[Michaelmaier]

9.1. was crashing when I upgraded and I couldn’t figure why. So I went back to 9.0.4

[Michaelmaier]

[Joseph Owens] “It is difficult for most FX people to be able to grade in context, usually because they don’t have judgement monitors to work with, and the big limitation — don’t have the benefit of seeing an entire scene – they usually only have the clip with handles – so have no idea where this came from or where its going.”

So are you saying that you would rather grade VFX shots after the VFX are done then?

[Michaelmaier]

I was not talking about pre-grading. I was talking about fully grading it, giving it a look and then sending the plate to them. I know VFX artists can match plate colors. But when you already have a stylized look to the plate it makes it more difficult.

[Michaelmaier]

Yeah, I know. Budget. 🙁

But for the clips that become problematic, maybe I could ask the mattes to the VFX people to try to isolate the problem? Unless most of the clips would become problematic.

It’s starting to look like you either trust the compositor to match the added elements to your graded look or you have a lot more work. Dang!

[Michaelmaier]

[Mike Most] “It’s the standard way of doing things for the reasons you mention and others. In theatrical features, there are changes going on right up until release time. There are also multiple versions, some of which have different material. The DCP operates with the concept of a composition play list, which specifies which frames to play from which files in which order. This allows for packages to be created that have the same “essence” files, but different files for things like audio, subtitles, etc.. Not only that, but you can create “supplemental” packages that allow you to insert sequences or shots from different essence files in the proper place during play out. Having the picture finished by reels allows this kind of flexibility to be much simpler to implement and program. You can create a DCP with one full length essence track, but no studio level theatrical features are done that way.”

Ok. But so it also means that you no longer need to mind the reels during editing right? It can be arbitrarily split anywhere and using any criteria. Because back in the film projection days, unless you wanted the audience to know exactly when the projectionist would change the reel, you had to mind it during the editing and have the splits in places that would make sense.

[Michaelmaier]

Another outstanding post Chris! Thanks.

[Chris Kenny] “Hmm. We grade Alexa-originated ProRes 4444 (on Windows) on a fairly regular basis, without apparent issue.”

Maybe the Alexas are set to REC709? This highlight clipping I mention with Prores only happens with clips recorded in full swing. REC709 will already probably shrink that range to fit within video levels.

[Chris Kenny] “and we’ve found smaller gamma shifts (no visible difference, very slight change on scopes) with ProRes than with essentially any other QuickTime codec, including QuickTime-wrapped DNxHD”

I only use DNxHD wrapped in quicktime since many programs have a problem with MXF. Maybe I should do some more tests but I haven’t found any significant gamma shifts with DNxHD QT.

[Chris Kenny] “As far as I know Blender doesn’t support video I/O hardware, so the question again is, how are you going to be able to watch the piece with ‘real’ monitoring as you’re working on it?”

I really have no idea. If it doesn’t then yes, could be a problem. Although I would never grade in Blender. I’m in love with Resolve. 🙂

But they made a whole movie in Blender called Tears of Steel. It’s the latest open movie from the Blender Foundation and it’s live action+VFX. So somehow they managed it.

Besides the potential I/O problem, it seems to me like the best option apart from Smoke. You got all in there in one app and you can do real video editing.

[Chris Kenny] “We generally fully conform features in Resolve, even when we’re outputting to ProRes and/or generating final deliverables in another app. Why? Because we never know when clients are done making changes…So we’ve found that while it might seem like more work up front to get every title, every VFX shot, etc. dropped into place in Resolve, it saves time in the end.
“

Sounds very interesting. If you have the time I would love to know the workflow you use for this. Finishing in Resolve seems to be the most appealing to me for some of the same reasons you mention.

[Chris Kenny] “A QuickTime file doesn’t just contain a particular number of audio tracks; those tracks can be configured in specific ways. So, for instance, having six mono tracks in a QuickTime movie is not the same as having a 5.1 mix in it, or three stereo pairs, or whatever, despite the fact that all of those are six tracks. As far as I’m aware, while Resolve can export pretty much any number of audio tracks, there’s no way to specify what they are like this.

Honestly I’m not sure e.g. Smoke actually addresses this either, though. By far the easiest way we’ve found to handle it is via roles in FCP X. Of course you might not actually need to care about this when delivering many projects.”

So you are saying for example that you couldn’t conform and output a show with a 5.1 track from Resolve?

Thanks again Chris. This has been a great chat and I’m learning a lot.

[Michaelmaier]

[Clark Bierbaum] “EFX is hard to do (see) on log footage but if the file they return has been linearized it may be hard to match with the camera original footage. I’ve had LOG background plates with linear foreground elements, FUN!”

I will be working with DNxHD for this specific project.

[Clark Bierbaum] “It’s always nice to hear from the client they are using someone who gets all of this. I spent many hours dealing with elements from people who don’t and it really is frustrating, especially when working for a fixed price!”

I can definitely relate to that. 🙁

[Michaelmaier]

[Chris Kenny] “There are two downsides to grading afterwards. One is that depending on where you take the grade, there’s a possibility that artifacts that weren’t visible in the ungraded shot — like imperfectly matched black levels for different elements, edges of rotoscoped objects, etc. — may become visible.”

In that case, just send it back to the VFX guy to correct it? 🙂
Unless I misunderstood you?

[Chris Kenny] “The other is that if you’re working with raw footage (like R3D or ARRIRAW), whatever settings were used to decode that footage to do the VFX work will be baked into the VFX shot. So, for instance, if you’ve decided to change the raw white balance of a bunch of shots in a scene, but there’s one VFX shot containing elements that were ‘developed’ with the in-camera white balance, you might have some tricky matching issues.”

I will be working with DNxHD files for this specific project.

[Michaelmaier]

Thanks.

But it also means to depend more on the VFX people, which always complicates things. Do you see any problems with just grading after? Grading the finished shots that is.
Besides, I’m not talking shots with only one or two elements.

[Michaelmaier]

I see.

Smoke, sure. But compared to a NLE, Resolve just seems to have so many more appropriated tools for finishing. High end grading, denoise, scale, sharpening,reframing,stabilization, cosmetic touch ups, smoothing out skin blemishes, power windows etc all at the touch of a button. Most NLEs can’t even come close. This is why Resolve looks so tempting.

If you have Smoke this is no longer a question of course.