-
color enhancement software
-
[walter biscardi] “If you have DV project that is going to mastered back to DV or DVCAM tape, you gain nothing going to ProRes and in fact you add another layer of 5:1 DV compression when you go to tape so you end up with a more highly compressed image than if you had stayed in a DV timeline. “
That’s just not true. If had been shot originally in DV, then fine, but the guy has 16mm film scans. Film will always have the most available information. From there on, you’ll always want to keep the highest possible quality in your workflow, no matter what your output is.
Generally, I think there are a lot of young people in the business who don’t care about formats or quality, but the fact is that those of us that edited tape-to-tape and had to worry about generation degredation, know better.
DV will have no additional information in Color. It won’t give you any hidden higlight/shadow detail, and even for this gentleman is doing, will give you minimum color information to work with. Might as well use the 3-way Color Corrector in Final Cut (almost).
ProRes scans will give a lot more information, although DPX would be best.
B.
-
[Bjarki Gudjonsson] “That’s just not true.”
It’s not true that if you take DV material, ingest it and color enhance in ProRes then lay back to DV or DVCAM tape you do not add another layer of 5:1 compression? You would have to feed ProRes back to the VTR via a video input, S-Video/Composite/Component.
Explain to me how the DV / DVCAM VTR does not add another layer of 5:1 DV compression to material that is being fed back via a video input.
[Bjarki Gudjonsson] “but the guy has 16mm film scans.”
Which if we go back to his follow-up post are in in DV / DV 50 format:
Currently, it’s in standard DV or DV50. Is there a good tutorial for doing this?
I am using DV50 and could render via 422 codec, but the final output is to DVCam so I’m not to worried about dealing with DV codec.So given all this information, there is zero to be gained by going to ProRes or even Uncompressed and then adding another layer of 5:1 compression to be added when you take that ProRes back to DVCAM.
[Bjarki Gudjonsson] “Generally, I think there are a lot of young people in the business who don’t care about formats or quality, but the fact is that those of us that edited tape-to-tape and had to worry about generation degredation, know better.”
Precisely. When I started at CNN it was all BetaSP / 3/4″ and 1″ deck to deck or CMX. Avid was just coming on line about the time I left and then we got into Media 100.
So using your argument, you’re adding a multi-generational loss by going to ProRes or any other format other than DV to this person’s issue.
DV tape to ProRes / Uncompressed back to DVCAM adds another full 5:1 compression on the way back to tape. The fact that he’s starting with 16mm scans is moot since the material is already on DV tape.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media“Foul Water, Fiery Serpent” now in Post.
Creative Cow Forum Host:
Apple Final Cut Pro, Apple Motion, Apple Color, AJA Kona, Business & Marketing, Maxx Digital. -
[Bjarki Gudjonsson] “DV will have no additional information in Color. It won’t give you any hidden higlight/shadow detail, and even for this gentleman is doing, will give you minimum color information to work with. Might as well use the 3-way Color Corrector in Final Cut (almost). “
The biggest problem throughout this thread is that Rick began it with ambiguity, stating “it’s either in DV or DV50,” as if the two codecs were the same, and interchangeable. As you and Walter both know, the two codecs operate in different color space, and are thus as different as night as and day. Only in his final post does Rick become definitive and state that the telecined material is in fact DV50.
So, there was an apples to oranges comparison built-in to this thread from the get go. However, beyond that, where you and Walter disagree, is simply that you, Bjarki, argue that it’s better to grade in 4:2:2 color space whether or not the final master is will be output to 4:1:1 DV — meanwhile Walter argues that it makes little difference what color space you work in for the CC if you are ultimately outputting to DV in 4:1:1.
I would tend to agree with you in this case Bjarki, because the important factor in this discussion is that the original telecined video is already in 4:2:2 color space, and thus CCing in 4:2:2 color space does in fact offer several advantages, even if it will ultimately mastered to DV in 4:1:1 color space.
1) CCing in 4:2:2 color space is easier, faster, and the quality is better, because of its greater latitude.
2) Outputting to 4:1:1 tape from the better 4:2:2 digital master has advantages as well even after compression, primarily due to the phenomenon of super-sampling, which yields more accurate interpolation of colors when sampled from a source with greater dynamic range.
3) Finally, CCing in 4:2:2 color space allows you to archive a 4:2:2 digital master, which is far superior for additional editing and/or subsequent repurposing.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los AngelesPOST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
A forum host of Creative COW’s Apple Final Cut Pro, Business & Marketing, Indie Film & Documentary, and Film History & Appreciations forums.
-
That’s pretty much what I’m trying to say. Thanks, David. I agree with you too, Walter, but the point you made in the fourth post of this thead is that when Rick says he has it in DV or DV50 you maintain that format doesn’t matter, which you know as well as I do isn’t true.
I did a project a year ago dealing with old film scans. I got the raw material on DV compressed QuickTimes and the producer wanted to squeeze more out of the footage. We went back and got uncompressed scans. It was a 3 minute historical ident for a shipping company, and I was surprised to see little nuances that I could tweak with those scans as opposed to the DV converted material.
My point here is, that you should try to keep your material at the best quality throughout your workflow. As soon as you comprimise, anything done after that point will be limited because of it.
I hope you understand what I’m trying to say.
B.
-
[Bjarki Gudjonsson] “Walter, but the point you made in the fourth post of this thead is that when Rick says he has it in DV or DV50 you maintain that format doesn’t matter, which you know as well as I do isn’t true.”
I guess I’ll explain it again. When I said “the format doesn’t matter” I meant in terms of which Color Correction Software you use.
As in, if you use DV, or DV50, or HD, or MPEG-2 or whatever, the format does not dictate the Color Correction software you use.
I hope that’s clear for everyone now.
As for the workflow in this project, I still say stay in DV since the final output of his project is DVCAM. Best to stay in that format all the way through so you know exactly what your master is going to look like before you finish.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media“Foul Water, Fiery Serpent” now in Post.
Creative Cow Forum Host:
Apple Final Cut Pro, Apple Motion, Apple Color, AJA Kona, Business & Marketing, Maxx Digital. -
Then we’ll agree to disagree.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up