What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

The place for questions about shooting with Blackmagic Cameras.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

Ulysses Paiva

  • Posts: 813
  • Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 8:32 pm
  • Location: Pernambuco, Brasil

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 11:28 am

Chris Whitten wrote:FWIW my 'beginner' view....
I've spent hours watching and rewatching Resolve tutorials. I've spent money on courses, for example at Ripple Training. Grading in Resolve is a very steep learning curve for beginners, at least for me.
I personally have found it easier to adjust my footage using the correction tools than using a LUT.
For me I try to get the shot as good as I can in camera. Of course in situations of a main subject in shadow, while other parts of the scene are bathed in hard, bright sun, are going to be a challenge. It's going to involve compromise, where some of the brighter parts of the image might be blown out, unrecoverable.

Both the camera (P4k) and Davinci Resolve are complex to use properly. If I'm having issues I know it's down to me, not the product. I wouldn't say using LUTs is 'essential' for beginners. If I get my CDNG or BRAW footage right in the camera, I find it relatively easy to get it to stage one viewable in Resolve using the wheels and curves.


Great! Now you got it! Only thing left is practice. That, no one can avoid. But you are exactly right on the path now, you showed you're an intelligent guy. I never use LUTs. In the beginning, I didnt cause I wanted to learn and practice. Then, I dont use because now I know how to do my own way. But we never stop learning.

Be sure of 1 true thing: You got high quality tools that are more than enough to let you do great work. Now it is up to you only. And be patient, its not easy and not quick, but it comes and you will love it everyday.
Ulysses Paiva
UPMD Filmes
http://www.upmdfilmes.com.br
Offline

Chris Whitten

  • Posts: 501
  • Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 11:40 am

Tyler Edwards demonstrates an easy workflow - also using a LUT right from the beginning.
The grading bit starts at 5 minutes in:



I never claimed it was wrong to use that workflow. I have decent results making exposure, contrast and saturation adjustments myself, once I have applied the correct settings in the camera raw window.

I use LUTs too depending on the project.

Back on the original topic. The BRAW footage in the Edwards video doesn't look poor quality or destroyed by the adjustments he makes in highlight or shadow recovery and contrast.
Chris Whitten
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 3043
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 11:45 am

Brad Hurley wrote:I think this is a lost cause


Boy, is it ever. It's funny to think that the OP actually followed the [bad] advice being given here, even though he hadn't yet heard it. And with such great results.

I believe examples of Ray's work was recently cited in another thread, and as I recall Ulysses posted samples of his grading some time back. It's for others to decide whether they admire the work or not.

However, the proof of the procedures some of the rest of us are advocating need no justification: they're industry standards. If you want evidence color management works, look at a Hollywood movie, or commercials on TV.
Offline

Chris Whitten

  • Posts: 501
  • Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 11:54 am

I'm neither a film maker or colourist professional.
This was shot on Pocket 4K with vintage lenses (C Mount Kodak) in Q5 Braw.
Once I had done my best to manually adjust the raw footage in Resolve I stuck a LUT on the end to add character - film grain, more saturation, and colour shift.
So, in terms of a 'Hollywood' standard look, no I'm not capable of that level of quality, and luckily it is largely not expected in music video.
Most of my errors occur at the shooting stage. I am not a cameraman and am working in a very dim studio space.
I'm very much a beginner at Resolve and grading in general.
Chris Whitten
Offline

Chris S

  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:04 pm
  • Real Name: Chris Sagherian

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 2:08 pm

John Paines wrote:But what's terrible first and foremost is your "grading".

This isn't a grade, this was simply trying to add a little color and recover shadows and highlights. Which is impossible with this kind of footage in a dynamic shot like this. I'll happily send you the BRAW file so you can show me what it should look like?
Offline

Chris S

  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:04 pm
  • Real Name: Chris Sagherian

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 2:14 pm

John Paines wrote:Boy, is it ever. It's funny to think that the OP actually followed the [bad] advice being given here, even though he hadn't yet heard it. And with such great results.


My point by providing that example was not to say I need advice on how to grade. Or have no clue. Or that that advice was correct or not. It was more to prove the theory wrong. That doing it that way will produce no better results, because the data is simply NOT in the file, luts, grading from scratch or not.

Now can you please add something valuable to the post, like what your thoughts are on why those shadows look like absolute garbage.
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 3043
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 2:21 pm

Upload the shot, or a portion of it, to dropbox or other similar service, and post a link here or PM me with it. If you're a recent forum member and try to post the link in the forum, you may need to add a space somewhere, for the forum system to accept it.

No doubt other people here will also take a crack at it. Which is all to the good! My interest is not in making it beautiful, but determining how much data is actually present, and ensuring that this data is fully represented in an initial adjustment -- the starting point for grading.

You can trim the braw file in Media Manager to as little as one frame. Consult the manual if the Media Manager is unfamiliar. Or just upload the entire file, if it's of manageable size.
Offline

Chris S

  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:04 pm
  • Real Name: Chris Sagherian

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 2:28 pm

Chris S wrote:
John Paines wrote:Boy, is it ever. It's funny to think that the OP actually followed the [bad] advice being given here, even though he hadn't yet heard it. And with such great results.


John this is the original file. The shadows are garbage in this .BRAW file. You can honestly tell me this image has 12-13 stops of DR?

No amount of grading will fix that.

Which brings me to my point about ISO 800 - Is it possible ISO 400 is just the magic ISO?

Image
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 3043
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 2:31 pm

I need the actual file. Not a picture of it. Otherwise, this is a waste of time.
Offline
User avatar

Ulysses Paiva

  • Posts: 813
  • Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 8:32 pm
  • Location: Pernambuco, Brasil

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 2:35 pm

Chris S wrote:
Chris S wrote:
John Paines wrote:Boy, is it ever. It's funny to think that the OP actually followed the [bad] advice being given here, even though he hadn't yet heard it. And with such great results.


