So... how do I do it?

[Martin Beek]

Hello Jim. Hoping you're still following this thread.
We're a year later in time now. We have RG3 and RC3.
Does this still apply:

So here is the secret... stay in RAW. Open with REDcolor2 and REDlogFilm or REDgamma2. Grade the crap out of it. Then output whatever you need. Do this in any number of apps that support the SDK. Pretty easy stuff.

What is the recommended gamma for best grading practice? (End format: DCP, not decided on grading tool yet)

Thanks,

Martin

[Phil Holland]

I'm certainly not Jim, but I can speak from Red shooter's perspective who handles post work as well (and also other's opinions I've gathered). RedColor3 is certainly the newest color science, but many shooters still prefer the look and feel of RedColor2 as it's pretty darn good. RedColor3 seems to provide what I would describe as a "denser color" which some may or may not like.

I use RedColor3, RedGamma3, and RedLogFilm personally. Just depends on what I'm doing.

From a colorist/post perspective RedLogFilm provides a ton of control. Mainly this year on commercials and music videos it's been RedColor3 and RedGamma3. For feature work it's been RedColor3 and RedLogFilm *usually*. Sometimes not though.

The bit from Jim's previous quote about "Grade the crap out of it. Then output whatever you need." is still the word. RedCode Raw is pretty damn flexible in post.

[Björn Benckert]

I'm certainly not Jim, but I can speak from Red shooter's perspective who handles post work as well (and also other's opinions I've gathered). RedColor3 is certainly the newest color science, but many shooters still prefer the look and feel of RedColor2 as it's pretty darn good. RedColor3 seems to provide what I would describe as a "denser color" which some may or may not like.

I use RedColor3, RedGamma3, and RedLogFilm personally. Just depends on what I'm doing.

From a colorist/post perspective RedLogFilm provides a ton of control. Mainly this year on commercials and music videos it's been RedColor3 and RedGamma3. For feature work it's been RedColor3 and RedLogFilm *usually*. Sometimes not though.

The bit from Jim's previous quote about "Grade the crap out of it. Then output whatever you need." is still the word. RedCode Raw is pretty damn flexible in post.

Not many Inferno / flame guys on this forum... but with the new smoke for free evaluation download and the coming smoke release. I think you guys should test the following...

r3d into smoke.
Set redcolor3 red log film
apply BFX
add a lut editor
set the lut editor to log to lin.
use the parameters in the lut editor.
apply a color warper node, refine and balance the colors.
apply a CC node grade...
apply an action node, modular keyers, etc....

I can not find any software out there that is even close in precision and control... makes resolve and the others look like iphone apps.. :)

[Gunleik Groven]

THX Bjorn!

[Jay A. Kelley]

Hi Jim (and fellow redusers),

Lighting is something I always want to learn more about, just wondering if you have any top recommendations for learning good lighting techniques. I know there are an abundance of "good" courses around, but honestly I find a huge amount of them just look cheesy and unnatural. What would you recommend for learning how to light in a way you would be enjoy watching in a cinema? Any pointers towards where I would find this knowledge would be received with open arms!

:)

Brad,

Because this is Jim's RECON thread I do not want to shill here, or derail the thread. I will say I have something for you that you might love.. So go check it out in the RED Discussion section.

[Hrvoje Simic]

Grading is not an exact science.

There is no "best stock" or "best paint" or "best brush". The same principle applies here.

If DoP did not light based on Redlogfilm and wants the starting point to be exactly what he saw on the set when he crafted the image, "Redlogfilm offers the largest range" becomes irrelevant. What's important is already "inside".
If DoP or anyone responsible for the final look prefers RC2, "RC3 is the latest" becomes irrelevant.

Variables in Raw development are dependant on creative aesthetic and workflow factors.

Any question formulated simply as "What's best..." is undefined and leads to incomplete answers.
Questions such as "What's best ... for ..." are much more effective.

[Nick Shaw]

If DoP did not light based on Redlogfilm and wants the starting point to be exactly what he saw on the set when he crafted the image, "Redlogfilm offers the largest range" becomes irrelevant.

I agree with the overall sentiment of what you are saying.

However I would argue that grading in REDlogFilm with a REDlogFilm to REDgamma(1,2 or 3) output LUT gives the most flexible solution in that you do have a start point which is exactly what you saw on set, but with the flexibility REDlogFilm allows to change things from that start point should you wish.

