Thoughts and Tips responses here...

[Graeme Nattress]

Ryan, we'll happily tell anyone what the software tools do, and how best to use them. That doesn't mean we tell you the exact code of what happens behind the scenes. All anyone needs to know is that they work as described and produce the results as described.

Actually, in many ways REDGamma/REDColor/FLUT ensure that things work so much better as what we are saying is that REDGamma/REDColor/FLUT is the "reference decode" of an R3D and if you visually in your end result gets images that are worse than the reference, you've done something wrong. And better still, nothing in REDGamma/REDColor/FLUT stops you taking that and improving on it still further.

Graeme

 

[shashbugu]

Wow, it really is different. I just graded the same shot in Color the old-fashioned way (import into FCP using Log and Transfer set to native, Send to Color, then grade the new 2k clip), and with RedCine-X. I set both White Balances to 5660, brought down the lift till it was just touching, brought up the gain till it looked nice, and cranked up the saturation till it looked like I remember it. So, very unscientific, but still, I did basically the same thing with both.

In the one I did in Color (first jpg), I had to really crank up the saturation to get the reds of the sunset to where I wanted them, and the blues of the sky got a little too saturated along with them, I think.

But in Redcine-X (second jpg), the reds saturated much more nicely, and the blues look more natural. More importantly, it brought out this delicious band of green between them. Definitely more like what it looked like in real life.

Also important I think is that it looks more evenly lit with the old color science, and in Redcine-X, the sun area is brighter and the outside of the frame is darker (I didn't mess with any contrast settings). The latter looks more natural to my eyes. Really nice.

Of course, when I exported it (to ProRes 422 HQ; third jpg), it came out a little lighter and less saturated. I wonder if anyone can give me a hint as to what's going on here. I don't think it's the gamma issue, because I have "Enable Final Cut Studio color compatibility" checked in Quicktime. Is it because ProRes compresses it and I lose a little color information, and it would look better in 4444? (Can't test, don't have Studio 3 yet.) I think I'll just have to spend a big chunk of time understanding the whole gamma thing. It's annoying b/c that's one thing I don't want to understand. I just want it to work. The same movie on the same monitor on the same machine should always look the same. (Disregarding loss of info from compression, of course.)

So back on topic, is it safe to assume you guys will be releasing (whenever it's finished, of course) a new version of the Final Cut Studio plug-in so we can grade the raw files in Color with the new color science?

Prores 4444, is pretty slick not the best though, 10 bit DPX's and 16 bit Tiffs are still the norm, I don't have an external 400 MB/S second raid though, so I don't know, how it will work on your machine. I don't own a RED Rocket™ yet, so rendering out at half debayer still takes a few days.

 

[David Rasberry]

So what is a good approach to finishing in other color/gamma spaces, specifically REC 709?
If you are releasing to a particular format, you need to correct for the best results in the applicable standard for that format.

 

[shashbugu]

So what is a good approach to finishing in other color/gamma spaces, specifically REC 709?
If you are releasing to a particular format, you need to correct for the best results in the applicable standard for that format.

Good question! My final conform has always been in AE, I render out a Qt Animation codec file, then back in PPro, I play out to Digi Beta via Kona 3, I have never had to deliver HD yet, whether for a feature, music video or commercial. my out put from redcine had always been, redspace, rec709. nut the FLUT requirements are different. So yeah I will like to know too.:thumbsup:

 

[Graeme Nattress]

REDGamma/REDColor/FLUT are what we describe as "REC709 compatible", which means they're completely suitable for using, grading and viewing in a REC709 environment. They are different from REC709 due to the limited color gamut and limited dynamic range of REC709 colour space and gamma.

Graeme

 

[shashbugu]

REDGamma/REDColor/FLUT™ are what we describe as "REC709 compatible", which means they're completely suitable for using, grading and viewing in a REC709 environment. They are different from REC709 due to the limited color gamut and limited dynamic range of REC709 colour space and gamma.

Graeme

Wow! Thats just wonderful.
Thank you

 

[shashbugu]

that rolloff is just amazing, It looks really good on skin tones, No more desaturating here, you can actually add color now

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

REDGamma/REDColor/FLUT™™ are what we describe as "REC709 compatible", which means they're completely suitable for using, grading and viewing in a REC709 environment. They are different from REC709 due to the limited color gamut and limited dynamic range of REC709 colour space and gamma.

