Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

skintone

I love this skin tone talk.

The vectorscope is dead when it comes to skin tone. That line on the scope is for "white" skin and is a total ballpark.

pantone has identified 100 skin tones colors now.

http://www.designboom.com/art/pantone-skin-color-spectrum/

So much of this discussion depends on where you are in the world and who you photograph.

i agree that the color gamuts are wider on these cameras now and that it is more important to reproduce accurate color over a correct skin tone. That means if the camera is doing its job (reproducing accurate color) and you know what effect your filtration has on the subject, along with things like makeup, etc, then you should have no problem reproducing skin tones with ANY camera.

Two red features come to mind, the girl with the dragon tattoo and Spider-Man. Both of these films to me, are excellent examples of how you just forget what it was captured on and you just gush over the images and the color, tone and consistency.

i do not believe the REDcode should be geared for "out of the box" skin tones. It should be geared for excellent color reproduction.

If you want out of the box skin tones then Red has given users the look tools to create that on their own.

ive noticed three things.

1. Staying RAW is best
2. DPX exports need to be white balanced and ISO selected, before ultimately exporting with RC3 and REDlog film for effects.
3. I don't compare my Nikon d700 to my epic, they are not the same camera and not geared to the same purpose.

The other discussion point here is artistic choice. I live in Florence Italy. I walk through the galleries and have looked at thousands of images (in person) of the some of the greatest paintings ever created. The same paintings whose lighting and color and composition DPs and photographers have tried to emulate for the last 140 years. Color is a stylistic choice, but a lot of our skin tone talk comes originally from painters who had the same problem mixing pigment and trying to get it right.

For the DOP, reproducing skin tone, opacity of skin, softness, Is in lens choice, aperture, filtration, lighting, light filtration,etc.

i think that colorists might probably be seeing many more inexperienced DPs with the new digital stuff, than they might have with film (just a thought)


Anyone posting in this thread should do this test as well to see if you really do see color properly.
http://www.xrite.com/custom_page.aspx?PageID=77


But I don't think red does bad skin tones. I think it's a camera and you have to understand what it does and how it reacts to light compared to other cameras.

david
 
:iagree: with David.

color_settings_2.jpg
 
I have come late to the thread, but I have noticed that in any given situation in daylight the MX sensor at identical setting resolves a little greener than most other cameras. Easily correctible, but FWIW I have noticed that time and again.

I always wondered what caused this effect?
 
Hi Ivan,
Ive had all types of colour shifts over the years... with many cameras actually.
Took me a while to figure it out. The main problem with colour shift bias is filters, secondly is lenses... I've had greens, pinks, yellows... which had me blaming the camera at the start, but once I had a bunch of cameras together I could replicate these colour drifts through all of them using the same filters and lenses.
The worst was from some old Nikon glass, was green as... Our cooke Zoom was magenta. my 50mm Ziess is a little warm. All my canon glass in a touch pink. The masterprimes we used one day during tests were warm...
Filters have always been a pain... I run Tiffen glass mainly.. but for the life of me, they are not perfect black tint either.. not sure of they change over time or what. But our new purchases are blue... and our older ones are greeny/blue. not enough for me to worry or even care about, but if you did a back to back you see the slight shift instantly.

At the end of the day and like you siad... Easily correctible.
When shooting 35mm for years we never every notice these problems because the colorist would roll straight over the problem correcting instantly.
 
Hey Mark,

Yeh that part is most likely true. That makes sense. But I have a feeling that there is a little sensor deception going on. Same glass on same sensor yields different results... Have you ever noticed a similar thing?

Happened a few times to me before, and it is always confounding... just 1 or 2 clicks on the Colour Temp slider does the trick though.

In other news, I will be shooting a movie in Brissy and the Gold Coast in Feb. If you about, lets grab a cold one.
 
I have been shooting and cutting multi-camera video since I began this journey in 1990 and I can echo what Mark is saying about lenses. Every lens is different, so I had to get used to the color correction tools whether I wanted to be a colorist or not.

In my experience skin tones have been the most difficult to correct for mostly due to lack of reference and tolerance. In just about every shot it is possible to find white and black reference points that can be used to get you in the ball park. For whatever reason it seems that we are also very accepting of variance in blacks and whites but none of this is true for middle grey, and that is where the skin tones live, in the middle. Without a reliable reference for mid grey your skin tones will not be right.

