Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down

Author Topic: wich codecs for grading ?  (Read 15949 times)


  • Guest
Re: wich codecs for grading ?
« Reply #60 on: August 25, 2011, 02:01:55 PM »

Imagine you already know this too, but ClipWrap will transcode to ProRes, & avoid the Quicktime glitches.

Thanks Bern.

Yes we use clipwrap and it works fast, better than the others, of course the footage still has to be graded.  That's where raw files are great, especially in multi cam because you can match them easily.

In regards to the Epic fans running, don't know, just read the note.  I do know we used our RED Ones in Bangkok and KL all at around 100f with 100% humidity and ran some very long takes without issue.

Maybe we got lucky.

For the FS100 I'll look at Able's settings.




  • Guest
Re: wich codecs for grading ?
« Reply #61 on: August 25, 2011, 02:03:06 PM »

Did a preliminary edit on fcp x during and after a client conference call.

As this cut will be eventually laid off to an effects house, it doesn't matter what program I work in as they will go through a few different processes.

The result?

For this type of work while you talk, the browser in X is genius.  You can see and scrub through every clip and just drag it in place (to refine it later).   You immediately know if the clip fits the dialog, etc.

Once the call was over did the semi final cut.  Now keep in mind I'm new to X and learning as we go.

X is fast in many ways and has most of the functionality of 7 with some added features, a lot of different or lost feature sets.

Setting in points have become easier, the color correction is good, but a ran into a few bugs.

First bug was all of a sudden I could not get any transition to work on the edit.  They just wouldn't link so I went through a few tutorials and google search, tried all the shortcut and long cut commands and nothing worked, so I made my own cross dissolves using the compositing (opacity) tool.

Second bug is exporting a movie.  First did prorezz to knock to to mp4 for web view, second did h264.

The prorezz versions exported well, with a little gamma change but not as much as on 7, though it did clip some highlights (???).

The second issue was using quicktime 7 to output and mp4 (while fcp X was still open), it would make an mp4 but all were somewhat damaged.  Some mp4 renders were blank, one had audio but no video.

So I moved the prorezz file to another machine and it made the mp4's so I could put them on the server for view.

Third bug is I shut down X to restart the machine and open up the ram and once fcp x opened my edit was still intact, but all the footage in the browser was gone.

As there is no manual function for reconnecting media, I tried reimporting it, but the browser would never show the footage.

At this point it's not the end of the world, but had this been an ongoing edit, I would have to restart the complete process which is kind of crazy given the fact that the edit is still on a timeline.

It's strange the edit is still listed in the bottom of events, but in the far left browser the event is missing.

Anyway, bottom line is once I learn X it's good, though my full faith and trust in it is somewhat limited and I would not go into a large project using it for the complete process as I don't really trust it (or me on X for that matter).

Since I travel and work multiple machines, the lack of manually reconnecting media is scary, but I could be missing something.

Oh and one more bug, it crashed in the middle of the edit, though it did save the edit and I lost no time.  Crashing seems to come when your analyzing a file for changing the speed or when you are overlaying clips with changing opacity.

Changing opacity and overlaying slows the system up considerably, though the rest of the functions are all real time.





  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2340
Re: wich codecs for grading ?
« Reply #62 on: August 25, 2011, 02:43:31 PM »

I dont know how X can be faster than 7 to actualy edit

7 goes as fast as my fingers?



  • Guest
Re: wich codecs for grading ?
« Reply #63 on: August 25, 2011, 07:52:09 PM »

This thread is now confusing me more than ever with the Red workflow.

I know that everybody has a personal workflow but all that seems frankly (unnecessary?) messy between convertions.

- Why not cutting directly with FCP7 with the proxies generated by the camera, grade re-linked RAW with a 700 euros DaVinci lite (saw it exactly 699 euros today in the crane supplier), and from there render to whatever?


- Why not getting a NLE that simply reads native R3D like Avid or Premiere, import the footage directly in the timeline, no need RedCineX, in Avid grade in Raw in the timeline or in premiere export the editing in your color app and export to your aims?
Even if you'd work with the proxies in Avid for speed, relinking to the rawfiles is direct so why having to generate ProRes from the beginning??


- using RedCine X, creating IS of your taste and from there work only in image sequences at full res or in PS or in Edius in proxy mode (for windows users). And then, DaVinci lite or Nuke or AE etc..?

It's true that the browser of FCPX is incredible. I'd like to have that in any NLE. But, thanks James to sweat in those testings and report, when I read the Coot's hands-on in a real workflow (that's important) I can't help thinking "great stuff" on one side and "to avoid like the plague for now" on the other side.

