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 :)

Weapon LUTs and Pro Res

Having the LUTS baked in to the prores is a very important feature. Commercial workflows demand delivery of raw camera files and graded offline Mxf or prores. Having the ability to load LUTS in the camera for each scene (or even shot) allows us to deliver offline files with the intended look without relying on an editor to match and actually USE a lut we provide. It allows us to not have to transcode and still end up with dailies that have our intended look.
 
Sorry for slightly derailing and for my big ignorance, but:

Since Weapon accept 33 point cube LUT, and Scarlet W 17 point, I wonder If a lighter version could be implemented and applied to the Raven, for monitoring purpose ONLY.
Or simple monitoring of 3D LUT in general needs so much more computational power compared to monitoring (heavily) modified Redcine LOOK metadata?
 
David Battistella said:
TO me custom LUTs are for the post room and not really for the set , UNLESS they are working very closely together (like a revenant workflow).
David
Click to expand...

Custom LUTs can be more valuable on the set than in the post room.

LUTs give you tremendous creative control, and MUCH LESS ERROR in workflow. They save time and money and give MORE control to the cinematographer.

In the very, very near future - the "post room" will be truly for "finishing" - the final look. The "lab" is now is the camera. Soon, in the not-so-distant future - we will look back at how we do dailies and editorial media today - and we will shake our heads and just laugh.

And the "secret sauce" shit ... it just silly. Pasting a great 3D LUT onto an image doesn't make you a great DIT, colorist or cinematographer. The best chefs in the world publish cookbooks. And then, many times, they become even more successful.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
The best chefs in the world publish cookbooks. And then, many times, they become even more successful.
Click to expand...

And they often leave out an ingredient or two in the published recipes; )
 
I agree with the proposition that a choice for when to apply the LUT would be ideal. Different workflows and politics require different approaches. Applying the LUT in camera would generally be my preference assuming the .movs were only used for editorial. I hope Red can give us this choice.
 
Mark,

i did mention i understand the value of luts on set. It might be some kind of dream for a DP to expect the look on set to be exactly the one on screens but i doubt they still wont be retouched in the context of an entire film.

You and I have had long backnand forth on this stuff but for the purposes of this discussion its about things being baked in or not. Not having looks baked in has always been touted as the greatest thing about raw, now with LUTS in camera, people want to bake in looks so some editor or colorist doesn't fuck up the look?

To me personally, that is what a telephone is for, as in, pick up the phone and have a conversation with post. I know thats not always possible or things can get lost in translation but baking stuff in? With Red? That was never the point of RAW. Still, I get there are times you want that.

I still also believe that if you really want to have a lot of control over the look, the best way to control a look is through lighting ratios and camera filtration (like any of the greats). Hasn't Roger Deacons been using the same LUT for ages? just as one example. People don't talk about a DP's LUTS, they talk about a DP's lighting style. Color comes into it too, but did Storaro have magic LUT for his films? He controlled his look very tightly and that made his work distinct.

I know that the future and LUTS means DPs will have more control over color and how it is mapped in a 33x33x33 cube, and that is cool, but it is never going to replace fundamentals, just one added tool. And I also admit that I might be incredibly short sighted on this and that is fine too.

David
 
Last edited:
Tom Gleeson said:
choice
Click to expand...

RED is now aware of the desire to have this included functionality potentially in a future firmware update. So that's good news.

Choice is good and there's a million ways to work these days. I think this is certainly doable without making things too complicated in camera. Having the option to Bake In the LUT or Copy to folder seems very doable for those shooting dual .R3D/.MOV or just .MOV work. Straight to air, straight to editor, whatever you want can be simplified.

The initial logic behind the way things are now with the "sidecar" 3D LUT in the .RDC folder was aimed more at a general production workflow where an editor, colorist, or whoever would make any adjustments to the underlying Quicktime and then apply the LUT, which still has very big advantages like if the LUT needs to change or whatever.

Additionally, we're still in the early days of DSMC[SUP]2[/SUP]. While REDCODE RAW workflow is extremely mature and supported everywhere and the cameras themselves are producing quality images there's still likely a few feature requests that will sprout up. Especially with the new tech.
 
