Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Resolve  (Read 27141 times)
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 12, 2013, 07:51:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Baselight looks very cool, but expensive.

Resolve + FCPX looks like my future with the BM cameras.

Too much software. Too little time.

Michael

I think Resolve is been given away for very sensible reasons - like I was given Photoshop 2 with my Nikon Coolscan in '95 - it will IMO establish it as a defacto program as all the kids will learn it


S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1207


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 12, 2013, 03:30:14 PM »
ReplyReply

I think Resolve is been given away for very sensible reasons - like I was given Photoshop 2 with my Nikon Coolscan in '95 - it will IMO establish it as a defacto program as all the kids will learn it


S

Not to paint with a broad brush, but . . .

I really think all the kids will be learning how to do video effects and looks on an Ipad, or even a phone.

They don't have a huge interest in the higher end aspects of perfect video technical reproduction as 99.9999999999999% of what they produce will be on something that looks like an instigram feed or tumblr.

To them it's ALL social media.

The thing about social media is, most metrics I've seen is the viewers don't view social media like we viewed traditional media in advertising. 

In other words it's more important that a friend likes a Ford rather than seeing a Ford advertisement.

IMO

BC
Logged

Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 13, 2013, 02:45:57 AM »
ReplyReply

Kids - I mean Sub 30s working in the industry.

BTW everyone I know uses FCP7!

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1207


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #23 on: August 13, 2013, 11:56:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Kids - I mean Sub 30s working in the industry.

BTW everyone I know uses FCP7!

S

Once again, I can't paint every generation with a broad brush, it isn't fair, though the 25 somethings that work with us, work in Apps, not applications and there favorite medium of choice is tumblr or looks like tumblr.  

Their process for making imagery has changed and with it our industry.  

We get specific projects, but not always specific media runs, i.e. traditional commercial, or traditional print ad or even web display.  If the project is a hit i's all of the above and more, if it's not well who knows.

Speed is the issue today, not just perfect broadcast quality.

Even today with a Savvy client explain why a motion and still projects takes 6 steps in post production, (minimum) and doesn't happen in 6 hours and their eyes just glass over, because they've been told they need it now and yes with social media and web, they do need it now.

I would love to see a dedicated machine, portable like a laptop with an attached I pad that ran apps, had fast processing, ingested of standard media (wouldn't standard media bee great?) and could be colored and effected in the edit, rather than separate suites.

It's not that the 25 year olds are calling the shots (they're not) but they are use to a process that is minimal and fast.  Though the thing is it must be fast and good.  

They got iPad fast down...but good is the next step.

Yes FCP 7 is still the choice for most short form.  I know lately with our work load I've spoken to at least half a dozen post houses form LA, to London and that's still the system.

IMO

BC

BTW:  I mentioned before but with the new I-macs I've gotten editing speed down to real time.  Setting in 8 bit rgb for edit (not output) last night did 6 40 minutes rough edits with a time code generator and color correction in the edl and the viewing rendering was under 3 seconds.  

Now the issue is output in 2k pro rezz was 15 minutes an edit, but when working fcp 7 can still be fast.

« Last Edit: August 13, 2013, 02:20:10 PM by bcooter » Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #24 on: August 14, 2013, 04:08:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Everybody talks and wants faster and intuitive
Workflows and everybody's spends more
Time than ever looking for oscurs turnarrounds

That's the reality.

Mentalities, needs, practises are changing
But the engineering is still an evolution
Of the past except for the pricing.
What costed 10000 yesterday costs 1000
Or is gifted today. That's all.
In terms of standardization we are at the same
Point as 10 years ago: the wild west.
In terms of cameras: nothinh works out of factory
Without the addition of a myriad of accessories
And peripherical costs.
In terms of softwares: not just one all-in-one
Solution that is well priced and intuitive that
Covers the basic tasks of the production but a big puzzle.

