secondary color grading 2K (sky keying) a small (yet encouraging) test

[Hector Berrebi]

i finally got my camera after a long shipping/customs conundrum and got to briefly play with it today.
i am extremely busy finishing up a project and preparing lectures for NAB so this is not, by any means, a camera test.
i will shoot a few of these (including comparisons to other cameras) as this is part of what i do for my work.
as a post person, i naturally go for tests that have to do with post
and honestly, i didn't even think of this when i shot.2K (6:1) at 60fps, ISO 320, REDCOLOR/GAMA3, TOKINA 11-16 at f11brought into REDCINEX, untouched (i could have made my life much easier had i known what i was about to do with the file)
and exported as ProRes 4X4 2Kbest part is, i keyed the sky using FCP7 3-way filter... its one of the worst secondary tools i can think of, regardless of skill, and it produced the cleanest key i have ever seen from it.
there is actually a second secondary on face and skin, which also keyed out impressively well

i attached 2 screen shots of the alpha produced by the key, and one of the un-keyed sky.i know the shot is short, but so are shots in movies... and i was lazy (it was late), key did hold clean for a solid minute of me goofing around infront of cam (again, i didn't know what it will end up being, and i was testing alone)


hector

 

[Hector Berrebi]

got to play with it again... FCP's render engine isn't capable of properly rendering this out.. and like i wrote before, FCP7 secondary tool is not the sharpest pencil around.
i couldn't get a video out of this, though it did exist and work.
color data in this file is so good its almost like working with green screen

this is done in FCP7 using FCP7 secondary and blending mode tools.
look at the before pic to see how colorless the sky apparently seems

my new studio in the Swiss Alps

i love it

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

 

[Lliam Worthington]

Nice Hector. This is one of the reasons I so badly wanted and appreciate the power of Scarlet.

Best

Lliam

 

[Nick Pasquariello]

To me, being able to use bad tools to do impressive things with footage is a great indicator as to the power of the footage. Really, you called out every reason that I could think of as to why this test is subpar, and yet the sky STILL keyed out relatively easily. That's impressive. I'm impressed.

I'm happier with my purchase with each passing day. Videos like this make me even happier.

Last night, I stayed up past midnight just editing some footage off my Scarlet that I took, really, just sort of messing around. But it looked so rich and so vibrant and it was 100% MINE in every sense of the word (no clients, no creative partners, no bosses). I haven't enjoyed a feeling like that while editing in . . . well, years, to be honest.

We have two Red Ones where I work (both MX), and I'm usually the one to run the footage through RedCine-X to ProRes for our FCP workflow. And the one time I was able to do the same with Epic footage, and now with my own Scarlet footage, I can't explain it, but Epic/Scarlet, to me, look better. I've been under the impression that they should be equivalent at the same framerate and resolution, but the newer cams seem more vibrant and flexible.

 

[Hector Berrebi]

thanks Lliam and Nick

when i get back from NAB i'll run some more secondary tests, i should have a C300 in hand by then to have good comparisons
of course, i will NOT test with FCP7 tools

not sure why, but the embeded video is gone from my first post... is it just me not seeing it? i'm pretty sure it was there yesterday...

 

[Lliam Worthington]

Hi Hector,

Yes it was there yesterday, though only three of the four seconds were playing for me and then it was doing a weird freeze.

Best

Lliam

 

[Nick Pasquariello]

The video is still there for me, but it is freezing 3 seconds in (out of the 4 seconds total). Odd.

We have 2 Red One MXs and a C300 at work (and 2 5D Mark IIs with a Mark III on the way). I'm finding the C300 files oddly hard to manage. If the files are not in a SPECIFIC location on my LOCAL drive, I can't get the XF Utility or FCP's Log and Transfer window to recognize them. So I can back the files up to our server, but in order to actually read the raw, I have to pull them down local to a specific folder. It's as if Canon wants all the footage you ever take with it to live within one folder. All footage from every different project you ever shoot all within folders that are only labeled by a string of numbers that indicated day and time that the transfer occurred. It's a DIT/Data Manager/Archivist nightmare, and I can't think of why it would work like this. Nor can I find anything instructing that there is a different more logical way to organize piles of media.

In terms of footage quality, the C300 does some impressive things with low-light capture. Of course, I keep reminding people, if you're using a Red without getting any lights set up, then (in general) you're doing something wrong. Lighting is a key component of film making, and saying "Ahh, I'll just wing it with whatever is there" usually means "I haven't thought enough about what I'm going to shoot and it's going to be a disaster in many ways for many reasons."

The C300 is a better self-contained run-and-gun package. But, personally, given the kind of applications I intend to use my Scarlet for, I wouldn't trade her for a C300. Wouldn't even consider it. That's no knock on the C300, per se, but it is an admission that they have 2 slightly different niches.

 

[Hector Berrebi]

The C300 is a better self-contained run-and-gun package. But, personally, given the kind of applications I intend to use my Scarlet for, I wouldn't trade her for a C300. Wouldn't even consider it. That's no knock on the C300, per se, but it is an admission that they have 2 slightly different niches.

the local rental house that rent's out my Scarlet charges twice more for a Scarlet than for a C300
i haven't played with footage. i will most definitely do and have fun stretching it to its limits.

i always try to remind clients that only a small % of what's shot is night exterior
low-light capabilities is the new BS sales pitch for cameras... as if we needed night vision devices.
sad thing is... in long run these cameras will make many productions narrow down staff and equipment, resulting in work loss for all of us.

i don't think the C300 files will be as versatile to grade. i will do several side by side shoots of common scenarios.

canon were never too strong with naming... DSLR post is always a mess because of the silly 4 digit naming convention

 

[Nick Pasquariello]

canon were never too strong with naming... DSLR post is always a mess because of the silly 4 digit naming convention

C300 files are a little better. They have 2 letters and then 4 numbers. If you named each card with a different set of letters, starting at AA and then going to ZZ, you'd have 676 cards to go through before you had to repeat. We use ours a few times a week, and even using it that much I'd say it would take us 2-3 years before we had to cycle names. By then, our old projects would be archived away. So the C300 files are certainly better at being unique. But the folder structure and ability to be recognized by the plugins is atrocious. Which, again, just makes no sense.

I would LOVE for someone to just swoop in, tell me I'm an idiot, and show me that I'm wrong about this, too. Would make my day job much easier.