My question for you all is: Do you find it true that we are less accepting of variances of mid tones in general, or is this color correcting phenomena of which I speak due to the inability of our correcting tools to correctly map the mid tones based upon a correct black and white point? Perhaps it is a bit of both?

Thinking about it further, I suppose it is just the nature of the beast. If you plot a straight line between black and white, any variance on either end is going to drastically impact the placement of the middle, and inaccuracy on both ends is a recipe for disaster. This is why I try my damnedest to shoot black, white and grey reference for every lighting setup.
 
Last edited:
It might lean to the green because there are two green pixels and one red and one blue in the bayer pattern.

the bayer pattern sensor captures more green pixels.

but as you said it's very easily corrected with white balance and temperature shifts.

FWIW I am finding that daylight comes in at around 5200 consistently over 5600 which is always a touch warm, but it could also be the time of year in this part of the world.

david
 
Scott. Agree with you on skin tones. I learned the hard way about that on a shoot a few years back, so I am very picky with lenses and filters these days :)

In regards to your question, I think it is more a matter of us being more sensitive to image "imperfections". As technology has advanced, so has what we deem acceptable, or otherwise... we are much more critical.

THat is my hippy interpretation of it anyway. I think the tools to get a nice mid gray are there... sometimes it will take a little more fiddling is all.

David

Sometimes I have noticed that too. Though it seasonally changes.

Maybe I should take my macbeth chart out more often to see whats going on, and report back :)
 
Scott Crawley said:
Thinking about it further, I suppose it is just the nature of the beast. If you plot a straight line between black and white, any variance on either end is going to drastically impact the placement of the middle, and inaccuracy on both ends is a recipe for disaster. This is why I try my damnedest to shoot black, white and grey reference for every lighting setup.
Click to expand...

I think you are right and the mid grey has changed with reds latest color science. I find myself pushing and stretching the mids much more than I ever used to and the blue channel reacts much differently (probably to reduce the noise floor).

i find I'm going for a much less contrasty image these days because i'm treating black and white as absolutes and limiting the contrast adjustments to see more detail throughout the image, like what you are saying about skin tones in a close up, it's all about how they mid greys are. Wide shots, landscapes, a completely different beast.

David
 
Ivan Kovax said:
Hey Mark,

Yeh that part is most likely true. That makes sense. But I have a feeling that there is a little sensor deception going on. Same glass on same sensor yields different results... Have you ever noticed a similar thing?

Happened a few times to me before, and it is always confounding... just 1 or 2 clicks on the Colour Temp slider does the trick though.

In other news, I will be shooting a movie in Brissy and the Gold Coast in Feb. If you about, lets grab a cold one.
Click to expand...

Stay in touch mate... Ill be back in brisbane around March/april.
 
Back when I got my first color meter I started taking daylight reference readings three times a day throughout the year. I haven't followed through, but the seasons do have a color and I expect places do as well.

I wonder if Italy is always warmer looking than other parts of the world.
 
Mark Toia said:
Hi Brad...
The simple fact is this, grading directly from the R3D's will give your the best results. thats fact. That means you have full Kelvin, tint, contrast, gamma control...
If you convert to DPX , Tiif or PRO RES or DNXHD using the same colour settings you shot with on set... then you have effectively created a colour baked image...
Click to expand...
Hi Mark,

Thanks for your detailed write-up. 100% agree with you that staying raw through to grade should be the preference if at all possible (for all the reasons you mentioned). I think you may have misread my post though :P

I wasn't asking what the benefits of working from raw are. I was asking if you think there has been a shift in the industry over the last few years toward understanding these benefits. ie, do post houses you deal with today have a better grasp on raw benefits and workflows than they did 1 or 2 years ago? Or generally are you seeing people treat RAW files like a baked file (or even working with baked files) just as much as they have in the past?
 
Thanks guys for all your invaluable write ups. This thread had been a good read. Would it help the colorist at the end of the project to have something like the XRite color passport as a reference? What I mean is, should be shooting a quick test with this at the top of every interview with each talent? So that the colorist has this as reference for skin tone for each subject? What's the best way to use the Xrite? Love to know your thoughts, because if there's a way to improve our color and skintone workflows, then great (not that we've had any problems so far, but I'm a systems based guy, and if there is a better workflow, I want to know it).

thanks.
 