John this is the original file. The shadows are garbage in this .BRAW file. You can honestly tell me this image has 12-13 stops of DR?

No amount of grading will fix that.

Which brings me to my point about ISO 800 - Is it possible ISO 400 is just the magic ISO?

Image


Chris, this image you shot has MUCH more than 13 stops in it. The difference between a sunlit area and a shadowed area can go above 20 stops. The problem is not with the camera or the codec, is with the way you shot it. Again, you are relying on the gear to magically do the things for you and you think you just need to press a button and everything will be hollywood. And its not. And thats why everyone here knows you dont have proper knowledge yet. You first need to accept that
Ulysses Paiva
UPMD Filmes
http://www.upmdfilmes.com.br
Offline
User avatar

Ulysses Paiva

  • Posts: 813
  • Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 8:32 pm
  • Location: Pernambuco, Brasil

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 2:36 pm

Chris Whitten wrote:Tyler Edwards demonstrates an easy workflow - also using a LUT right from the beginning.
The grading bit starts at 5 minutes in:



I never claimed it was wrong to use that workflow. I have decent results making exposure, contrast and saturation adjustments myself, once I have applied the correct settings in the camera raw window.

I use LUTs too depending on the project.

Back on the original topic. The BRAW footage in the Edwards video doesn't look poor quality or destroyed by the adjustments he makes in highlight or shadow recovery and contrast.


Chris, forgive me. I confused you with the OP.
Ulysses Paiva
UPMD Filmes
http://www.upmdfilmes.com.br
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 3:00 pm

Man this thread is getting out of hand... so why not add to it?

LUTs are perfectly fine and used often in professional settings for a variety of purposes. The thing is that you have to shoot for something like a creative LUT in order for the look to be correct. If the LUT is made for a certain Kelvin for example and you don't balance for it, it won't look right until you fix the balance to fit the LUT. Same thing for curves... if you do not expose for the curve correctly, the image will need manual adjustments to get it to look right when using the LUT.

Generally, the fastest process that uses the least amount of labor and gets the proper look is the preferred way to run a production on this front. It is not necessary to manually grade every single shot or grade a project to be completely different from the next. LUTs can greatly reduce the time spent in grading if done right even if the only purpose is to bring the footage into proper REC709 with no creative looks at all. If you manage a lot of a projects per quarter like I do (over 100 projects in Q2), you want a streamlined process that gets the same looks every time with as little effort required as possible.

Make the process idiot proof. LUTs can fit this bill perfectly.

But like anything, it has to be done right. Slapping a creative LUT made for one look that used a certain camera onto a shot that's lit contrary to the LUT's purpose and shot on a different camera will often provide crap results, requiring a hell of a lot of work just to make it kind of work right, and often it looks bad unless you are decent at the helm. This is why people THINK that its a "beginner" thing, when it isn't. Its just beginners aren't great a doing a lot of things, and that's fine.

Its like anything... if you don't know what you are doing and experimenting, you mess up, and that's perfectly fine as long as you learn from it.

Nothing at all wrong with LUTs and when you have a clean, streamlined process, it can be the easiest way to get great looks without even trying in the grade software.
Last edited by Dune00z on Fri Aug 09, 2019 3:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Chris Whitten

  • Posts: 501
  • Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 3:01 pm

Again, amateur here, but when attempting a shot like that porch I would set the camera to capture the main subject, which is very dark and shadowy. I would then not expect to have great detail in those very bright skies showing through the trees.
Chris Whitten
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 3:12 pm

Chris Whitten wrote:Again, amateur here, but when attempting a shot like that porch I would set the camera to capture the main subject, which is very dark and shadowy. I would then not expect to have great detail in those very bright skies showing through the trees.



Contrary to what some people seem to believe, proper exposure is completely relative to the purpose of the shot. If you are trying to capture ALL of the dynamic range the camera can provide, then you may just expose to protect highlights. That is probably what the OP is trying to do since it seems to be a dynamic range test shot, not a narrative.

This camera doesn't have 20 stops of DR. It has 13. I have shot this camera at noon with bald sun and the shadows would not be clean without blowing certain highlights. Of course the best way to combat this is with filters to expand DR, but there is only so much the thing can capture.

What the OP could do is try capturing the same shot with different exposure methods to see which works best and use Davinci Resolve to do the grading since it works best with BRAW and use a variety of grade techniques discussed in these forums and online to see what fits. Anytime you start using a new thing you have to get your head wrapped around what it can and can't do and give time to play with it.

Also the OP could use a different lens as well as the lens used looks uh... let's just say sub-optimal.

I was a bit snarky before because the thread looked like it was another BRAW haterade thread... hoping some of what I am saying can be helpful.
Offline

lee4ever

  • Posts: 287
  • Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:59 pm
  • Real Name: Aki Lee

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 11:10 pm

Chris S, my opinion about it, the problem isn't directly BRAW, but the sony sensor is the way it is. With CDNG your example picture would not be better. I don't like the BMPCC4K image quality so much and especially in the shadow area you can see a lot of noise.
Offline
User avatar

Dmitry Shijan

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:15 pm
  • Location: UA

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostFri Aug 09, 2019 11:58 pm

This is all useless... No source files, no info about timeline/project settings...
Last edited by Dmitry Shijan on Sat Aug 10, 2019 12:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
All my custom made accessories for BMMCC/BMMSC now available here https://lavky.com/radioproektor/
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 3043
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 12:24 am

Ray, this is the 3rd or 4th inane argument I've been involved in, in about as many days, over questions which aren't actually controversial (except here). Even when you refer people to established authorities in the field, like Steve Yedlin, who takes the trouble to perform meticulous tests and argue his positions lucidly and patiently, it doesn't matter: people here, with zero credentials, still know better.

