Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: F5  (Read 16941 times)
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2218


WWW
« Reply #20 on: July 14, 2013, 10:43:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Lets call it a debate.

Firstly I get that a scene shot with say a streetlight may not have any blue - so the blues may be lost to the sensor and therefore unrecoverable

Now consider a steadicam shot that transitions a location with a 2 stop change in light level and a 2k change in temp

In resolve you can ramp that shot in a way that cannot IMO be done after a transcode has happened - or certainly not to any codec that would by editable with my machine

Resolve you can add a grad or a million other things - unlike red cine x

It's why I like resolve and don't get rcx - i consider it first gen tech in the same way that ACR is first gen and Lightroom is second gen
« Last Edit: July 14, 2013, 11:11:39 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

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

Posts: 1137


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #21 on: July 15, 2013, 02:27:06 AM »
ReplyReply

Lets call it a debate.

Firstly I get that a scene shot with say a streetlight may not have any blue - so the blues may be lost to the sensor and therefore unrecoverable

Now consider a steadicam shot that transitions a location with a 2 stop change in light level and a 2k change in temp

In resolve you can ramp that shot in a way that cannot IMO be done after a transcode has happened - or certainly not to any codec that would by editable with my machine

Resolve you can add a grad or a million other things - unlike red cine x

It's why I like resolve and don't get rcx - i consider it first gen tech in the same way that ACR is first gen and Lightroom is second gen


There something most people forget about digital capture . . . there is always filters when shooting.  The deal is to know what color you want a scene to be before you shoot, which is difficult considering today's production requirements.

The RED's love warm colors, have a tougher time with blue, but that's just in my view, other's use may vary.

Red Cine X is not meant to be a real grading tool, (I guess it should be, could be, would be nice if it was), but it's just a way to quickly flip out a prorezz for proxy or editing.

But in the world of raw, still and motion, most people believe that color is on the backend and I think somewhere down the line we forgot that we could get the look we want on the front.

(I'm as guilty as most).

But hey Morgan, you really want to buy a Scarlet and realize I'm not in the camera selling biz, give me a call, but not at 5 grand.  5 grand I might as well keep it for MOS or a nice paperweight.

All the best.

BC
Logged

Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2218


WWW
« Reply #22 on: July 15, 2013, 02:43:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Ill swap it for my hassy H1 Smiley

Seriously - if you can afford 4kRaw workflow Id give this camera (F5/55) a run and tonk it into Resolve - I was pretty impressed - it just looked 'right'

S

Logged

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

Posts: 792



« Reply #23 on: July 15, 2013, 03:58:39 AM »
ReplyReply

What I found in motion,  and it was the same
In still, is that appart from cgi and fx,
When material is been shooted by
Experienced profesionals, the RCX stage of
Fine tuning and create a look is generaly very
Friendly. In other words, the footage is very
Close to the final look and requires little post.
Generaly just checking
The wb, the gama, and fine tuning using the
Rcx sliders gives optimum results in many cases.
It won't replace the capabilities of a color app
Like Resolve, but what rcx has is how well it works
Within the workflow if one is minimaly organized
With the bins. The implementation imo is great.
The only thing where I find Red a little strange
Is in their color science and the jargon associated.

It just depends on everyones mentality, my favorite
Workflow with Red do not pretend of course to fit
Everybody, but I really do consider rcx as a crucial
App into the pipeline.

As Bruce pointed, there are often misconceptions
On the raw. All this is metadatas, and they can be
Applied in the nle, but as well as in a previous stage
In camera. For ex: i can create a look in rcx and
Plug it into the camera for shooting. But, this is all
Non destructive, everything can be reverted or altered
But the way it's been shooted will define the range
Of action in post. So there is virtually no limits, within
The limits if I might say, to use a shortcut.
If one alters drasticaly the raw datas from the capture,
Info will be lost. And that of course will also happen
In the color application of your choice because it depends
On what you come from.
So raw or not raw, it's important that people on set
Know what they are doin and that people in post
Know what the ones on set have done.
Exactly like littin a green screen, it can be a breeze
In post or a complete nightmare.

« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 04:41:24 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2218


WWW
« Reply #24 on: July 15, 2013, 04:39:22 AM »
ReplyReply

What I found in motion,  and it was the same
In still, is that appart from cgi and fx,
When material is been shooted by
Experienced profesionals, the RCX stage of
Fine tuning and create a look is generaly very
Friendly

Well that depends what you call professional. Sure a professional pulls out his genny, sets up a tent with a big monitor, controls his DR to match a 709 LUT, using HMI lights and or scrims that needs 4 guys to hold down in the wind. That is making movies. Its big its expensive and with a wide DR camera.. its un-proffessional.

Then you have an unprofessional hooligan like me who learns his wide DR camera, pushes that to the absolute maximum, using the minimum possible light and resources on set - works fast spontaneous - can move - doesn't plasticise the talent with waiting for 'the machine' but lets them perform. What a loser.

Then you pull the second guys images into post - looks terrible - but the data is there to be recovered pushed pulled in post, a kid sitting in a room on minimum wage - not a huge machine costing $5k per hour.

Once the second footage comes out of post, it looks as good as 'professional man one' but its better, more natural and cost 1/5 the amount to shoot.

Now the true professional actually understands both set ups/methods and picks a fine line between the two, balancing on set costs with post costs in his head, shot by shot, location by location.

Anyone who thinks they can grade out from a transcode from raw is IMO fooling themselves, fine as long as the keep dragging the machine with them when they shoot, but fooling themselves as to the future. Look at the stills world to see that.

In stills I canned the machine within a week of owning the D3 - the first camera good enough to drop the machine, now I look for a camera that can do that in motion. Even more critical because HMI is a real pain compared to flash.

Repeat after me. Every stop of latitude should halve your lighting budget.

S








« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 04:53:47 AM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

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

Posts: 792



« Reply #25 on: July 15, 2013, 04:54:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, when I refered to pros, i wasn't specially thikin
Of the ortodox trade-unioned arrogant crowd. Grin

When i was workin in stills with Pepe, the raw images
Were ready. The post-prod stage reduced to minimums.
He could well have been shooted jpegs. There was no
"recovery" thing. In fact, the retoucher was bored like
Hell because there was very little to retouch.

And more important consequences of that: less time
In post. I know a guy here (a 30 years old motion pro)
That when he shoots hand-held his Canon 5d2, the footage
Is just ready. I don't know how the guy does it, been tryin
To figure-out but it just works, it's just nailed.
Those people are priceless.
Logged
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2218


WWW
« Reply #26 on: July 15, 2013, 05:00:48 AM »
ReplyReply

I guess 5d man nails it by a relationship with the director?

In the shade, in magic hour, in the right time the light just fits the camera. Do a spot in portugal at midday (as per the director) and you are playing a different game?

Or he's controlling the light with 'a machine' - a 5d is fine with a machine behind it.

S
Logged

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

Posts: 792



« Reply #27 on: July 15, 2013, 05:31:47 AM »
ReplyReply

He is retired. He only shoots
Now his own stuff (reportages)
For his pleasure.
He does not rig, and exclusively
Mount Schneider glasses on the
5d2.

But it's like Pepe. I mean he lits
And nobody understand what
He does, and it's just the final
Look.
I remember anecdotes with the
Retouchers were he pointed it
Was badly done when it looked
Perfect to everybody else, me included,
And then he was right, but only him
Was seeing it.

I think it's more a question of natural
Habilities. I know i will never be a good
Camera operator, even if i try hard.
It's just not in my blood.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 05:33:24 AM by fredjeang2 » Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #28 on: July 15, 2013, 08:39:45 AM »
ReplyReply

4k, 2k 4:2:0 to 4:4:4, 8 bit, 10 bit 14 bit, 100mbs, or 30, Intra, progressive, interlaced, MPG 2, 4, h264, Pro REZ DPX. whew?

The ONLY thing that matters is what you shoot looks good, hopefully damn good.

For two weeks we've been shooting the gh3's next to the RED 1's and Scarlets and honestly, you can flatten out any file, the RED's have a lot of control, but once you've slightly crushed it, worked the skin tones, and ready for at least primary grading, the GH3's are pretty, not exactly film like pretty, more digital still pretty, but regardless they look good.