David Battistella said:
I still also believe that if you really want to have a lot of control over the look, the best way to control a look is through lighting ratios and camera filtration (like any of the greats). Hasn't Roger Deacons been using the same LUT for ages? just as one example. People don't talk about a DP's LUTS, they talk about a DP's lighting style. Color comes into it too, but did Storaro have magic LUT for his films? He controlled his look very tightly and that made his work distinct.

I know that the future and LUTS means DPs will have more control over color and how it is mapped in a 33x33x33 cube, and that is cool, but it is never going to replace fundamentals, just one added tool.
Click to expand...

It is not supposed to replace fundamentals. It is an addition, not substitution.

This principle allows crafting a part of the image aesthetic before the project and knowing how the shot works and feels with that aesthetic. So the DP and the colorist can already do a part of the creative work before the shoot, which might affect creative choices on set.
That's just one example.
 
I never said I am against it. I get why people want to bake in. I get why people want to use LUT's. I suspect more LUT's will be misused rather than used properly. But this is getting a bit old and tired.

I'm all for choice. Red should do everything the people want.

David


Hrvoje Simic said:
It is not supposed to replace fundamentals. It is an addition, not substitution.

This principle allows crafting a part of the image aesthetic before the project and knowing how the shot works and feels with that aesthetic. So the DP and the colorist can already do a part of the creative work before the shoot, which might affect creative choices on set.
That's just one example.
Click to expand...
 
so right now, can you shoot raw and have at least a rec709 or red color baked into the prores? if not, yeah that has to come.
having the prores option as a simultaneous recording option is supposed to save the dit having to transcode for editing purposes, if it's just pushing out a flat profile on the prores that negates the whole process for me since the dit will have to still give the footage a look and re-transcode for the client.
 
jordan levy said:
so right now, can you shoot raw and have at least a rec709 or red color baked into the prores? if not, yeah that has to come.
having the prores option as a simultaneous recording option is supposed to save the dit having to transcode for editing purposes, if it's just pushing out a flat profile on the prores that negates the whole process for me since the dit will have to still give the footage a look and re-transcode for the client.
Click to expand...

I posted a sample months ago of that. Your Look settings (Color Space, Gamma Space, and general custom Look you can set in camera, as well as Sharpening) all effect the ProRes file stream.
 
Phil Holland said:
I posted a sample months ago of that. Your Look settings (Color Space, Gamma Space, and general custom Look you can set in camera, as well as Sharpening) all effect the ProRes file stream.
Click to expand...
oh great, sorry, this thread threw me for a loop, that's all i care about for now, thank you again phil!
 
David Battistella said:
I suspect more LUT's will be misused rather than used properly.
Click to expand...

That's a normal process in every new technological advancement and after the new concept is grasped with sufficient usage and its trials and errors the percentage of its adequate utilization rises.

It was the same with Red's introduction of raw motion imaging to mainstream, with more potential consequently bringing more room for mistakes.
We've all been there, in one way or the other and likely facing new challenges with new developments.

Gradually, the collective assimilates.
 
True.

Hrvoje Simic said:
That's a normal process in every new technological advancement and after the new concept is grasped with sufficient usage and its trials and errors the percentage of its adequate utilization rises.

It was the same with Red's introduction of raw shooting to mainstream, with more potential consequently bringing more room for mistakes.
We've all been there, in one way or the other and likely facing new challenges with new developments.

Gradually, the collective assimilates.
Click to expand...
 
Keep cheery everyone. I just think of the alternatives. Black magic ursa mini 4k is up to 2.25 stars with 44 reviews on B and H.
 
I took the LUT out of Look B and have shot all day and the camera has run perfectly. The instability and shutdowns I experienced with my Weapon only happened on the day I had the LUT loaded although not selected. I might walk away from using LUTS for a while and give Red some time to work on this feature.
 
Phil Holland said:
Would it still be important if the 3D LUT that comes with the .RDC and .MOV files automatically detects and loads into 3rd party programs and players via intelligent sniff or metadata?

Just curious.
Click to expand...

I think that a LUT coming in via sniff/metadata on prores footage is not a prime scenario. In premiere for example when a LUT is applied it slightly slows down scrubbing. Even on a blazing fast machine. For large projects with tons of footage a LUT will slightly (only slightly) slow down a seasoned editor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top