Graeme

so exporting for dpx film out is also in redgamma/redcolor/FLUT™ or some different setting

better: what are the settings with film out as delivery?

 

[shashbugu]

I also notice that, the actual playback window or canvas is responsive to the histogram, in 1/4 debayer there is clipping in both goal posts, but at half or full debayer there is no clipping,

 

[Deanan]

so exporting for dpx film out is also in redgamma/redcolor/FLUT™™ or some different setting

better: what are the settings with film out as delivery?

For a print log workflow we are working on a new output option that is looking very nice.

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

For a print log workflow we are working on a new output option that is looking very nice.

yammi yammi, red burger with special sauce sil vous plait.

 

[Jannard]

I also notice that, the actual playback window or canvas is responsive to the histogram, in 1/4 debayer there is clipping in both goal posts, but at half or full debayer there is no clipping,

Critical adjustments should be made in Full (or 1/2) resolution mode.

Jim

 

[shashbugu]

Critical adjustments should be made in Full (or 1/2) resolution mode.

Jim

Thanks Jim, but I already figured that out. Heh heh just kidding:badputer:

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

Read... try it out... and then we'd love your feedback.

Ok, I tried it, and yes, discovered how RedColor and RedGamma yield more natural and accurate color reproduction than the old tools. And yes, FLUT is a nice tool that seems to speed up color grading.

But, I really don't know how to put this in words kind enough and which reflected that my intention is not to be a party spoliler although still find that RedColor, RedGamma, and FLUT is not an answer to all my needs. To explain my point, I'll give first an example and then explain, what kind of tools I would like to see.

My experience suggests the footages which have a lot of tones/details in the highlights are bit difficult to color grade. By experimenting have found that I have to underexposure at least 1-1.5 stops from what the raw metering shows of clipping. In my understanding, clipping occure when the barber's pole upper red light is on. So, have to come down by a stop or 1.5 stops from that.

When such a footage is opened in post in the past wirh RedSpace or now with RedColor/RedGamma, there are not much details visible in the highlights, see the snow filed in front in Example-1.jpg. Decreasing FLUT does not seem to make a diffence, see Example-2.jpg. This is still a hasty conclusion from my side -not enough experience yet.

Choosing Rec709/Rec709 shows bit more details, see Example-3.jpg, and by adjusting the gamma curve to look like a S-shape I get the footage quite quickly to appear close to how my eye perception, see Example-4.jpg. It looks like RedColor/RedGamma pushes the middles too high, and consequently to get the right look I have to drag the gamma-curve down, Example-5.jpg. In this case adjusting the curve is more sensitive to small changes of the mouse than in case of choosing Rec709/Rec709, see Example-4.jpg.

Now, the tools I would like to have. First the camera metering; It took me some time to realize why I have to underexposure from the clipping point. My guess is that the response of the sensor is not linear all the way up but instead there's some roll-off of the highlights. If so this means the highlights become compressed and consequently to stay on the linear regime I have to somewhat underexposure. (When ETTR the whole point is to stay on the linear region.)

1) So, at first would like have a camera metering that reliably showed where is the uppermost point of the linear response. Obviously would also like to see the point when clipping occurs.

2) Would like to open the raw image in RC-X without any gamma-curve applied. At this stage the gamma-curve window showed the sensor's response curve (which is almost linear, except at the bottom and top). I know that the image appears rather akward without any gamma curve applied, but still would like to start from this point. Would also prefer if the raw gamma curvewas visible in some drak gray all time say, as then one knew precisely when one is adjusting the linear part and the compressed highlights.

3) When applying any gamma-curve such as RedGamma or Rec709, the curve in the window changed accordingly. If I guess right the same what one can get by tweaking the FLUT control can also be obtained by adjusting the gamma-curve. If so, accordingly, when the FLUT control is changed would like to see how the gamma-curve changes.

4) Finaly, would find it useful if there was a main gamma window and then another auxiliary gamma window that allowed to make precise fine tuning to the main window such that the changes of the mouse had only a small effect on the main gamma curve.

Just in case would like to emphasize that definitely find that the new RC-X and the "color science" is nice progress that is highly appreciated from my side.

