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 Rant

M Most said:
No, it's not. The ISO setting and the FLUT control are exactly the same except in terms of scaling. The Exposure control is a different control that does not use the FLUT math and is, I believe, downstream of the FLUT based controls.
Click to expand...

No, it's not downstream. It's in the same place as ISO and FLUT in the order of ops. However, it's pure gain, should you need it, calibrated in EV.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
No, it's not downstream. It's in the same place as ISO and FLUT in the order of ops. However, it's pure gain, should you need it, calibrated in EV.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Can you outline why and when you would use one of these over the other? ISO, FLUT, Exposure?
 
David Rasberry said:
Can you outline why and when you would use one of these over the other? ISO, FLUT, Exposure?
Click to expand...

My take:

ISO = the ballpark
EXPOSURE = fine tune
FLUT = adjust brightness as necessary, without worries about clipping highlights

Flut is closer to adjusting the gamma curve than to a simple gain operation.
 
I'd put ISO as your overall brightness rendering intent, with a fine-tune on FLUT. Exposure should only be used when you want to utterly force clipping.

Graeme
 
jake blackstone said:
I find this a perfect example of immaturity of Red workflow. After all the time, that FLUT had been in use, people still not sure what it is or how to properly use it.
Click to expand...

Aren't you supposed to experiment and figure out what works? Isn't there a default setting for all of these things that looks very good? Even if what you are saying is true how does that make it "immature"? If you were doing a workflow from another RAW camera wouldn't you have the same issue, but with fewer tools. If you are doing a workflow from a "baked" camera, then it seems like adjusting you "ISO" in post pretty much impossible.
The fact is if you look at all of the companies making cameras right now, Red is actually the one that has invested the most in post production software for their system.

IBloom
 
jake blackstone said:
I find this a perfect example of immaturity of Red workflow. After all the time, that FLUT had been in use, people still not sure what it is or how to properly use it.
Click to expand...

Education takes time, but I'm not sure that warrants the negative connotation of being called "immature". The alternative is to never provide new tools and to be forever limited. Do we really want to send the message that innovation is bad? Seems to me there are plenty of other cameras that cater to that way of thinking... we should be thankful that Red has a different philosophy.
 
Perhaps we should all submit to 8-bit 1080p H.264 and forego any innovation for the sake of a safe workflow.

*sigh*

Of course, as has been the case throughout the history of humanity, any level of innovation is always received with skepticism.
 
jake blackstone said:
I find this a perfect example of immaturity of Red workflow. After all the time, that FLUT had been in use, people still not sure what it is or how to properly use it.
Click to expand...

Partly because it's called FLUT. It might as well be called globgleeb. Neither word gives the reasonably knowledgeable user any clue what the tool does.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
I'd put ISO as your overall brightness rendering intent, with a fine-tune on FLUT. Exposure should only be used when you want to utterly force clipping.
Click to expand...

I tend to use it i.e. when the otherwise proper ISO (or, the clip's default ISO) results in a bit of clipping, fine tuning it downwards until clip-free.
 
Eric Haase said:
Partly because it's called FLUT. It might as well be called globgleeb. Neither word gives the reasonably knowledgeable user any clue what the tool does.
Click to expand...

I've always thought it stands for "Film LookUp Table", as it mimicks the film like highlight compression. Dunno where i got that impression from...
 
Eric Haase said:
Partly because it's called FLUT. It might as well be called globgleeb. Neither word gives the reasonably knowledgeable user any clue what the tool does.
Click to expand...

And ISO is okay? ASA? HDMI? CRI? HMI? What makes an acronym acceptable... :)
 
Tim Morten said:
And ISO is okay? ASA? HDMI? CRI? HMI? What makes an acronym acceptable... :)
Click to expand...

It's just a small example of a way to keep things simpler and more understandable. If flut is just a fine tune ISO why not just call it what it is.

RED has brought out a lot of new things REDCODE raw, red color, redspace, red gamma, red log, red film, flut, drx (not sure if that one is special to red). You have to do a lot of homework (reading message forums) or calling experienced people to fully grasp it all. REDs official documentation is lacking or nonexistent. Out comes a camera like the 5D or even the Alexa that record to h264 (yes i know the inferior specs) and prores respectively. Easy to understand, easy to sell (as a DP to a producer, post producer, studio, network, etc). I wish RED would take a page (or at least read one) from their book. Just from the simplicity, reliability, and ease of use chapter.
 
I guess I am one of those "lucky" ones who hasn't yet had to dirty his hands figuring out the RED workflow as I have not had the chance to shoot with one up to now (a sad situation that is to be remedied next month!!). But, in anticipation of getting a Scarlet, I have been fooling around with some R3D files in REDCine-X and, to me, it seems like a fabulous tool. I have done plenty of RAW processing of stills in Aperture and Photoshop in the past, and it is a dream-come-true to be able to do this with motion files. As far as I am concerned, this is THE number one reason RED is so far above the competition.

But I can't help but note that if all it takes to stay ahead of my "competition" in the marketplace of high quality video, is to put in a little extra effort and RTFM, than I will definitely do that. Really - and I say this in all sincerity and not to snipe at anyone - I can't think of a situation with a complex process like video production and post where it doesn't require some time and effort to get it right and stay on top of it. I think that was the gist of what Michael Cioni said elsewhere and I certainly think he would know.

