Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Motion & Video => Topic started by: Morgan_Moore on November 03, 2013, 04:30:39 am
-
Ive sort of blogged my vague ramblings of why my new camera is a Sony PMW-F3
http://www.sammorganmoore.com/backstage/choosing-a-new-a-camera-sony-pmw-f3
S
-
ROFL at myself - I clicked this thread thinking you bought an old Nikon F3 stills camera and hoped for some analogue insights - made my day ... :D
Should have guessed from the forum ...
-
No need for me to buy a Nikon F3 - Ive had one since 1992 still works - my review of the Nikon F3? I prefer the FM2n with 1/250 flash synch or the Nikon F4 due to AF. :)
S
-
Ive sort of blogged my vague ramblings of why my new camera is a Sony PMW-F3
http://www.sammorganmoore.com/backstage/choosing-a-new-a-camera-sony-pmw-f3
S
Morgan,
What format will you shoot to 422, 420, or 444 uncompressed?
Just curious if you tested all three, because honestly I don't think bit rate and depth is all it's cracked up to be, or if it is, did you notice a difference?
I now shot about a billion hours of footage on the gh3's and the RED 1's, Scarlets, etc. sometimes in the same session and settings and honestly final out in 2k I can't see any real difference other than the Red footage takes a lot more work to get to a read to edit proress. Actually I have three RED rocket cards two in mgloic cases one in an 8 core mac and the only one that works today is the one mounted in the mac.
Don't know why the other two stopped but it's maddening to be in the middle of a project and all of a sudden your encoding times quadruple because two $4,500 video cards or software, or something fails to work.
In fact I'd buy an Amira just for proress output, but once again, if i can't see the difference between a 4k raw 444 $25,000 camera vs. a $1,299 420 h264 camera then I kind of wonder if we're not chasing the dream more than the actual result.
I don't disagree with your final choice and understand it's a big purchase, but I am a little curious why you went with a 2k only camera and I'm not a real advocate of 4k except for lack of moire, because the 4k I've seen on a big screen and 2k I can't see any difference. I can tell more about depth and color and professional on set and post production than I can about the actual camera . . .
Which leads me to believe that in video or digital cinema or whatever it's called, a lot of this talk is just mumbo jumbo, kind of like the stuff we went through with still photography where everyone thought they needed a trillion megapixels and now think 20 mpx is great.
But getting back to my point, I don't for a minute think that the next catch phrase of motion will be 4k. I've already had clients ask, I've already had client's go wow, even though I intercut those little gh3 files into the REd footage and nobody say a word.
Anyway, nice report and wish you the best with your new camera.
IMO
BC
-
Ill do a blog on the specs.
With grey washout log you are wading around with no idea where to go. Simply I tried to replicate an image from my nikon D3.
Actually that was really easy to do in Resolve. And opened my understanding of the codecs.
Seeing the different codecs in Resolve scopes you can see huge holes in the smaller codecs.
Does that matter? Well I was finding the files did not have 'meat' somehow were hitting a grey or sony look as one closes to the top end.
I cannot record 444 as I dont have the right recorder.
35mbs onboard is blatantly a joke - there is jpg style compression all over the image
422Pro Res is a little thin (compared to the nikon D3 shooting stills!) but will have to be what I go with
422 uncompressed is 10gb per minute and I would suggest the file is close to a tiff from a nikon D3.
==
A side note is shooting 422 prores onto SSD, - you can play back your footage while it is on the card the card plugged into the computer (imac 2011), and also dump it off the card really fast (even USB2 reader I have at the mo - I could pick up a thunderbolt reader and double the dump speed)
This workflow is radically low effort, radically.
==
downside is the thing is not far short of an MX built up (with recorder + batts) - ok maybe 2/3 the mass but still a lump
S
-
Nikon Still D3 vs uncompressed Slog attempted match in Resolve..
(now I have stored that as a look it is easy to paste onto future shots)
(http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=78174&d=1383573293)
(http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/attachment.php?attachmentid=78164&d=1383570726)
-
2k vs 4k?
