-
BMCC alternate workflow
-
[Walter Soyka] “FCPX does not seem to be creating optimized media from my 16b TIFFs — there is no “High Quality Media” folder in my Events folder”
It would be within the render folder. But yes, I noticed that, too. Maybe it only does that for some graphic file formats, like JPEG.
BTW – to amend my earlier comment regarding the difference blends in X. I do actually see a difference on the waveform, but it’s only in the 0-2% range.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Thanks for testing this out Walter. It’s good to know FCP X is preserving the bit depth. I must have had create optimized media selected when I imported the 16 bit tiff. I’m going to do some further testing of FCP X’s handling of still images when I get back home next week. If I discover anything interesting I’ll post it here.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Ironically, FCPX seems to hint at having this capability.
We just need to know what is happening, and of course we need more options, see here:”
Not sure, Jeremy, but I think that set of Color Profiles should cover most needs, at least for the kind of stuff most of us work with.
Although I understand the theory behind Color Profiles and the need (at least for certain workflows/materials) of proper Color Managing, I have a few questions on the practical side. For example:
– When importing QT video (SD/HD) is FCPX aware of the different color profiles?
– What about when exporting video? Does FCPX (32bRGB) apply the proper Color Profile (Rec 601/709) un to the export format (NTSC/PAl/HD)?As long as we still working with a lot of QT stuff that (in my understanding) do not have a proper embed Color profile:
– In an average video workflow (you know with normal cameras/codecs that most of are are using, edit, Color Grading, add some home made graphics, and Broadcast, DVD or web delivery); it makes a real difference when improperly managing Rec 601/709 Color Profiles?The last question is about “sRGB/Rec-709”.
– Are they, lets say, interchangeable? I mean, if I’m making graphics in an application like Photoshop, to be put on top of HD footage, is sRGB the correct Working Space?
I have much more question, but if somebody give me some answers to those, I promise to keep the rest for my self, for a while.
rafael -
[Rafael Amador] “Not sure, Jeremy, but I think that set of Color Profiles should cover most needs, at least for the kind of stuff most of us work with.”
I guess I see it extended beyond color profiles and starting to use proper LUTs. With the proliferation of Log color sciences on almost any new and modern camera from cheap to astronomical, this will become ‘de rigueur’. It’d be nice to select a bunch of clips and apply a LUT via this drop down. Since many productions have more than one camera per shoot, and more than one log color science, you could then apply different LUTs to different footage without having to apply a separate filter. At least, that’s how I see it in my head.
[Rafael Amador] “- When importing QT video (SD/HD) is FCPX aware of the different color profiles? “
Why shouldn’t it?
[Rafael Amador] “- What about when exporting video? Does FCPX (32bRGB) apply the proper Color Profile (Rec 601/709) un to the export format (NTSC/PAl/HD)? “
There is no reason to apply a profile to everything. It really depends on your source material and of course your output. You shouldn’t have to mess with this option for regular video much at all, if ever.
[Rafael Amador] “it makes a real difference when improperly managing Rec 601/709 Color Profiles?”
It can make a difference on how it looks, yes. For the most part, you won’t have to touch anything unless you want to. In the case of this camera test we are talking about, with a proper raw importer you can select whatever profile you want. It is metadata.
[Rafael Amador] “- Are they, lets say, interchangeable? I mean, if I’m making graphics in an application like Photoshop, to be put on top of HD footage, is sRGB the correct Working Space? “
It depends on ow you want it to look. There is no right or wrong unless you have to match footage to other footage, or use exact RGB colors for client logos or branding.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I guess I see it extended beyond color profiles and starting to use proper LUTs. With the proliferation of Log color sciences on almost any new and modern camera from cheap to astronomical, this will become ………, you could then apply different LUTs to different footage without having to apply a separate filter. At least, that’s how I see it in my head.”
You are right. I’m still dealing with Color.[Jeremy Garchow] “[Rafael Amador] “- When importing QT video (SD/HD) is FCPX aware of the different color profiles? ”
Why shouldn’t it?”
[Jeremy Garchow] “[Rafael Amador] “- What about when exporting video? Does FCPX (32bRGB) apply the proper Color Profile (Rec 601/709) un to the export format (NTSC/PAl/HD)? ”There is no reason to apply a profile to everything. It really depends on your source material and of course your output. You shouldn’t have to mess with this option for regular video much at all, if ever.”
You can’t do a proper YUV>RGB conversion if you don’t know the Color Profile of the YUV stuff, and QT files do not flag the color profile.Most people takes for granted that all the HD is REC-709, and I guess that thousand of people that are shooting CANOND DSLRS don’t know that records HD Rec-601.
If you import Canon footage to FCPX (or whatever other application) and FCPX treat it as Rec-709, is doing a wrong conversion to RGB.[Jeremy Garchow] “[Rafael Amador] “- Are they, lets say, interchangeable? I mean, if I’m making graphics in an application like Photoshop, to be put on top of HD footage, is sRGB the correct Working Space? ”
It depends on ow you want it to look. There is no right or wrong unless you have to match footage to other footage, or use exact RGB colors for client logos or branding.”
Right.
Imagine that I want treat some Freeze Frames from HD stuff (Rec-709) to Photoshop, and back to the NLE.
Photoshop has no idea about Rec-709. Should I export the stills as sRGB to match better the video color?When I send video to AE, the video looks the same in sRGB than Rec-709, and both looks the same than FC canvas. If I do not set any Color Profile (Working Space), the color are very different.
rafael -
[Rafael Amador] “Imagine that I want treat some Freeze Frames from HD stuff (Rec-709) to Photoshop, and back to the NLE. Photoshop has no idea about Rec-709. Should I export the stills as sRGB to match better the video color?”
Photoshop does Rec. 709 — but it’s not available as a working space with the default color settings. If you click “More Options” in Photoshop’s Color Settings dialog box, “HDTV (Rec. 709)” will become available as a working space.
[Rafael Amador] “When I send video to AE, the video looks the same in sRGB than Rec-709, and both looks the same than FC canvas. If I do not set any Color Profile (Working Space), the color are very different.”
Here’s how Ae’s color management system works:
If color management is not enabled, then Ae makes no effort to ensure accuracy or consistency. RGB values are simply passed through as in any other unmanaged workflow.
If color management is enabled, then Ae interprets a footage item according to its embedded profile (or the profile defined by the user in Interpret Footage), transforms it to the working space where all calculations are performed, then optionally transforms it again to the monitor’s profile for display or to the output module’s color management space for render. This preserves the appearance of colors throughout the Ae workflow.
If you correctly set your source and output profiles, it doesn’t matter what your working space is set to — unless you linearize (as this affects computations), and as long it is large enough to contain the other spaces (to avoid clipping).
Practically speaking, if you have a single deliverable, I think it’s a good practice to base your working space on your deliverable (Rec. 709 in your example) as Ae bases the default output module profiles on the working space.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “If you correctly set your source and output profiles, it doesn’t matter what your working space is set to — unless you linearize (as this affects computations), and as long it is large enough to contain the other spaces (to avoid clipping). “
I worded this terribly, so I want to briefly revisit. I called out linearization specifically because it’s so markedly different from traditional video color spaces, but that’s misleading in that it falsely implies that only linearizing the working space changes the results of calculations.
As I mentioned above, the working space is the one common space into which all source colors are transformed for calculations (effects and blending).
With that in mind, imagine a source image with no applied effects or blends. If the working and display/output spaces are large enough, we can preserve the look of the original image from its source through the working space to the display and output spaces. Changing working spaces will not change the visual result (again, unless we choose a working space smaller than the output) because we are simply transforming the same perceived color through a series of different RGB representations in different color spaces.
Once we apply some effects or blends to the image that alter the image, changing the working space will change the output. Why? Because these effects and blends are really just math done on the RGB values for the pixels, not the colors those RGB values represent, and because different color spaces translate specific RGB values to actual perceived color differently.
However, there’s no right or wrong choice for working space (again with the proviso that it is large enough), because adjustments like these are made subjectively. If you were working in a different working space, you’d simply have to make different adjustments to get your same desired end result.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Rafael Amador] “You can’t do a proper YUV>RGB conversion if you don’t know the Color Profile of the YUV stuff, and QT files do not flag the color profile.”
I think you might be over thinking this.
What do you mean by “proper”?
What’s done is done. FCPX does not let you transform color on video files. The “Color Override” option goes away, and there’s a non changeable “color profile” field that simply lists HD or SD.
The footage that you have has been recorded and it looks the way it looks. In the case of the few Canon DSLRs that do shoot 601, there’s zero reason to transform them to 709. I mean, you can if you want to, but there’s really no reason to.
This is going back to my original post about this, is that I’d like more control of this for LUTs. The BMDCC, the footage is raw when shooting DNG. With raw, you have complete control on how to “develop” the image and can change it at any time. It would be nice if FCPX allowed this type of control on raw video formats as well. For Log video formats, it’d be nice to simply load a LUT through that drop down similar to loading a color profile.
[Rafael Amador] “If you import Canon footage to FCPX (or whatever other application) and FCPX treat it as Rec-709, is doing a wrong conversion to RGB.”
But it’s not “wrong”. The camera should be shooting 709, but editing and outputting a 601 source in a 709 container won’t do anything incorrectly. Even if you could transform the 601 to 709 in FCPX, that wills simply cause the color to look different than when it was shot. You will probably have a more difficult time as it will look one way in one application but not the next.
[Rafael Amador] “Imagine that I want treat some Freeze Frames from HD stuff (Rec-709) to Photoshop, and back to the NLE.
Photoshop has no idea about Rec-709. Should I export the stills as sRGB to match better the video color?”No. Don’t transform the color at all.
[Rafael Amador] “When I send video to AE, the video looks the same in sRGB than Rec-709, and both looks the same than FC canvas. If I do not set any Color Profile (Working Space), the color are very different.”
I never color manage in Ae as I find there’s no reason to with regular video (that is to say, there’s no reason to change what I am working on). If I am working with Log material, I will mostly use a LUT as it also transforms gamma. Of course, broadcast monitoring helps with all of this as you can see what you’re really getting is there’s no reason to transform the color space.