In this case, your insistence that using normalizing LUTs and color management are bad practices is just plain ludicrous. It's done every day in the business, and at the highest levels. Nobody has to be an "expert" to know that. It's just a fact. If you can't accept it, your argument isn't with me. It's with Davinci Resolve and the entertainment industry.

Anyway, that's all I have to say on this subject.
Offline
User avatar

Jack Fairley

  • Posts: 1336
  • Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:58 pm
  • Location: Los Angeles

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 12:35 am

John Paines wrote:It's done every day in the business, and at the highest levels.

I am sure the minds behind ACES will be very disappointed they've been wasting their time :D
Threadripper 1950X 3.7GHz
64GB DDR4-2666
2x GTX 1080 Ti
DeckLink 4K Extreme 12G
Resolve Studio 16.1
Windows 10 Pro 1803
Offline
User avatar

Dmitry Shijan

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:15 pm
  • Location: UA

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 12:36 am

Australian Image wrote:
Brad Hurley wrote:After normalizing is done, that's when you move on to lift, gamma, gain, color balancing, etc. to fine-tune the result, and then on to secondary grading.


And isn't that exactly what I'm talking about?

John Paines wrote:I believe examples of Ray's work was recently cited in another thread, and as I recall Ulysses posted samples of his grading some time back. It's for others to decide whether they admire the work or not.


Keep up the bagging mate. At least I'm making the effort of explaining what does work for me. Sure, some of my earlier grading efforts have been woeful and I'll freely admit it, but if you've never made a mistake, you've never made anything. Clearly, it seems, you've never made a mistake.

And it's really easy to pick bad examples and leave out the better ones to try and put someone down. And the fact is that I'm often using three different cameras, BMPCC4K, E-M1 and TG5 to make various videos and/or combine them, so that there's always variations given what they produce. So in less than 12 months I think I've made a decent amount of progress and as someone that has started completely raw with Resolve, can make suggestions to someone in a similar boat.

So in all of your magnificence, all that you've managed to do in this thread is attempt to disparage me. That['s where all of your efforts have gone. Do you now sit back and tell yourself, 'Man, I showed him!. Where is all of your work so that others can see if you not only talk the talk, but can walk the walk? I think that we deserve to see exemplary work in all respects, given how you claim to be such an expert.

Over to you.


Ok. I can't keep it in my mind anymore :)
Australian Image, if you on learning path with variable unclear image look results, the worst thing you can do is take those suggestions here and there to other people with low level of experience and produce total mess in their heads. Especially when your Pocket 4K video examples graded like they where all shoot on web camera or cell phone and also with no any artistic style and composition talent. Especially when multiple people try to point to your mistakes in gentle way and instead listen and think, you fight against healthy critics by providing some outdated Youtube video tutorials and other random buzz. If you put your own video online this means it was passed your own artistic "moderation", so people have full right to measure your skills level based on in.
All my custom made accessories for BMMCC/BMMSC now available here https://lavky.com/radioproektor/
Offline
User avatar

Dmitry Shijan

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:15 pm
  • Location: UA

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 12:46 am

Jack Fairley wrote:
John Paines wrote:It's done every day in the business, and at the highest levels.

I am sure the minds behind ACES will be very disappointed they've been wasting their time :D

There is nothing special in ACES. It is just one of the attempts to build universal "one for all" color space transform engine that easy to pair with VFX linear gamma workflows. Compare to ARRI log to rec math curve or BMC color Space Transform, ACES build-in transforms converts log to rec in rather hard way with more aggressive highlights clipping. RED IPP2 math also looks smoother. ACES is rather limited and less flexible for color manipulations compare to native Resolve Color Space Transforms.
All my custom made accessories for BMMCC/BMMSC now available here https://lavky.com/radioproektor/
Offline

Frank Engel

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 11:09 pm
  • Real Name: Frank Engel

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 1:07 am

Australian Image wrote:They are all referring to creative LUTs, but all of those videos (and many others) all recommend doing some basic correction/adjustments before going anywhere near a LUT (if at all). These basic corrections/adjustments include WB, highlight/shadow detail, contrast, etc, then you can apply a LUT to get a certain colour look, say orange and teal if that's your thing. But you really shouldn't start with a LUT and then commence other adjustments.


They might be, but those in this thread are not. A technical LUT maps one color space onto another, generally to reverse some form of color compression being performed by a camera. They are mathematically accurate to produce as exact a reversal of some change that was made in the camera as possible in order to bring an image into a usable color space. In some cases the curves involved could be quite complex and expecting someone (even a very good colorist) to accurately produce the same correction manually is a fool's errand.

A LUT of this nature *MUST* be applied FIRST, before those other corrections are made, because making other adjustments to the image would result in the image no longer matching the profile that the LUT was designed to reverse.

Since the LUT would be working 1:1 with the source image to map it to a destination color space as would be optimized for a specific camera or encoding, the notion that this somehow results in lower end quality is bogus.

The purpose of using such a LUT is to take nonstandard coloring of log-type footage as produced by a particular camera and convert it into a standard, linear color space for editing. This is not something any colorist should normally bother themselves with - that is why there are technical LUTs.

Others have pointed out Resolve's color management features which basically take a different approach to doing exactly what the LUTs do. That is a perfectly valid option. Trying to discourage beginners from using LUTs and other perfectly good tools in those situations where they make sense is *not* valid.
Offline

Frank Engel

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu May 17, 2018 11:09 pm
  • Real Name: Frank Engel

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 1:35 am

Ulysses Paiva wrote:Chris, this image you shot has MUCH more than 13 stops in it. The difference between a sunlit area and a shadowed area can go above 20 stops.