Well my camera was used so cheap.
Also Ive properly tested the Scarlet and F5, and to some extent wonder if 4k for 2k delivery is the right thing. The F3 has a cleaner signal than both of those cameras and no downscaling issues.
The F3 seems a little like one of those 11mp stills cameras that just do the job!
I would like the Sony F55 and raw recorder but that comes in at 10X more money which was not an option. I think Arri cameras are too heavy.
S
-
I went through a very similar process before ending up with a Scarlet :)
What coot says about the GH3 matching the RED's I guess is true so long as you nail it (lighting especially) on set.
Certainly I've found that if I nail it, my AF100 gives results almost indistinguishable from the RED... as long as I'm not shooting anything with subtle gradations in it, like a plain wall or a halo around a light when there's haze in the air. Then the AF100 bands like a bastard EVERY DAMN TIME.
The moment stuff starts to clip, or you have to compromise between letting a bit more daylight than you'd ideally like in, versus the amount of oomph you actually have with you to light with, or a highlight goes a bit clippy, or the clouds thin a bit and the light level suddenly goes up half a stop... that's when the RED footage is easy, even a pleasure to pull back in post, and the AF100 footage is unusable. A nice fat (but compressed) codec on board is really what sold me on the RED.
As a fellow one-man-band operator most of the time, resilience is the reason I *always* reach for the RED as my default choice, even though the ergonomics are not as good as the AF100 in several other respects. For larger crew shoots, the RED ergonomics really shine, that's what it was designed for after all. But lack of ND, hunger for batteries, weight, hunger for card space, heating and fan issues, etc. make the RED a little tricky sometimes.
The huge saving grace is that these tricky situations are exactly where I'm most likely to fail-to-nail it on set. Can't be everywhere- if I'm concentrating on framing and monitoring sound levels, I might well miss the daylight brightening by half a stop. That's when I'm really glad of REDcode RAW to rescue me.
Oh, and when I do nail it with the RED, it looks like a five million dollar movie, not a five hundred dollar photoshoot, which is nice.
Look forward to hearing how you get on with the new "beast", Sam! :)
Cheers, Hywel
-
I agree - the smaller your shoot the more you need a robust codec.
The Sony sales people really (selling the F5 that I didn't buy) really thought I was odd having any interest in raw.
To me the Scarlet was too light insensitive and too heavy and the lack of a easy codec meant I moved along.
The F3 is equally heavy or close but I see that as a 'cost' of getting the far cheaper camera (than the f5) - the Scarlet is heavy and costly!
As for GH2 - Ive just never really been interested as they lack audio and ND - Id have one as a runaround.
S
-
Uh sometime small shoots work great with the red, though I've found the RED only comes into it's own with a lot of light and crew. For run and gun, even stripped down I don't see it giving me anything more than the gh3's.
Maybe a little more post work with the gh3's but I've also learned to underexpose the gh3 file a little about 1/2 stop as the shadows pull up well and it holds the highlights well.
I'm actually pretty amazed by those little cameras and I've learned a few other tricks like I keep a small lightpanel turned down low mounted on the gh3's even in studio. It's small doesn't really show up as a light, but evens out the face, the shadows and helps with any problems of banding.
One trick for white walls, that don't key out to white and to stop banding is I key the wall down and lay a clip underneath it with a defocus blur, just slightly changing the opacity. It makes for a richer file and that's the key with motion to have as deep and rich a file as possible.
But don't get me wrong I dig my REDs and even like the Scarlet now that I've changed the mounts to Canon added fast zooms and a EVF, because I can't work that glossy screen. The only dig I have against RED right now is the problems with the rocket. I was cranking along like crazy and all of a sudden two of the rockets just stop working and I'm ready to throw them in the creek.
IMO
BC
-
Some colours?
http://www.sammorganmoore.com/backlot/d3ing-the-f3
DR..
