Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016

[Steve Connor]

Some interesting stuff but mostly a stand up sales pitch.

[David Roth weiss]

Did they color correct Michael’s on-camera interview in FCPX?

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los Angeles

David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.

[Oliver Peters]

[Steve Connor] “but mostly a stand up sales pitch.”

Agreed. But, if you strip out the hyperbole, there are some nice points described. However, as someone who’s done a lot with native media in all sorts of LEs and NLEs, I have to take exception with the “never before possible” claims. That’s actually more attributable to the fact that they shot with Alexa and used native ProRes media. “Never before accepted in Hollywood” would be a little more accurate. Nevertheless it’s still a solid workflow story and cudos to all involved.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Oliver Peters]

For more detail and less sales pitch, here’s a more involved discussion with the directors and editors.

https://vimeo.com/161709369

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Gregor Queck]

Great discussion.

Highlight: 27:48 – 29:06:
‘ It’s shocking how slow it is to work in that timeline (Avid)…….
….Avid could do this and Avid can do that. It isn’t until you get back in the program. Oh wait: It can’t. ‘

[Michael Gissing]

I must say I am most stunned that a feature with a reasonable budget would not shoot raw. Especially with 1000 VFX shots.

I also love the shot of the editing assistant with editor and a notebook is what they are looking at. Despite the awesome database, a good old piece of paper and a pen can triumph.

I also don’t understand the assertion that X is a database with an NLE and AVID is an NLE with a database. All edit systems are databases with a UI to perform editing. Surely they all are database first, NLE UI second. How can they be otherwise?

[Oliver Peters]

[Michael Gissing] “Especially with 1000 VFX shots”

Many of these shots are production fixes. Wire removal, boom removal, etc. So those 1,000 VFX shots are certainly different than the ones in “Deadpool” for example. But ProRes4444XQ from an Alexa are pretty amazing and I doubt raw would buy you anything.

[Michael Gissing] “I also don’t understand the assertion that X is a database with an NLE and AVID is an NLE with a database”

FCPX hyperbole. However, the integration of external data is very slick inside FCPX, especially data from script and audio.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Michael Gissing]

[Oliver Peters] “But ProRes4444XQ from an Alexa are pretty amazing and I doubt raw would buy you anything.”

Providing you don’t want access to ISO, Color temp, image sharpening, exposure and highlight recovery etc in the grade, then log ProRes is fine. At least it is 12 bit.

[Oliver Peters]

[Michael Gissing] “Providing you don’t want access to ISO, Color temp, image sharpening, exposure and highlight recovery etc”

Sure, but that would be true of any non-raw film. There are quite a lot of films these days that forego shooting raw because it isn’t worth the effort. Most films that are shot raw don’t deliver raw files to the color correction stage. All of Fincher’s RED films, for example. If you were shooting with film negative, effectively you’d have the exact same limitations. Same was true when Viper or F900 cameras were the digital cinema camera of the day.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Michael Gissing]

If they don’t use the raw to grade then sure, it’s a waste of space to shoot it, especially with controlled lighting.

Personally I am looking forward to my new camera (Ursa Mini 4.6) which can shoot UHD at 4:1 cDNG raw. The data rate is on par with ProRes4444HQ so why shoot non raw?