Now, I think the scenario to keep going serious projects on FCP7 and wait FCPX to be ready might be a good choice indeed. The only downside is that you are not free and depend on Apple's next release but it might be worth the wait.  The only alternative anyway is going Avid right now and have to spend a few weeks in a completly new learning. But you will be rock solid once done for any cases.

In Avid, you can apply filters or color correction instantanously to all the cuts. Let's say you have a timeline with 80 cuts. Well, you can apply a specific filter from sec 2 to 60,56 cuts, the apply a color correction from cut 10 to cut 30, and changing those parameters is visual, instant. You can cumulate as much of those (there must be a limit but haven't found it), they act a little bit like the layers in PS but with a third dimension: time. (each one of course is keyframeable). It's virtually impossible to go faster because the time you just think about what you want it's done.

I'm doing an editing in cinemascope ratio and I had some editing tasks I wanted to compare face to face between Avid and Edius 6 and really both are rock solid. They go to the same results differently and I would give a slightly advantage to Avid in terms of speed and to Edius because of real cinemascope in-out format but both are very fast in use indeed.
In fact, I can't think of a faster way because I was doing those things to use the Morgan's expression, at the speed of my fingers in the keyboard (and all with keyframes within the effects, masks, positions etc...).

About the Able's settings, the curves seem to me in the very line of the 5D2 Technicolor. Do they also provide a LUT?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2011, 10:00:50 PM by fredjeang »


  • Guest
Re: wich codecs for grading ?
« Reply #64 on: August 26, 2011, 04:41:46 AM »

This thread is now confusing me more than ever with the Red workflow.

I know that everybody has a personal workflow but all that seems frankly (unnecessary?) messy between convertions.

- Why not cutting directly with FCP7 with the proxies generated by the camera, grade re-linked RAW with a 700 euros DaVinci lite (saw it exactly 699 euros today in the crane supplier), and from there render to whatever?


In regards to RED workflow, the whole idea, IMO is to be able to make pleasing, matching prorezz clips that can be first used for editing, then manipulated to the style of the edit and overall motion piece.

To me using any of the .mov proxies is out of the quesiton because the color is way off and their is no noise reduction.  I don't want to start a client edit looking like that.

Whether you set the color in camera (any camera), or in a processor like Scratch, Cine X, etc.  it's rare if you don't have to go back to the files, (either the processed prorezz or the raws) and do some more work.

I think that's where X will overrun them all because right now their color correction is good and I assume will get much more detailed.

Maybe X will eventually run a 4k RED file, though I don't think it's absolutely necessary as any photographer, director, dp or editor always wants to change imagery for that special look.

In regards to FCP X.

I don't think I or anyone should take a 1.0 NLE and try to do heavy lifting with it.

I don't mean to get off track here but, Apple is smart and nobody but them knows where X is going, at least nobody I know so most people take a wait and see.

It has some great assets like the browser.  The browser is amazing and all the other standard NLE operations like markers, keyframes, etc. are good, different but good.

X still has bugs.  I just arrived in LA tonight and moved the edit to another machine.  Since I had ingested the project at full rez it came up on the screen first thing and I could continue to work, though in the middle of it all the clips on the timeline went to black and white.

They show up in the browser as color and the view window as color but in the timeline B+W.  I'm sure the next time I restart the computer they'll come back up, but right now, this program is just too new for me to risk a serious project on.

You still can't change a clip, work it in a color suite and replace the clip in the edit and have it connect which is kind of strange given a lot of people do work outside of the NLE once the final cut is locked. 

Still, running X on a machine for the price is a no brainer and it's worth it for some quick functions, like a quick color key, or effect.

I've been running X on an I7 Imac and tomorrow our 12 core comes in.  The 12 core is set up to eventually move to Avid which I may do, though with our deadlines I'll stay in 7 until I have more time.

Avid is fine, but it's not free of issues either or a long learning curve and whether it's Apple, Avid or Adobe I don't have a great deal of faith in any tech company playing nice with the other.

Googles recent purchases kind of signals that the major players are trying to emulate Apple and move to a proprietary world. 

Regardless, Avid, Edius, FCP Classic, Premier is old think and based on the "go to another program to do any serious effects process", put it in the timeline to see if ti works, then do it again. 

I think FCP X is a thought beyond that.

Everybody is talking about Apple today but you have to really hand it to Apple because they have the ability to look at the way people do things and completely ignore the normal process.    They go their own way against the advice of everyone and though I don't have a crystal ball, I think eventually X will make a much bigger change in NLE than FCP Classic ever did. 

