Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: wich codecs for grading ?  (Read 11462 times)
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #40 on: August 18, 2011, 06:44:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Chris,

Don't you have the same feeling than in this old 70's movie where the dude's hypnotized and see colored lights turning with this magic mushrooms music? I find motion like the sirens and I hope we are firmly attched to the boat.
One siren callks us: it's Avid, the other one says "no, come with me, come with me", it's FCPX, then you got this Alexa striking blonde on a rock who says looking at us "I'm hot" etc...

I feel like my eyes are looking right opened everywhere, like a kid in "toys r us" store before Christmas.

Maybe we get younguer with that feeling, wich would compensate the older we are getting with the learning curves.
 
Logged
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #41 on: August 18, 2011, 07:04:35 PM »
ReplyReply

LoL.... absolutely man.  Fortunately Avid has a killer competitive upgrade deal for FCP users so I might just get both.  Alexa has no hold at all on me, my sites are firmly set on Epic, especially now that the Canon mount is forthcoming.  I'm gonna need to take two months off this winter just to get up to speed on all this friggin software!
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #42 on: August 19, 2011, 04:58:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Me too.

This autumn I'm going back to the school bench. About Avid, I've only scratched the surface that allows me to work fine at a basic level. But I find that the masterclasses are just the best thing to do. I can't afford anymore those long self-learning processes when just finding proper info (when we find it...) takes at least half of the time invested. It's not a profitable ecuation.

National TV here are giving Avid training to everyone who wants. The "prob" is that they are really really integrists. It's Avid Avid and Avid. I also found a pro that works on almost any editor but more focussed in Avid workflow. I prefer this formula because it's more open.

 
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #43 on: August 21, 2011, 01:25:35 PM »
ReplyReply

I have to admit, I totally wrote FCP X off without really investigating it. 




OK after skimming through three tutorials and loading some files for a fairly complex edit that we currently have in the works, I have to admit that I "think" FCP X will do very close to everything I was doing on FCP Studio other than import a psd, park footage and export an edl.

I should emphasize I think, maybe, because FCP X is such a departure from any other NLE it's like starting over.  Everything is different from the lack of 3 point editing to the viewer window doing double duty as the Canvas.

Most of it is 1000 times faster and once you learn the keyboard shortcuts should be even faster as there is very little rendering time.

I understand why Apple left off EDL export as you can see that everything will eventually be done in the one program and even when I outsource to a Di-vinci suite 9 times out of 10 they screw up the time code anyway, so the edl export becomes somewhat worthless, though with this software I feel in 12 months you won't need Di-Vinci or scratch or anything, because you'll do it all in the timeline.   

I gotta admit I would just kill for a way to view on a broadcast monitor and dual viewer windows to match footage, it is a pretty amazing piece of software and much more complex than I originally thought.

The thing that kind of puts you into I-movie land is the way they list effects and transitions with those awful transition and effects previews/thumbnails that looks like they farmed them out to Microsoft for the design works.  What's with the blues and oranges?

I threw it on a bone stock Imac I7 and it ran faster than Final Cut Studio does on a fully tricked out 8 core. 

I have 20 something days of full editing and if the interface wasn't such a huge departure from everything I know, I'd use it, but the learning curve is going to take a month minimum to be up to speed.

Anyway, this software might not be exactly ready to go into a large editing bay, but it is close and I wouldn't bet against apple, because this is typical of their way of thinking.  They don't just change things, they invent a new market and this really has the beginnings of becoming a new way of thinking.

It's kind of like I-movie mixed in with, final cut 7,  C-1, light-room, motion, cine'x, and di-vinci with everything you know about editing thrown out the window.

I do know that if I was up to speed on FCP X and understood it as well as I do the old Final Cut, for the next 20 days of editing the time involved would probably be cut in half.

IMO

BC
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #44 on: August 22, 2011, 01:34:25 PM »
ReplyReply


Fred,

Edius is good, though their main supplier in Los Angeles doesn't represent them on their website so that's a little too far out of the mainstream for me.

Also it's a PC program and the box shouldn't matter, but I'm way too deep in Mac's to start the PC routine.

On a followup note, I put in about 4 hours last night cutting a piece on fcpx and think I know it at aboug 60% which is a fairly quick learning curve.

It is faster, not as accurate as fcp7 and though the workflow is probably a little faster, all the hidden little tabs and buttons are non intuitive.

It does do damn nice color correction on the fly and matching images is easy.  It has it's good points and will eventually be better (I hope).

IMO

BC
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #45 on: August 22, 2011, 04:44:29 PM »
ReplyReply

That's a VERY fast learning curve indeed.

About Edius, I wish it had all the Avid's capabilities while I wish Avid had the Edius easy workflow, all that with the Premiere flexibility...well maybe in the end Apple will surprise everybody again and re-standardized the edition.

I've heard that Edius has been recently bought, read an interview of the new staff in and they want to do something really big to compete with Avid. For the Windows users keep an eye on it.
But there is no bloody paradise. What you win in one editor you loose it on the other.

IMO, the problem of Avid is that they have other softwares to sell. It's not interesting for them to do a 4K NLE like Edius with a really pro color correction because they have an app for that they wouldn't sell otherwise. But the pressure is there and maybe we could thank Apple just to put more pressure on the competition.

Same with Premiere. The problem is that they also sell AE.

Also, Avid works for big prods and TVs and their target are generally long-time experienced editors that are used to this sort of dinausors workflows and are very efficient and comfortable with that. They can extract the full potential of Media Composer in an high-end environement, they like its stability and features but the reality is that to really extract the full potential of Avid you'd need as much hours of training as you would invest in an Autodesk unit. (and quite frankly, I'd rather work on Smoke). Those in the end are heavy tools for specialists, not for generalists.

Cutting basic in Avid is rather easy but then it's only using 10% of the software. All the rest is not what I would call intuitive.

What's sure is that, words like intuitive, powerfull, fast, reasonably priced and pro in just one application will be the future. A sort of Smoke but without needing a PHD to master it.

What I really don't understand with Apple, is why they have get rid-off Color. I mean this color app had everything I could think about in a NLE for cheap and the Edius or Avid color tools don't come even close. That's really a pity.
You seems to like the color tools in #10, maybe they did a good job at keeping it simple without sacrifizing the efficiency. I've seen videos on the color tools, nice to have secondary CC inside and tools look great but it's the disposition I don't really like to have the tools in a windows like in AE and need to scroll all the time to reach the right tool. (it reminds me having to enter a dslr menu to access basic features). I would REALLY love an equivalent of Color in any NLE. All in one panel.

I don't know if you had a 6th sense intuition, a guardian angel, or whatever but I think you did very well in the end not to hurry and re-do all the motion workflow seeing the first ww hostiles reactions on FCPx. All the scene is moving fast and in the end keeping FCP7, waiting, no rush nor sirens songs may be a very good operation.

But what I don't get is this: FCPX can really edit native RED files? I can't reallysee what would be a R3D work with it.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2011, 06:09:27 PM by fredjeang » Logged
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #46 on: August 23, 2011, 12:21:02 AM »
ReplyReply

But what I don't get is this: FCPX can really edit native RED files? I can't reallysee what would be a R3D work with it.

No.... Cooter is transcoding to ProRes... yeah?  From what I've read FCPX doesn't even work with the R3D Proxies (QT Wrappers).  I still haven't settled my WorkFlow... waiting for Adobe to fix the Resolve roundtrip.  Need some time to explore all the NLE's but spent 14 hours shooting today, my beer is finished and it's time for bed!

cb
Logged
stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #47 on: August 23, 2011, 02:05:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, I'm finding FCPX great for my workflow. I think one of the secrets to getting the full benefit of its undoubted speed, is to memorise the shortcuts, at least those you use most. Unusually (I'm a lazy git usually) I took the trouble to learn them at the outset as I just had a feeling that this would turn out to be my main NLE.

Once you decide to work the way the thing is designed to, and stop trying to make it take a backward step to the bad old ways, then it gets a lot easier. Things just feel right with it. The precision editor thing is good, the color grading is really good, assembling a rough edit by sticking the selected bit of the selected clip on the end with a tap on E, or W to insert it at the playhead, couldn't be simpler or faster. I'm all for simple if the thing works.
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #48 on: August 23, 2011, 03:21:44 AM »
ReplyReply

You can't be eaten alive by this stuff or you'll go crazy.

At least not under deadlines.  I hear people all the time say something works for them, then you find they're doing 10 second videos, mos with music and there is nothing wrong with that, it's just not what happens in the paying world.

I was ordering a new editing system from _________ today and talking to the service rep, going over every detail, buying a new 12 core, di-vinci, cards, raids, monitors, etc. etc.

I had a lot of questions, like #1 how to speed up final cut pro 7 and what's next?  

I told him in the few hours I've had with X it's good, it seems like it could be amazing, but I don't know it that well and am worried about going to it on a deadline driven project.