(http://www.sammorganmoore.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/850_002.jpg)
-
Yup, the light sensitivity of the RED isn't the greatest. It's fine at ISO 800, bit grainy, but works fine downsampling to HD which is what I always do.
Coot, thanks for the white wall tip! Next time I need multi cam to pair with the RED I'll give that a go. A not-quite-perfectly-lit infinity cove was the absolute worst case for the AF100.
If anyone's interested, I've just put a few shorts on Vimeo shot with the RED:
https://vimeo.com/user22192826
They're ultra-compressed of course, but would be very interested to know what you think.
Cheers, Hywel.
-
Looks good. Im not sure my eye was entirely drawn to the technical elements of the work.
-
Yea the RED 1's are grainy at 800, heck sometimes at 600, but they kind of look like kodak vision which had a lot of ants crawling up the wall look also, so it's not a leap.
I'm still a little freaked by the numbers on these cameras because other than the sony fs100 which produces a file that just doesn't work for me, I still think the gh3's produce an image that is so close to anything I've used, I don't know if I should be happy that I bought them, or pissed I spend so much money on the REDS, but regardless of money, the specs should push the RED's 1000 times beyond the gh3's and they don't.
They don't get close to being that much better and they're not. i've don't green screen testing of full blown full lit, full rez red footage next to the same set with the gh3's and in the terms of matting and keying there is no difference.
If the Gh3's have any liability it's the sound going into one channel and even from a mixer is a little rough, where with the R1's if our sound tech (tech is a crappy word, sound artist should be the term) anyway, the sound from his mixer to the r1's and scarlet is zero difference than the files he hands me out of his system, where the gh3 makes a little mess of some of it.
Still, it's a 1200 buck camera.
Another post trick that's easy and adds depth is to buy a plug in called beauty box. It's a great smoother and grain/artifact killer and used properly is more than good on faces it's good on everything if you work it right. It allows you to really push a file, the only downside is with fcp 7 it slows down the rendering big time.
It will also clean up skin and once again you have to learn it's settings and use it usually with a clip over and a key, but when done right, you get cinema quality.
I'm pretty stoked on Panasonic and I really like a dslr form factor for shooting, because I guess I'm use to it and it's an easier format to shoot than a long brick of a camera that requires a shoulder mount.
IMO
BC
-
I am gonna rent the GH3 to see what I have been missing. The idea of useable auto focus for certain situations sounds great. My only issue is dynamic range. I use a BMCC and love the look. The file it produces is exactly what I like; great DR with beautiful highlight roll off. There are many backlit situations that look just fine with no fill light. How does the GH3 compare in DR?
-
Great thread, guys. We're all living on the cutting edge with you, but without all the blood and bandages.
-
> Im not sure my eye was entirely drawn to the technical elements of the work.
If it had been, I would have regarded it as a failure on my part ::)
My earliest revelation of how to approach shooting was to realise that with super-glam models the technical side of my job boils down to not screwing up. So long as the light isn't too horrid, the exposure's about right, the shot's in focus and I'm far enough away to give a flattering perspective, my film making can be unobtrusive; everyone is watching the girls anyway!
Cheers, Hywel.
-
Actually I would suggest that is almost the same with all work, or certainly my style in the last decade for the camera/lighting to become 'invisible'.
The only trouble is that if you achieve it no one notices.. and often thinks that light location or whatever were 'lucky'
S
-
Working the onboard codec.
http://www.sammorganmoore.com/backlot/pmw-f3-onboard-slog
-
I am gonna rent the GH3 to see what I have been missing. The idea of useable auto focus for certain situations sounds great. My only issue is dynamic range. I use a BMCC and love the look. The file it produces is exactly what I like; great DR with beautiful highlight roll off. There are many backlit situations that look just fine with no fill light. How does the GH3 compare in DR?
To autofocus you're going to have to learn a few settings and try them. For tracking different options work, I could explain them, but try them all. for manual focus, just use the touch screen on what you want and the face detection is tremendous for tracking, especially if you put a person's face in the menu.
You can also manually focus the pana and oly lenses as they are smooth.
Keep ALL other settings on manual, mess with the viewfinder brightness to match your computer.
800 iso is good 1000 you can get by with, but over that you'll need some denoise software, though I've shot at 1600 without break up.
Shoot on the highest bit rate.
If you rent it try the pana leica 25mm 1.4 the oly 45, and 75. The oly 45 feels cheap but is nice, the 75 feels like a billion bucks.
If time permits use the fast leica and oly primes.
Shoot a little under exposed and a less saturated setting with less red in custom seting
The IOS on the pana lenses is ok, but it is not steadicam smooth.
Watch your shutter speed. On my RED's I can go at 30 fps to 125th of a second without that strobing look, but the gh3 really is a intra file and reacts like film frames.
Keep the camera small. You'll need ND's so either go to the 5 series lee system or screw in tiffin (use tiffin as they are very good) .
Good luck.
BC
-
To autofocus you're going to have to learn a few settings and try them. For tracking different options work, I could explain them, but try them all. for manual focus, just use the touch screen on what you want and the face detection is tremendous for tracking, especially if you put a person's face in the menu.
You can also manually focus the pana and oly lenses as they are smooth.
Keep ALL other settings on manual, mess with the viewfinder brightness to match your computer.
800 iso is good 1000 you can get by with, but over that you'll need some denoise software, though I've shot at 1600 without break up.
Shoot on the highest bit rate.
If you rent it try the pana leica 25mm 1.4 the oly 45, and 75. The oly 45 feels cheap but is nice, the 75 feels like a billion bucks.
If time permits use the fast leica and oly primes.
Shoot a little under exposed and a less saturated setting with less red in custom seting
The IOS on the pana lenses is ok, but it is not steadicam smooth.
Watch your shutter speed. On my RED's I can go at 30 fps to 125th of a second without that strobing look, but the gh3 really is a intra file and reacts like film frames.
Keep the camera small. You'll need ND's so either go to the 5 series lee system or screw in tiffin (use tiffin as they are very good) .
Good luck.
BC
Thanks for your detailed reply BC but how about DR? How does it compare with your Red? I have the BMCC which seems equal to the non dragon sensor in DR.
-
Cooter have you tried the newer (perhaps still beta) versions of RedCine-X that use GPUs for debayer? It's way the hell faster than past versions if you have to live without a rocket. My MacBookPro Retina is playing back 5k Epic footage real time at 1/2 debayer off the Mags.
CB
-
Cooter have you tried the newer (perhaps still beta) versions of RedCine-X that use GPUs for debayer? It's way the hell faster than past versions if you have to live without a rocket. My MacBookPro Retina is playing back 5k Epic footage real time at 1/2 debayer off the Mags.
CB
Thanks CB.
Funny you mentioned it. Two RED rockets have c__ped out and are on their way to RED with a support case number, so I'm running naked on a new 27" I mac. It runs about 1/2 as slow as with the Rocket.
Oh . . yea I have the newest cinex, went back to older, went up to newer, just did the newest of the newest, reflashed the rocket about a dozen times . . . spent more time on the damn rocket than I would if I'd just run it on the Imac, so tonight the Imac is crunching away hopefully all night.
I like RED, they responded to me in minutes, but still no resolve and the only suggestion was wait for the rocket X and after 12 grand in rocket cards, I think it'll be a very cold day in Miami before I buy another one, X or not.
Thing is for the price of one Rocket you can almost buy two I macs and run. Something wrong with this business model.
Damn, I wish these cameras shot a usable prores.
In fact when you go deep into discussion about the RED's 90% of everyone, converts the raws to a useable format and never again goes backwards to the raws.
That tells you something about the raw world and yea, I thought raw was better, today I'm a little unsure.
Thing is, today there is not a lot of place to go. Red was working on a module that produced prores but that feel quiet and if they make it I think it's about 15 grand.