This time it won't be a price comparison between a $100,000 NLE  vs. $1,000 FCP desktop,  it will eventually be a change in productivity, creative speed and the workflow we change to.  Also the ability to work as fast as you can think.

I'll admit I was way against X when it was introduced, as all I wanted was a faster FCP 7, but I jumped too soon and didn't look past my own keyboard.

Creative editing will always be complicated and take a lot of thought, but if you work X you can see a time when effects, masks, keying, key frames, coloration, stabilization, slow motion, could just become as simple as just dragging the cursor over a clip, making your adjustments  it, clicking it and dropping it in the timeline.

Almost as fast as I can write this.

At least that's what I'm hoping for.




  • Guest
Re: wich codecs for grading ?
« Reply #65 on: August 26, 2011, 06:02:34 AM »

Avid is not without issues, true.

I've been eating all the bloody learning curve and so far I can say that I'm mastering Media Composer to a 30 ish % of all its features, but I'm also seeing that taking further steps are now easier. As I've been through that adaptation process, I can comment a few points for the ones who might be interested in going Avid.

Is Avid slow and non-inuitive? My answer would be yes and no.

Concerning the editing itself, Avid is in fact fast to learn and start to cut with confidence, color correct, filtered, keying, tracking etc...that learning curve for someone who has already edited could be indeed fast.

Then, where Avid is frankly not friendly-user, is when it comes to more specialized tasks. Let's just generate an EDL from it and man, it's like a software in itself and the options are really for techs in the industry. So you see that and give up, like reading a book in chinese. But... when I managed to generate EDL from it after watching boring oscur tutorials and import in other programs, it bloody works while from Premiere it would eventualy works.

Bins are extremely powerfull and versatiles and not one editor in the market have such capability. But understanding the bins and their full capabilities is not specially intuitive. things like that.

Some say that the color correection tools are not powerfull enough. I beleived that at first, now I don't buy it. Color correct in Avid without leaving the editor is very powerfull and extremely reliable. Doing primaries or secondary but it has to be learned how and yes, that's not either something specially intuitive at first, but then, it's incredibly fast and efficient.

Not entering into details, for resuming, the learning curve in Avid is at the same time friendly and unfriendly, intuitive and tremendously not intuitive, depending where you look at and the background in edition.
But the good thing is that the unfriendliness is not in 80% of the tasks we generally need. No need to chase extra plug-ins like in Adobe and so on, all what's necessary for any workflow level is already inside.

There is nothing that Scratch or Looks can do you couldn't do inside Avid when one get the how.

The overall sensation when you get the basics in Avid is stability and efficiency. Then some irritating stuff like no DPX workflow, very unfriendly workflow with AVCHD...and I'm on Windows and ignore what could be the issues with Mac platforms.

But you realise very fast why it's the standard in this industry. When I use Premiere pro after Avid I have exactly the same feeling that when I tried the Gimp after PS.

So my resumed point is that: no fear of the learning curve in Avid, it's not that bad and even no perfect, you can't go wrong with it. Then going deeper into this software might be frustrating and rather unfriendly for newcomers in video like in my case. But I did it in the end and now the things I have to learn are not critical and I can keep going the learning very relaxed.

The TV guys here are absolutly addicted to it, to the absurd. But I can understand why such a thing.

And you know, we all want faster and more intuitive softwares, but it's also true that when we are used to a system we can work almost at the speed of light with some time on it. Honestly, if FCP7 didn't have those renders and renders, FCP users would probably not even think about another NLE.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2011, 07:19:52 AM by fredjeang »


  • Guest
Re: wich codecs for grading ?
« Reply #66 on: August 27, 2011, 06:06:57 PM »



  • Guest
Re: wich codecs for grading ?
« Reply #67 on: August 28, 2011, 02:13:59 PM »

not a bad workflow either right here....

We've done it two ways where we grade prior (small projects) or after (larger projects) and just use the pleasing dailies for editing in fcp 7 then go back to cine x for closer grading.

I've tried scratch, I don't see an difference between it and cine-x and we've just added di-vinici with a board running the Red Rocket though it just came in Friday so we haven't had a chance to go through it.

Actually it all pretty much comes out the same, whether you work a flat file in the editor or third party software, or try to make the prorezz files as exact as possible from the get go.

The biggest issue I have with FCP 7 and snow leopard is when you go to quicktime 7 for your final, you get a  flat, slightly overexposed quicktime file.   I see it on all of our snow leopard machines but it doesn't show as much on a leopard system, which I keep just for outputting various codecs.

Not to bring up fcpx again but the color correction tools in X are fast and very, very good.  Not as elaborate as color or di-vinci but you can see where they easily could be.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up