We did a shot in Paris yesterday in an outside cafe with some silks and a few leds to kick some fillm running the gh3's next to the REDs.  Honestly I didn't see an inch of difference and the RED has amazing lattitude.  Actually, I had the crew set up two RED's considering the challanging light and I know when we get to first edit, the GH3 footage will be used the most at it is the most fluid and has really beautiful skin tones.

The RED's I love em, but they're a lot more work, cost a lot more and in the end, I'm positive I can shoot a gh3 and get so close to equal the RED's nobody is going to tell the difference.

I know, I've seen every pixel peeping, highlight blowing, shadow recovery test, but in the end the only thing that matters is the look.

If the GH3 has any one drawback is the menu is very difficult and the lenses which are good don't get close to most PL's in complete look.

But, If I was Morgan running a one man band I'd forget about the F5, buy a gh3, put some cash into a few large kino banks and a 4x silk for fill and not worry about it.

Personally the 2k 4k talk may have merit, (obviously the makers of 4/5k cameras want you to think so, but I'd bet we're at least 5 years away from real 4k TV and even then I doubt seriously if anyone will notice.

For the movies, well it's a little different, but a film like True Grit was shot with a 2k Arri and nobody worried about Roger Deakins work, or will say heck, why didn't he shoot it 4k and future proof it.

Actually I'm not in favor of future proofing because my goal is to shoot new stuff, not repurpose old.

In regards to the black magic being a game changer, well I hope so, but that's a lot of stuff in a little box and I know our RED's get damn hot running 18 minutes segments, the Scarlet blows the fan like a jet dryer.

Sony, they play too many games and they lost me with the FS100, never to return. 

I think the guys at Panasonic have the answer if they'll quit protecting territory and just make a super gh3.

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 08:42:23 AM by bcooter » Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #29 on: July 15, 2013, 09:15:26 AM »
ReplyReply

...I think the guys at Panasonic have the answer if they'll quit protecting territory and just make a super gh3.

I really think so too.

Maybe there is a guy at Panasonic Head dep that is reading Lu-La
Logged
smthopr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 237


WWW
« Reply #30 on: July 15, 2013, 02:27:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Lets call it a debate.

Firstly I get that a scene shot with say a streetlight may not have any blue - so the blues may be lost to the sensor and therefore unrecoverable

Now consider a steadicam shot that transitions a location with a 2 stop change in light level and a 2k change in temp

In resolve you can ramp that shot in a way that cannot IMO be done after a transcode has happened - or certainly not to any codec that would by editable with my machine

Resolve you can add a grad or a million other things - unlike red cine x

It's why I like resolve and don't get rcx - i consider it first gen tech in the same way that ACR is first gen and Lightroom is second gen

Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't think it's possible to apply a grading ramp to the raw conversion settings. When you grade from raw files, you set the raw conversion settings for the entire clip. When you apply a grade and maybe a grading change during the shot, it's a grade on the transcode. The transcode might be invisible to you, but it's there, cached in your computer. If you transcode first to an uncompressed format, without any clipping, you are essentially grading from the same material.

I have worked both ways grading features shot in red raw. One we graded from the R3d files and the other from a transcoded DPx file. There was no difference in the possible manipulation of the images. There were some effects shots that had a high contrast baked in from the raw converter, and these were impossible to fix.

So, don't transcode to a "finished" look. Transcode to a low contrast full range file or log format and you cAn change color temp and exposure the same as in the raw converter. That's my point and I'm sticking to it Smiley
Logged

Bruce Alan Greene
www.brucealangreene.com
smthopr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 237


WWW
« Reply #31 on: July 15, 2013, 02:46:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Well that depends what you call professional. Sure a professional pulls out his genny, sets up a tent with a big monitor, controls his DR to match a 709 LUT, using HMI lights and or scrims that needs 4 guys to hold down in the wind. That is making movies. Its big its expensive and with a wide DR camera.. its un-proffessional.

Then you have an unprofessional hooligan like me who learns his wide DR camera, pushes that to the absolute maximum, using the minimum possible light and resources on set - works fast spontaneous - can move - doesn't plasticise the talent with waiting for 'the machine' but lets them perform. What a loser.

Then you pull the second guys images into post - looks terrible - but the data is there to be recovered pushed pulled in post, a kid sitting in a room on minimum wage - not a huge machine costing $5k per hour.

