Thx 4 tip
As of right now, I give up. Offsets and contrast with pivot control are awesome. Everything else is a disaster, unless you'd flip to the standard 3 color control. But switching back and forth is not something I plan on using. It's too bad, cause properly executed Log grading is so much better, than the standard LGG controls.
having no experience on Lustre or Baselight, I have nothing to compare to. But I find it useable in the default settings to "clean up" the blackest blacks without messing up the shadows. I guess it starts to act like targeted corrections using the curves but with ring / ball control...
I continue to experiment.
Thanks Guys ... been using the info on this discussion ... and have noticed my DPX files out of adobe, which are going to grading, looking a lot "better" (i.e. gradeable, smoother, more "filmish"). What i was doing before, the grading was "icky" and i was "forced" to use openexr to send to grading instead of dpx because of image issues. So my current takeway is "log" workflow helps on dpx output, which simplifies color grading (i'm assuming it's making the bits nicer in some way so that when the grading occurs, it is not clipping the wrong bits before it goes to grading).
Are you exporting DPX/EXRs for VFX purpose? Otherwise, why are you not grading the R3Ds directly?
In regards to "grade-ability", I agree with you 100%: much more control, hence more cinematic feel. Still trying to "master" this a bit better, but so far, way better results...
I have kind of given up using the color grading functions of AE and have decided to just send this complex composite as a single DPX to Davinci(this btw also allows me to have someone competent [i.e. not me] do the final color grading). I tried doing complex compositing in Davinci but I know AE perty well, and had much better luck with AE(the other high end compositing systems that the big guys use hurt my brain btw). My compositing step is also a bit mixed with "editing", so is something i have to do. arghh ... i'm sure there is a better way to do it ... but that's what is at the limit of me doing it. This is for "puddles of light" btw, everything else i do i'm either doing concept art or finance (one or two companies away from production).
I know of a West side colorist (a major name who has three more Ferraris than I do) who color-corrects entirely in Linear, and has done some of the biggest DI projects of the last five years. So it can be done. There's lots of different ways of crossing the finish line.
LUTs are mandatory for a lot of material, but that's not necessarily using log controls on the console. My point is that there's a lot of way to pull this off.
Everybody at the same facility generally follows his lead and works in a similar way; I know people at a totally different West side facility who also use linear grading. I think often, it's the "old guard" colorists who work in linear, simply because it relates more closely to the way they worked in the 1980s and 1990s.
I've gone back and forth and tried it both ways, and there are pros and cons either way. I think linear is faster for my style of work, but I do use a LUT and a base correction to bring the file in line before I start correcting. But a lot depends with the nature of the material and how good/bad/ugly it is.
I do agree with you 100% that doing this totally with a mouse is very hard. I was floored to see the eFilm guys doing this in the early 2000s, and yet they were able to get out decent work for a long time, prior to their adapting to control surfaces.
One thing i dont get from log grading is the way is behaves. It really goes weird quickly. Or am i doing it the wrong way ? Especially the mids control.
Is this how log control behaves in other di system ?
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|