Marc Wielage
Forum Replies Created
-
The official configuration guide is here:
The guide is pretty specific, particularly about Mac hardware, and makes it clear you’re not going to get great performance out of machines with compromised GPUs and limited RAM (including most laptops & iMacs).
-
Use a computer and do a search for QuickTime Gamma Shift. Tell me what you see. This is not a Resolve problem.
Professionals learn to anticipate the problems and come up with solutions for them. I often say, “much of what I do is not color-correction… it’s problem solving.” Gamma shifts are solvable and predictable if you know what you’re doing.
You’re far better off working on a solution rather than griping about the problem. It’s as silly as somebody screaming about the weather. I’m the kind of guy who just dresses appropriately and grabs an umbrella just in case.
-
[Joseph Owens] ” A couple of years ago I was asked how great it would be if the whole post process could be accomplished in one application — because I had voiced an opinion that I would rather see a group of dedicated individuals and programs operating in concert. Well, we’re kind of into it now.”
Doh, I’m totally opposed to that. I get that there are low-budget people and students who have zero money and want to try an “all in one” program, but it’s not going to do the job.I continue to insist to anybody who’ll listen that editing, VFX, sound editing/mixing, and color are all four completely different skill sets. True, you can color correct a little bit in Avid and Premiere and FCP, and you can edit somewhat in Resolve, but I think you’re better off using a dedicated program to do each specific thing, with skilled professionals who know how to use them well.
Where I think the editing features in Resolve 12 will be useful is as an online tool, making last-minute changes, adding sophisticated titles, stitching together segments, syncing up the final track, and delivering the air version or theatrical version at the end. It’s basically Symphony for 2015, only with a very full-featured color-corrector. Nothing wrong with that.
I think trying to make one program that does everything is kind of like having a clock radio/refrigerator/microwave oven/dishwasher/garbage disposal in one package. What’s the point? It’s so much more flexible to have multiple devices you can use at one time, rather than one box that does each thing in a sort of half-assed way. I don’t have a problem with people who are skilled at several tasks, but even though I can mix in Pro Tools, I’ll be damned if I want to do that on the same box in which I’m color timing.
The biggest advantage I can see for splitting up editing, VFX, sound, and color is that you can have four people working simultaneously without getting in each other’s way. I tell producers (particularly TV people) that if you have segment 2 done, we can jump in and get that completely color-corrected before segment 1 is ready, and then just output everything at the end of the day. This can work great, particularly with last-minute changes.
-
Wait until you see the 1096-page manual for Resolve 12…
-
Go to Timeline mode. Select the node. Delete it.
I would also check to see if you have Groups turned on and have a Pre-Clip or Post-Clip correction applied. Pages 797-803 of the v11 manual. The Timeline mode is actually very useful, but you do have to be careful if you accidentally dropped a node in there that’s unintentionally affecting the entire project.
-
[Mark Linthicum] “Unfortunately it is not possible to finish in DaVinci, text and other graphics should not be color corrected with picture.”
Yeah, I’ve been working in post about 35 years, so I would be aware of that.You can actually add the titles within Resolve if you know and understand the Edit interface. The alternative would be simply to render the color-corrected background as a baked file, bring that into your editing program of choice, apply the graphics, then render those out and bring them back into Resolve without a color correction.
Read what I said again about checking scopes and using test signals, and see if it sinks in. Much of this has to do with Apple’s implementation of ProRes color space within QuickTime. You’ll find the same image in FCP7, FCPX, Resolve, different versions of Premiere, Avid, Vimeo, and YouTube all look different. Whose fault is it? Which is telling the truth?
I find the best course is to solve the problem and not look for blame. If you want absolute rock-solid images that don’t change, go with 10-bit DPX uncompressed, which will look the same everywhere (assuming the monitors are calibrated to a known standard). The only problem is, dealing with image files this massive is beyond the scope of average user’s hardware.
-
Add five seconds of bars and five seconds of 10-step grayscale to the head, then check the scopes. See how the program is interpreting levels, and adjust the settings accordingly. Also do a search on GAMMA SHIFT IN FCPX and see what you find.
Me personally, I think a better workflow is to do everything necessary in the editing software, then use Resolve last as final delivery. I try to avoid going back to the editing software if possible. But when you do, check the bars and make sure nothing is changing in terms of video level/data level. Note that dynamic range scaling and resolution scaling are two different things, so JoePo could well be correct.
-
Resolve can be the very final step in the post-production pipeline. Once you lock your edit, export an XML or an AAF from Premiere, import that into Resolve, re-conform the entire project, then color-correct it. Output that, and all you need to do is add titles. And in truth, Resolve can do some titling (all the titling if you provide graphics files with alpha channels).
-
[jake blackstone] “And let’s credit BMD, that they had managed to distort the color grading software business so much, that even the best of them left scratching their heads trying to decide how to survive in this market.”
I wouldn’t call it “distort,” but I agree that BMD’s “price disruption” philosophy follows Red and several other companies in drastically dropping prices over a short period of time. It’s a benefit to some and a disaster to others, but I think it’s inevitable and expected in a lot of ways.As I’ve said before, look at what an Avid Multi-camera Editing system cost in 2000: well over $100,000. It ain’t that now. Certain things have stayed very expensive, like lenses, but look at monitors. A BVM-32E was $35,000 15 years ago, and now you can get a better HD monitor for about half that. Hard drives have never been cheaper than they are today. And yet the prices for other things, like food, cars, and gasoline, still go up.
-
[Eric Klassen] “Marc, the RAW files needed to be retained on this project. The project was getting sent over to another company for testing on prototype Wide Color Space monitors.”
What is the delivery format? To my knowledge, it’s not possible to render out Raw in any way. Raw is strictly a camera format, not something that can come out of Resolve. And the monitors can’t play back Raw — they can only play back an actual color-corrected file in a specific color space.I think a lot of people cling to Raw when what they really mean is, they need all of the range of Log — which is not the same thing. A ProRes 444 Log file is going to give you 97% of what you need and will suffice for the vast number of most productions. If you need more, go with DPX. That seems to work for $150M-$200M blockbuster movies very well, and all you need is extremely fast drives and lots of GPUs.