Once the second footage comes out of post, it looks as good as 'professional man one' but its better, more natural and cost 1/5 the amount to shoot.

Now the true professional actually understands both set ups/methods and picks a fine line between the two, balancing on set costs with post costs in his head, shot by shot, location by location.

Anyone who thinks they can grade out from a transcode from raw is IMO fooling themselves, fine as long as the keep dragging the machine with them when they shoot, but fooling themselves as to the future. Look at the stills world to see that.

In stills I canned the machine within a week of owning the D3 - the first camera good enough to drop the machine, now I look for a camera that can do that in motion. Even more critical because HMI is a real pain compared to flash.

Repeat after me. Every stop of latitude should halve your lighting budget.

S










Morgan, I think you miss the point of all that lighting equipment.

The director asks to see the faces of the actors in an apartment and he needs to see the church outside the window. How do you do that without big lights and crew? You can make a beautiful photograph using natural light, but it won't fit the story or the directors vision.

Or, I've had this experience: we walked into a large nightclub and the natural light looked spectacular with the light coming through the windows. We needed to get the actors into makeup and wardrobe and then spend 2 hours shooting the scene. While the actors prepared we brought in 7 lamps to recreated the window light. Which was good as the clouds came by in about 10 minutes.

The lighting is not about squeezing contrast to rec 709, it's to make the movie look its best and consistent from angle to angle. And to keep on schedule at the same time.

If you don't have lights, wide dr is your friend. If you do have lights and crew...wide dr is also your friend!
Logged

Bruce Alan Greene
www.brucealangreene.com
Morgan_Moore
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2218


WWW
« Reply #32 on: July 15, 2013, 04:17:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Bruce - truth is we are both right about lighting -.just I'm a couple of steps left of you

I'm sure your right about outputting a flat too

Coming from a decade inside c1 Capture one. I just prefer the davinci way

S
Logged

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

Posts: 2218


WWW
« Reply #33 on: July 15, 2013, 04:52:23 PM »
ReplyReply

And can you ramp a raw grade in davinci?

Well I've gone through that with Peter chamberlain of black magic

You cannot ramp or use the camera tab in nodes but he suggests the space of the software means you have the same latitude outside of the camera tab

I'm not 100% convinced of that so the answer is sort  of maybe if you ask me and yes if you ask the people who make the software

I'd like it if different nodes could have different raw settings
« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 04:56:10 PM by Morgan_Moore » Logged

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

Posts: 792



« Reply #34 on: July 15, 2013, 06:17:41 PM »
ReplyReply

If you transcode first to an uncompressed format, without any clipping, you are essentially grading from the same material
I think so

We could think of r3d as a digital negative

And i also don't thing it's possible to apply the
Grading ramp to the raw convertion settings.
Unless using the trick of having 2 or more raw settings
Of the same cut and use masks on layers, each
Layer being one raw convertion, and a blending
Mode, but for this kind
Of stuff i rather have an Avid DS.

Everything that is out of the source setting panels
Is not affecting the "digital negative" but the rgb
Conversion. So what Bruce pointed is correct.

And in my case, I like to use Rcx as a primary
Correction pass. Remember also that the rmd files
Can be mailed.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 07:10:46 PM by fredjeang2 » Logged
Chris Sanderson
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1908



« Reply #35 on: July 15, 2013, 06:18:46 PM »
ReplyReply

very interesting, inspiring and worthwhile discussion - thank-you.

My 'problem' is that I see two sides (not really the Sony...) I've been in both the old-tradition big crew, big $$ productions for many years and more recently a simple one-man-band affair. Yes, it has been an 'affair' of love and some tribulation.

It's great to see cooter doing his lovely work essentially as a successful new manifestation of the old trad $$ work and Morgan doing his as a guerilla. Keep up the great work - hope you are having as much fun as I am - and I did...
Logged

Christopher Sanderson
The Luminous-Landscape
Peter McLennan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1692


« Reply #36 on: July 15, 2013, 06:48:18 PM »
ReplyReply

very interesting, inspiring and worthwhile discussion - thank-you.

Indeed.

Film making has come a long way from calling the lab and telling them to "force one stop on rolls eight and nine."  You guys may not need to carry an exposure meter any longer, but you sure need to know a lot more stuff.  I'm gonna have to get me a GH3.