Nick Morrison said:
Thanks guys for all your invaluable write ups. This thread had been a good read. Would it help the colorist at the end of the project to have something like the XRite color passport as a reference? What I mean is, should be shooting a quick test with this at the top of every interview with each talent? So that the colorist has this as reference for skin tone for each subject? What's the best way to use the Xrite? Love to know your thoughts, because if there's a way to improve our color and skintone workflows, then great (not that we've had any problems so far, but I'm a systems based guy, and if there is a better workflow, I want to know it).

thanks.
Click to expand...

Nice,

I look at it this way. It is a reference.
Should we have one clip with TONE at a reference level recorded for audio? ABSOLUTELY.
Should we record room tone for every interview? ABSOLUTELY

Should we film a reference chart in setups. (my thinking) ABSOLUTELY

It's a good practice. It gives you a reference of what the lighting conditions are in the scene and it is easy to do. Otherwise it is subjective.

I still like to shoot slates and charts in different setups whenever I can, even if it is stuff I know is going to be in house. It's just become a habit for me.

Camera bars are useless because they are not reflecting the light of the scene, a chart is a color reference of the reflected light in your scene.

David
 
Nick Morrison said:
Thanks guys for all your invaluable write ups. This thread had been a good read. Would it help the colorist at the end of the project to have something like the XRite color passport as a reference? What I mean is, should be shooting a quick test with this at the top of every interview with each talent? So that the colorist has this as reference for skin tone for each subject? What's the best way to use the Xrite? Love to know your thoughts, because if there's a way to improve our color and skintone workflows, then great (not that we've had any problems so far, but I'm a systems based guy, and if there is a better workflow, I want to know it).

thanks.
Click to expand...

Shooting a reference like the passport is key. Do it every time the light changes for accurate and repeatable color. Having a known reference allows you to calculate an offset. You can use that value to either neutralize the color cast of light and lens or to duplicate it.
 
Last edited:
We film a fair bit of 3D and had colour shift issues on commercial mirrors, we commissioned a scientific optics company to make mirrors for us that were less more than 2% accurate and 1/4 wavelength accurate, we did our best to extend the spectrum in to the Violet and Red as best we could for spec but I think 3D will remain tricky whilst mirrors are around. Bjorn highlights the point of issues of post and workflow which is where many of the issues more often persist for any camera originated media. Given the quality and availability of the tools available then the issues of colour should be behind us.
 
David Battistella said:
Anyone posting in this thread should do this test as well to see if you really do see color properly.
http://www.xrite.com/custom_page.aspx?PageID=77
Click to expand...


i mismatched 2... right in the green. could be my eyes, could be my old, uncalibrated laptop's rendition, or just sloppiness.

besides color perception/tolerance... there is another factor. as you mentioned, there is a range of skintones... and a range of light filtration. i know this is a huge no-no for some people, but i'm okay with letting the light affect the skin color. or the mood of the shot for that matter (within creative reasoning). [heck, look to the left at my 'avatar'... 5 year-old canon jpg (i'll grow up sometime) and a little intense... but that's besides the point. the light bends a certain way at sunset and fluctuates based on time (season) and space (geo)... and 'artistic intent'.] i understand, at least a little bit, the idea of 'memory colors' - but perhaps i have a little bit of artistic leeway in my philosophy. i'm still just learning all this stuff, though - you guys each have much more experience than i do, so i'm willing to listen and learn about this stuff and really appreciate this discussion. sorry to throw a tangent out there, but it is a factor... (and a balancing out of technical minutia)

so, what does 'accurate' skintone rendition look like, and is archetypical 'accuracy' via plato the ultimate form? how do you guys think about these things?
 
Shooting a reference chart and white balancing based on it may be less than optimal strategy, in cases such as:

- when a DoP wants the starting point of grading to be exactly what he saw on a reference monitor on set with dialed in camera settings, which can easily be technically "off" regarding WB
- when shooting a scene with varying light throughout the shot (camera movement, uncontrolled light, mixed light etc.)
- when scene's actual captured color values are very far from perfectly white balanced color, and typical WB creates an undesired starting point by negatively affecting either texture, range or tonality
- when it creates a longer route to the desired look in any way
- when challenging and important shots lack the reference chart but are chosen as a reference for the look creation
- when aditional fiddling with additional variable on a fast moving shoot with 100+ shots starts presenting a distraction or limitation of any sort, being less helpful than a adequate colorist.
...etc...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top