We're going to have cameras soon that shoot a 422 4k file that will probably sell under 5 grand soon, so 15k to convert to prores may be too late and regardless I do want RED to succeed, I just want to get away from build #20, Firmware number 17 and well you get it.
What is strange is on the RED one the semi red prores files are beautiful and sharper than the raws. But batching them out is brutal, unless somebody knows a method I don't.
I'm not that big on the raw world anymore, because if you match up cameras, hit your settings and white balance, you gotta grade anyway, so why go through the extra step. I'll bet 90% of everything shot with an Arri is prores and not raw.
BC
-
Thanks for your detailed reply BC but how about DR? How does it compare with your Red? I have the BMCC which seems equal to the non dragon sensor in DR.
The red has more lattitude, I guess, but I don't shoot the RED running down the street, so it's kind of hard to say.
The RED needs light and shines when lit professionally, as a documentary camera, it's just not made for that.
A gh3 IS NOT a better studio or high production camera than the RED, it's just better than any other cameras I use except the RED.
IMO
BC
-
Coots I know you hate Sony -so do I - but I buy them anyway.
Really the F3 and F5 you should be taking them for a drive. Slog basically turns off the Sony look then you get edit ready codecs, sound, all sorts of stuff, I have a grudging respect for their cameras and see why 80% of broadcast is done with their stuff.
The F3 with a recorder, 200mbs 10bit codec (prores), sound, onboard backup 35 mbs codec, (pre roll) bla bla..
S
-
The Sony business model isn't set up for me, to them I'm just a small producer, they're looking at millions of consumers or 245 international networks, but not me.
The fs100 to 700 was the perfect example. They could have gone 4k without such a huge financial hit to the buyer, made a higher bit depth file, expanded the E mount line, especially in light of the Z series and gotten away from that awkward avchd wrapper but they didn't they brought out newer cameras and left the e mount guys hanging.
Sony also changes media like I change socks.
Red is not perfect but they got back to me last night in 5 minutes on the phone twice and in multiple emails. 5 minutes.
No camera company has done that.
Red also has a base coloring suite, not perfect, changes a lot but they have one, along with monitors, media, viewers, breakout boxes, cages, everything it takes to go to work, without having to dig around for a week on the web.
Their cameras aren't perfect, but my R1's have already lasted longer than my fs100 that sets in a case, the R1's and Scarlet are working this week.
The R1's have made us serious money and not only impressed on set, have impressed in final delivery.
Yes I hate this raw file render process, but at least I can line up 200 clips base out the color and go to bed knowing I'll have prores in the morning ready to roll, even if the rockets aren't working.
Now If I was moving to something else it probably would have been Canon because they sort of get it. The 1dc shoots 4k and I like a dslr form factor, but it shoots a screwy codec and is limited on recording time at 4k which wouldn't have worked. At least Canon serves me on both ends stills and motion and Sony doesn't.
Panasonic can be just as screwy, though they seem to be on to something with the gh series if not for cost alone and when it comes to run and gun, the gh3's with their autofocus fits a niche I need the gh4's will expand upon that without throwing out all the lens mounts.
We're at a tipping point and Somebody needs to fill the niche, with not only motion cameras, but a complete motion to still solution that covers the on set and back end workflow.
Canon could do it, they're close, but they tend to mess around. Arri won't do it, they're a movie cam company, but right now for what I do they probably are the best solution except for costs, the Arri's make RED look cheap.
Also even though Arri is logical taking a 2.5 k file and making it 2k with a lot of depth, unlike red that takes 3.8 k and makes it 4, it's still going to be a 4k world whether I or anyone like it or not.
My bottom line is no more 10 grand and over cameras. What I have is on movie sets around the world and RED takes the back end response very seriously because they know in the land of motion, there is no redos.
RED is a love/hate company, I fall in the former, but my love is tempered by reality.
IMO
BC
-
Sony also changes media like I change socks.
'CineAlta' is seperate from the Nex(FS700) line (which all run on SD cards)
Cinealta cameras.
Sony EX1 - 2008ish- SxS cards - Used $2000
Sony EX3 - 2008ish- SxS cards Used $3000
Sony F3 - 2009ish - SxS cards Used $8000
Sony F5 - 2013 - SxS cards $15000
Sony F55 - 2013 - SxS cards $25000
Output 10bit to external pro res recorder - (all with the same cable professional SDi)
EX1
EX3
F3
F5
F55
Batteries, BPU60 or 12v input
EX1
EX3
F3
F5
F55
Sound, Stereo XLR
EX1
EX3
F3
F5
F55
Stereo HF jack,
EX1
EX3
F3
F5
F55
Seems like you don't change your socks enough :)
BTW they all have built in NDs too.
As for the NEX line - well that is a bit of a mess indeed.
Im quite with you, no more $10g cameras - thats why I bought the F3!
S
-
'CineAlta' is seperate from the Nex(FS700) line (which all run on SD cards)
Cinealta cameras.
Sony EX1 - 2008ish- SxS cards - Used $2000
Sony EX3 - 2008ish- SxS cards Used $3000
Sony F3 - 2009ish - SxS cards Used $8000
Sony F5 - 2013 - SxS cards $15000
Sony F55 - 2013 - SxS cards $25000
Output 10bit to external pro res recorder - (all with the same cable professional SDi)
EX1
EX3
F3
F5
F55
Batteries, BPU60 or 12v input
EX1
EX3
F3
F5
F55
Sound, Stereo XLR
EX1
EX3
F3
F5
F55
Stereo HF jack,
EX1
EX3
F3
F5
F55
Seems like you don't change your socks enough :)
BTW they all have built in NDs too.
As for the NEX line - well that is a bit of a mess indeed.
Im quite with you, no more $10g cameras - thats why I bought the F3!
S
I can put a prorezz recorder on the gh3's but adding weight somewhat defeats the purpose. I can also do the same with the RED's but the output is limited.
Sony is just a funny company and I know you dig their equipment, but they seem to just be everywhere in their line up.
During the last Zacuto shoot out with the F5, Sony was the only company that required they graded their own footage, through technicolor and the results weren't stunning.
That stuff freaks me out.
Anyway, it's kind of a mute point because I've spent the money for 4k and will live with it. Now, if Canon's c100 with autofocus shot 4k or 3.8 k in a prores format, I'd be seriously interested, but they don't they won't and life goes on but Canon is goofy with their C line up having dedicated mounts. Makes no sense.
Sony, I just got too burned with the fs100 and I didn't lightly glance over that camera, I busted ass to make it work and it had way too many issues with the file.
I respect what you bought, it made sense for you, maybe for me if I already hadn't made the investment in RED, but I have and I'll continue.
IMO
BC
-
Yep you have money in R1 and Scarlet - great cameras. Sometimes I think you should swap out for a couple of F5s, sometimes not.
I think it is certainly worth you trying a grade on a proper 10bit file - when I have one I might send it to you.
I feel that the proper 10bit codec (not 8bit in a 10bit wrapper as I guess the GH2 does) is not only quick on the workflow but very very deep in how you can grade (4xmore colour info), I have been describing it as "as good as raw but without the exposure slider"
Testing the F5 I shot a bunch of daylight on tungsten (on purpose) and then graded it back to daylight absolutely no problems
This 10bit stuff is really a codec worth checking as it presents a very good balance between muzzovision and raw.
S
-
I keep my files raw until final render.
I do a very rough one light in RED CINE, import to FCP-X which keeps pointers to the RED metadata files so if I make a change in RED CINE, then hop back to FCP-X, the change is instantly implemented.
If I think the edit is going to be heavy duty or I need to do it on a laptop, I render Proxies when I import to FCP-X, which doesn't take too long although admittedly I have a screaming system (12 core 2.93 MHz Mac Pro, dual GPU, striped SSD for work drives, RAID-1 2x4 TB media internal drive). Playback is just fine with 4K material. Editing via proxy with an older MacPro or MacBook is fine, and I just connect to the main Mac media drive come export time; I often have both Macs exporting at once. The load on the drive is fine since the whole thing is CPU bound not IO bound.
Since I need to turn around two short films per week, I generally grade by doing one lights in RED Cine, fine tuning clip to clip once the edit is done. Any additional mucking about with secondaries I do with FCP-X colour boards, plus a few plugins (Magic Bullet, FilmConvert primarily). Then just export as ProRes at the end of the sequence, so I only end up rendering the frames I'm actually using. I render final output (web MP4 etc) from the ProRes Master using Compressor which can chug away overnight if necessary. Then archive the FCP-X events, projects and final export ProRes.
When I have the leisure for a longer grade, I export the project to daVinci Resolve and finish there- round tripping is pretty slick.
No more screwing around with ProRes intermediates, always grading from the original is a great way to work.
Cheers, Hywel.
-
So your working in fcpx as an nle?
If I was working 64 bit I'd work the raws, but I'm still on 7.
I obviously don't like X, don't know premier either, but liking and using are different. I've cut one small effects edit on X and it was ok but an easy edit.
I have arranged for a fcpX tutor to come to our studios , when I return to LA if i get a week of downtime and walk me through it, because I'm never going to learn watching online videos.
The real problem I have with Premier and X is every outside source I work with, (and this covers a lot of territory) either works in 7 or avid. I've yet to meet an editor that is working in premier and X, unless they are in house working closed loop.
Not saying x or premier isn't good, It's just today they are not the standards 7 and avid are.
IMO
BC
I keep my files raw until final render.
I do a very rough one light in RED CINE, import to FCP-X which keeps pointers to the RED metadata files so if I make a change in RED CINE, then hop back to FCP-X, the change is instantly implemented.
If I think the edit is going to be heavy duty or I need to do it on a laptop, I render Proxies when I import to FCP-X, which doesn't take too long although admittedly I have a screaming system (12 core 2.93 MHz Mac Pro, dual GPU, striped SSD for work drives, RAID-1 2x4 TB media internal drive). Playback is just fine with 4K material. Editing via proxy with an older MacPro or MacBook is fine, and I just connect to the main Mac media drive come export time; I often have both Macs exporting at once. The load on the drive is fine since the whole thing is CPU bound not IO bound.
Since I need to turn around two short films per week, I generally grade by doing one lights in RED Cine, fine tuning clip to clip once the edit is done. Any additional mucking about with secondaries I do with FCP-X colour boards, plus a few plugins (Magic Bullet, FilmConvert primarily). Then just export as ProRes at the end of the sequence, so I only end up rendering the frames I'm actually using. I render final output (web MP4 etc) from the ProRes Master using Compressor which can chug away overnight if necessary. Then archive the FCP-X events, projects and final export ProRes.
When I have the leisure for a longer grade, I export the project to daVinci Resolve and finish there- round tripping is pretty slick.
No more screwing around with ProRes intermediates, always grading from the original is a great way to work.
Cheers, Hywel.
-
Ouch!
Sound, Monitoring (in the sun), long power, S35 220mbs, no moire, builtin ND, badboy all for less than $7k..
http://www.sammorganmoore.com/backlot/building-the-f3
-
Cooter have you tried the newer (perhaps still beta) versions of RedCine-X that use GPUs for debayer? It's way the hell faster than past versions if you have to live without a rocket. My MacBookPro Retina is playing back 5k Epic footage real time at 1/2 debayer off the Mags.
CB
One crazy thing I did today was going through some stills in lightroom I hit an RED folder and could see an R3d file in all it's glory, so I imported it and it took about 1 second to import and could play it out in what looked like full debayer in realtime with sound.
I tried to export it from lightroom but that didn't happen, though if you want to view and view easily without messing with all the cinex or red player stuff, try lightroom 4.4 for viewing.
(PS) just to be save I would try this on duplicate files.
BC
-
As long as Cinex won't have secondary capability
It's a pitty but there are ways to overcome the limitation.
I can't think of a more flexible and clean workflow using
The way Red structured the files and cleverly separated
The metadatas with the RMD files.
Because: setting the source settings using RMDs means
That we can affect the edit in real time without touching
The Timeline nor roundtrip to a color app and it works
Even on underpower units.
And....(roll drums)....
It's possible to do secondaries. The trick (and it's way faster
Than roundtrippin) is to work on layers where necesary.
The base edit has the primary correction assigned with one rmd
While you can add layers above the edit like we'd do in PS
Using the collapse (in fcp 7 "collapse has another name I
Don't remember), and assign rmds that correspond to
The 2nd color corrections but with tracked masks and
As much as you want, then it's mergin parameters etc...
Not touching the edit and only using cinex as a full color app
You cover all territories with just applying RMDs.
And no roundtripping to anything but just your nle
And just cinex opened.
Then...(roll drums 2)....
The very big advantage of this approach, a part from consuming
Almost no mem, is that batch application is a kid game.
Many times, a particular color correct will have to be
Applied in different parts of the edit. If you have done
A good bin organization, it's really fun how you can just
Hit a button and bang...all the desire parts of the edit
Corrected at once.
No roundtrip, no resolve, just NLE workflow. Clean.
What Red did best IMO is to have separated the metadatas
From the Raw, and that's not available in DNG.
The workflow I described is doable in Avid and probably
Doable in PP if it has tracking mask capability without
Going to AE. Probaly doable in FCP7 if it has the set source
Settings options but I don't know about it.
To recap the entire workflow from the beg:
- I do my edit with proxies if long
- when edit booked, I relink all to the R3Ds (10 seconds)
- I assign the primary CC assigning R3Ds to the corresponding
Files using the bins (not touching the edit)
- when secondaries are needed I collapse the segments,
Create layers with the duplicated footage and assign
The corresponding RMDs but this time with tracked masks.
As I can control the merging the possibilities are infinite.
It differs from a color app workflow in the sense that
Instead of coloring, what you actually do is merging
Different versions of the same image. But it leads to
The same goal: affecting the colors the way you want.
The edit remains untouched and if you open the project
A year later, you picture what's been done immediatly.
Doing versioning is also very easy and flexible.
All you need is: an NLE that can work with RMDs and
Has basic compositing tools.
-
My first poke with the F3 https://vimeo.com/79619001 pass w1
-
Wow. Looks pretty good from here. Wish I could have had one of those when I was a kid.
What wattage were your lights?
-
Wattage? Dark. $30 flouro work lights 2 150w dedo s and exterior a 6tube fake kino typically diffused with black sheet.
1600 at 2 or 2.5 getting the histo no higher than 70
To be honest I'd seek to lower the iso next time
-
Interesting, Sam. Thanks.
I was thinking that you'd used a small wattage fresnel on some of those closeups. LTM Pepper or similar, I thought. Close. :)
-
A Dedo DLH4 (http://www.uklight.co.uk/buy-dedolight-kd3b-3-head-150w-basic-dimmer-kit-soft-case.html) is indeed a small wattage Fresnel, very similar to a LTM Pepper..
I messed them up (for some shots) with a cookaloris made from scissor cut cardboard and some coloured gel
I find a straight fresnel challenging to work with, disliking hard shadows in the main but kind of learning to use them, coming from stills/strobe I am not experienced with a focus-able beam
For the later car work I used a couple of these.. Led Torch (https://www.google.co.uk/shopping/product/10572751499767426125?q=rolson+led+torch&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en&biw=1832&bih=930&dpr=1&ei=suWJUtrCLMiqhQfQooCwBg&ved=0CIkBEKYrMAM)
One on the dash to fill the face and one by his ear with green gel, both ND/Diffused with toilet paper.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BZRROvGCUAAz0mz.jpg)
You may also enjoy a possible opening shot, using my gopro on 2 axis stabilised head on a self-build boom https://vimeo.com/79593317
S