Do you miss the optical viewfinder?  Or do you guys actually operate?

Electronics aside, I was interested to see in the credits that the US$200M+ "The Lone Ranger" is film-originated.

Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #37 on: July 15, 2013, 07:05:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Honestly Chris, I like motion, love it when there is a decent storyline AND the time to really craft a shot.

For this the RED's were pretty good, but now I see it all differently.

First, it's all becoming a one man band show.  Sure there is large production out there, we do a lot of it, but with much less people that I ever dreamed imaginable.

I don't have a single person that can't wear multiple hats.   DT that can grade and hang a light.  Grip or swing that can mount a camera, hang a light, move 4,000 lbs of stuff and maybe not with a smile, but at least do it and don't quit.

We shot today in France, two interview sessions, one lifestyle (different locations) one voice over then packed up, took the eurostar got into London at 9, set up and pre lit for the next day, it's now 12:46 pm and will start at 9am with a scheduled 12 hour day tomorrow.

That's today's reality, so Morgan's style probably is becoming everybody's style.  I may have more crew, but considering the scope of what we're doing we are all one man bands.

That's why I bought the GH3's and will probably buy two more and one more bit of honesty.   The RED's impress so we put them on set most of the time, but with the gh3's 90% of the footage will come from them.

Clients like big cameras, but they really like a fluid shoot and it's expensive to move 24lbs of camera, with no IS vs. 2lbs.  

In fact I've spent more time riding around in a wheelchair lately as a defacto dolly than I have shooting on sticks, dollies, sliders and gibs.

At first I thought the RED's and raw were great, get close, fix it later.  Now, with the timeframe we work under I want every camera to be set as close to the look as possible, every camera set exactly at the same settings and locked and if the colour needs tweaking do it with filters.  I see the GH3's as transparency film and   I consider on set to be our primary color and only want to tweak after final locked edit for secondary color, unless there are effects or an elaborate edit.

We don't work sloppy, but if a shot requires detail through a window and crafted light, that is discussed, budgeted and signed off on.  If it's not, then we let the windows blow and call it art.

Honestly, time, is money and as you know with motion (I really hate the word video) time is like a black hole.

Even with the RED rockets you have to transcode in real time.   With the gh3's even an mp4 file, if shot right, we transcode to prorezz, match the sound for multi cam and start the editorial process.

I know that one of the reasons TV land is so hopped up over the Arri's isn't the camera, or the file, it's the straight to prorezz and into the NLE.

Heck on the Movie lots, even for episodic TV I see one trailer parked between two sound stages with a team that is laying in the first cut as the shooting is happening.

BTW: we don't scrimp, we don't overspend, because both of those processes are the paved road to hell, but the one thing I will not budge on is sound.  With dialog we have a sound tech, sometimes two because I can get by with a "challanged" visual but can't get by with sketchy sound.

We do carry our own set of lavs for emergencies though I have two sound techs both great, both different and I demand they use their kit because they know it front to back.

I've tried sound the do it yourself way and it sucks.

I've tried the don't worry we'll fix it in post and that also sucks.

Somewhere the happy medium is between Morgan and Roger Deakins.  I think we can all learn more from you and  Morgan than Roger.

IMO

BC




Logged

bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1137


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #38 on: July 15, 2013, 07:12:09 PM »
ReplyReply

Indeed.
 Or do you guys actually operate?


I storyboard, contribute to the script, operate, direct, set the color, look, style edit sometimes to finish.  

My partner and producer not only does the first AD's job, she producers over and underline, even does makeup if time permits.

My partner and I negotiate the talent, select the score, (or commission the score) and btw: I'm not bragging, just talking about what it's like in todays world, or at least my world.

So what I see in the viewfinder is what I want to see in the NLE and btw:  I'm getting deep into fcpX, (which I loathe) but which I believe is the future.

New tech like "FCP X may not be better but in today's world, it's damn close to being the right solution.

I know FCP X pretty well, but when I return to the states, I'm searching for a fcpx tutor to crash course me through the system so when I return to Paris in August to do the final cut, I want to be dead nuts on top of it.

