Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: RED WORKFLOW  (Read 11472 times)
fredjeang
Guest
« on: September 01, 2011, 02:45:38 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't know if you'd fancy that but, why not a thread exclusively on the Red workflow?

I think it could be good for practical reasons so we always know where to look for when Red is concerned.

Ps1: Even for people like me who do not own (yet) a Red camera, I have to deal with Red workflow in post, and Red is the future.

Ps2: True that we can look into RedUsers but I'm convinced that as it's growing fast, a special thread in Lu-La is not a bad thing either.

We could give it a try.

Cheers
« Last Edit: September 04, 2011, 04:19:04 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Robert Moore
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #1 on: September 01, 2011, 03:26:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Sounds very good to me....

I have been playing with REDCINE-X Pro today. Output to PP 5.5 for final grading. 4K 16x9 to 1920x1080 H264. Red Color 2 RedLogFilm Out of RCX Pro.

The following are very rough at present. Both R1 - first with 501 head...very poorly setup....second on Sachler.

Nikon 14-24 G lens no aperature control on this mount so it is at F22...diffraction at its best.

http://www.vimeo.com/28471072

Pentax 67 105 wide open.

http://www.vimeo.com/28461462

Both password protected : r1

I find the RCX Pro very fast intuitive and while I do not understand all of it yet it seems very workable.

Thoughts and suggestions welcomed.

Bob
Logged
Graeme Nattress
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 02, 2011, 08:26:42 AM »
ReplyReply

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?62838-REDCINE-X-Professional... New RCX-Pro available for testing. Enjoy.

Graeme
Logged

www.nattress.com - Plugins for Final Cut Pro and Color
www.red.com - Digital Cinema Cameras
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #3 on: September 02, 2011, 11:27:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Downloaded the 64bits yesterday before seeing that post. First impression is very positive except 1 crash when a pop-up windows asked me if I wanted automatized updates strangely quite some time after the first run. After that, all fine.
Definately more agile than the prev. Find the help somewhere complicated.
It's a beta version anyway so no complains.
« Last Edit: September 02, 2011, 11:30:16 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Graeme Nattress
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 582



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 02, 2011, 01:16:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Please report in the bugs you find on the appropriate forum - the team read and interact and really want to make this app as good as it can be.

Graeme
Logged

www.nattress.com - Plugins for Final Cut Pro and Color
www.red.com - Digital Cinema Cameras
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #5 on: September 04, 2011, 02:38:19 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been trying to work in image sequences workflow from R3D 3 minutes footage.

I've been using Photoshop and Nuke.

PS with a relatively simple script is way too long to render each frame. The interesting thing I discovered is that having PS rendering on backstage, didn't affect if I was doing a work on an NLE during and vice-versa. In other words, PS didn't render faster if you had no other software runnin during the process and it does not slowdown either the work on any NLE when it renders the scripts.

Nuke in that aspect is another planet and indeed that's the path to go with image sequences even for color correct and even if it's not its essence (Nuke or AE or Flame etc...). Jesus! you ingest any kind of image sequence in it with no res limitation and it just plays it like butter. Color correct, import LUT or whatever and the export is fast. Absolutly no comparaison with PS.

I find the workflow in IS very very good, the only downside being the HD space but HD are cheaper than ever.

Also...for the Avid's potential users, something that really pisses me off in Avid is the 2ish gb limit on sequence export with codec (yes you read well and Avid has all sort of "good" arguments on that aspect). But on images sequences there are no limits.

There is a huge difference in how you can play with colors and push to limits in Tiff compared to any video format I've been trying so far. It's not subtle, it's huge! (nothing compared to raw of course but closer)

Also, R3D converted to DNxHD 10bits is worsed (it's visible) than R3D converted to Canopus Lossless. The convertion in Avid is way too long so it's much wiser working with AMA. But Grass Valley is doing frankly a better job in converted workflow (Edius doesn't read native R3D so you have to convert anyway but to my eyes the Canopus codec works frankly better than the Avid's but it's not a scientific proof but a personal perception)

Don't know if some of you guys have already worked RED footage in image sequence but it seems to me that it's really the best quality and simply hassle free. (codec free if you wish)

I don't see why we should be kept on bondage with the fairy tale of transcoding-the-codecs (and the gamma fun cherry on the cake) when the HD space is available now for everyone.

In image sequence workflow, all the NLEs are ok but Avid's the worst. Premiere and Edius are very good indeed.


Quite frankly, why RED doesn't provide soon a RCX a little more featured in the editing aspect and no need anything else than that. A sort of reduced Smoke for RED. It's nearly there. Frustrating !
« Last Edit: September 04, 2011, 03:10:25 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Robert Moore
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #6 on: September 10, 2011, 06:36:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Graeme,

This one is for you....


In REDCINE-X Pro if I throw a number of clips onto the timeline and then Paste a Grade onto one of those...is it possible to Paste a Grade onto multiple clips but
maintain integrity for each clip...in other words seems like when I later select the third clip in a row (all of them Pasted) and change something it spills over to the
others.

My hope is that there is a way to apply RC2 and RLF with a preliminary grade to all the clips but adjust exposure curves and gamma individually without changing the grades of the others on the timeline. It is so slow to individually grade each clip and export it only to then coalesce all of them in Adobe PP.

Suggestions?

Thanks,

Bob
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #7 on: September 11, 2011, 04:43:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Graeme,

Another thought.

Since the RED is essentially the equivalent of still medium format platforms for motion cameras take a step back and look at the past with Hasselblad, Leaf and Phase.

Phase produced a software suite that would accept their cameras raw files along with most major dslr files.

Hasselblad somewhat has added that function, Leaf never did though now can run through Phase's C-1.

How important is this?

Well, even though we use Red Cine X and the Red rocket to produce one light dailies, it is the first line of showing a client close to what their going to get in the final.

Cine X is also fast (with the Rocket) and fairly easy software to learn, though it still has a few bugs, I assume it will become more full featured as time goes on.

Now if we could add other maker's pre cooked h264 files into Cine-x it would go along way to match the initial grading of the one lights.

Even with two RED's we have never shot a project that didn't have some smaller camera footage, either a Canon or the Sony fs100.

Having the ability to stay in one software suite and closer match the RED raw to the other footage is a huge time saver and just like with C-1, I'd be more than happy to pay for that added function.

Just a thought but from someone that shoots a lot of footage I know it would save us a lot of time and relearning if you added this.

It would also open up cine-x as a profit center and get new potential customers up to speed on your software so when they do upgrade to a RED camera, they'll be ready.

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: September 11, 2011, 04:45:04 AM by bcooter » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 11, 2011, 05:54:05 AM »
ReplyReply

"profit centre" - I bet Phase has made more from C1 than backs!

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #9 on: September 11, 2011, 05:58:56 AM »
ReplyReply


...Having the ability to stay in one software suite and closer match the RED raw to the other footage is a huge time saver and just like with C-1, I'd be more than happy to pay for that added function.

Just a thought but from someone that shoots a lot of footage I know it would save us a lot of time and relearning if you added this.

It would also open up cine-x as a profit center and get new potential customers up to speed on your software so when they do upgrade to a RED camera, they'll be ready.

IMO

BC


My thoughts exactly.
I was thinking about that those days.

In fact I pretty much like RCX, although it is still a kind of "free facility" but the enveloppe is good and it's not far and a bit frustrating in its current limitations.

Also, (for Graeme), think that not only the Red owners are interested in a RCX like Cooter describes; people like me who don't own (yet and triple yet) a Red camera but yes might have to edit with Red raw material, mixed with other formats etc...

I'd be ready to pay money for a more advance RCX that would allow to by-pass manipulations and also a more advanced editing timeline would be very welcome.

As an example, if I import via AMA R3D and grade in Avid MC, I can grade RAW BUT (and that's where the irony is), I can not output my corrections back into RCX, even through XML. This has been discussed with Chris Sanderson before here. The idea is not going nowhere except staying in RCX.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2011, 06:07:17 AM by fredjeang » Logged
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #10 on: September 11, 2011, 09:46:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Someone asked about this on RedUser.  Jannard's response was along the lines of...  if you want a great software to work with video from other camera manufacturers, ask those manufacturers to write it.  RedCine-X and now RCX Pro are free.  I don't think JJ cares about "profit centers" and has no desire to deal with the headache of integrating other manufacturers codecs into the RCX code.  So... I kinda doubt this will ever happen.

Storm would have been a great solution for this as they were going to do exactly what you asked for, but The Foundry announced they were gonna EOL that software right after RCX Pro was released.

Drag.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #11 on: September 11, 2011, 10:55:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, too bad. The Foundry is a great company and their softwares are top. On their official communication they also warned us to keep an eyes on secret newcoming product based on Storm. It was Hiero.
Well, to be watched with great interest. That is something that I will follow step by step because coupled with Nuke it's going to be very powerfull and on the line of the new workflow generation.

http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/products/hiero/


nota: the Mac version will be available this automn  before the Windows one.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2011, 04:26:18 AM by fredjeang » Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #12 on: September 12, 2011, 05:05:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Storm made no sense to me as it was just another learning curve to do mostly what Cine-X did.