 

[shashbugu]

All I need now is my own Red Rocket

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Hey, Lauri... Why are you pushing the white point all the way to 12270K? Most of the snow-covered winter scenes I've shot haven't benefitted from pushing too far past daylight to 8000K. When you do, it's like a form of instant gratification, but makes it difficult to actually push and pull your color after the fact. The 9600K setting in your REC709 grabs seems much more fitting.

 

[shashbugu]

Ok, I tried it, and yes, discovered how RedColor and RedGamma yield more natural and accurate color reproduction than the old tools. And yes, FLUT™™™ is a nice tool that seems to speed up color grading.

But, I really don't know how to put this in words kind enough and which reflected that my intention is not to be a party spoliler although still find that RedColor, RedGamma, and FLUT™™™ is not an answer to all my needs. To explain my point, I'll give first an example and then explain, what kind of tools I would like to see.

My experience suggests the footages which have a lot of tones/details in the highlights are bit difficult to color grade. By experimenting have found that I have to underexposure at least 1-1.5 stops from what the raw metering shows of clipping. In my understanding, clipping occure when the barber's pole upper red light is on. So, have to come down by a stop or 1.5 stops from that.

When such a footage is opened in post in the past wirh RedSpace or now with RedColor/RedGamma, there are not much details visible in the highlights, see the snow filed in front in Example-1.jpg. Decreasing FLUT™™™ does not seem to make a diffence, see Example-2.jpg. This is still a hasty conclusion from my side -not enough experience yet.

Choosing Rec709/Rec709 shows bit more details, see Example-3.jpg, and by adjusting the gamma curve to look like a S-shape I get the footage quite quickly to appear close to how my eye perception, see Example-4.jpg. It looks like RedColor/RedGamma pushes the middles too high, and consequently to get the right look I have to drag the gamma-curve down, Example-5.jpg. In this case adjusting the curve is more sensitive to small changes of the mouse than in case of choosing Rec709/Rec709, see Example-4.jpg.

Now, the tools I would like to have. First the camera metering; It took me some time to realize why I have to underexposure from the clipping point. My guess is that the response of the sensor is not linear all the way up but instead there's some roll-off of the highlights. If so this means the highlights become compressed and consequently to stay on the linear regime I have to somewhat underexposure. (When ETTR the whole point is to stay on the linear region.)

1) So, at first would like have a camera metering that reliably showed where is the uppermost point of the linear response. Obviously would also like to see the point when clipping occurs.

2) Would like to open the raw image in RC-X without any gamma-curve applied. At this stage the gamma-curve window showed the sensor's response curve (which is almost linear, except at the bottom and top). I know that the image appears rather akward without any gamma curve applied, but still would like to start from this point. Would also prefer if the raw gamma curvewas visible in some drak gray all time say, as then one knew precisely when one is adjusting the linear part and the compressed highlights.

3) When applying any gamma-curve such as RedGamma or Rec709, the curve in the window changed accordingly. If I guess right the same what one can get by tweaking the FLUT™™™ control can also be obtained by adjusting the gamma-curve. If so, accordingly, when the FLUT™™™ control is changed would like to see how the gamma-curve changes.

4) Finaly, would find it useful if there was a main gamma window and then another auxiliary gamma window that allowed to make precise fine tuning to the main window such that the changes of the mouse had only a small effect on the main gamma curve.

Just in case would like to emphasize that definitely find that the new RC-X and the "color science" is nice progress that is highly appreciated from my side.

actually choosing rec709 is wrong because you are seeing a limited range of colors, in high contrast, ie less contrast ratio. So it appears more detailed and pops out, this is what you want to avoid. On the histogram look at both bottom corners the little white hyphen shows that you have reached the gain threshold (usually when you add more blue) on the left corner the vertical bar shows that you have gone below zero (colors are clumped and bleeding) you wont see this on your computer monitor, but on a yuv screen you will wail out. The histogram is your best friend you can achieve amazing saturated deep rich natural colors if you stay in between that zone. How did you get 9600 k, and 12270 k?

On shoot like that with so much white make sure you have a Warm card, and a colored clapped stick with a grey swatch. The sensor is very powerful you will to trick it a little to capture the colors in the back ground. basically treat it both like a film cam and an Hd cam at the same time.

 

[Jannard]

Ok, I tried it, and yes, discovered how RedColor and RedGamma yield more natural and accurate color reproduction than the old tools. And yes, FLUT™™ is a nice tool that seems to speed up color grading.

But, I really don't know how to put this in words kind enough and which reflected that my intention is not to be a party spoliler although still find that RedColor, RedGamma, and FLUT™™ is not an answer to all my needs. To explain my point, I'll give first an example and then explain, what kind of tools I would like to see.

My experience suggests the footages which have a lot of tones/details in the highlights are bit difficult to color grade. By experimenting have found that I have to underexposure at least 1-1.5 stops from what the raw metering shows of clipping. In my understanding, clipping occure when the barber's pole upper red light is on. So, have to come down by a stop or 1.5 stops from that.

When such a footage is opened in post in the past wirh RedSpace or now with RedColor/RedGamma, there are not much details visible in the highlights, see the snow filed in front in Example-1.jpg. Decreasing FLUT™™ does not seem to make a diffence, see Example-2.jpg. This is still a hasty conclusion from my side -not enough experience yet.

Choosing Rec709/Rec709 shows bit more details, see Example-3.jpg, and by adjusting the gamma curve to look like a S-shape I get the footage quite quickly to appear close to how my eye perception, see Example-4.jpg. It looks like RedColor/RedGamma pushes the middles too high, and consequently to get the right look I have to drag the gamma-curve down, Example-5.jpg. In this case adjusting the curve is more sensitive to small changes of the mouse than in case of choosing Rec709/Rec709, see Example-4.jpg.

Now, the tools I would like to have. First the camera metering; It took me some time to realize why I have to underexposure from the clipping point. My guess is that the response of the sensor is not linear all the way up but instead there's some roll-off of the highlights. If so this means the highlights become compressed and consequently to stay on the linear regime I have to somewhat underexposure. (When ETTR the whole point is to stay on the linear region.)

1) So, at first would like have a camera metering that reliably showed where is the uppermost point of the linear response. Obviously would also like to see the point when clipping occurs.

2) Would like to open the raw image in RC-X without any gamma-curve applied. At this stage the gamma-curve window showed the sensor's response curve (which is almost linear, except at the bottom and top). I know that the image appears rather akward without any gamma curve applied, but still would like to start from this point. Would also prefer if the raw gamma curvewas visible in some drak gray all time say, as then one knew precisely when one is adjusting the linear part and the compressed highlights.

3) When applying any gamma-curve such as RedGamma or Rec709, the curve in the window changed accordingly. If I guess right the same what one can get by tweaking the FLUT™™ control can also be obtained by adjusting the gamma-curve. If so, accordingly, when the FLUT™™ control is changed would like to see how the gamma-curve changes.

4) Finaly, would find it useful if there was a main gamma window and then another auxiliary gamma window that allowed to make precise fine tuning to the main window such that the changes of the mouse had only a small effect on the main gamma curve.

Just in case would like to emphasize that definitely find that the new RC-X and the "color science" is nice progress that is highly appreciated from my side.

Lauri... thanks for the post. Part (most) of what you are asking for is delivered with a new camera firmware build that supports the FLUT™ science.

I'll be curious to read your comments after that becomes available (soon).

Also... be aware that you are seeing pre-grade info with FLUT. There is more actual info to be graded if you select REDgamma over RED 709. I would resist the temptation to judge what can be attained by the 1st thing you see when you open the files.

Jim

 

[Lauri Kettunen]

Hey, Lauri... Why are you pushing the white point all the way to 12270K? Most of the snow-covered winter scenes I've shot haven't benefitted from pushing too far past daylight to 8000K. When you do, it's like a form of instant gratification, but makes it difficult to actually push and pull your color after the fact. The 9600K setting in your REC709 grabs seems much more fitting.

Forgot to mention that, the 12270K is what the automatic white balance gives for the snow field in the front of the image. Yes, it's way out, but just took that as a starting point because did not want to show a blue snow field.

This is taken at the arctic circle in December. The light is very very blue although in one's eyes the snow still appears rather white. Typically I set the temperature somewhere around 8.000-10.000K in this kind of footages.

 

[Jannard]

Forgot to mention that, the 12270K is what the automatic white balance gives for the snow field in the front of the image. Yes, it's way out, but just took that as a starting point because did not want to show a blue snow field.

This is taken at the arctic circle in December. The light is very very blue although in one's eyes the snow still appears rather white. Typically I set the temperature somewhere around 8.000-10.000K in this kind of footages.

You should set WB the same for all comparisons...

Jim