Go in the Cow, open the day's boards of your
Favorite brands and look at the title threads.
I mean: issues, issues and more issues.
This stuff is NOT working as it should but a huge mess.

The tragedy is that zillion of hours are
Currently spent in the internet ww to fix
Things that shouldn't have to be fixed.
The mess is such that a new and lucrative
Profession has became the key point: the
Dits educators. People in charge to answer
To the professional's endless issues and
Provide solutions on line or in conferences.
It's a bit like you buy a Car, but you need the
Mechanic with you all the time.
A car by the way, that comes without the weels,
Without the gear, with one seat, with half of
The engine...normal no? As there are the
Third-party manufacturers in charge of the
Missing parts...

And beleive it or not, but I noticed that those
Technic issues are actually addictive. People
Ask for more because in a way it keeps the
Buzz alive and gives the sensation that it's
Cutting edge.
Keeping people on bondage in internet because
They have no other choice is a very very clever
Strategy...
« Last Edit: August 14, 2013, 04:22:24 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1207


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #25 on: August 17, 2013, 03:10:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Everybody talks and wants faster and intuitive
Workflows and everybody's spends more
Time than ever looking for oscurs turnarrounds

That's the reality.

Mentalities, needs, practises are changing
But the engineering is still an evolution

snip.



What we need more than anything, other than a simplified colour suite, is the ability to make the image on the lcd match the image in a computer.

It just fractures me to see a beautiful lcd image, put it into a calibrated, or non calibrated monitor and see it 2/3s of a stop under.

IMO

BC

P.S. by simplified, I don't mean less options, just a more intuitive system. 
Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #26 on: August 17, 2013, 04:31:52 AM »
ReplyReply


What we need more than anything, other than a simplified colour suite, is the ability to make the image on the lcd match the image in a computer.

It just fractures me to see a beautiful lcd image, put it into a calibrated, or non calibrated monitor and see it 2/3s of a stop under.

IMO

BC

P.S. by simplified, I don't mean less options, just a more intuitive system.  

And equipment that are not obsolete the day we buy them... ]
In fact, the wish and need list that aren't fullfilled
Is like dark energy: it bloody grows with time,
And the cameras and post tools we would all like
To see is like dark mater: invisible.

Look at those nodes in Resolve. Not only they look
As nice as a Birkinstock pair of shoes on a Botero
Statue,  but if I understand the
Why in Nuke, I don't get the point in an app like Resolve.

Take the GH line. They will improve AF accuracy for sure
Year after year. That's the good news. But then, how will
They build the system will define if one's lenses invertion
Will have to end on the studio's garbage or not.
So not only the cameras are obsolete but the lenses too.
They are not even able to make a standart battery within
The same line...each new version comes with it's brand
New battery model. Look at what happened to the
Excellent Olympus pro lenses of the recent past. Nobody
Wants those any more and they are really top. But they
Don't AF well.
It sort of break my heart to put 3000 on the table knowing
That it's already for the garbage in a few months.  

Red and Arri are more rock solid invertions and made
To last more than a year or 2. But where the really
Inovations take place are in the hand of the big companies
And unlike Red or Arri, they produce massively and
Have other goal in mind than a stable equipment
For the pro but consummer products that eventually
Will be used in professional productions but obsolete
The day they are available in the market.
7It's funny to see how Pana implemented the codec in the
GH3, just as good to tempt the hackers crowd, but just
As bad to not tempt the P users...

I bet anything to anybody that Cinema DNG will not
Become a standart in practise when Raw video will be
The norm but each brand will provide it's own system
That of course no NLE will be able to read and we will
End with a myriad of RCX kind of softwares just to
Bloody handle the footage. It's gona be really fun,
And of course...faster than ever.

Have you seen the prices of broadcast monitors?
You won't tell me that inside the box there is such
A cutting edge tech that can justify it but only because
Broadcast have unlimited budgets. For the independant
And tiny houses it's all DIY.
 
