[Don Starnes]

[solved]

This is an artifact of the Fusion clip being inside a timeline inside of a compound clip in DaVinci Resolve. When I back out of the Fusion page and look at the image in the timeline, the saturation, etc., is correct.

This is odd, and surely a bug. This means that, in this arrangement, I can’t comp and see the image from this Merge node correctly in a Viewer at the same time. But: at least I can use the comp.

This Russian doll approach is my attempt to edit in a low resolution timeline and composite in full resolution. Fusion inputs stacked clips at the timeline resolution. To overcome this limitation, I edit each VFX sequence in a full resolution timeline inside a compound clip.

If you know of a better method for editing at low resolution and comping at high resolution, I’d love to know it!

I expect that Blackmagic Design will iron all of this out as it continues to better integrate Fusion into Resolve.

[Don Starnes]

Attachment: Merge1’s foreground input and output have the same waveform and vectorscope images

[Don Starnes]

Merge1’s foreground input and output have the same waveform and vectorscope images (the same brightness and saturation). Switching the viewers of each merge node doesn’t change its image (the Viewers LUTs match).

I can sort of match the input and output in the Viewer with a Color Corrector node before Merge1— while distorting Merge1‘s output signal, with a wildly different waveform and vectorscope image from its foreground input.

[Don Starnes]

Mike,

The following rant isn’t directed at you per se (we’ve never met and I assume that you are a good fellow); I’m directing this to Producers in general. I’m just taking the opportunity here to get this off of my chest:

I’m a long time DP who has been doing some producing and directing lately; I’ve hired people and been hired.

Just today, someone from one of the crewing agencies called wanting a union member (such as me) to shoot what is probably little more than a Powerpoint presentation at a hotel in October. What is my rate? I told them. But can’t you do it for 1/2 that?

I understand that different kinds of projects have different budgets. I understand that people feel compelled to race toward the bottom in order to capture gigs from the competition.

However, I’ve yet to see a show, no matter how low budget, where it was ok with the client if the footage turned out unusable.

Producers forget this when discussing rate, saying such silly things as “hey, it’s only a guy giving a presentation!” or “I can get anybody to do this job; why should I pay you anything like that rate?”, as though the camera people were dime a dozen.

My response? Assuming that this is so, then go ahead and hire some inexperienced person to do the job, pay them the low rates that you negotiated with your client, and roll the dice.

The bottom line: anytime you cut corners, you decrease the chances that the show will work and increase the chances that you’ll go to your client with only lame excuses about how you saved them money. It might work! Then again, it might not.

I can’t work that way, as a DP or as a Producer. I like to do a good job.

Charge your clients what it costs to do the show. Get the best people that you can. If you do this, chances are good that you will develop a reputation as being a guy who always delivers.

Don Starnes
Director / Director of Photography
http://www.donstarnes.com