If you need to output to something different, like some sort of film or print stock, and transforming the color actually has some merit, then color management makes sense.
Jeremy
-
[Rafael Amador] “You can’t do a proper YUV>RGB conversion if you don’t know the Color Profile of the YUV stuff, and QT files do not flag the color profile.”
[Jeremy Garchow] “I think you might be over thinking this. What do you mean by “proper”?”
I assume he means preserving perceived color from the camera through post-production. Incorrectly interpreting a 601 Canon file as 709 is no different than using a wrong LUT for a specific camera in your previous example.
[Jeremy Garchow] “But it’s not “wrong”. The camera should be shooting 709, but editing and outputting a 601 source in a 709 container won’t do anything incorrectly. Even if you could transform the 601 to 709 in FCPX, that wills simply cause the color to look different than when it was shot. You will probably have a more difficult time as it will look one way in one application but not the next.”
If the Canon camera uses 601, then interpreting it as if were 709 (in other words, failing to transform it to 709 for HD editorial) will cause the color to look different. That’s Rafa’s point — if you’re assuming that the Canon is working in 709 when it is not, the color is wrong.
But yes, HD cameras should use 709, and it’s puzzling that the 5D apparently uses 601.
[Jeremy Garchow] “I never color manage in Ae as I find there’s no reason to with regular video (that is to say, there’s no reason to change what I am working on). If I am working with Log material, I will mostly use a LUT as it also transforms gamma.”
A LUT is a pre-computed transform from one specific color space to another.
A color profile describes a color space (like Rec. 709) or the response of a device (like your monitor) in terms of a common, device-independent color space like CIE XYZ.
Color management in Ae is unnecessary when the your inputs and outputs use the same color space. If you have multiple inputs from different spaces (or multiple outputs in different spaces), then color management automates their transformation to a common space. You could manually do this by applying LUTs to all your items, but you’d need different LUTs for each combination of input/output spaces. For example, if you’re working with a photo stored in Adobe RGB (1998) in an HD Rec. 709 project, you are not getting correct color unless you enable color management or have a LUT to transform from Adobe RGB to Rec. 709.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Of course, broadcast monitoring helps with all of this as you can see what you’re really getting is there’s no reason to transform the color space.”
For straight video, then you can practically make up for technical incorrectness in the grade. For compositing from multiple sources, this is far less practical.
If you need to ensure consistency across an entire workflow, some form of color management is necessary.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “I assume he means preserving perceived color from the camera through post-production. Incorrectly interpreting a 601 Canon file as 709 is no different than using a wrong LUT for a specific camera in your previous example.”
Yes, but that’s a human interaction. If you don’t touch a 601 recorded signal in a 709 container, nothing bad is going to happen, so therefore there’s nothing “improper”. There’s no reason to reinterpret this footage if working with normal video output.
[Walter Soyka] “If the Canon camera uses 601, then interpreting it as if were 709 (in other words, failing to transform it to 709 for HD editorial) will cause the color to look different. That’s Rafa’s point — if you’re assuming that the Canon is working in 709 when it is not, the color is wrong.”
I guess “wrong” is subjective then. Older Canon DSLRs record in 601. Of course this is meant to be 709 so that part is certainly wrong. So, when I edit in 709, I am not changing the colors of the original media, the colors remain just as recorded. If I change to 709, then the colors won’t be as recorded, and therefore they will be “wrong” even though they are technically now in the correct color space to match the container. You are applying an adjustment to something that doesn’t need adjustment.
[Walter Soyka] “For example, if you’re working with a photo stored in Adobe RGB (1998) in an HD Rec. 709 project, you are not getting correct color unless you enable color management or have a LUT to transform from Adobe RGB to Rec. 709.”
Yes, and I mentioned that it is highly dependent on your input and output. Rafael was asking specifically with QT media and regular video pipelines.
With photos , and certainly Raw photos, adding a color profile can certainly help you define an aesthetic look. The CinemaDNG files that we are talking about in this thread seems to come in as AdobeRGB1998. You can override them to 709, and the colors are different. Are either of those right or wrong, or are they just different? That is the advantage of raw is that you can define it, and it is just metadata so it’s not baked in and is changeable.
When you work with Red, you can define all different kinds of “color profiles” none of them are wrong, and none of them are right, even when you are destined for 709 delivery, you don’t have to choose the 709 color space.
[Walter Soyka] “A LUT is a pre-computed transform from one specific color space to another. “
OK. But it doesn’t have to be a specific or standard color space. It can be whatever you want when you create your own LUT similar to the Arri Looks creator. Sure I can conform it to within the 709 space, but I don’t have to. LUTs are different from color profiles, but the idea of transforming one space to another is not that much different in profiles and LUTs.
[Walter Soyka] “If you need to ensure consistency across an entire workflow, some form of color management is necessary.”
As I said in an earlier response to Rafael, it really depends on your input and output.
Rafael is asking about regular video and 709 QT media. There’s really not many reasons to touch this material with differing color profiles.
Jeremy
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up