Juan Salvo
Forum Replies Created
-
If you’re letting your client make color critical decisions on an inadequate display that differ from the decisions they would make on adequate display, then yes, you’re engaged in malpractice.
That said, for 709 there are plenty of very cost effective displays that are quite adequate. Like the panny plasma you mentioned. I use a BT300 as my client displays. But when properly calibrated both client and reference display lead to the same decisions.
But the seiki display is not describing the same thing. If you’re finishing 709, why look at it in 4K? There’s no standard/distribution for that.
I’m not saying you have to spend 70K on a 4K projector, I’m saying you shouldn’t claim to be able to do 4K finish, on a $1500 Chinese knockoff panel. I see nothing wrong with using a plasma to do an HD finish.
Just use the appropriate gear for the job, and if you don’t have the gear be honest with your clients about what you can do.
[Neil Sadwelkar] “I ask because the distinction between consumer and pro gear is narrowing, DI and finishing budgets are shrinking”
A big part of the reason they are shrinking is because producers won’t know any better until the project is done, are going with shops that underbid, because they don’t have the right gear. They do what they can to make it look good in the room, regardless of the fact it won’t look like that anywhere else because it doesn’t adhere to standards.As far as the distinction between pro and consumer gear narrowing… when it comes to displays if anything it’s been widening of late. Edge lit white LED has become the norm. IPS panels are being phased out. Plasma is dying off. IGZO panels are fairly weak right now. If you look at any of the consumer 4K displays, they all leave a lot to be desired.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
[Vladimir Kucherov] ” What am I missing in terms of it not being fast enough for GPU work?”
PCIe 2.0 x16 is 80Gbps, and it’s a few years old. PCIe3.0 x16 is 128Gbps. Way faster than ThB2. But that’s not the only issue. There’s also much higher latency, and the fact that ThB is point-to-point interface.
As of today, ThB can’t support any GPUs. In the future the os may be updated to support this. And clever programming may allow for ThB 2.0s limited bandwidth to be used for GPGPU. But performance will still fall behind that of a 4 year old interface, and WAAY behind that of a modern one. Heck it’s even behind that of PCIe1.
That said, I’m sure clever people will make it work as best they can. Not to mention that there are a pair of onboard GPUs.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
Well I stand corrected. In my defense, I couldn’t seem to see this thing in the resolution that everyone else could… was there some trick? The link to me looked like 480P.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
[John Whitcomb] “I dont know, those $1500 4k 55” Seiki monitors are getting a lot of attention.
A few post houses are claiming that after ISF calibration they are good enough for color work. “
If by few (post houses) you mean one. And having seen the display, and tested it fairly thoroughly, I can confirm it’s very much a gimmick. (It is exactly and nothing more than it claims to be, a bargain priced, bottom market knockoff panel that can’t even do 709) Great for the price though. But ultimately a joke; Seiki, pronounced ‘Sucky’.[John Whitcomb] “Once you get into the area where even most professionals can’t tell the difference in color accuracy between 2 different displays, spending the extra $100k-200k for something that is intangible (and the client doesn’t get a sh!# about) is a hard sell.”
You’re not in this area when comparing a consumer projector to a DI projector. And you’re certainly not in this area when talking about a $1500 bottom market display.
There’s certainly a purpose and place for all tiers of equipment. And there’s no point in paying enormous sums just for it’s own sake. If you want to do 4K theatrical finishing though, you certainly need to meet a baseline of performance. The bargain products simply don’t do that.
Not to go off on a rant here, but there are some in our industry who are engaged in what is essentially malpractice.
Someone using a display that can’t even do 709 as a color critical device in a “DI” suite is doing his clients an enormous disservice. When their client goes to screen their “4K master” in the only true 4K enviroment currently available (a DCi Projector) and see something that is either entirely inaccurate, or inaccurate and also a minuscule fraction of what their original image was capable of, that hurts all of us who practice this craft. It reduces client confidence in all of us, if some are tricking them.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
You’re absolutely right. Although plenty of people want to be able to review footage through resolve at full res without necessarily using that image as a color critical evaluation. So all kinds of uses for stuff.
I don’t think the red laser projector if it ever does come to market will be truly viable for color critical evaluation either. I think it’ll be in the same park as the nice consumer projectors that are similarly priced. Laser light is inherently spikey.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
I thought we were talking about consumer products.
I think the comparable Sony would be the https://store.sony.com/p/VPL-VW1000ES/en/p/VPLVW1000ES
But I hope you don’t intend to use this for color critical work. For color critical 4K, you’d be looking at a steal for 50k. Meaning I don’t think there is a 50k product that can do color critical 4K display. Projection or otherwise.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
Just upscale. I think that’s pretty clear from the product website. You want 4K input look at the Sony.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
Sure it can. You just need to add a shaper lut. I’m a bit confused by what you mean working full range internally but grading out to head range? If inside resolve your intended black point (let’s say it’s true black) is falling on 0 and your intended white point is on 1024. Then you’re working full. If it’s at 64-960 (internally in resolves scopes, regardless of outside scopes) then you’re not working full, and would need a shaper lut feeding into the 3d transform.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
That’s quite cool. But unfortunately it won’t tell you, without identifying metadata embedded, what colorspace your media is in.
To answer Carmelo’s question. There is no tool that I know of that does this. Something like a dpx sequence is basically a blank slate. Those RGB values could represent anything. The format the media is in can be one indicator however. Don’t see a lot of 4:2:2 P3 material. But basically this is what colorist need to make a concerted effort to track. Naming conventions are a big part of this. And a good eye can usually spot the difference between p3 and 709. And xyz is pretty easy to spot.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author
-
Poynton is a very strong and vocal proponent of the BT.1886 standard and it’s corresponding 2.4 gamma. I think this is quickly becoming the defacto standard.
Colorist | Online Editor | Post Super | VFX Artist | BD Author