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 05:08:51 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #27 on: August 17, 2013, 05:10:15 AM »
ReplyReply

Moaning!

You can buy gear in another way.

I have an investment in peripherals- 20+ nikon lenses (some have been in use since my first employment in 1993, many since 1996), $3k of Vlock batteries, DP6 monitor, tripod and the like.

I buy cameras that fit this lot and skip them if they don't - I hold the keys to my own wallet.

(this took some time to learn!)

Sure something like my NEX5n or GoPro may become junk but something more expensive - if if doesnt match my other investment I wont buy it. One reason I did not buy Scarlet was the need for a Red monitor, bloody annoying if you have 3 SmallHD and a Transvideo.

It happens that the F5 works with Vlock, SmallHd, Nikon and all my Rails/Rods - thats why its more on my radar than Red or BMC which take more fixes, special leads etc to fit my current investment.

As for Raw and Post..

Resolve works with Red, Arri, BMC, ProRes (so all DSLR/FS100/700 C300 etc), F5, F55, F65  Raw(I think?)

I think you will not see one rawconverter per camera - it will become like LR or C1 where a new cam gets integrated in a few months..

S
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 05:13:01 AM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #28 on: August 17, 2013, 07:51:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Morgan,

Do you think it's normal that there's no DCP creation in Avid when this is the standart in cine prod? DCP by the way that a bunch of programmers
have created under open software...and examples like that abunds in post engineering.
Or what about resolution dependance? Or what about external softwares like Squeeze to read-writte (and have to be constantly upgraded of course)
because the core, the editing softwares don't handle natively most of the gazillion of unstandardized codecs.

Not having ND integrated filters, needing Resolve for a yes or a no because nothing reads nothing except this, nothing does secondaries CC well
in editor etc etc...
I mean the lack of ND in most cameras is simply amazing.
The need of Resolve for dailies is amazing.

And talking about rigging: do you think it's normal to have a plate that is in fact a peice of metal with a bunch of holes that cost 200 bucks just to be able
to fix the myriad of accessories required? A decent magic arm with a decent clamp is incredibly expensive considering the materials and engineering involved.
This is a very very lucrative market. Zacuto knows this well.


Do you think it's normal that we still get quite a lot of middle priced cameras that shoots in 8 bits !!! When it's not compression artifacts orgy, it's the need of matteboxes,
follow focus (good ones are really expensive...what's involved in it? nothing). Needs
of external recorders, of V-lock that are great but they are big and they weight. Cablery, clamps, rods, in the end all that looks like a bad WW2 german experimental design.

How many long hours did it take you to get it right with the conflictive color balance of the Sony? You had to run a lot of testings didn't you?
How many differents hacks I had to test before I falled on one that handles quite well the GH2 downsides and minimize best the bleeding? a lot !

Get prores? fantastic, it does not write on peecees !!!
Cinema DNG? Brilliant, just resolve reads the "standart" or some still softwares that aren't made for motion requierements.
I don't get the point why some people developp things like Scratch or Baselight, if in the end we'll all be on bondage with Resolve.
 
Of course it's possible to get in the end a system that fits one's needs. Lot's of trys and errors, lots of money, lots of internet researches, lots of hours
and lots of fragmentated equipment and workflows.

But something small and powerfull that works right out of factory without crazy aditional costs does not exists. And same in softwares.






« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 08:09:08 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #29 on: August 17, 2013, 08:36:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Of course you are right too.

Its saturday and Im trying to isolate a high frequency hum on my audio - leads leads leads

This is interesting(ish) https://vimeo.com/72344423

A decent camera is missing (or not being the F5/55)

As for workflow Im doing OK with FCP7/R9 but it could not handle a lot of client input

On the topic - I actually like working in Resolve almost better than Photoshop/C1 now

S
Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1207


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #30 on: August 17, 2013, 02:02:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Of course you are right too.