I too am thinking this is the actual issue behind the original post. The porch needed to have some fill light added to bring the dynamic range into the range of the camera.

As an aside, 13 stops is more than what most film stocks offer.
Offline
User avatar

Steve Holmlund

  • Posts: 416
  • Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:30 pm
  • Location: Montara, California

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 4:50 am

Australian Image wrote:OK, let's take this one step further. Some are saying that you need to do RCM before anything, so what settings does anyone new to the system choose? You have a drop down selection, then another, then another and even more. And if you use more than one camera type and want to combine videos, how complex does it have to get? Maybe just leaving this at the default and going straight to the Colour Page might be a little easier in the first instance...
.

Ray,
For me, it didn't seem too difficult:

1. Color Science: DaVinci YRGB Color Managed
2. Input Color Space: Blackmagic Design Film (I have OG BMPCC and shoot RAW)
3. Timeline and Output Color Space: Rec.709 Gamma 2.4 (a common space to work in)
4. Click Save.

Before RCM, I started by trying to manually adjust the log files and got nowhere. I invested in the Ripple Training course I mentioned earlier. The courses go on sale frequently and I was just spinning my wheels. They have helped my understanding a lot. I'm just a hobbyist but I realized I needed to invest some time and energy to understand how things work.

If anyone needs a good, free, quick introduction to the benefits of RCM (including the incredible amount of time you can save matching shots from multiple cameras), Brad Hurley posted this link in the Resolve forum last November:



I'm reluctant to be critical, and of course you're entitled to both your opinion and your approach, but I feel you do a disservice by telling others to ignore the experienced, expert advice on this forum. To me, that is one of the most unique and valuable things about this particular online community. I, as a hobbyist just trying stuff, can get my questions answered (patiently and for free!) by professionals who do this for a living.

Anyways...

Cheers!
Steve
Steve Holmlund
Hobbyist
BMPCC, vintage Rokkor lenses, Olympus 12-40 and 12-100, Panasonic 100-300 II
SmallHD Focus, i7 8700k / GTX 1080
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2395
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 1:04 pm

John, don't bother. Even if you could be perfectly correct in arguing with Ray, it's pointless. I can glimpse you are both talking about things from differing directions, but Ray is very linear and is stuck on the fact that people should learn the basics, and that somebody with some sort of reputation said luts are bad, even though that doesn't really aplly to the sort of technical luts we should be talking about here. The posting of a video titled "luts don't work", is a patently wrong thing to say on the videos part, hype. But there is a guy over reduser who makes technical luts to normalise footage for individual camera models after a lot of testing. I would trust his stuff as a basis. But, on the other side of this debate, is newer abilities to apply things without baking them in, then bake them in at output, allowing maximum flexibility in working the image in relation to issues.


But, you guys are pretty expert, and I'm more interested in designing stuff. What sort of setup do you use to realistically automatically transform your footage into technically correct and linear values, then apply a look on top without wrecking everything, all automatically, then allowing you to fine tune, or change the preferred look then fine tune, all virtually, then commit and output a baked file?
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline
User avatar

Steve Holmlund

  • Posts: 416
  • Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 11:30 pm
  • Location: Montara, California

What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 2:47 pm

Australian Image wrote:...As I mentioned, I use a number of cameras, four to be exact, and RCM is pointless in this case as it doesn't cater for those other cameras and it's not possible to have multiple settings (as far as I know). So going straight into the Colour Page has taught me a hell of a lot about how to manipulate the settings to try and match the outputs from different cameras....

My latest video, I think, is a vast improvement and each one that I do has me trying out something new and which points out to me errors that need improvement. Unfortunately our bitter winter (by Australian standards) has prevented me from getting out and doing anything more interesting.


Right-click the clip in the Media or Edit page and select Input Color Space. Of course, your other cameras may not be listed.

New video looks good to me!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Steve Holmlund
Hobbyist
BMPCC, vintage Rokkor lenses, Olympus 12-40 and 12-100, Panasonic 100-300 II
SmallHD Focus, i7 8700k / GTX 1080
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 3043
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 9:33 pm

Australian Image wrote:As I mentioned, I use a number of cameras, four to be exact, and RCM is pointless in this case as it doesn't cater for those other cameras and it's not possible to have multiple settings (as far as I know).


Gawd forgive me, I swore I wouldn't say another word, but this is beyond crazy. The other cameras you're using, like the TG5, only record in rec. 709 color space, so the footage doesn't need normalization. It's already in the correct color space, like video from any consumer camera.

But, unfortunately, you neglected to tell anyone that you're weren't talking about the BMPCC 4K. So the rest of us were advising you on the correct approach to the BMPCC 4K, while you were insisting that your consumer cameras don't require such processing. And they don't. They require, and allow, relatively little color correction. Because they don't record log.

On the same note, the videos you're posting here are evidently shot with rec. 709 profiles, on cameras with consumer-level in-camera processing -- they're not tests of color correction ability from log files. If they're meant as proof of your ability to normalize log footage manually, the problem is, they're not log.

Finally, you're mistaken in saying that "it's not possible to have multiple settings" in RCM. That's the whole point of RCM -- you can mix footage from dozens of cameras, each with different log formats, and bring them into a single output standard.

Now, can we have a little sanity, or are you going to claim, to the death, that you're right and everyone else is wrong?
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 3043
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSat Aug 10, 2019 10:16 pm

Here we go again. OM400log, if you're actually using it on the EM-1, is is a slightly flattened color profile. It doesn't require much to be "normal". The shots can be so close to an acceptable rec. 709 profile, you don't even have to touch them, if you like that look.

BMPCC 4K log is quite different, as your previously posted experiments should have proved to you.

