-
So many ways to color correct…
-
[Chris Wright] ” try L*A*B color. your head will explode. it’s very powerful.”
Is that an option in Resolve? Head exploding in a good way I hope
-
[Michael Gissing] “Is that an option in Resolve? Head exploding in a good way I hope”
It’s a kludge to actually use so heads are exploding trying to deal with it. Some people have made workflows for it.
-
Thanks Michael for that indepth description of your workflow. Much appreciated. Thanks to all you guys. Who thought this question would get so many responses from the heavyweights here. Cheers!
Dell XPS 8920
Intel i7 core 7700 build
GeForce GTX 1050ti
32 Gigs of RAM
3 7200 RPM SATA Drives
Windows 10 64-bit
DaVinci Resolve 14.2 -
[Duke Sweden] ” I trust Aram K although he normally works with RAW files. “
On this topic, how do you folks feel about working on a project originally shot on RED but handed down a DNxHD file with no way of getting the RAW footage?
Currently struggling with one now 🙁
-
Unless something really bad happened in the transcode I actually would prefer Prores or DNxHD/HR files.
-
[Tero Ahlfors] “Unless something really bad happened in the transcode I actually would prefer Prores or DNxHD/HR files.”
A lot has happened but I am more proficient with RED RAW files.
Then, of course, there is the “what if I need the 4K and up version of this movie” problem 😛
-
[Eric Santiago] “Then, of course, there is the “what if I need the 4K and up version of this movie” problem”
I always prefer to have the R3D files. These days editors punch in on shots as many DPs are encouraged to frame wider. Stabilising shots also punches in so I prefer to have the files that let me do this, not an HD baked version. Also fixing exposure or color temp issues, I much prefer RAW.
And these days I mostly work to a UHD finish timeline and make the lower res deliverables from that. Basic future proofing. It doesn’t cost much more to do it properly but redoing later does. False economy. Just wait till they tell you they want to sell to Netflix.
-
[Michael Gissing] “I always prefer to have the R3D files. These days editors punch in on shots as many DPs are encouraged to frame wider. Stabilising shots also punches in so I prefer to have the files that let me do this, not an HD baked version. Also fixing exposure or color temp issues, I much prefer RAW. “
All the major Hollywood features almost always use DPX, EXR, or (for TV) ProRes 444. You can always render in high-res, which will still take advantage of the larger frame size.When I get a project shot on Red where, for efficiency reasons, we have to finish in ProRes, I always try to supervise the transcode process so that I know the debayering and rendering are all done at optimum levels. It’s only when I get backed into a corner — like when the color temp or ISO is screwed — that we have to either re-render or make a drastic change.
-
[Marc Weilage] “All the major Hollywood features almost always use DPX, EXR, or (for TV) ProRes 444”
The irony there is the file sizes are sometimes as big or bigger than the 8:1 compressed 6k RAW.
-
[Michael Gissing] “The irony there is the file sizes are sometimes as big or bigger than the 8:1 compressed 6k RAW.”
If the storage/workflow is specced for large resolution image sequences they’ll probably run better than compressed RAW because you don’t need to spend computing power uncompressing it.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up