I obviously have a vested interest in promoting that approach because I sell REDlogFilm to REDgamma LUTs, but the reason I created those LUTs in the first place is because I genuinely believe this is the best approach (insofar as there is such a thing).

[Hrvoje Simic]

However I would argue that grading in REDlogFilm with a REDlogFilm to REDgamma(1,2 or 3) output LUT gives the most flexible solution in that you do have a start point which is exactly what you saw on set, but with the flexibility REDlogFilm allows to change things from that start point should you wish.

Notice the Conditional "should you wish". :)

Point being..."flexibility", in its typical perception, may not be the deciding factor when choosing "the best" route.
I understand your point though and agree with the advantage in the context suggested.


Proposing a few notions:

First: For the purpose of widening image shaping perception throughout the grading workflow, let me introduce the term "determinative basis".

Redlogfilm as a basis makes imagery "breathe" a certain way, allows being manipulated a certain way and allows greater flexibility - generally speaking. Redgamma used as a basis makes the image "breathe" a different way, image manipulations based on it have a different effect. Some crucially different, some almost unnoticeable.

If the desired manipulations are in accordance with the type of "breathing", instead of a limitation, this raw imagery's "determinative basis" acts as an aid to move the image in the chosen direction. This may or may not be an important factor to a colorist, but the option exists and it can be used in a creative or a functional way.

Second: Individual creative logic

A while back Mike nicely addressed different types of colorist approaches, the individual factor, often not taken into account. This factor may be also seen through various types of creative mindsets and their individual creative logic affecting properties of visualization, navigation and chronology throughout the creative process.

One type of creative mindset would involve the preference of a standardized, unified and a wide toolset. This is the type of mindset which first mentally builds up the technical structure, then focuses on the image with the toolset and options accustomed to (not addressing the UI, but grading workflow).

Other type and its extreme would be focusing on the image first, then building up the required toolset/strategy/approach along the way, with only the necessary yet adequate elements/steps/tools for the desired outcome. This approach includes understanding the aspects of prior mentioned "determinative basis".

If the image is "closer" to the desired outcome through Redgamma(s), and if individual logic, image requirements (per image or project) mostly do not involve going back to the Redlogfilm starting point, Redgamma(s) can be more suitable.

Third: Variables.

There are many people who prefer reducing variables to a minimum.
Less time and focus needed to take care of them, less requirements to inform all the people in charge of the image on-or-off the set, less chances of mistakes, less fiddling with the technical part, more focus on the creative part, current stage and the targeted outcome.


...



Not disputing your point, approach or type of priorities Nick, through which your LUTs make perfect sense.
Simply suggesting the notion of variety of contexts.

Two different examples: One extreme we had was having to create a "look" almost completely in post, and having to start from RLF for various reasons. Other extreme was just a slight intervention on fantastic DP work, based on one of other, more defined gammas used as a reference. RLF was completely redundant, and art direction and photography were so precise, so effective and perfected on set that any larger interventions would ruin the footage.

There is an understandable tendency for trying to define "The best" route in a grading workflow, and just sticking to it, as the tools have increased their complexity for many users, but in my experience there is none, nor there is a specific "Secret Sauce" applicable to everything.
Every thing brings own advantages with the cost of own drawbacks.


Many ways to bake the Raw...

[Nick Shaw]

Not disputing your point, approach or type of priorities Nick, through which your LUTs make perfect sense.
Simply suggesting the notion of variety.

Not disputing yours either ;-)

I don't think they necessarily conflict.

I'm all in favour of finding the most suitable approach for a given scenario – It's often what I get paid to do.

If I had to set up a standard approach for somebody which would work in most situations I would suggest a stack/node chain (depending on your grading system) which started with RAW decoded as REDlogFilm, followed by a "film grade" layer/node, followed by a REDlogFilm to REDgamma3 LUT followed by a "video grade" layer/node. That way you have three places you can make adjustments (or not) as you wish. 1) RED SDK parameters; 2) Log grade; 3) Video trim/grade.

Although this is not guaranteed to give you a start point of exactly what you saw on set if camera parameters other than ISO/FLUT and white balance were adjusted dramatically from defaults to set a look, as SDK parameters like contrast, brightness and curves applied to a REDlogFilm image followed by a LUT do not have exactly the same result as those same parameters applied to a REDgamma3 image.