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 :)

RedWideGamutRGB: discuss!

Brian Boyer said:
Graeme, since the latest beta build of RCX has done away with the gamma corrected Post Saturation and the new Saturation slider seems to behave in a similar, post-gamma fashion (Hallelujah, praise Cheebus), will/can the SDK change as well, such that the RAW controls Saturation slider in Resolve (and others) has the same gamma corrected response?

I hope so. I feel that pre-gamma Saturation was the cause of many an unfortunate grade.
Click to expand...

So as I outline above, the order of operation is now those three stages, saturation being part of CDL in the "grading" stage, occurring in RWG/Log3G10 space. The new IPP2 SDK will reflect that.

Graeme
 
Graeme -- maybe it is just me, but I shot some footage today with an Epic W and when I look at it in RC-X beta it is glorious, when I import it into FCP X, change it to RWG/Log3G10 and then apply the same LUT to the footage, it just does not look as nice. The highlights seem more exposed in the latter and washed out, and if I reduce the ISO trying to match a face, then the background is much darker. Because of this I am processing in RC-X to ProRes and then importing the ProRes clips into my editor (FCP X). Maybe after the final render it would come out the same, but I am amazed at how nice RC-X makes the image. Could it be somewhat the new debayer?

Respectfully,

Jon
 
It could very well be the new demosaic and highlight extension it offers. It could also be display related in how RC-X and FCP write the image to the screen. I'd always want to go out to a proper production monitor to view what's going on. For instance, I was testing that the ProRes from the camera is identical in tonality and code values to ProRes made from an R3D (other than in respect of the extension of clipped highlights) and I was surprised to see that opening up the ProRes in Quicktime it looked rather different to how it "should". But opening both a reference DPX from the R3D and the ProRes in Resolve produced identical results, as did the output over HD-SDI to my monitor. So check that it's not just a monitoring issue.

Graeme
 
Thanks Graeme -- very well could be as I am using the Apple display and not a reference monitor. Nice to know.
 
Jon Dishler said:
Thanks Graeme -- very well could be as I am using the Apple display and not a reference monitor. Nice to know.
Click to expand...

As I say, it scared me when I did that test and I thought that things were not right. However, they are correct even if the mac isn't showing you them correctly. For any kind of colour critical work, a proper monitor is essential. I'm using the Flanders DM250 at the moment and it's quite superb.

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
As I say, it scared me when I did that test and I thought that things were not right. However, they are correct even if the mac isn't showing you them correctly. For any kind of colour critical work, a proper monitor is essential. I'm using the Flanders DM250 at the moment and it's quite superb.

Graeme
Click to expand...
Can be scary, indeed! :)

How you get the signal to the reference monitor is important. In this type of work, you want the software you use to make use of the AJA / BMD SDK (which ever SDI card you use) so you bypass what the OS might do to the image, such as ICC profiles being applied, and write directly to the SDK frame buffer.
 
Stacey Spears said:
Can be scary, indeed! :)

How you get the signal to the reference monitor is important. In this type of work, you want the software you use to make use of the AJA / BMD SDK (which ever SDI card you use) so you bypass what the OS might do to the image, such as ICC profiles being applied, and write directly to the SDK frame buffer.
Click to expand...

Yep... and when I have the budget for it, I'm getting a CalMan + a pro monitor. :)
 
Graeme Nattress said:
So as I outline above, the order of operation is now those three stages, saturation being part of CDL in the "grading" stage, occurring in RWG/Log3G10 space. The new IPP2 SDK will reflect that.

Graeme
Click to expand...

Ahh...I see.

I read (i.e. gave it the once over) the white paper but didn't READ it. If I had, I would've seen the Saturation adjustments come after the initial RAW development. It's a process that gets applied on top of the RAW adjustments like a LUT or any other image manipulation.

The fact that Resolve currently allows for the selection of RWG/Log3G10 but still has the RAW pre-gamma Saturation controls was throwing me. I had that behavior in my head when I "read" the white paper. I was still associating Saturation with the RAW stage even though I knew I was accessing it in RCX through the CDL stage.
 
Graeme Nattress said:
... For any kind of colour critical work, a proper monitor is essential. I'm using the Flanders DM250 at the moment and it's quite superb.

Graeme
Click to expand...
What I am finding is I'm shooting with the GIO scope up on the 9 inch monitor using RED as a modern light meter while framing with the EVF - trusting in the r3d that I have what I need similar to the film days when I'd shoot but have no feedback exactly how it would look when developed. Then I go to redcinex with the new color science, but move it to proves 444 to create a ingest DI also similar to how film is done(i.e. no lift/gamma/gain "grading" at this point). I also don't need any high end field monitors since I am more/less trusting in the R3D as long as I lighted the scene correctly (again just like a film process). The ingest/colorist does have the high end monitor though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top