One last thought - regarding Final Cut Studio. I am a loyal and relatively long time FCP user and it does seem like Apple has been lagging slightly lately. But it also doesn't seem like that much. They did a somewhat "halfway" rev a little less than a year ago (I believe) so they are hopefully getting close to something a little bigger. What doesn't seem to make sense to me is jumping ship to grab the latest greatest software tool because they are a few months ahead of the tool you have been using. I am not saying that Premiere or Avid or Vegas isn't any good - just that I can't imagine switching back and forth every time one of these companies temporarily gains the lead in features. I guess if you think Apple (or Adobe or Avid or Sony) doesn't intend to keep improving their product, then it would be time to move over. Personally, I don't believe Apple will let FC Studio languish in a million years so I am just going to wait. But that's me... :mellow:
 
I Bloom said:
Aren't you supposed to experiment and figure out what works? Isn't there a default setting for all of these things that looks very good? Even if what you are saying is true how does that make it "immature"? If you were doing a workflow from another RAW camera wouldn't you have the same issue, but with fewer tools. If you are doing a workflow from a "baked" camera, then it seems like adjusting you "ISO" in post pretty much impossible.
The fact is if you look at all of the companies making cameras right now, Red is actually the one that has invested the most in post production software for their system.

IBloom
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting Ian. I've been trying to avoid this thread - because some of the comments here really blow my mind.

"I just want crappy RGB files to give my client at the end of the day"???

Buy a freekin' 5D or 7D and get on with your life. The RED ONE is digital cinema camera designed to shoot high resolution RAW images. That is what THIS tool is.

The thing that frustrates me most is when people say "the (RED) workflow" - I'm like ... WHICH "workflow" are you talking about? There are MANY ways to cross the finish line with RED - and actually - I think that people stuck in the past have a hard time with that.

Yes ... if you want to use a professional tool you actually have to learn how to use it. You don't have to use FLUT control, but the camera is a powerful, professional tool with many options. You will need to actually make an effort - assuming you want professional results.

You can "point, shoot and offload rgb files" with tools like the FLIP phone and the iPhone.

We shot the 3rd or 4th feature film in history on RED ONE cameras back in 2007 - about six weeks or so after we got #006 & #007. We had a workflow then. The producers got DVD dailies every day - the following day by lunch time. Pre Red Rocket. Pre RedcineX. Pre CS5. Pre Redline, etc. etc.

Over two and half years ago.

Has it always been easy and perfect? Of course not. But every step of the way - each "workflow" we used was faster, easier and offered more advantages than 35mm film workflows - from the first day.

Anyway, I do want to get sucked into a flaming thread about workflows - but ... just like Ian said - the truth is - Red has put more into post production software for their system over any camera system I know.

And charged you ..... zip for it.

Sure ... it's EASY to digitize HDCAM SR tapes. Easy workflow, right?

I can tell you that the HDCAM SR deck I own with every optional board costs more than most luxury sports cars.

I can also tell you that RED footage doesn't show HDCAM SR compression artifacts.
 
Last edited:
Mark L. Pederson said:
...the truth is - Red has put more into post production software for their system over any camera system I know.

And charged you ..... zip for it.
Click to expand...

I agree with just about everything you just said. But I would also say that Red had to put more into post production software than anyone else because their system didn't conform to any known industry standards. That has had a very large up side, but the downside has been the need to do the software themselves in order to allow post production to happen in the first place. I admire the way they have done that, and the effort they have put into it, but the fact is that it was a practical necessity given the nonstandard nature of the camera, its files, and the lack of finished quality HD video output.
 
I Bloom said:
Aren't you supposed to experiment and figure out what works?

IBloom
Click to expand...

Test? Yes. Experiment? No. I do not do R&D, I can't charge for it and I'm kind of busy grading. I'm a user. I need the system that I know works and I fully understand the tools I'm using.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
Thanks for posting Ian. I've been trying to avoid this thread - because some of the comments here really blow my mind.

"I just want crappy RGB files to give my client at the end of the day"???

Buy a freekin' 5D or 7D and get on with your life. The RED ONE is digital cinema camera designed to shoot high resolution RAW images. That is what THIS tool is.

The thing that frustrates me most is when people say "the (RED) workflow" - I'm like ... WHICH "workflow" are you talking about? There are MANY ways to cross the finish line with RED - and actually - I think that people stuck in the past have a hard time with that.

Yes ... if you want to use a professional tool you actually have to learn how to use it. You don't have to use FLUT control, but the camera is a powerful, professional tool with many options. You will need to actually make an effort - assuming you want professional results.

You can "point, shoot and offload rgb files" with tools like the FLIP phone and the iPhone.

We shot the 3rd or 4th feature film in history on RED ONE cameras back in 2007 - about six weeks or so after we got #006 & #007. We had a workflow then. The producers got DVD dailies every day - the following day by lunch time. Pre Red Rocket. Pre RedcineX. Pre CS5. Pre Redline, etc. etc.

Over two and half years ago.

Has it always been easy and perfect? Of course not. But every step of the way - each "workflow" we used was faster, easier and offered more advantages than 35mm film workflows - from the first day.

Anyway, I do want to get sucked into a flaming thread about workflows - but ... just like Ian said - the truth is - Red has put more into post production software for their system over any camera system I know.

And charged you ..... zip for it.

Sure ... it's EASY to digitize HDCAM SR tapes. Easy workflow, right?

I can tell you that the HDCAM SR deck I own with every optional board costs more than most luxury sports cars.

I can also tell you that RED footage doesn't show HDCAM SR compression artifacts.
Click to expand...
Still not sure why you object to the definition of "workflow". Would you prefer to call it something like a ... train, like someone suggested earlier? What would be a good word to describe the method of post workflow in light of ever changing Red software and SDK?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top