Its saturday and Im trying to isolate a high frequency hum on my audio - leads leads leads

This is interesting(ish) https://vimeo.com/72344423

A decent camera is missing (or not being the F5/55)

As for workflow Im doing OK with FCP7/R9 but it could not handle a lot of client input

On the topic - I actually like working in Resolve almost better than Photoshop/C1 now

S



Motion is frightening compared to stills.   It's not just the image quality, then it's the movement, shakiness, a bump, a hum in sound or a dropped frame.

I agree with Fred2 but there is not much we can do about the movement of cameras in the electronic world.

The upside is few of us could every afford anything that looked cinematic in the film world, unless we found old Maxwell's or Arri's and went shot film ends.

I mean most digital cameras on the lower end look like digital video, but some look good, IMO the GH3, some look bloody great IMO the RED 1, but none of them come without a price, or without a new learning curve.

In the past a cinematographer could go from a beaulieu to a arri and not blink.  Today it's truly a week of learning a menu and what not to touch.

But let's face it guys we're doing more than ever.   In the past no editor would color, no camera operator would direct, no director would edit, except for a few exceptions.

And in the past few cinematographers owned any real cameras.  Today few own an Epic or a Arri or even an F5, but they can probably afford one of those.

What I would like to know is why the equation changed in cameras, still and motion.

In the film days they built a film camera to last 10 years minimum and obviously most camera companies did well enough to stay in business, without having to obsolete your camera every 18 months.

Maybe they made it off lenses, or an extra body or a prism.  Today so many of the traditional cameras are gone and digital equipment at almost any level get's semi replaced every 2 years.

Why the change . . . and don't say the iphone or ipad because digital cameras went on the 18 month to 2 year cycle long before everybody had a smart phone in their pants.

____________________________

Morgan,

I guess this flies in the face of what I just said and Fred won't like it, but if you want to speed FCP 7 up to the point that clients don't leave the room, look at a new Imac.  For 3k you can fly and yes its thunderbolt and yes you might need to add a Sonnet pci expasion box, but you can grade and cut in close to real time.

Yesterday we were running two stations.  One 8 core maxed out desktop with a RED rocket card grading and transcoding out 4k to 2k footage.  It was running in real time.

On the second station the new Imac with h264.  My process is to put the H264 into FCP 7, drop in apples 3 way color corrector do a few base primary adjustments and burn it out in prorezz 422.   Other than doing it in fcp 7 which is on a per clip basis (if you want to hold onto file naming integrity, the actual process of the corrected h264 to prorezz was faster than the rocket.

Since I just got the imac I haven't tried it with Apple color, but I'm betting it's as fast if not faster than a dedicated machine with dedicated render cards. 

Anyway in editing fcp7 on the imac, if you have prorezz and your working a complex edit, if you put your sequence settings to rgb for editing, regardless of transitions, filters, etc. you can almost work in real time.

A 4 minutes edit will render for viewing in about 2 seconds to under a minute.  It doesn't handle the same as 64 bit edls but it's fast and since you know fcp 7 well, it's faster than the new learning curve.

Downside is  . . . well we all know fcp 7 is toast and how long Apple "allows" it to work in their operating system is up to them.  Second downside is for some reason FCP 7 will go on a crash spree.

When it happens the only solution is to turn the machine off, then on and with the combined solid state and spinnng drive apps start up in moments.  I think my crashing is coming from Ram as max ram was ordered but not delivered . . . yet.


IMO

BC






Logged

Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2221


WWW
« Reply #31 on: August 17, 2013, 02:56:18 PM »
ReplyReply

The pace of change of camera - dont you feel you have been there before..stills - in fact being on the bleeding edge (MFDB 2005) was what brought me to this board.

I had
FM2n/F4/Mamiya ProTL - used for many years then went into a costly digital hell..