IMO

BC
Logged

fredjeang2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 792



« Reply #39 on: July 15, 2013, 07:25:40 PM »
ReplyReply

Honestly Chris, I like motion, love it when there is a decent storyline AND the time to really craft a shot.

For this the RED's were pretty good, but now I see it all differently.

First, it's all becoming a one man band show.  Sure there is large production out there, we do a lot of it, but with much less people that I ever dreamed imaginable.

I don't have a single person that can't wear multiple hats.   DT that can grade and hang a light.  Grip or swing that can mount a camera, hang a light, move 4,000 lbs of stuff and maybe not with a smile, but at least do it and don't quit.

We shot today in France, two interview sessions, one lifestyle (different locations) one voice over then packed up, took the eurostar got into London at 9, set up and pre lit for the next day, it's now 12:46 pm and will start at 9am with a scheduled 12 hour day tomorrow.

That's today's reality, so Morgan's style probably is becoming everybody's style.  I may have more crew, but considering the scope of what we're doing we are all one man bands.

That's why I bought the GH3's and will probably buy two more and one more bit of honesty.   The RED's impress so we put them on set most of the time, but with the gh3's 90% of the footage will come from them.

Clients like big cameras, but they really like a fluid shoot and it's expensive to move 24lbs of camera, with no IS vs. 2lbs.  

In fact I've spent more time riding around in a wheelchair lately as a defacto dolly than I have shooting on sticks, dollies, sliders and gibs.

At first I thought the RED's and raw were great, get close, fix it later.  Now, with the timeframe we work under I want every camera to be set as close to the look as possible, every camera set exactly at the same settings and locked and if the colour needs tweaking do it with filters.  I see the GH3's as transparency film and   I consider on set to be our primary color and only want to tweak after final locked edit for secondary color, unless there are effects or an elaborate edit.

We don't work sloppy, but if a shot requires detail through a window and crafted light, that is discussed, budgeted and signed off on.  If it's not, then we let the windows blow and call it art.

Honestly, time, is money and as you know with motion (I really hate the word video) time is like a black hole.

Even with the RED rockets you have to transcode in real time.   With the gh3's even an mp4 file, if shot right, we transcode to prorezz, match the sound for multi cam and start the editorial process.

I know that one of the reasons TV land is so hopped up over the Arri's isn't the camera, or the file, it's the straight to prorezz and into the NLE.

Heck on the Movie lots, even for episodic TV I see one trailer parked between two sound stages with a team that is laying in the first cut as the shooting is happening.

BTW: we don't scrimp, we don't overspend, because both of those processes are the paved road to hell, but the one thing I will not budge on is sound.  With dialog we have a sound tech, sometimes two because I can get by with a "challanged" visual but can't get by with sketchy sound.

We do carry our own set of lavs for emergencies though I have two sound techs both great, both different and I demand they use their kit because they know it front to back.

I've tried sound the do it yourself way and it sucks.

I've tried the don't worry we'll fix it in post and that also sucks.

Somewhere the happy medium is between Morgan and Roger Deakins.  I think we can all learn more from you and  Morgan than Roger.

IMO

BC






Yeah, but Coot, there is a big contradiction there.

I agree totaly with you and Morgan on the path this
Business is going

But can someone explains me then, why we never
Had so many DIT workin just to fix toundtrippin issues
When we are all talking about faster, less crew, more
Dynamic.

because it's really amazing that we still don't have a super gh3
And that we still have to color in an ext app.

It's a one man show but we don't have the tools yet.

Each time i talk about integration, i hear resolve. And
Resolve is great, but it comes from the past workflow.
Is there a Raw standart fully supported? Nope
Between conversions and roundtripping, the one-man-show
As became a nightmare of time black-hole. I mean
People who are working in there are aging like bloody
Politicians. Everybody is chasing a camera that does not exist
Yet, and softwares that are fragmentated and require
This new profession called dit to make all that buzz work
Minimaly.
And the time to send an aaf, open the new app, bla bla
The color grading would almost have been finished with
What we should normaly work with in the new panorama.
Gosh, it just pisses me of why Avid has not bloody updated
DS at Nab instead of more of the same bullshit.

So, are we in the past or in the future? I think we are nowhere
Yet.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2013, 07:44:13 PM by fredjeang2 » Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad