Scarlet Color Test REDUX

[Timur Civan]

After the last test, I re-shot the Skin tone portion of my F3 / Scarlet test to help eliminate errors.

As is stated in the previous thread, there may come a day when a Scarlet shooter may need to intercut F3 footage. Might be nice to know how they stack up.

I am in Vegas for NAB and using my Phone for internet so i could not upload the DPX / R3D files for you guys to play with. I will get them up when i get back to NY.

The details: http://timurcivan.blogspot.com/2012/04/examination-of-sony-f3-and-red-scarlet_20.html

Tom (DIT and editor) used the worst font and Music on earth.... to mess with us. Thanks Tom......

 

[Malvin Ng]

After the last test, I re-shot the Skin tone portion of my F3 / Scarlet test to help eliminate errors.

As is stated in the previous thread, there may come a day when a Scarlet shooter may need to intercut F3 footage. Might be nice to know how they stack up.

I am in Vegas for NAB and using my Phone for internet so i could not upload the DPX / R3D files for you guys to play with. I will get them up when i get back to NY.

The details: http://timurcivan.blogspot.com/2012/04/examination-of-sony-f3-and-red-scarlet_20.html

Tom (DIT and editor) used the worst font and Music on earth.... to mess with us. Thanks Tom......

Wow RC3 + RedLogFilm LUTed looks much better than the F3

 

[Vadim Bobkovsky]

Actually I don't mind the fonts and cute song from "Amelie". But hey, look at that RC3 + RedLogFilm LUTed. Wow.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Thanks

Makes more sense!

 

[Phil Holland]

Wow RC3 + RedLogFilm LUTed looks much better than the F3

More information in there.

 

[Gunleik Groven]

Seriously, the two are not really a match.

If - in addition to this - you had gone 2 stops + and minus, the shots would've looked even more different.

But Thanks!!

 

[Erich Ocean]

Can someone explain better what exactly was done to achieve the "Scarlet RC3 / REDlogFilm With LUT" look?

I've read the article twice and it still doesn't make sense to me. Specifically, I have no idea what this means:

Tom created a LUT on set, and saved the TrueLight Cube before converting it to a 3DL file to be applied to the LOG footage in Scratch.

If that was the default starting point for my grades, I'd be one happy man. (I assume it can just be set as the output LUT in Resolve or similar, with RC3/RLF as the input footage.)

 

[Álex Montoya]

That's very interesting. Thanks a lot, Timur and Thomas.

 

[Tom.Wong]

Can someone explain better what exactly was done to achieve the "Scarlet RC3 / REDlogFilm With LUT" look?

I've read the article twice and it still doesn't make sense to me. Specifically, I have no idea what this means:



If that was the default starting point for my grades, I'd be one happy man. (I assume it can just be set as the output LUT in Resolve or similar, with RC3/RLF as the input footage.)

essentially I created a look up table on set, live paintboxing the signal coming out of the scarlet as it was outputting redlog film. I saved that look up table, and applied it as a grading light inside of scratch lab. It's basically creating my own custom gamma curve avoiding redgamma 3, utilizing everything the camera had to offer rather than using red's gamma curve first and building a look on top of that. and build a look from the live signal let me see what we were getting and exposure levels properly right away and how the "sensor" likes to see an image. I didn't bring a tower with rocket on set, and this was the quickest easiest way to do what we had to do without taking a shot, loading it into the tower, and looking at it on a computer, needing an hd sdi out via rocket to get a good hd reference.



they both performed well, but the f3's increased sensitivity was working against it. it dug into the shadows way too much, and the lut as created to get the skintone at optimum exposure, but in turn, the 1600 iso of a f3 raised out all contrast and effected the skintone as well, looks creamier but lacks the punch you'd want out of a image as well. we would have needed a nd3 to compensate, and that may have effected the results as well.

as expected, log workflow really shined through on the scarlet, looks great, contrasty, saturation is nice and healthy. never been a fan of the stock redgammas, I've always thought working with log as your starting point and building on that has always been the way to work. using redgammas can really effect lighting decisions. the camera has a lot more information that it's showing in redgamma 3. MX is a great sensor, and redcolor 3 is excellent.


as Gunleik mentioned, really impractical to cut this 2 cameras together. completely different looks, base sensitivities, and color matrix. both have their own look. f3 def does cut better with a very well known competitor, but stacking it with any RED camera system wouldn't be a good idea in my opinion.

 

[Erich Ocean]

essentially I created a look up table on set, live paintboxing the signal coming out of the scarlet as it was outputting redlog film. I saved that look up table, and applied it as a grading light inside of scratch lab. It's basically creating my own custom gamma curve avoiding redgamma 3, utilizing everything the camera had to offer rather than using red's gamma curve first and building a look on top of that. and build a look from the live signal let me see what we were getting and exposure levels properly right away and how the "sensor" likes to see an image. I didn't bring a tower with rocket on set, and this was the quickest easiest way to do what we had to do without taking a shot, loading it into the tower, and looking at it on a computer, needing an hd sdi out via rocket to get a good hd reference.

they both performed well, but the f3's increased sensitivity was working against it. it dug into the shadows way too much, and the lut as created to get the skintone at optimum exposure, but in turn, the 1600 iso of a f3 raised out all contrast and effected the skintone as well, looks creamier but lacks the punch you'd want out of a image as well. we would have needed a nd3 to compensate, and that may have effected the results as well.

as expected, log workflow really shined through on the scarlet, looks great, contrasty, saturation is nice and healthy. never been a fan of the stock redgammas, I've always thought working with log as your starting point and building on that has always been the way to work. using redgammas can really effect lighting decisions. the camera has a lot more information that it's showing in redgamma 3. MX is a great sensor, and redcolor 3 is excellent.


as Gunleik mentioned, impossible to cut this 2 cameras together. completely different looks, base sensitivities, and color matrix. both have their own look. f3 def does cut better with a very well known competitor, but stacking it with any RED camera system wouldn't be a good idea in my opinion.

Thanks Tom, that helped a lot.

Would you create a different LUT for each setup during a shoot, to aid with lighting? Or is the one you created for this test something you'd just re-use over and over? (I assume it's the former...)

 

[Tom.Wong]

Thanks Tom, that helped a lot.

Would you create a different LUT for each setup during a shoot? Or is the one you created for this test something you'd just re-use over and over? (I assume it's the former...)

multiple ways of working, I can either creating a very simple contrast/saturation lut like i did with this test, with a few kelvin and offset tweaks and using that as a "lighting" lut, and work with that for the whole scene or even day sometimes if the lighting is very consistant and similar. If we are changing lighting setups, or doing company moves etc. i start over and build a custom lut for each scene. I tweak as I go along during a scene as well using reference stills and video I capture live off the camera to make sure it matches properly as there are so many variables during the day.


lots of debate on grading luts, but I find them useful for the finishing colorist to be able to baseline what was the intended look on set, since working with RAW and or linear log can go so many different ways. Of course the finishing colorist and producers might just throw everything out and start over without the DP, especially in commercial workflows. But I see more often than not, they grade on top of my LUTs as I see stuff I work on get aired. it's just easier that way, and I basically already pre match the whole piece for the colorist saving a lot of work.

 

[Luis Caffesse]

Tom (DIT and editor) used the worst font and Music on earth.... to mess with us. Thanks Tom......

I'll give you the font, Timur - but the music? Come on... that Amelie soundtrack is fantastic.

It was good to see you guys this week.
Hopefully another full year won't pass before our paths cross again.

 

[Erich Ocean]

multiple ways of working, I can either creating a very simple contrast/saturation lut like i did with this test, with a few kelvin and offset tweaks and using that as a "lighting" lut, and work with that for the whole scene or even day sometimes if the lighting is very consistant and similar. If we are changing lighting setups, or doing company moves etc. i start over and build a custom lut for each scene. I tweak as I go along during a scene as well using reference stills and video I capture live off the camera to make sure it matches properly as there are so many variables during the day.

Thanks again, you're really selling me on this whole DIT thing. :smiley:

Sounds like a great way to work.

 

[Tom.Wong]

Tom (DIT and editor) used the worst font and Music on earth.... to mess with us. Thanks Tom......

it was either Amelie, a hardcore dubstep track, or me rick rolling everybody...

 

[Tom.Wong]

Thanks again, you're really selling me on this whole DIT thing. :smiley:

Sounds like a great way to work.

I really thinking that methodology of working is a really great way of doing it too. It lets you really see what you have, while redgammas look good, it doesn't show you the full range of what the camera can REALLY do. so it make you play it safe, but it throws away a few stops of detail. you can see in the redlogfilm lut compared to rg3, there is a c stand on the top right corner, just look at how that highlight comes back, or how over crushed the shadow is in rg3. it would have made a DP most likely try to slow down that hot spot and bring in more fill while in rg3. in doing so your lighting ratios are way different now, and it really effects the creative decision making.

rg3 is a great baseline when you got nothing else, but i think this is a major reason why custom looks on set are really helpful to the production. It's a bit more difficult to work the way I do using epics or scarlets because if you set the camera to redlogfilm, the on board lcd gets milky too and the AC has no contrast to pull focus with. I'm trying to convince RED *hint hint* to allow for the option of rlf out of the hd sdi while maintaining rg3 on the on board monitor for focus pulling. I think overall if productions can work like this they'll be seeing getting the best out of what these cameras have to offer.

and it offers a LOT.

 

[Erich Ocean]

So, Scratch Lab is pricey*–*more that the Scarlet!

Does the 3cP software from G&D do more or less the same thing as far as this part is concerned?

 

[Tom.Wong]

So, Scratch Lab is pricey*–*more that the Scarlet!

Does the 3cP software from G&D do more or less the same thing as far as this part is concerned?

looked into 3cp, they don't update fast enough for me to invest in their system. Scratch Lab was purely a business decision, amazing support team. it's like being part of a family it's great. it does everything I want it to do, great render engine. resolve 9 will do a lot of the same things but I really need the backing of a immediate responsive support team if things aren't working right. Plus performance is optimized in scratch for single gpu use, really fast and don't need to bring more gpu's on set for performance. just less of a hassel and less to troubleshoot. nothing is perfect per say, but even with the news of no resolve 9, I have no regrets on going with Scratch. another way to work is to do a one light in rcx using rlf, and loading it into your camera, but i find that a really fast paced productions, especially commercials, that can be a time killer. and not being able to tweak live and immediately bites too.

hopefully RED will open up their cam for more on set workflow options!