Finally, as I and others have said before, many times, the issue is correct preparation of BMPCC 4K log footage for grading. Skills beyond that stage are really beside the point now. Your insistence on turning everything into a competition, where you must be right and all others are wrong, seems to make it impossible for you to absorb new knowledge. It's also remarkable to me that despite this furious arguing, you still haven't read the manual on RCM ("as far as I know", indeed!). So the fact that you don't know, and admit it, means that you're right even when you're wrong ("I said I didn't know"!).

In any event, several people have tried here to help you, to no effect, and if I continue on this any longer, the moderators will probably intervene. Good luck with your grading.
Offline
User avatar

Dmitry Shijan

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:15 pm
  • Location: UA

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSun Aug 11, 2019 12:35 am

And it keeps rolling and rolling...
All my custom made accessories for BMMCC/BMMSC now available here https://lavky.com/radioproektor/
Offline
User avatar

Dmitry Shijan

  • Posts: 961
  • Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 7:15 pm
  • Location: UA

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSun Aug 11, 2019 1:43 am

Australian Image wrote:
Dmitry Shijan wrote:And it keeps rolling and rolling...


How's that battery pack rolling?


like this:

Image
Image
All my custom made accessories for BMMCC/BMMSC now available here https://lavky.com/radioproektor/
Offline

Gary Jaeger

  • Posts: 28
  • Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSun Aug 11, 2019 4:03 pm

I probably shouldn't get involved, but came across this thread while browsing. For any beginners, if somebody is arguing *against* a proper color managed workflow, ignore that advice. Learn how and why color management exists (fyi it's not just for cameras. It's for VFX, stills, compositing, CG, delivery, etc) and how to use it properly. If you've been told it's just a bunch of old-guard types giving overly complicated advice, that is patently and demonstrably wrong.

I just came off a 6 day, multi-camera, shoot in LA shooting the Venice, and if I had walked over to the DIT booth and said 'oh you guys with your LUTs! It's just not necessary! LOL!" there would have been a loud record scratch over playback while the whole crew watched while I was gently escorted off set by the 1AD.

Learn to do it right. And learn the ins and outs. Or at least try. It CAN BE complicated. And yeah, it can be religion for some people. But to try to *manually* compensate for any sort of log/linear source material vs applying the correct input transformation first is not correct.
Gary Jaeger // Core Studio
249 Princeton Avenue
Half Moon Bay, CA 94019
650 728 7060

http://corestudio.com
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2395
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostSun Aug 11, 2019 4:34 pm

Dmitry Shijan wrote:And it keeps rolling and rolling...


It's unbelievable, they should reflect on the conceptual relationships of what they are saying misapplied.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Chris S

  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:04 pm
  • Real Name: Chris Sagherian

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostMon Aug 12, 2019 6:08 pm

Just as an update and after a lot of testing. There is a huge difference in the quality you get using "Constant Bitrate - Q0" and almost everything else. In addition ISO 400 does seem to be a magic number. It seems you get the most latitude with color, highlight and shadow reproduction as related to noise and overall image quality.

It's still a mystery what "Highlight Recovery" does, as 90% of shots I try to use it on--That you'd think it would work, based on exposure histogram--it does nothing, while 10% of shots, it maybe helps recover some slight detail. I'm not exactly sure what's going on here. It recovers detail that's been just barely clipped I guess?

Any, big thanks to everyone who has tried to include constructive ideas on how to push the limits of BRAW.

I'm going to post a follow up on some things that helped me after being forced to move from Premier/Adobe -> DR.
Offline

Chris S

  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:04 pm
  • Real Name: Chris Sagherian

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostMon Aug 12, 2019 6:12 pm

Australian Image wrote:
Chris S wrote:Here are just a few samples of some footage I feel looks completely terrible.


A couple of steps that can improve the effort:

1. Press Alt-S (if using Windows) to create a serial node. Always work with nodes rather than the original file so that you never do any physical changes to the original file. You can create as many nodes as you like and what nodes do is sequentially add the changes that you make to the file to produce the final result. If you do something you don't like, you can delete that node and start anew without damaging anything you've done previously.

2. To begin with, in the colour wheel section, click on the cross at the top left where it says Lift and move the cross to the darkest point in the image. This will set the black point ie, make blacks black. Don't worry if the image goes too dark, that can be adjusted later. I prefer to p[lay around with the settings below the colour wheel.

3. Then click on the cross where it says Gain and move the cross to the whitest point in the image. this will now change the brightness of the scene. Same thing applies as before by adjusting the setting below the colour wheel.

4. The Gamma setting changes the overall brightness/darkness of the scene and

5. Offset expands/compresses the brightest/darkest parts of the scene and if you enable scopes, you'll see how the three colours change when you adjust the

6. The settings below that 1/2 allow for additional changes to suit your own preferences regarding saturation, contrast etc.

This is just a very rough starting point, but will work well is not taken to extremes. Work in small increments and become familiar with each control. If you use nodes and play around with these setting in turn, you'll quickly learn what works, when you're going too far and what looks nice and natural.


Thanks for taking so much time to try and demystify some of this stuff. I get how a lot of basic settings work, it's just a much different work flow vs premier pro/cinemaDNG. Also it seems Q0 gets much better results for dynamic range latitude, IMO after some more recent testing.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2395
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostTue Aug 13, 2019 1:19 am

Chris, if you follow around here, you will find that ISO is faux ISO here, and shouldn't be relied upon in Bayer raw. There are only two real iso's, and you should expose to them.