He said their techs busted into X and it has everything in it that will eventually make it a "could" be  good system if Apple takes it further, but right now they don't believe it's there.

Further more no editing house has even thought about adopting it yet.  Not that they wont, but like me, they don't have the time to get into the middle of the project and find it won't do what they need.

Video is different than stills, way different, though client demands change like they do in stills.

Today I have a client that want's a video subtitled.  In FCP X it's fairly easy to import and XML file and just make subtitles and X won't accept subtitles.

The videos I'm cutting now are multiple windows and though X does  it, it doesn't allow you to see keyframes (at least I don't think so) though movement is easy, exact movement is kind of a guess.  Also with multiple windows I need slides and fades and exact keyframes that do what I want with precision and though X "may" do it, nobody I know knows it well enough to even offer instruction, much less dive into it and cut 10 kind of projects t find it works for everything.  Same thing with modifying transitions and a whole bunch of other little things that I'm not sure of.

IMO  I think Apple should have waited 8 months.  First no backward compatibility is just a crusher for a busy shop.  You just can't take multiple years of work and say ok, that's done now let's just go on to a new way.  Apple could have devised a way to open old files and since X is such a huge departure from 7 they could have made some kind of interface switch where everything worked like before and we could all slowly go to the new system as we had time, rather than just dive in and hope for the best.

It makes no sense for me to argue with a multi billion dollar company and obviously Apple is smart for their consumer brands, but my company is just as important to me as Apple's is to them, so today I'll keep running 7 and slowly move to X when it's ready.

Don't get me wrong X is damn ingenious and Apple might have the right way of doing this, but they aren't there yet and even if I'm missing something and they are the solution, they sure as heck have a strange way of showing it.

Let's be truthful, it's damn arrogant to not have any backwards compatibility.  Imagine photoshop if the next version would not accept Tiffs or PSD;s or make a jpeg.  Even if X is the best in the world, it's just basically a crappy way to treat your customers.

I might try AVID, though I know I won't to to premier.  Premier is just not that widely adopted so I can't lay off editing to freelancers when were overbooked and I don't have a lot of faith that Apple will keep running Premier as fast as X on their upcoming systems if they run it at all.  It wouldn't be the first time Apple and Adobe had a semi divorce.

And though I love photoshop, I've never been that wild about Premier even from the early days.

If you work for a living stability is more important than any feature.

On another thought I just received a note from our producer that the Epic's fans don't shut off all the way when recording like the RED Ones.  Someone that was shooting close-ups was just going crazy with the sound.

That's another case of not ready to be released and try to tell a client you can't shoot close-ups and dialog and see how well that goes over?

Maybe I'm just telling myself I'm glad I waited on the Epic and bought a second RED One, though I know once the bugs are worked out I might go that way, but who knows, by then Canon may be making a killer cam?

No you just have to keep working with what's tried and true and let someone else take the beta test hit.

IMO

BC




« Last Edit: August 23, 2011, 03:34:05 AM by bcooter » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #49 on: August 23, 2011, 04:49:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Still can't picture the Red workflow.

Ok, one transcode to Pro bloody Res to be able to edit in FCPX. Fine, no prob with one transcoding if the cherry on the cake is not having to leave the editor to delivery. But then what about re-link the files to originals once the editing and grading's done?

Or let's say you want to work with still images and export a Tiff sequence from RedCineX. Can FCPX import image sequences? Then export as well image sequences?

We are talking about the color correction tools but what about the sound capabilities in FCPX? Is it good enough that we don't have to edit in third party app for most of the cases, and then how FCPX would be able to re-import the sound?

What about capturing from devices?

Can we work multicam? Because that really speeds the editing.

Many many questions. Because to me the story is this: FCPX only makes senses if the speed-efficiency that we gain with it is not shaded by having to export again in third party app. Because that's basically what we have with the others apps and they are zillion times more featured. So really, if Apple has simplified a lot the editing, the logic is not having to leave this app unless for special fx, no transcoding etc...if one of those points are missing, the app is not ready.

If FCPX in #2 or 3 version becomes what we want, I wouldn't hesitate to re-invest in a Mac platform.
(unless the competition improve usability within the time)




« Last Edit: August 23, 2011, 04:57:00 AM by fredjeang » Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #50 on: August 23, 2011, 05:02:11 AM »
ReplyReply

You think of prorezz as a tiff you produce from lightroom or c-1 then eventually go to photoshop.

In other words you make it useable, a little flat, do your edit, media manage the final locked cut and then take the clips into di-vinci or whatever your color app is of choice and then color them, relink them in final cut 7 and your good to go.

It's not near as complicated as it sounds.

Anyway, I don't care about most of the export functions in X because actually FCP X has some very powerful color correction, tracking and selection tools that are easy to use.

I actually don't care about exporting in 4k.  Nobody is showing 4k, even most of hollywood productions and even if it becomes a 4k or 5k video world, it's gonna be some time until anybody can play it.

Look, in reality today Apple has kind of abandoned the pro user, (at least that's the overall opinion) but in reality they may eventually make it easier and an NLE that works in the real money paying world.  Maybe the future world, but Apple lives in the future.

Are videos we produce really going to only TV (though TV resolution is pretty easy), or they going to high rez mobile devices?

I'll bet on the mobile devices and HP's recent sale of their computer business and even some pundits think the major U.S. television networks won't even exist in 5 years makes sense that Apple's little buttons of send to utube or flakebook makes sense.

Who knows, all I know is I gotta a lot of work to do that's why I'm up at 5 am.

IMO

BC
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #51 on: August 23, 2011, 07:47:20 AM »
ReplyReply

mmm...I'm sceptical.

I generally agree with 99,99% of your views on this industry future and the mediums to anticipate but I think you're drawing a strange idea here. (although I can be wrong because I've been wrong many times).

I keep one of your statement in another thread that "clients ask for anything now". This is true.

In other words, let's say you have a perfume campaign of a good brand.

I don't see why they wouldn't ask for a cinema display plus a tv display plus adds in Youtube plus mobile and web interactive stuff, plus some stills extracted from the cameras?

If your original is 4 or more ks, you cover all those needs with the bonus to have an extremely good quality in large cine screens and top downsampled because in the end donwsampling from a larger files is always better.

IMO, I agree with the FCPX usability but I'm sure this will move to lots of Ks and not in ten years. So editing with more than 2K and in Raw is IMO going to be the based workflow in a few years.

I don't think Canon or Panasonic will miss the Raw party. If not the 5DMK3 it will be the 4 but it's virtually there.

Apple sort of anticipated the future but I think that for the moment, they cutted the apple in 2, one peice is missing there. It's like it's a first step but not yet there.

But I can be wrong.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2011, 08:01:28 AM by fredjeang » Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #52 on: August 23, 2011, 10:40:48 AM »
ReplyReply

As artists, content providers, image makers, whatever we're called today, whether we like it or not, we don't decide on the delivery device, we just respond.

Always have.   

After all what photographer ever decided that lithographic printing should be a 133 or 200 line screen, or tee vee should be 720x480 or 1920 x 1080?

We didn't, we don't and honestly nobody ever asks us, clients just explain what they want and usually the information is sketchy, but once again we respond.

Even back in the original still 1ds one days, clients would ask for large file sizes which were overkill and I'd just say my camera makes a 90mb file (it did if you moved that photoshop slider all the way up).  They'd say cool and life would go on.

When I moved to digital backs, at this point most clients were overwhelmed with file storage and started asking for smaller files.

Now it's more complex than ever.

This week I have either produced or viewed motion images in 600 pixel wide on a virgin america screen, 1920 x 1080 on my office led tv, 2700 or my computer desktop screens, 1920 on the powerbooks, whatever an ipad is, whatever an I phone is, whatever you tube is, whatever the wall street journal videos are, a 900 pixel high still movie poster at a new theatre, a 180 line screen printed in store poster and have sent out two double truck still ads, at 4,600 pixels across, one shot with the RED one with the Canon 5d still camera.

So my point is I'm not too sure it matters.  I know when we crop in on the RED files we go back to cine-x and reprocess out at 2k with the exact crop, or just sticking withe the original 2k file and enlarging it in the edior I can't see a 5% difference.    I've done this two dozen times and honestly as long as I don't crop more than 40% it looks the same.

I have one client that has this long list of video deliverables, that leaves off kps, most codecs but is adamant about having separate sound tracks.

Go figure.

I do know this . . . that by the time client's get off the 2k standard, we'll probably have motion cameras that shoot 10k, because if video cameras mirrors still camera development that's the way it will probably go.

Apple knows this also and they don't care about 100,000 RED users, they care about the 12 gazillion 5d2 and down users.  That's where the money is and you can't blame them.

The only thing I see changing is streaming video where the network can identify your connection speed and computer and send out the highest ( or lowest) quality possible.

With the heavy demand of bandwidth eating up the carriers, I assume the lowest.

I also know one other thing that as the economy continues to be more challanged, all clients want their message out in the most contained and viewable way possible and their beginning to view every surface as a form of media.

In fact all in-store would be led's today if the economy hadn't tanked. 

Don't think we won't see softdrink machines, petrol pumps, checkout stands, magazine racks, POS posters that upload a new video a day that moves, talks, dances or whatever and though the world may start to look like a mini time square, advertisers don't care as long as you look at the message.

http://creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2011/august/cool-sht-new-directions-in-advertising

What most clients don't care about is whether you edit and/or color in fcp 3,5,6,7 10, Avid, Edius, Premier or I-movie.

They just want what they want and it's up to you to decide how to make it happen.

IMO

BC
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #53 on: August 23, 2011, 11:22:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for this very interesting argumentation and perspective. Lots of keypoints in your post to take into consideration IMO.

We are lucky in Lu-La to have members who bring the debates to those levels and it truly help me to see clearer what really matters and what really does not that much and re-consider some of my beleifs if necessary.

Those days I'm happy because I have a lot of editings and I'm FINALLY (Haleluia) starting with practice, tries and sweating to have a workflow that works pretty well.

More I'm into movie, more I love it.

Time to do like Chris, have a beer, before the yoga clases. (I know I know...beer and yoga is not very logical)
« Last Edit: August 23, 2011, 11:25:39 AM by fredjeang » Logged
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #54 on: August 24, 2011, 12:17:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Having a beer as I catch up here after another 14 hour shooting day.  No.  Beer and Yoga don't mix.  I was getting heavy into Bikram for a while but it was seriously impeding my alcohol intake.  You've got to have priorities!

James, have you tried working with the Proxies in FCP7?  If you're moving into DaVinci you should try that workflow out.  It saves you an initial Transcode step, then DaVinci works with the Raw files and you render out ProRes for your finish.  Why bother making a Log looking ProRes when you can grade from Raw?  Especially saves time when you're pushing in.

I'm fried.  I know I'm gonna take December off but maybe I'll take most of October off too and just make some films for myself.

Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1902



« Reply #55 on: August 24, 2011, 12:50:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Time to do like Chris, have a beer, before the yoga clases. (I know I know...beer and yoga is not very logical)

Entirely and unequivocally logical dear Fred.
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #56 on: August 24, 2011, 07:06:01 AM »
ReplyReply

FCPX takes time to learn. If you don't learn any software you'll spend ten times longer doing what the old stuff did in a jiff. I remember my first meeting with Avid...(I'm beginning to sound like a promo for X so I'll stop after this one - sighs of relief all round). It does multiple tracks on the time line, keyframes are a doddle, as are PIP's, movement can be as precise as you want, modifying transitions is easy, etc, etc...once you know how to do these things. The color, exposure, saturation controls are a breath of fresh air IMHO.

My vids are quite a bit longer than ten seconds and before I started my current project I checked X could do all the fiddly bits I needed. It could, so I dived in and no regrets. I think if I tried to tame a totally new NLE during a big project I'd be tearing out what bit of hair I have left. And I know that any creative decisions would suffer too. Like BC, I'd also like to meet someone who really knows the program to cut short the learning process, but despite that - and despite a really crappy manual - I'm getting faster by the day.

I don't think Apple have abandoned the pro market. I do think they see pretty clearly the way our world is changing and I think X is another of their responses to that. I'd be willling to bet a couple of beers that this time next year there'll be quite a few converts.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #57 on: August 24, 2011, 08:52:30 AM »
ReplyReply

priorities? I want it all...
Logged
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #58 on: August 25, 2011, 11:23:52 AM »
ReplyReply

I used the Sony about 25% of the time and love the form factor, hate all the little buttons and find hitting color on the presets very difficult.  I spent one pre pro day working on the color presets and thought we had it nailed and then boom first session and it looked 100% different.

Cooter,

The AF100's presets aren't good either, & I spent a lot of time working out my own, but eventually settled on using Abel Cine Tech's, or variations of.

Not sure if you'd find them useful, but you might look at Abel's scene files for the FS100.

FS100 Scene Files from AbelCine
http://blog.abelcine.com/2011/07/25/fs100-scene-files-from-abelcine/

Best,
Bern
Logged
Bern Caughey
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 179



WWW
« Reply #59 on: August 25, 2011, 11:34:24 AM »
ReplyReply

In fact once you factor in having to remove the ACHVD (or whatever it's called) wrapper from the FCP files to get them to h264, the process out the h264 to prorezz and then...

Imagine you already know this too, but ClipWrap will transcode to ProRes, & avoid the Quicktime glitches.
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad