Matching Multiple Cameras

[David Battistella]

Looking forward to multicam shoots.

How simple will it be to match multiple RED's?

Do you think there might be some sharing of looks (setups) on this forum?

Might the Red team ship some preset looks with the camera? (emulating some film stocks perhaps, I love the look of vision 320 for some period or "old world" shoots for example)?

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

I may have been covered but I searched and did not find anything.

Thanks,

David

[Brook Willard]

Since it shoots RAW, there won't be a need to match "looks" - you just get everything.

As for transferring LUTs and color info between cameras, it seems like this will be possible via SD cards. Time will tell.

I wouldn't expect any preset "looks" as looks are generally permanent and baked in. Since you're shooting RAW, you just capture all the data and work in your "look" in post. If you want to see a preview of what it'll look like on set [I.E. load a "look" into the camera as metadata for viewing purposes], you will be able to load LUTs and settings.

This is all based on what I've read... things may have changed or I may not have phrased it perfectly.

That said, there is also another thread on this about five threads down from yours. :)

[Shane Betts]

I reckon Brook's right. From my experience shooting RAW stills, all you need to do is get the histogram right and all else is done in post. That's not a downside (I thought so before I made the move) it's an incredible upside.

For the same reason we probably won't have a techo on set like with video cameras and we won't be looking at colour bars and waveforms and won't be calibrating on-set monitors. It's all in the histogram.

The worst thing I find is the guilt. I find myself looking over my shoulder to see if anyone notices how little actual thinking I'm doing - I don't feel like a pro anymore but the shots are the best I've ever taken in 25 years in the biz.

This is probably one of the reasons Peter Jackson could shoot 100 setups in two days. Just point it, get the histogram right (and lighting, composition etc...) and shoot. Everything else is up to the colourist. It's so poweful!

[David Battistella]

It might be nice to take those looks right through the post process, or at least use them as the foundation for teh CC process.

It would be nice to give a client a good "rough idea" of the look right on set. I am just thinking about it outside of feature production. I also like the idea of DP's creating styles and looks (like picking stocks, etc) and not just handing it over at the end of a shoot and have that represented as, "your work".

Maybe DP's are going to need to spend a bit more time in the post process with directors establishing the final looks of the films they make.

David

[Nick Shaw]

It might be nice to take those looks right through the post process, or at least use them as the foundation for teh CC process.

I think that's the idea. The 'look' gets stored in the meta-data with the RAW file, so is the default grade. You will of course be able to change it if you want.

[David Battistella]

That's great because that can and will affect shot composition, lighting, lens choices, etc..

It's great to have all of these tools in the toolbox.

As I understand it, from the thread below, these files are going to require a laptop, to upload to the camera? It would be nice to set these once and retrieve them from the SD cards as not everyone is going to have a laptop handly. Not every production is going to have sophisticated finishing, so a great baseline set of looks will be a great help.

David

[Jiri Bakala]

The idea of sharing settings via SD cards is great and it would likely also allow emailing these files. That way, if the production uses multiple cameras in multiple locations, the baseline 'look' can be established and shared. And as David mentioned, not every production is going to be using sophisticated finishing and extensive CC, so it would get things close enough from the get go.

[Shane Betts]

I think the sentiments are right but maybe we're not embracing the full power of this kind of workflow. IMHO this is how it will wind up working.

DP shoots, controlling lens selection, Tstop selection (DoF), lighting and composition but shooting at 4k using the histogram for exposure. The footage sent to post has as much data as possible. In other words, if you're after a Matrix kinda look, don't do it camera or you risk losing options later. No spectrum reducing filters, no under exposure or ISO fiddling to give the grungy look - just clean, open images in camera. After the cut is done, the DP then sits in on the grading process and stipulates the look.

The colourist effectively becomes part of the DP's department (and that's how it must be - don't let that guy get out of your control - image look is your job!) Director and DP (and colourist) can then find the ideal look with the full power available from the unrestricted digital image. Doing too much on set to control the eventual look may paint you into a corner down the track.

Like they tell doctors - first do no harm. It's all about post and that's going to be (has been for me) the hardest thing for those of us used to shooting film. There is so much less to do in camera. Relax and wait for the grade. And it doesn't take sophisticated finishing - any goose with FCP can do this stuff better than you can in camera. It's a brave new world guys!

[David Battistella]

Betsy,

I think this is correct. What I understand is that any look you put on the camera is in the metadata of the file. This means it is only a pointer to how you are asking the footage to play back, you are not baking the look into the recording. The original 4k recording always looks the same.

All that you are doing with a pre defined look is telling the recorded file how to look on playback. It's recording it as separate data, you aren't applying on to the recorded image. This is a nice start because you can establish looks (that can be altered later) but they will ultimately affect the way everybody works with the footage.

If stuff comes through looking completely clean, then this will affect how the images are edited. So to pass the footage to an editor with the base look will also affect the aesthetic of the film you set out to make. This is why I think having/creating a handfull of looks will be of great benifit. How you actually shoot a scene would change if you altered the color and contrast of the images on set.

This is very true of black and white vs. color. The style of the edit will change significantly if the editor is looking at BW images vs. color images. There is a different reverence for images and the footage will have a completely different effect if it is handed over as a "good baseline image" over one that has a look and feel established.

Also. The RED will not be limited to feature work so not every budget will allow for the workflow you are describing, so it still allows a DP to have some control, or demonstrate how the footage was intended to be screened.



David

[BigKahuna]

Color matching these cameras on a multi camera shoot is very important. We a video production facility that uses 2 to 3 cameras using old school triax connections to a video person who colors as we shoot. We (achem) attempted to change over to Canon HX-G1's shooting film style. Guess what. The cameras don't match ( I'm saying it as nicely as possible) even though we're setting them with the same SD Preset file. So we're spending too much time in Post Color Correcting scene by scene. I'm investigating RED to see if we can match these cameras easily. Is there software to Color Correct a preset file or are you just eye-balling it? We shoot multiple sets per day. How many presets does Red have? Can I edit them easily then pop the SD card in the other cameras to match them?

Does the camera have built in test patterns? SMPTE Color Bars?

So, I'll ask the original question again. How are you all matching cameras in multi-camera shoots.