Highlight recovery probably uses a trick to use the unburnt out color pixels to guess the burnt out ones, but eventually all channels get burnt out. You might be talking about a couple of stops. So you should expose with that limit in mind. Otherwise highlight recovery is likely to be haphazard and only just shape over exposed regions a bit better. If it had been a 16 stop+ camera, it would be easier to make it look more like what we see naturally. But here, it's old picture work, you have to work it. I see a lot of .. over exposed bark and leaves flat shaded without even curvature and detail, and little colour, and people call that fantastic. On my old 16 stop+ pocket stills camera, I might get grain, I might not get much color at the extremes (very Bayer raw looking) but I would get curvature and some detail. Once you go 16stop plus correctly, it looks mystical, alien something there is a brighter twighlight without much highlight effect. Rather cool. Pity, that nearly 20 year old sensor had a version data speed rated around 720p. Would have been sic compared to a lot of cinema cameras last decade.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Mark Grgurev

  • Posts: 259
  • Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 7:22 am

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostTue Aug 13, 2019 1:33 am

Chris S wrote:It's still a mystery what "Highlight Recovery" does, as 90% of shots I try to use it on--That you'd think it would work, based on exposure histogram--it does nothing, while 10% of shots, it maybe helps recover some slight detail. I'm not exactly sure what's going on here. It recovers detail that's been just barely clipped I guess?


Is it possible for you to post examples of where you're trying to recover highlights?
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 274
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostTue Aug 13, 2019 6:11 am

Chris S wrote:Just as an update and after a lot of testing. There is a huge difference in the quality you get using "Constant Bitrate - Q0" and almost everything else. In addition ISO 400 does seem to be a magic number. It seems you get the most latitude with color, highlight and shadow reproduction as related to noise and overall image quality.

It's still a mystery what "Highlight Recovery" does, as 90% of shots I try to use it on--That you'd think it would work, based on exposure histogram--it does nothing, while 10% of shots, it maybe helps recover some slight detail. I'm not exactly sure what's going on here. It recovers detail that's been just barely clipped I guess?

Any, big thanks to everyone who has tried to include constructive ideas on how to push the limits of BRAW.

I'm going to post a follow up on some things that helped me after being forced to move from Premier/Adobe -> DR.

In RAW there is no difference to the image data if you set your ISO at 100 400 or 1000 - it's just a different metadata tag in the xmp file. Highlight recovery attempts to reconstruct a clipped channel from the remaining data from the unclipped channel and as you are seeing if you are not clipping it's not doing anything. I've not seen an difference between Q0 and 3:1 - care to explain what you are seeing?
Dell XPS 9560 i7 7700HQ,GTX 1050m, 32gb 1Tb NVME C drive, 1TB SSD 2nd internal as Cache. GTX 1080ti eGPU, 4x 7200rpm 1.5tb HD's in RAID 0 on USB-C as media storage. Win10 x64, Resolve Studio (all latest versions and up to date drivers)
Offline
User avatar

MScDre

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:31 pm
  • Real Name: Andrea Domenichini

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostTue Aug 13, 2019 8:45 am

I had slowly progressed from

- Using LUTs
- Manual Grade
- Manual grade in RCM

and was quite happy, but after having footage that seemed to really struggled with RCM I experimented with just about every setting and configuration and found what I think is the best BRAW workflow bar none.

I went back to non colour managed set up and all I do before I start is go to the raw clip settings and change the colour space there from BM Film to REC 709.

This changes the colours to super accurate and nice looking without affecting anything else.

I then manually adjust primary exposure and usually have a fantastic grade within about 30 seconds.
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2395
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostTue Aug 13, 2019 4:12 pm

So, no BT2100 or DCI? Is there an easy way to make them like those rather then knock off the colour gamut?
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 274
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostTue Aug 13, 2019 6:19 pm

I find that RCM on a project level seems to have a big hit on playback speed for some reason. I prefer to use color space conversion on a timeline node if all the clips are from the same camera and on clip node if I'm mixing cameras. I must say that I let resolve do the gamut mapping (you can't do this manually) but a lot of the time I will do the luminance mapping manually. I use luts at the end if I want a specific look but I have long moved on from using them to do basic conversions from camera to timeline. When we are all shooting linear RAW and not LOG then LUTs will just be for the output look. LOG is after all a workaround for the limitations of the camera codecs data rate as it's a form of data compression.
Dell XPS 9560 i7 7700HQ,GTX 1050m, 32gb 1Tb NVME C drive, 1TB SSD 2nd internal as Cache. GTX 1080ti eGPU, 4x 7200rpm 1.5tb HD's in RAID 0 on USB-C as media storage. Win10 x64, Resolve Studio (all latest versions and up to date drivers)
Offline
User avatar

Rakesh Malik

  • Posts: 2707
  • Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 1:01 am
  • Location: Lynnwood, WA

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostTue Aug 13, 2019 9:49 pm

Gary Jaeger wrote:I probably shouldn't get involved, but came across this thread while browsing. For any beginners, if somebody is arguing *against* a proper color managed workflow, ignore that advice. Learn how and why color management exists (fyi it's not just for cameras. It's for VFX, stills, compositing, CG, delivery, etc) and how to use it properly. If you've been told it's just a bunch of old-guard types giving overly complicated advice, that is patently and demonstrably wrong.


Definitely. I've run into people resisting that advice because it's too complicated for them... and their work looks VERY amateurish, so it's clear that they're just not trying.

I just came off a 6 day, multi-camera, shoot in LA shooting the Venice, and if I had walked over to the DIT booth and said 'oh you guys with your LUTs! It's just not necessary! LOL!" there would have been a loud record scratch over playback while the whole crew watched while I was gently escorted off set by the 1AD.


I'm going to prep a LUT for use on set for a shoot this coming weekend, because the director wants his short to be in black and white. So rather than view in color and guess, we'll view in black and white.

That's part of what LUTs are for -- though it's true that you do need to know what they're for and where to use them in order to get the results you expect. IDTs first, looks after, then ODT.

It's actually not that complicated for just a single color space, but if you're making a Dolby Vision AND a Rec709 grade, you'd have to have to ODT's set up, one for the Dolby Vision display and one for the Rec709 display, and each monitor needs its own calibration...

But how many newbies would be attempting an HDR grade of any kind at all yet?

Learn to do it right. And learn the ins and outs. Or at least try. It CAN BE complicated. And yeah, it can be religion for some people. But to try to *manually* compensate for any sort of log/linear source material vs applying the correct input transformation first is not correct.


It *can* be done, but grading is a LOT easier if you get your color management set up correctly. I used to grade starting with log footage, and it was a pain -- once I learned how to get the color management set up correctly, grading got a LOT easier. The IDTs really can save you a lot of work.
Rakesh Malik
Cinematographer, photographer, adventurer, martial artist
http://WinterLight.studio
System:
Asus ZenBook Pro Duo i9 Octacore/32GB/2060

Alienware M15 Hexacore i7/32GB/1070 Max-Q
Offline

Que Thompson

  • Posts: 374
  • Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:19 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostTue Aug 13, 2019 9:59 pm

Que Thompson wrote:
Chris S wrote:I feel the quality is no different than any other mirrorless camera now. It's very very sad and very disappointing.


I have the perfect solution. Get a new camera.

Have you ever seen anything shot in BRAW that you like? If so, contact that person and get some information. If not, sell your camera. Easy peasy.


I can't believe this much effort is being exerted on this. Either figure it out like the rest of us or get a new camera. It's obviously user error. Simple.
Offline

Que Thompson

  • Posts: 374
  • Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 10:19 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostTue Aug 13, 2019 11:05 pm

Australian Image wrote:The discussion is actually quite informative. It shows how differently people approach post-processing and how differently people interpret what each other is doing, often assuming the wrong thing. This is exemplified in another similar post in the last day..

But it's also informative to those who ask such questions. However, if people are too afraid to ask questions and others too afraid to pose their views because others start belittling both, you might as well not have a forum. Sometimes all sides might learn something about their own ideals and views.


The title of the post is off-putting. It sucks because of user error. Had the question been posed differently, my response would have been different.
Offline

mwalker1000

  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:57 am
  • Real Name: Mike Walker

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostWed Aug 14, 2019 3:53 am

OP,

P4K has 2 real analog ISO's, 400 and 3200. So if shooting in BRAW set to either 400 or 3200 and expose properly. I never shoot anything with the P4K outside of 400 and 3200, but I frequently adjust the ISO in Resolve afterward. This is directly related to the highlight recovery option, which has nothing to do with recovering blown out pixels while filming.

You need to also understand page 44 of the new camera manual. Its in the others but I only have the one that comes with the 6.5 camera update at the moment. The image I attached. This camera has a "strategy" on ISO that needs consideration. This camera is very unique in this way. My experience was similar to yours when I first started shooting with it until I learned about that uniqueness. Once you figure it out its not hard to master, but you will have to take into account more information when deciding which analog ISO to use in what conditions and with what expectations. For instance, know why 1250 ISO is much better than 1000 ISO in low light conditions, with this particular camera.

The video here seems to be right up your alley. It explains everything you want to know.

Attachments
1.png
1.png (440.45 KiB) Viewed 3999 times
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 274
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostWed Aug 14, 2019 4:57 am

Australian Image wrote:I now realise what's going on here, it's all to do with language. While the eggs spurts keep disparaging someone who has more than 14 years of experience in processing RAW stills files,

As someone who has been processing RAW stills ( professionally) for 16 years I have to say that it has very little relevance when it comes to grading LOG source video.
Dell XPS 9560 i7 7700HQ,GTX 1050m, 32gb 1Tb NVME C drive, 1TB SSD 2nd internal as Cache. GTX 1080ti eGPU, 4x 7200rpm 1.5tb HD's in RAID 0 on USB-C as media storage. Win10 x64, Resolve Studio (all latest versions and up to date drivers)
Offline

John Griffin

  • Posts: 274
  • Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 4:18 pm

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostWed Aug 14, 2019 5:57 am

Australian Image wrote:
John Griffin wrote:
Australian Image wrote:I now realise what's going on here, it's all to do with language. While the eggs spurts keep disparaging someone who has more than 14 years of experience in processing RAW stills files,

As someone who has been processing RAW stills ( professionally) for 16 years I have to say that it has very little relevance when it comes to grading LOG source video.


Why?

OK.....
RAW stills is uncompressed 14/16 bit RGB linear which is very easy to work with when compared to 8/10 bit YCbCr LOG (often highly compressed) codecs. ETTR is the default exposure with stills RAW and as long as you don't clip and keep out of the noisefloor you can do just about anything to it and it and it will respond predictably to the simple tonal and colour controls in stills RAW converters. Colour space conversions are fairly simple as well unless you are converting to CMYK for commercial press printing and it's pretty easy and cheap to buy monitors these days that cover 100% ARGB which is the working and delivery color space.
In terms of workflow then pro video grading has been developed to work within large teams in post production facilities where large amounts of complex working footage has to be processed as quickly and as efficiently as possible and pass between different specialist operators so a standardised set of procedures is essential. Stills are generally processed by single owner operators and are never going to be going through the same large scale industrialised production workflows and any self devised workflow is going to work. When you are processing stills it's obviously nice to get a set of images that looks fairly consistent with regards to colour, tone and exposure but variables are not going to be noticed too much as the media is physically separate. With video clips in a timeline it must be matched perfectly otherwise even the untrained eye will pick up differences (continuity).
I could go on but as someone who classes myself at the higher end of expertise in stills RAW processing and retouching and who can comfortably operate in a professional capacity in that industry I consider myself as a beginner in video grading who would be totally out of my depth in a video production pipeline. I mean I could probably get the result in the end but it would take so long that I wouldn't be commercially viable as an operator.
One thing I have learnt from video grading is I wish I had the scopes and image controls in C1 and ACR that I have in Resolve - scopes particularly.
Dell XPS 9560 i7 7700HQ,GTX 1050m, 32gb 1Tb NVME C drive, 1TB SSD 2nd internal as Cache. GTX 1080ti eGPU, 4x 7200rpm 1.5tb HD's in RAID 0 on USB-C as media storage. Win10 x64, Resolve Studio (all latest versions and up to date drivers)
Offline

