IN camera Preset LOOK, I know I will get killed for this

[BRANDON JAMESON]

Thank you!!!

[Waleed Al Shehhi]

its really nice ....

[z luye]

The delete metadata is clutch. Nice work.

[Paul Harding]

What lenses did you use?

[Von Thomas]

Thank you, I'm going to create a finall look that I want, and beauty of raw is, I can delete the meta data, if I screw up.
The looks helps me with lighting,contrast etc....! When I can see it live on the monitor

This is very good. As a long time still shooter (30+ years), I know that most times, every image is corrected after the shoot is taken. It' s luxury to run with image straight to print, and it is rare. That is why I an thousands of other photographers know that we squeeze as much out of the camera as we can, and we do the rest on the computer. RAW is a beautiful thing, and I will never tire of it.

To take a video (non RAW) image and manipulate it, is in fact tearing the image. This is the test we did back in the day. Open a fresh unaltered 8 bit jpeg image in PS, look at he histogram. The histogram has continuous information, now tweak it, crush the blacks, lift the highlights, alter the color, and finally check the histogram again, now you see a histogram, but with a less than perfect flow of color information, the comb effect. Here is an example of a badly exposed 8 bit image and it's histogram, and attempt to correct it, with the resulting histogram, notice the difference in the two. This effect happens as a result of image manipulation with an 8 bit non RAW image.



Now if you shoot underexposed, if you shoot without proper white balance settings on most non-RAW cameras, and have to adjust later in post, your image will be damaged to some degree. The ability to dial in your exposure as close as possible, and to dial in your white balance will insure less damage to your image, resulting in better image quality. I notice this when I DIT other non-RAW cameras.

I'm not sure how many still shooters we have on REDuser, but we know we have options in shooting, RAW or Jpeg, or RAW + Jpeg. Most photographers I worked with in New York shoot RAW, and process out their image to get a desired result. Jpeg was a quick was solution, but never the REAL solid image they want to submit to their client. I liken Jpeg to a video (non-RAW) file, burned in camera processed, less than.

I can't for the life of me, figure out why, a lot of todays shooters want the easy way. Everyone wants automatic, is that really filmmaking? If that is the case, Sony and all the rest are taking us out of the equation.

Oh, and dialing in your settings on the RED, sweet!

Viva the RAW, Viva the RED.

Von

[Marc Wielage]

Everyone from another side of the game (Sony Canon etc...) , are saying you can't get a good image straight out of your red, its flat, it's all in post, hour and hours. I think that is BSSSSS. SO i had PROVE IT.

Well, but: you're not getting the image straight out of Red. Are you not debayering it through RedCineXPro? No problem with that, but don't confuse this with getting an image right out of the camera.

I agree the image quality is fine (though the saturation is a little hyped up from what I see), but I think you can improve from there with reasonable color-correction. Post is a necessary part of the process, and it need not take "hours and hours" as you say. I often have told my clients, "we can color correct a movie in an hour per reel, an day per reel, or a week per reel -- your choice." I've had movies that took 8 hours to correct, and other movies that took 3 months to correct. The project expands to encompass the available time and budget.

[greg filipkowski]

"Well, but: you're not getting the image straight out of Red. You're processing it through RedCineXPro."

I dont have to process it thru redcine, unfortunately I'm FCP , waiting for the announced plugin, So just like any other footage from any other cam I have to render out the files to Proress. With this method, I throw inn the card in to red mag, Hit reneder All clips and go have a dinner. DONE:)

Lenses 24L 1.4 & 50 1.4

[Marc Wielage]

Sure you can just hit the go button and let it render. But the images will never be as good as they possibly can be without a final color-correction pass.

[Uli Plank]

Well, you can do a two-stage process: get them reasonably close to the intended look, render ProRes 4444 (or 422 HQ, if you can't afford it) and do a mild final grade.

Or get Premiere and Resolve ;-)

[George D.]

Hell, I wouldn't kill you for it. You've read my mind. The out-of-camera footage from our Red-One has always bothered me. I agree with you. I don't care if it is RAW and can be adjusted in post. I want to see it NOW with a lot more pazzaz than it normally would be.

I have set up our R1 as per your settings, but there are a few differences that I'd like to ask you about, since you know more about it than I do. I am still learning this camera.

- The FLUT will only go down to -4.0, so I guess I'll have to settle for that.

- And (I know this is stupid), but I cannot figure out how to change the Red Color to 3 and the Redgamma to 3.

Would you please be kind enough to tell me how to alter those settings in our Red-One so I can get closer to yours?

Thanks again, and I'm sure glad to know I'm not the only one that thinks that way.

Take care.

.