click to expand...

So, having read the entire thread about OPLF and I'm still wondering if I should be adding sharpness to the RED footage. I run everything through Redcine, which apparently has OPLF build in, right? So should I need to add more sharpness?

This actually just came up, a job we did went through 3D, 2D and CC and we noticed that the end results looked a bit soft and we are trying to figure out where that happened. The DPX file sequences that I transcoded out of Redcine at 2k look plenty sharp, but that is at 2k. Once scaled down to SD, does this require more sharpening?
 
brandonk said:
So, having read the entire thread about OPLF and I'm still wondering if I should be adding sharpness to the RED footage. I run everything through Redcine, which apparently has OPLF build in, right? So should I need to add more sharpness?

This actually just came up, a job we did went through 3D, 2D and CC and we noticed that the end results looked a bit soft and we are trying to figure out where that happened. The DPX file sequences that I transcoded out of Redcine at 2k look plenty sharp, but that is at 2k. Once scaled down to SD, does this require more sharpening?
Click to expand...

How are you scaling down to SD? Depending on the scaling algorithm you may see different results. Some algorithms try to smooth out ringing/aliasing and will potentially produce a softer image. Others attempt to keep things sharp but at the expense of aliasing. And the really good algorithms find a happy medium between the two.
 
stevesherrick said:
How are you scaling down to SD? Depending on the scaling algorithm you may see different results. Some algorithms try to smooth out ringing/aliasing and will potentially produce a softer image. Others attempt to keep things sharp but at the expense of aliasing. And the really good algorithms find a happy medium between the two.
Click to expand...

The scaling is happening in 3D where the image was actually composited. However, first I am scaling the 4k to 2k in Redcine. We suspected 3D is where the softness is happening, but it's a bit of a mystery.

So back to my previous question... Should we be adding sharpness post-composite or pre-composite or is Redcine doing enough in the way of OPLF?

Thanks in advance.
 
Brandonk,

Nice start on a workflow. Well done!

From now on I'm all out of compliments....well almost!

Not having documentation of post workflow on different platforms (as they become available) is gotta be one the dumbest actions Red has done to date!

Sorry it just is!!

Forgetting the camera takes pretty pictures, the biggest barriers the camera poses for itself are these:

1. It's an new & sometimes unreliable piece of equipment - particularily in new hands. People are understandably scared of this!
Perception or otherwise it's a worry amongst owner/operators not to mention others who don't have must exposure with the Red, wanting to use it. I expect 75% of these problems will disappear with Red v2. Not too much wrong there.
Jim got a heck of a lot of things right with RedOne thou I'm sure with hignsight may have dearly wanted to spend more 'effort' in certain areas.

So what's all this go to to do with this thread...

Well the other reason for not using Red actually.

2. Lack of Post knowledge on how to process RED footage without reading months of Reduser!
The name of this game is to have a r3d file in one hand and a user guide on your specific software in the other...and bingo.....good looking files pop out the other end!
It should be an 'Easy Guide' with detours into more elaborate processes as required.
But what we're got at present is most post house/editors etc going...eerrrr dunno...lets go HDCam etc........
How criminal is that!!
To me the push should be...to present the information in an easy to decipher guide for anyone who wants to go near a Red.

Idiot guide for Camera Ops
Data wrangling
Rushes
Offline/Online Ingest
Conforms
etc, etc.

But there's not and therefore every Red convert has to come up with their own way of firstly doing this stuff and then telling everyone around them how to 'sort of' do it.
And every 'Red unconvert' will wait in the dark, refusing to deal with the camera or it's ootage until it is so universally taken up that it presents low risk to all. (back to the r3d in one hand/manual in the other!)

But you know what the most crimanially stupid thing about this it...it's there are lots of people out there that can operate the Red and process Red footage out there with near zero risk today. and that information's stuck there. So how do you get their information out?...umm
And for everyone of them there is probably 20 other who have experience (or not) on similiar equipment but don't have a clue regarding Red...and would probably like to. Make it easy for them I say!!

But don't they know.....the dissemination of information. It's crap!!
and it hurts Red owners/Red Inc.
So guys, a couple of easy to read guides ain't gonna kill ya!
I could go on & on (I will for a bit) but jeez...you could make a machine that cures cancer, prints money & get's you laid, but if you don't provide an easy to read guide to it, it's only going to greatly slow down the takeup of it..

Getting tired...goodnight
Dave,
 
I understand the frustration David, but I think it's time to be frank about one thing. When I did the workflow event at NAB, the goal was to assess what options were available for REd workflow, both low end and high end. We got a lot of good information out of that session, including an interesting demo of Cineform. Like everyone else, I want to see Red integrated seamlessly into a number of workflows.

But there is a reality that people sometimes ignore on here. There is a workflow in place right now, today. It's just not the one everyone wants. Why? Because it's expensive for a lot of small shops (I'm one of those small shops). Should Scratch be the only option available for R3D native support? No, and that's why Adobe is on the way and others soon to follow. What is causing this divide right now is money. People can not afford Scratch or Scratchcine. So, the result is people are lashing out against Assimilate.

But let's take Scratch out of the equation for a moment. There are workflows in place for the little guys too. Are they streamlined, flawless? No, but considering the price of these tools, is it fair to ask for perfection from these beta tools. They need some time to mature. It's going to take some time for Red to sort out the SDK and work with the major players to integrate into their NLEs and 3D/graphics software. We are only 1 year into cameras being out in the market. There are a lot of moving targets. Firmware changes, OS upgrades, QT upgrades, Avid upgrades FCP upgrades. To support Red natively like we all want these companies to do is going to take some coordinated effort.

As to how to get the best from your Red footage, I feel like people want the magic button treatment lately. Shoot it, hit the magic Transcode button, and Redcine will make everything look good. The reality is that every sot that enters this process has an infinite amount of variables, and there really isn't a cookie cutter way to process the footage, just as there isn't a cookie cutter way to color correct in an online. It takes some assessment, some knowledge of working with curves, with scaling algorithms, with sharpening, etc. Your final deliverables play a huge role in all of this too. Sure, a general guide to get you going in the right direction is a good idea, but it won't solve everything for you. Testing will.

Don't get me wrong on this, I am all for getting smoother workflows. I too have lost jobs because clients decided it was too risky. But I have also got jobs because I was able to guide clients through the process, showing them how it works from acquisition through post. Eventually, a lot of this will get easier for people to wrap their heads around, just as P2 is now.

In my opinion where things stand right now is if you need fast and cheap, you can edit with proxies or transcode to ProRes. This can be your final deliverable if quality is high enough for you. You can take it a step further and conform using Crimson Workflow. This adds some time, some extra steps but solves the quality issue. Or you can create full debayerd files from Red apps and get the most out of your footage, but at the expense of time. I did just that for project I'm cutting now, and the extra quality is nice. Or you can get Scratchcine and use it as a tape deck going into a capture card. Nice way to get 1080 4:4:4 files. And don't forget that digibeta decks cost $30-$50,000 dollars, so is this really that bad of deal they are offering. Too expensive for me right now, but I can see big post houses using something like this. And then you have the systems at the high end, working natively with the footage, 2K realtime, etc.

The old saying fast, cheap, and good pick two probably applies to Red Workflow right now. We will see advances for sure. Companies will compete and the endusers will reap the benefits. All I ask is, can we honestly say there is no workflow? I don't think so. The guys at Plaster City and Offhollywood have workflows that seem to be working just fine. They also have some in-house solutions that they have used in conjunction with the standard tools to take it to an efficient level. Ideally, someday we'll all be able to do the same with affordable, off-the-shelf tools. But because I can't, does that mean that workflow doesn't exist?

I do know first hand that perception plays a role in all of this and that producers and editors/post supervisors are probably proceeding with a lot of caution. And in fairness to them, this is a big change. Right now, they can't take files and drop them right into their Avid. There are extra steps involved and that translates to potential for mistakes, as well as money. Red might pose a potential problem for them. I get that, and there may be facilities that Red just doesn't make sense to use yet.

Sorry for this rant guys. It's not like me to go on like this, I just fear that we do ourselves an injustice by adding to the fear factor, when in fact we should be properly educating ourselves about Red and the workflow and then communicating that to our clients and potential clients.

End of rant. :innocent:
 
stevesherrick said:
...when in fact we should be properly educating ourselves about Red and the workflow and then communicating that to our clients and potential clients.
Click to expand...
We're kinda pioneer's...We trek the route with our cameras on set and in post and hopefully the rest of the film industry will follow.
Our job should be to map that trail so other can easily follow.
The easier that map is for the others in the industry who don't have the same time to devote on pioneering/experimentation with Red/Post, the faster the uptake and the better off we all are.

Steve, your comment above is apt. The best solution I feel is an easy to read map (user guide)...a little along the line to what have been proposed in this thread.
Now your potential clients may be using Avid, Autodesk, Quantel, FCP, Adobe, Scratch...etc.
I would imagine each of the above workflows have taken their specific users a day or so to get a rudimentary workflow together and weeks of refinement.
Most of the time it's not your call on post (unless that's you're business) and even if you where in the position to effect the decision,
you'd still have to prove it and show the person actually doing the post, the successful workflow.
Do you know all these workflows? Maybe not.
The information now shouldn't take weeks of reading & experimentation particularily as 100's of people already have been down that road.
As stated, the easier and more accessible this information becomes, the more we all win. most of the time it is up to us but not in the ways you'd commonly think.
Thinking smarter about how to get the message across usually helps. And that ain't usually door knocking and converting everyone we come across. But it helps.
People seems to want to do it themselves.
I say write up the basic information in one area, update as necessary so the ones who are interested don't have to spend weeks trawling for it.
That way 1000's more will have enought information to get started...and not giving them that is plain, well.......!!
D
 
stevesherrick said:
But there is a reality that people sometimes ignore on here. There is a workflow in place right now, today. It's just not the one everyone wants.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that rant, Steve. I completely agree with you.

Ok... here's my [RANT]:

I think culture shock is at the root of most frustration with Red and its post workflow.

You've got the high end guys who are used to expensive gear and proven, but costly post production workflows. Studio feature film DI costs start at @ $150,000 including film scanning, conform & color, and film recording, and working with Sony gear and HDCAM-SR is nowhere near cheap, either. So spending $200 to $600 per hour for Scratch sessions is really no big shock. The biggest shock to that set is that Avid, Resolve, Pablo, etc... support isn't/wasn't available - now that the SDK is out it's just a matter of time before developers get R3D tools to their customers.

On the other end of the culture-spectrum you've got folks who were shooting DV, HDV, ENG, etc... who are accustomed to instant access to footage at its highest possible quality level with no special post process required, and can edit, color correct, and output footage relatively painlessly from any number of software packages running on a wide variety of hardware. Though it has been mentioned that there are a number of workflows available for Red, they are not as numerous as DV / HDV or tape-to-(insert codec of choice). And the primary, simplest workflow > FCP / edl / Scratch > seems to be out of reach, price and availability-wise for these folks.

First, one needs to consider that we're working with considerably more data, from an arguably more sophisticated camera (not that prosumer and pro eng cams aren't sophisticated), and the resulting post requirements and limitations should not come as a complete shock. Working with film, for instance, requires a certain amount of processing which nearly always needs to be done by a 'facility' - and yet there are precious few complaints about that. Familiarity and acceptance are the key here, I think...


Disclosure: in addition to being an all-around filmmaker, I perform conform and colorist services, and as 'objective' as I'd like to be when making the following point, I don't want to hide the fact that I earn a portion of my income on this...

Going to a facility or individual that specializes in a particular workflow and using their services can actually be a good thing.

Rather than buying Scratch (which, pricing wise, is not designed to sit idle while you're writing, editing, shooting, etc...), why not rent time in a Scratch room? You may be surprised at how quick and easy it is to get your work done there. The time and frustration saved alone can make it worth the money spent. Quite often facilities will have off-hours time available with special rates for indie customers, etc... .

I've extended special rates to every indie red user that has approached me, working hard to find a level of service that is appropriate and affordable, and people are usually surprised at the affordability and ease of this process, and most importantly, the quality of the finish.

People that do this full-time for a living can also be surprisingly good at what they do, and may even contribute to raising the level of quality of a given project.

DIY is superfun, and I LOVE editing, shooting, etc..., but if I'm doing a project that I have high expectations on (i.e. just about anything with Red involved) I'm going to hire the best DP and operator I can find, and the greatest editor I can possibly afford.

I am rarely disappointed when I allow people I have chosen based on their abilities to contribute their talents to my project. I find it almost always results in better work than if I had tried to do everything myself.

No doubt, the control freak in me makes giving up editing and shooting very hard sometimes...

[/RANT]

cheers,

John T.
 
google is the way to search reduser

google is the way to search reduser

Kevin Wild said:
I just did a search on "DRX" and our wonderful search engine turned up NOTHING...nada.
Click to expand...

The reduser search engine truly leaves much to desired. Try searching through google instead. Just put in the desired search terms followed by "site:reduser.net" no parenthesis. You can use all of the normal advanced google search parameters such as restricting to certain dates.
 
lunacie said:
Thanks for that rant, Steve. I completely agree with you.

Ok... here's my [RANT]:

I think culture shock is at the root of most frustration with Red and its post workflow.

You've got the high end guys who are used to expensive gear and proven, but costly post production workflows. Studio feature film DI costs start at @ $150,000 including film scanning, conform & color, and film recording, and working with Sony gear and HDCAM-SR is nowhere near cheap, either. So spending $200 to $600 per hour for Scratch sessions is really no big shock. The biggest shock to that set is that Avid, Resolve, Pablo, etc... support isn't/wasn't available - now that the SDK is out it's just a matter of time before developers get R3D tools to their customers.

On the other end of the culture-spectrum you've got folks who were shooting DV, HDV, ENG, etc... who are accustomed to instant access to footage at its highest possible quality level with no special post process required, and can edit, color correct, and output footage relatively painlessly from any number of software packages running on a wide variety of hardware. Though it has been mentioned that there are a number of workflows available for Red, they are not as numerous as DV / HDV or tape-to-(insert codec of choice). And the primary, simplest workflow > FCP / edl / Scratch > seems to be out of reach, price and availability-wise for these folks.

First, one needs to consider that we're working with considerably more data, from an arguably more sophisticated camera (not that prosumer and pro eng cams aren't sophisticated), and the resulting post requirements and limitations should not come as a complete shock. Working with film, for instance, requires a certain amount of processing which nearly always needs to be done by a 'facility' - and yet there are precious few complaints about that. Familiarity and acceptance are the key here, I think...


Disclosure: in addition to being an all-around filmmaker, I perform conform and colorist services, and as 'objective' as I'd like to be when making the following point, I don't want to hide the fact that I earn a portion of my income on this...

Going to a facility or individual that specializes in a particular workflow and using their services can actually be a good thing.

Rather than buying Scratch (which, pricing wise, is not designed to sit idle while you're writing, editing, shooting, etc...), why not rent time in a Scratch room? You may be surprised at how quick and easy it is to get your work done there. The time and frustration saved alone can make it worth the money spent. Quite often facilities will have off-hours time available with special rates for indie customers, etc... .

I've extended special rates to every indie red user that has approached me, working hard to find a level of service that is appropriate and affordable, and people are usually surprised at the affordability and ease of this process, and most importantly, the quality of the finish.

People that do this full-time for a living can also be surprisingly good at what they do, and may even contribute to raising the level of quality of a given project.

DIY is superfun, and I LOVE editing, shooting, etc..., but if I'm doing a project that I have high expectations on (i.e. just about anything with Red involved) I'm going to hire the best DP and operator I can find, and the greatest editor I can possibly afford.

I am rarely disappointed when I allow people I have chosen based on their abilities to contribute their talents to my project. I find it almost always results in better work than if I had tried to do everything myself.

No doubt, the control freak in me makes giving up editing and shooting very hard sometimes...

[/RANT]

cheers,

John T.
Click to expand...
Excellent post, however...:it's a bit like a previous thread about an Israeli filmmaker who got frustrated when he lost a day's work; some go berserk when things go wrong or they don't understand how it all works; others react: this is a professional tool, the professional way is not easy but it works very well. I think it is more complicated than that; after paying off my red I spoke to someone from one of the more prominent rental companies in the Netherlands, and he freaked me out by telling how they had bought one of the early reds, and they had sold it on because they didn't think it was ready to be rented out yet; they would get into it again after the product and the workflow seemed more or less clear and flawless. I think Red is a wonderful product that will make high quality available to people who are not used to working with machinery like that and therefore might be bewildered by it. That's not bad, because I assume that these were among the targeted buyers of the Red. On top of that comes that it's a work in progress, things are changing daily and you can hardly claim that for a professional it's as clear as buying and working with an F900, because it isn't. For the veterans it isn't absolutely clear either. That's what you get when you pay cheaply for a revolutionary product. The price and the quality is the bonus, but you'll have to work for it, and you're not guaranteed a fully flawless product, until it is finished
 
Agreed - but it also comes down to culture. Here in the US Red is being adopted by productions at a staggering pace. There are still all the same questions floating around, but when you get down to it, the overriding concerns of production here are: does it make financial sense, and is it technically/artistically competetive.

For me the answer is an unqualified 'yes'. I can't think of another camera that offers the same performance/cost benefits. But like Geoff Boyle loves to say, 'courses for horses'. My interpretation of that being each production has its own 'formula' balancing cost, artistic choices, and delivery requirements. We either make camera choice based on that formula or live with the consequences.


JT
 
Thanks so much! Built 17??

Thanks so much! Built 17??

I am just starting to work with a RED ONE camera and this is the information that I need. Please let us all keep this valuable information updated, possibly in the manner of Wikipedia?

By the way: does anyone have experience with newest built 17? The agent I work for wants me to test it. Should I wait and first work with 16?
 
If you have the time for testing, just go ahead. This is not a one-way street like build 16, you can go back if needed.
 
Chris Vasco said:
I am just starting to work with a RED ONE camera and this is the information that I need. Please let us all keep this valuable information updated, possibly in the manner of Wikipedia?

By the way: does anyone have experience with newest built 17? The agent I work for wants me to test it. Should I wait and first work with 16?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the feedback. An update is overdue to this document I know. Please send along any useful information regarding updates and I will incorporate them into this document.

Lets please try to refrain from posing long rants to this thread from now on.
 
Thanks Brandon for organising as much up to date info. as possible and gathering it all into the one document, (as David F mentioned) as opposed to hours of trolling through reduser to join all the dots.
 
Thanks Brandon...
This manual is nice but a DIAGRAM would be so much much simpler, especially for a newbie like me. manuals are for newbies anyway, aren't they?
As they say: a picture is worth a 1000 words.

I'm dreaming of a diagram, drawing and arrows synthesizing everything in a glance.

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