Nikon D1 - crop sensor files too small for glossy
Kodak Digiback - crop sensor no wides, crap AF
Skipped Nikon D2 - files too small for glossy
Kodak SLRn - fullframe + moiree + too slow flash synch + crap high ISO
Hassy H1 - crap AF, too low ISO - poor support from Sinar/Hassy - tiny companies, constant firmwares and fixes options to upgrade to a new sensor (sound familiar?)

.. and then I got a Nikon D3 - which basically had no problems and shot a pretty file out of the box - I still use after five years (although I just got a D600 as the 24mp is a bit better for interiors with corrected verticals)

Canon reflected the nikon curve but were a bit ahead.

So I went through a bunch of digital stills crap and then got to a good place with my stills cams.

The same is ladder is true with video but we are still one step from that good place (or may be there with the F5/55 - subject to tests - Sony now have not given me a demo for more than a month)

---

iMac? - I have a 2012 27inch (is that modern?), seems good to me but I dont do 4k, and it is 'portable'. Solid with FCP and resolve.

S








« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 03:02:23 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

Sam Morgan Moore Cornwall
www.sammorganmoore.com -photography
fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #32 on: August 17, 2013, 06:54:04 PM »
ReplyReply


Motion is frightening compared to stills.   It's not just the image quality, then it's the movement, shakiness, a bump, a hum in sound or a dropped frame.

I agree with Fred2 but there is not much we can do about the movement of cameras in the electronic world.

The upside is few of us could every afford anything that looked cinematic in the film world, unless we found old Maxwell's or Arri's and went shot film ends.

I mean most digital cameras on the lower end look like digital video, but some look good, IMO the GH3, some look bloody great IMO the RED 1, but none of them come without a price, or without a new learning curve.

In the past a cinematographer could go from a beaulieu to a arri and not blink.  Today it's truly a week of learning a menu and what not to touch.

But let's face it guys we're doing more than ever.   In the past no editor would color, no camera operator would direct, no director would edit, except for a few exceptions.

And in the past few cinematographers owned any real cameras.  Today few own an Epic or a Arri or even an F5, but they can probably afford one of those.

What I would like to know is why the equation changed in cameras, still and motion.

In the film days they built a film camera to last 10 years minimum and obviously most camera companies did well enough to stay in business, without having to obsolete your camera every 18 months.

Maybe they made it off lenses, or an extra body or a prism.  Today so many of the traditional cameras are gone and digital equipment at almost any level get's semi replaced every 2 years.

Why the change . . . and don't say the iphone or ipad because digital cameras went on the 18 month to 2 year cycle long before everybody had a smart phone in their pants.


Completly agree !!



and Fred won't like it, ...

Mac does great stuff. No doubt.
What I really don't get is their oscurantism on their coming products.
What I really don't like is their protective mentality on Prores and the way they implemented QT.
and the way they can just burn the land behind them and leave thousands of users and fans in a very embarrassing situation.
Then, Peecees aren't the garbage they used to be any more and really now a more than serious competitors for the ones
who need real power and flexibility.
But...I think that the New Macs are far from being a bad option. On the opposite, I do think that they could indeed be
a very hassle-free solution for a specific kind of users, and even (not kidding) with FCPX as the core.
I haven't decided yet if I upgrade my studio with heavy PC artillery or if I choose to go the Mac route. Both have their strengh and wicknesses.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2013, 06:57:30 PM by fredjeang2 » Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1207


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #33 on: August 19, 2013, 09:37:35 AM »
ReplyReply


What I really don't get is their oscurantism on their coming products.
What I really don't like is their protective mentality on Prores and the way they implemented QT.

I have decided in the digital motion world, from cable, broadcast and web, there is no real standard and everyone is holding on to their own territory.

Try to send a FCP edit to Avid, or an Avid edit to fcp.  Try to round trip from any color suite, except adobe's cloud system and even then it's multiple parts.

Nobody is talking, nobody is sharing and honestly nobody is winning and Apple is the worst culprit.

Call 3 houses, effects, editorial, grading, and ask how they want a file prepped?   You'll get 6 answers.   

Then try working with multiple cameras, 4k, 2k raw and h264 and find a solution and a standard from pc to mac.

It won't happen and it's crazy.  It's like a PC runs a .TIF and a Mac runs a .tif and neither one will match.

Or in the print world if you send a file out for printing, it would need it's own complete naming structure different than your system provides.

Or better yet, if you wanted to process and retouch a file you'd have to round trip back and forth from lightroom to photoshop to get close.

Somehow, the makers have either outfoxed themselves or just can't get together for a single standard in delivery.

With stills changing a few dozen files isn't hard, but not pleasant, but with motion changing 200 clips and getting them prepped for web view and for editorial for first look is virtually impossible without a team.

Teams are fine, but client's don't want to pay for teams anymore.  They expect the editor to color, the colorists to effect.

IMO

BC
Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #34 on: August 19, 2013, 03:49:29 PM »
ReplyReply

I have decided in the digital motion world, from cable, broadcast and web, there is no real standard and everyone is holding on to their own territory.

Try to send a FCP edit to Avid, or an Avid edit to fcp.  Try to round trip from any color suite, except adobe's cloud system and even then it's multiple parts.

Nobody is talking, nobody is sharing and honestly nobody is winning and Apple is the worst culprit.

Call 3 houses, effects, editorial, grading, and ask how they want a file prepped?   You'll get 6 answers.   

Then try working with multiple cameras, 4k, 2k raw and h264 and find a solution and a standard from pc to mac.

It won't happen and it's crazy.  It's like a PC runs a .TIF and a Mac runs a .tif and neither one will match.

Or in the print world if you send a file out for printing, it would need it's own complete naming structure different than your system provides.

Or better yet, if you wanted to process and retouch a file you'd have to round trip back and forth from lightroom to photoshop to get close.

Somehow, the makers have either outfoxed themselves or just can't get together for a single standard in delivery.

With stills changing a few dozen files isn't hard, but not pleasant, but with motion changing 200 clips and getting them prepped for web view and for editorial for first look is virtually impossible without a team.

Teams are fine, but client's don't want to pay for teams anymore.  They expect the editor to color, the colorists to effect.

IMO

BC

James, you read my mind.

In the end, despite this holy mess, it works
Because we make it works, at high costs
But it could be so much simple.
Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1207


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #35 on: August 20, 2013, 12:31:24 AM »
ReplyReply

James, you read my mind.

In the end, despite this holy mess, it works
Because we make it works, at high costs
But it could be so much simple.


The thing is, technique is getting in the way of inspiration.  

Today I shot almost entirely on the RED's with very little Gh3 footage.  Why?   Because RED has a system for first light dailies that works reliably and fast, the h264 to pro rez to some form of color, to output then knock down to h264 galleries, back to edit, takes four softwares and a huge volume of handwork.

Today I bid a edit and in the bid the prep work is higher than the edit, because .............drum roll please.............it takes 4 times the effort and time.

Now that's not what the tapeless era was suppose to be about.  It was touted as shoot, lightly organize, edit, color, approve, output and if your staring down hundreds of clips from 4 camera makes, your looking at a monster in organization, matching and prep.

If RED can build a graphic card, decoder, software suite and ......a series of cameras, someone like Apple, Adobe, Sony....heck someone should be able to make a universal format that shoots, a software suite that batch colors and a hardware aid that converts into multiple codecs for distribution.

The only reason I can guess is everybody has their own proprietary file, system and requirements.

Heck if you worked if we all worked in a completely closed loop, we'd all probably shoot a Sony, build a big honkin' PC and work in Vegas.

But let's be honest.  Most coloring suites don't have an eye dropper?
  
Now really.



IMO

BC
« Last Edit: August 20, 2013, 12:38:45 AM by bcooter » Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #36 on: September 04, 2013, 03:46:46 AM »
ReplyReply

The thing is, technique is getting in the way of inspiration.  

Today I shot almost entirely on the RED's with very little Gh3 footage.  Why?   Because RED has a system for first light dailies that works reliably and fast, the h264 to pro rez to some form of color, to output then knock down to h264 galleries, back to edit, takes four softwares and a huge volume of handwork.

Today I bid a edit and in the bid the prep work is higher than the edit, because .............drum roll please.............it takes 4 times the effort and time.

Now that's not what the tapeless era was suppose to be about.  It was touted as shoot, lightly organize, edit, color, approve, output and if your staring down hundreds of clips from 4 camera makes, your looking at a monster in organization, matching and prep.

If RED can build a graphic card, decoder, software suite and ......a series of cameras, someone like Apple, Adobe, Sony....heck someone should be able to make a universal format that shoots, a software suite that batch colors and a hardware aid that converts into multiple codecs for distribution.

The only reason I can guess is everybody has their own proprietary file, system and requirements.

Heck if you worked if we all worked in a completely closed loop, we'd all probably shoot a Sony, build a big honkin' PC and work in Vegas.

But let's be honest.  Most coloring suites don't have an eye dropper?
  
Now really.



IMO

BC


To ilustrate the holy mess we are talking about,
Yesterday I was in Nuke
Doing a reformat from hd to 2k.

Put my write node to export a 16bits tiff i.s
Error message...

I knew that it came probably from an
inproper file name but it looked ok.

It took me 20 minutes to realise (and
Remember) that a dot was missing!
I was doing:  ####.tiff
And Nuke wants: .####.tiff

How can such a sophisticated software
Can come with BS like this?

Result: 20 mn spent in just remembering
The correct filename procedure for tiff export!
Holly crap !

See? Those are exactly the kind of little hassles
That is plaged the post-prod. In the end we are
Loosing time not into the creativity itself but
In those irritating tech stuff.

Amazing !
« Last Edit: September 04, 2013, 03:54:58 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
Sareesh Sudhakaran
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 547


WWW
« Reply #37 on: September 04, 2013, 04:14:04 AM »
ReplyReply


It took me 20 minutes to realise (and
Remember) that a dot was missing!
I was doing:  ####.tiff
And Nuke wants: .####.tiff

How can such a sophisticated software
Can come with BS like this?


I think it's perfect. It helps you number the sequence in the correct way rather than the 'established' way. The reason is that it is easier for the code to parse (Nuke is highly customizable with Python). It's like driving - you can either follow all the rules to a T, or the exact opposite.

It's been ages since I worked with Nuke, but you can alter the file name structure, I believe - or am I mistaken?
Logged

Get the Free Comprehensive Guide to Rigging ANY Camera - one guide to rig them all - DSLRs to the Arri Alexa.
fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #38 on: September 04, 2013, 05:00:56 AM »
ReplyReply

I think it's perfect. It helps you number the sequence in the correct way rather than the 'established' way. The reason is that it is easier for the code to parse (Nuke is highly customizable with Python). It's like driving - you can either follow all the rules to a T, or the exact opposite.

It's been ages since I worked with Nuke, but you can alter the file name structure, I believe - or am I mistaken?

You're absolutly right, the reason of all this is the Python, but then who bloody does that at an independant level? Only the biggest houses have the luxury to be able to customize a software
and affect its behaviour, create scripts in Python is not the task of a FX artist. So it's team thinking, highly trained team thinking.
It's not a bad thing in itself, but it's just old school IMO. 
Logged
MrSmith
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 922



WWW
« Reply #39 on: November 20, 2013, 11:19:45 AM »
ReplyReply

anyone got some good video tutorial links for getting started with resolve? not about to buy a ripple training package but want something to give me the basics so i can start to experiment.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad