FCP/red 2009

[Noah Kadner]

Noah,

Naw, I'm not even talking about Red anything with the Controller. I was thinking just to have a training on the use of a tactile controller like Wave using Color. Going through the Color workflow to grade a timeline of a project. From FCP to Color using Wave. That sounds nice.

Maybe the Red workflow somewhere down the road once Scarlet is out.

Oh that- it's actually shockingly intuitive. Like so intuitive that once you color correct with a controller like the Tangent(assuming you already know how to use Color) you'll wonder what you were thinking ever even attempting to use a mouse and keyboard. It's like playing the best videogame ever or being a virtuoso on a piano- dope.

Noah

[M Most]

mmost you are missing the point. When you are editing for standard def release you do not off line. The quality is full for standard def. The point is that with Cineform you can now edit with the same online model we all use for standard def. Edit once. It is your master.

I'm not talking about standard def release. Network television dramas are all finished in HD, but offlined in SD. That WAS my point. There is little interest in changing that model for a number of reasons, some of which would be the rental model for editing equipment that is used by nearly all television and most feature productions, the need for videotape delivery in television work, the ease and efficiency of a tape based workflow for those shows, the level of high end support available from post facilities, the time factors involved in a television post schedule, and the amount of material required to be kept on line at any given point in time. In short, it works, and it works well. There is little incentive to change it, and even less incentive to go to an even more compressed format than HDCam SR, D5, or even HDCam.

Of course, this is all based on the fact that the vast majority of television dramas are shot on film. If that changes, perhaps some of this will be re-examined, but my guess is that if a show today wanted to shoot on, say, a Red, the same post workflow would likely be used, with a facility converting the R3d files to HDCam SR, synching double system sound, and using the SR tape as the daily master.

[David Newman]

I'm not talking about standard def release. Network television dramas are all finished in HD, but offlined in SD. That WAS my point. There is little interest in changing that model for a number of reasons, some of which would be the rental model for editing equipment that is used by nearly all television and most feature productions, the need for videotape delivery in television work, the ease and efficiency of a tape based workflow for those shows, the level of high end support available from post facilities, the time factors involved in a television post schedule, and the amount of material required to be kept on line at any given point in time. In short, it works, and it works well. There is little incentive to change it, and even less incentive to go to an even more compressed format than HDCam SR, D5, or even HDCam.

Of course, this is all based on the fact that the vast majority of television dramas are shot on film. If that changes, perhaps some of this will be re-examined, but my guess is that if a show today wanted to shoot on, say, a Red, the same post workflow would likely be used, with a facility converting the R3d files to HDCam SR, synching double system sound, and using the SR tape as the daily master.

We understand that CineForm approach is not the traditional way, our bet is this will change over time, and it certain has already for part of the market.

Note: In terms of quality, CineForm is less compressed than HDCam, D5, or HDCam SR, and there is a lot of interest in removing these expensive decks from the workflow (certainly avoiding adding more.)

[M Most]

We understand that CineForm approach is not the traditional way, our bet is this will change over time, and it certain has already for part of the market.

Note: In terms of quality, CineForm is less compressed than HDCam, D5, or HDCam SR, and there is a lot of interest in removing these expensive decks from the workflow (certainly avoiding adding more.)

Decks are owned and operated by facilities who don't have a particularly strong interest in either not using them or removing them. They are not used by production and are not owned by production companies.

Network television post production is handled by a small number of very sophisticated and well equipped post facilities that do their job very well under very difficult schedules and circumstances. In other words, it works. And it works very reliably and very well. Individual productions, and even studios for the most part, have very little interest in becoming post facilities, particularly when those that already exist do the work - and do it well - for less than it would cost the studios to do it themselves. And they take on the technical responsibility for meeting network delivery requirements, which are extensive, complex, and get even more so every year. Every few years individual studios dabble in creating in house post facilities, and they abandon it a short time later because they discover what I just said is true. This has happened time and time again. I'm not saying that things will never change. What I am saying is that while film is still the dominant production medium for network dramas - and it still is, and will likely be for the next few years regardless of what else comes along - it is unlikely that the current methods of doing post production will change substantially, because what's done now works quite well.

The technical requirements and extremely tight turnarounds of network television demand extremely high quality, extremely high reliability, extreme technical sophistication, and the ability to do it all very fast. That is what the post facilities bring to the table, and what individual editorial teams can't, at least not while network deliveries are still on videotape.

[David Newman]

The key part is "certainly avoiding adding more", we have first hand knowledge of this. Post workflows are changing.

[Dylan Reeve]

I sometimes feel like I'm one of the few people who actually still likes the offline/online workflow. For any sort of series or long form work it just seems easier - we have a short series that shot something like 200 tapes. We offlineed at DV25, and still ended up using nearly 2TB for that. Holding all that material at any sort of HD finishing resolution wasn't an option for us, and was unnecessary.

Also, more importantly, I think, is that not all tools are created equal, some are better suited for finishing, and others are better suited to cutting. Also, the skills are different - many of the best editors wouldn't stand a chance of finishing something for broadcast.

I also like that the offline/online workflow creates clear delineations between different parts of the process. You know the cut is locked off once it leaves offline. It can be helpful for some directors, a sort of 'closure' I guess.

[Cynthia Ludwig]

The key part is "certainly avoiding adding more", we have first hand knowledge of this. Post workflows are changing.

David,
Do you have the numbers of features and TV shows that have changed their workflow. My guess... .02 percent. mmost brings up a valid point. Use the constructive criticism to make the "new workflow" more desirable, stable, functional and elegant. Some of us "Standard Posties" look forward to the day when we have no doubts about online/online being the better workflow. That time is not yet.