Wayne Steven

  • Posts: 2395
  • Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 3:58 am
  • Location: Earth

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostWed Aug 14, 2019 8:33 am

Backing back up the recent post list. Yes, as we are saying, people were speaking from different aims and conceptual angles, producing the argument, I feel. Since then it has become about the absoluteness of each camp, one camp mistaking what the subject was about. I've been on the receiving end of that a lot, pretty much kills learning sharing etc. So, it's important to come at it from the same conceptual angle that's already started. Any other angle is a contrast, alternative to the same aim, or off topic, but is not something to insist what was originally said was about something different than it was and that the other person is wrong for stating it.
Often people deceive themselves so much they do not understand, even when the truth is explained to them.
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostWed Aug 14, 2019 3:03 pm

Australian Image wrote:I've been a professional photographer as well, working for newspapers and other industries since 1980. Even when doing news work, I always shot RAW vs my peers who shot JPG. I simply found it better and faster to make any necessary changes. Plus RAW files gave me much better control, given the often very unpredictable lighting conditions and working situations. My tools were a camera and flash at best.

But we're not talking about the size of the production team, in this thread it's just one person coming to grips with BRAW and producing pleasing results. The simple fact of what I described is that processing RAW still images has much in common with processing RAW video files. The same would apply to processing JPG and ProRes files. Understanding what the tools in the Colour Page do is fundamental to generating quality work, just as understanding the equivalent tools is in Capture One.

And it's even more important if you are a one person operator that does everything. That video clip that I posted above was shot in roughly half an hour (36 separate files) and then processed in around another hour and a bit, plus a bit of extra to find and work in the background music. If Resolve allowed easier rearranging of clips, the work would flow even faster, though much faster now with the Cut Page.


I thought you were not supposed to change images when doing journalism thus why so many in journalism shoot in jpg?
Offline

Dune00z

  • Posts: 280
  • Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:40 pm
  • Real Name: Duane Eues

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostWed Aug 14, 2019 8:51 pm

Australian Image wrote:
Dune00z wrote:I thought you were not supposed to change images when doing journalism thus why so many in journalism shoot in jpg?


That's absolutely true, you don't materially change the image, but it's quite acceptable to adjust, exposure, contrast, highlights/shadows to produce a clean image. Working in the Australian sun can be horrendous when it comes to getting a clean shot, so using RAW was a great benefit over using JPG.

News photographers use JPG (often compressed) because most news outlets don't have RAW processing software installed in their systems. Some cameras also had woeful burst mode in RAW. Then they simply uploaded their images into the server, often with no adjustment (hence why you sometimes see awful news shots), added a caption and then sent it off to the sub-editors.

I used my own laptop to do the RAW processing and then uploaded the finished JPGs into the system. Many may think that this was slow work, but it wasn't. I could clean up a RAW shot much faster than any JPG shooter. There was also an advantage for me if the sub-editors wanted a larger or even a full/half page shot, as I always had a RAW copy of the image to give them a much better JPG file.

Like my peers, I wasn't shooting with the latest and greatest cameras, so I had to take advantage of what I had. Many would be surprised at how many news and sports photographers use quite old gear. Nowadays the newspapers have gotten rid of most photographers and just give their journos a P&S or they use their iPhone. Sports photography is still partly alive, but even then I've seen journos with a bridge camera taking shots of a game.


OK thanks for the info on that. Each journalist I have met shoots a DSLR because its reliable, most actually choosing the Canon 1dxmii for example even though the sensor isn't the greatest compared to others but its fast and out of camera jpgs are really good from it. Some LOVE the Sony SLT designs, which I thought was really weird. All of them shoot JPG though so hearing about raw shooting for journalism seemed odd... used to work in TV News but that's not the same obviously.
Offline
User avatar

MScDre

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:31 pm
  • Real Name: Andrea Domenichini

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostThu Aug 15, 2019 9:07 am

Well I thought I had it but now I am confused.

I had figured out how to kill the horrible houselights in the venue I shoot one of my interview shows and had added a china ball as the key light.

Now I feel like the UMP shot has less ugly color issues but all the shots are now noisy



I though the noise shimmer was from the house lights but seems like its worse without them on. Is it in fact BRAW ? I don't remember ever really seeing noise in Prores
Offline
User avatar

MScDre

  • Posts: 145
  • Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:31 pm
  • Real Name: Andrea Domenichini

Re: What are you doing to MAKE BRAW not suck?

PostThu Aug 15, 2019 9:20 am

Australian Image wrote:I watched that twice on YouTube at full screen and can't see any noise.

On a side note, do you use one or two cameras? I've always been under the impression that with two cameras, you have them positioned so that when swapping from one subject to the other, the camera position appears the same to the viewer ie, bot are shot from the same visual side.



Its 3 cameras, two Pocket 4Ks and one Ursa Mini Pro G1

Currently set up like this

Image

Each subject is set up so that there is empty space in the frame in the direction they are looking to preserve the impression that they are talking to each other. Doing it the way I think you are suggesting would break this conversation visual convention.
PreviousNext

Return to Cinematography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kim Janson and 186 guests