Had Storm taken other forms of footage and the ability to analyze a scene and give a basic match to something like a RED and a 5d2 then it would make sense, but it didn't, so I see the reason they killed it.

I'm not going to give Mr. Jannard any business tips because he owns his own island, his own camera company and I don't, though I don't necessarily agree with all his decisions.  

I know in my business I've found the more solutions I can offer a client, in the most effecient way, the more it is appreciated.

Then again I don't spend much time (if any) on the RED forums because it's a lot of fanboy and rah rah and a lot of the good information gets buried so finding it takes time.

There are other software suites that will essentially work all formats, we've even added Di-Vinici, but it's another learning curve and another expense and with this added move to motion another learning curve and another expense really isn't something to look forward to.

I much rather put our resources to new content rather than learning why there are primary and secondary color corrections.

I'm not an equipment junkie, I'm brand agnostic, but I am intent on using what works best for what we're producing.   I only use the RED's because I think they make the prettiest footage.  Period.  I use the Canons and Sony's because they do some things the RED's just can't do, like fast setup, semi to full autofocus and ease of mounting and transport.

Given that, it just shouldn't be that complicated to color and do some basic effects on footage.

I think we're in the early stages of digital cinema/motion/video/interactive/mobile/whatever comes next and like the transition in stills from film to digital it takes a while for workflow's to become standard and it all depends on the project, the budget, (I guess it's always the budget.)

RED is in the old film workflow (the digital equivalent) of  One light dailies, then three light for intermediate, then editing, then color grading, effecting, more editing and output, with all of those functions coming in separate steps and workstations.

Maybe that's where I see the potential of FCP X.  When I use it, I get the idea that as apps are added, it can be a one stop software suite when everything is done in place.

The only thing that concerns me about FCP X is how quickly the professional market adopts it.  If like most editors I know just diss it without diving deep and learning what it is . . . what it will be, I'm afraid apple will lose interest in developing it further.

On the other hand, if apple and third party developers quickly go all out to build affordable plug ins, or apps, then the thought of 7, or even three software suites to get to final may be a thing of the past.

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: September 12, 2011, 05:29:30 AM by bcooter » Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #13 on: September 12, 2011, 05:53:01 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't think Apple will loose interest in developping FCPx. On the contrary.

I beleive (or I hope so) that major software players are aware that the classic workflow has to die and fast all-in-one solutions is the path.


The thing is that look at our profession itself. I think nobody can deny that we have to do more, in less time and with less costs.
This reality in a traditional workflow is not bearable. Something has to change to make it profitable if not, what will happen is that all an industry will be amateurized except a few niches.

It's almost impossible to cover the current needs with the "old way" and growing economically. The equation simply doesn't work any more.

I'm swiming (sometimes painfully) in Avid's waters and I can recognised how powerfull it is or whatever, but...20, 30 years old experienced men are currently cuying in the unemployment offices. Highly skilled editors, colorists are on the street and they break prices because they need to eat. It's like suddenly a nuclear engineer is ready to work as an electricist so the electricists have no chance to get a job because there are overkill people ready to do the same job for the same money.

Time is over where somebody learned during long years expensive and complicated softwares and get a job well paid with good conditions because of that knowledge-skills. Now the conditions are doing more, in 10 time less and paied also 1/10...if not, Avid TV guys unemployed are going to do it anyway. Craftmen style is over.

Nobody is preapared to learn Avid or Smoke during a year or so and in the end get a badly paid job and some deadlines Avid or any "old fashioned" software hardly can cover. I'm actually stopping my learning on "heavy" softwares and wait and watch with interest the evolution. The old way leads nowhere and certainly not getting paid and get a good job or build a competitive studio. There is no middle term anymore. Or you're on the very top or you have to be different.

To make that bearable and profitable, we have to gain something on softwares. If we have more volume and less time but softwares that allow us to do the job 10 time faster with no hassles, then that's another story and we can work and make money. The old way is not possible anymore for much more time.

I beleive that the future is in FCPx kind of softwares but in a more mature version. I'm sure the new generation is not preapared to deal with the old way hassles. Are you going to tell a young guy "look, you'll be learning high-end softwares during long years, you'll need fairly good skills in maths and art and when you'll be ready we'll put you with 10 people in a 20m2 room and your salary will be 1000 bucks a month for 9 hours declared 4 because it's too expensive"...if the person is minimaly healphy his only answer will be: "F...K you!". My house keeper earn more than that without studdies.

I'm in between both generation and already the simple fact to read a user's manual is putting me on nerves and that's not the way to do but pro training within the industry. On your own with Pablo, Smoke or Avid you go crazy, it's like learning to fly with a flight simulator. You want to take-off one day and you crash...surprise. Avid, being the most "classical+heavy+powerfull+anti-intuitive" NLE (even being the most featured) is driving me nuts because it's designed for another time that doesn't exists anymore except for the very big structures like the BBC etc...(and they fire people every week), and not for a long time anymore because ads are going elsewhere.

I'm absolutly tired of going from a software to another, export. reimport, make sure that was ok and if not it's a lot of time involved. Yet another software and another learning curve and all that just for grading? for keying? for breathing?...this is not serious indeed. This workflow is thought for big structures with many high skilled people involved, well paied, trade-unioned etc...I'm afraid people who don't want to see that this is disappearing are going to have a hard awakening.

We need speed, power, low-cost and intuitive softwares now in an all-in-one solution. Small crew.



This is pirat world, not wonderland, not the 60's... and to survive and grow on that mess we have to be very fast, adaptable, creatives, and we need pirat tools. Not tools created to destroy an all fleet with heavy cruise battle ships that hardly can manouver and requires 10000 people just to bloody switch-on the engines. (sorry for the military analogy). The current workflow is absurd!
 
« Last Edit: September 12, 2011, 11:17:53 AM by fredjeang » Logged
stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #14 on: September 12, 2011, 11:31:28 AM »
ReplyReply

"The current workflow is absurd!" - Fred

"Maybe that's where I see the potential of FCP X.  When I use it, I get the idea that as apps are added, it can be a one stop software suite when everything is done in place." - BC


Totally agree, guys. That's what I see in FCPX and why I'm keeping at it. Each week I hear of another experienced FCP user putting it on his system, learning it at leisure while earning his keep on FCP.

Like i said (moaned) earlier, it's just bloody hard work learning two or three new incredibly complex programs. I can edit, grade and export just fine from FCPX, so why should I go to the expense/effort of Resolve, et al? Ok, I have bought Motion (bought? seems almost free considering what it can do) and sometimes a clip will make the round trip from FCPX to M for f/x then back to the X timeline, but not often. And I might just "splash out" on Compressor for some easy extra output options but that'll be it.

When the missing bits are bolted on to FCPX, and when a few plug-ins are available, it will be all most people need. IMHO. Don't think this was OT but sorry if it was...
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #15 on: September 12, 2011, 12:26:33 PM »
ReplyReply

List of christmast for RED deciders. (after all we can dream)

Graeme take a pen and a paper please:

-a 4000 euros 4-5K RedOne light model with a gifted metal adapter for m4/3 or Sony mount could it be?.

-a RCXpro2 with advanced timeline, an equivalent of Avid's AMA, and with a DaVinci colooor correct engine and Nuke's compositing for 200, no, 250 euros.

-a free tea-shirt or chair director for each buyers with our name graved.

-10% discount on Red accesories for the Lu-La's members.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2011, 12:32:25 PM by fredjeang » Logged
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #16 on: September 12, 2011, 02:10:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Forget Christmas!  My birthday is next week and I've got a number of fun things coming from the Red Store  Wink
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #17 on: September 12, 2011, 03:23:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Forget Christmas!  My birthday is next week and I've got a number of fun things coming from the Red Store  Wink

Good idea! I'm Libra, my birthday is soon too.
Logged
ChristopherBarrett
Guest
« Reply #18 on: September 13, 2011, 09:25:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Adobe just released Premier 5.5.1.  Roundtripping to Resolve is now ON via the FCP XTML edl's.  The raw footage gets dropped into Premier, sliced and diced, transitions, titles, multiple tracks.  Imports flawlessly into Resolve for fast, powerful grades that include power windows with tracking, noise reduction, repositions and image stabilization.  Exports back out to Premier rendering at full res or anywhere below and finish there with effects and audio intact.

My workflow is finally locked down.  No transcodes, no rendering in the timeline, Full Rez realtime playback and editing on the 12 core.  It doesn't even matter if you have to work with FCP editors now, with the XTML export.

Adobe totally just made my day.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #19 on: September 13, 2011, 10:23:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Let me see if I got it.

- You shoot RED 4k and you create a 4K project in Adobe and import the R3D natively and edit directly.
(what about the case you have to mix footage and work in a 2K project? do you have to use then RCXpro? or Adobe does the job according to the res like Avid does)

- then what I don't get is why do you need the FCP edl's from Adobe? Do you need actually to have FCP open, export from Adobe an EDL that you have to import in FCP and from here to Resolve?
(because that was the old way editors where doing, they had to enter FCP from Adobe to then from FCP enter in Resolve...true, without rendering anything).

I can't picture what is the gain on that workflow.  Shocked

 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad