2K and 4K Finish with RAW

For a narrative feature, I'm transcoding the R3D files to Prores 422 HQ for a 2K DCI (2:37.1) finish. My question is will I be able to color the HQ footage with satisfaction using Resolve 15? Or, will I miss the lattitude an R3D file will give me? Does it make sense to do a combination of the two: color the PR HQ footage except for shots that require more flexibility. In this case, on the timeline link to the original R3D clip - can this be done? The reason I'm considering this workflow is because I'm doubtful that my machine can handle an entire feature film tilmeline with R3D files.

I may also need to do a 4K finish of the film. In this case, do I need to export in Prores 4444 (again 2:37.1) or can I still do 422 HQ? (Forgive my ignorance on this - I get the feeling that its a very basic question.) And, can my system handle this for an entire feature film?

My system is a souped-up 2009 MacPro: Processor is 2 x 2.66 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon. Memory 40GB. Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8191 MB.

Are you debayer in log? Like redlog or ipp2?

If so you're good unless you pull crazy keys (like on skies)

Yes, I'm debayering in ipp2, but I do not know enough about Resolve just yet to understand your question - how this process can solve my problem. If you can elaborate a bit, please do.

FYI, 2K DCI scope is at 2.39 (2048x858) not 2.37.

You're right, I misspoke, er, misstyped. 2:37.1 is RED Wide, not DCI. (I will finish in DCI, however. I don't think the little extra black on the edges of the screen will be discernible. If so, I'll do a 1% blow-up of the deliverable which will be harmless to the image quality.). Thanks for your catch.

If you want to preserve original sharpness then 1% upscale is as bad as 5 or 10% as pixels gets interpolated.

Thanks for the advice. I'll stick to the sliver-thin black pillars, then.

FYI, 2K DCI scope is at 2.39 (2048x858) not 2.37.

2.3869..... there is an extra line...

I'm a fan of grading the original RAW footage. You just get more control.

I'm a fan of grading the original RAW footage. You just get more control.

That's a myth: if you debayer to exr 16 bit (liner light or log encoded) there is no difference.

For normal color, 10 bits log is adequate.

i could not agree more about16floatEXR

but there's a gap between 16floatEXR and ProRez422Hq being asked about

i'm happy to work with 16floatEXR, am today, do commonly

have never been asked to grade a feature from ProRez422Hq, i'd test it firsthand with the actual footage, a collection of the worst / over/ underexposed / flat skys / dark shots and eval what you are giveing up - but on paper there's a fair bit to be lost, may not make a bit of difffrence, may be a huge issue... test for your self

i could not agree more about16floatEXR

but there's a gap between 16floatEXR and ProRez422Hq being asked about

i'm happy to work with 16floatEXR, am today, do commonly

have never been asked to grade a feature from ProRez422Hq, i'd test it firsthand with the actual footage, a collection of the worst / over/ underexposed / flat skys / dark shots and eval what you are giveing up - but on paper there's a fair bit to be lost, may not make a bit of difffrence, may be a huge issue... test for your self

i'm finishing right now a movie shot w/arri directly to prores, (444 i believe) and unless I pull stupid keys it's fime.

i'm finishing right now a movie shot w/arri directly to prores, (444 i believe) and unless I pull stupid keys it's fime.

I completely agree with this. I think 99% of the time, Raw to ProRes 444 in the same native resolution works just fine. On rare occasions, we'll go in and re-transcode in the event I didn't like the decode settings, but I doing think this happens even a dozen times in a feature. And we also do tons of work in Raw. All things being equal, I'd prefer going from Raw unless it's a very VFX-heavy project.

do you equate 444 to 422Hq?

the orignal Q was about transcodeing r3d's to 422HQ...

like you i've finished alot of stuff shot on Alexa to 444, no sweat there

never been asked to finish a feature from 422Hq sources tho

I'd be testing to find out if there's any weak links, esp given the teensy-tiny cost in diskspace diff between 422Hq and 444

I think 422HQ should be fine but I would prefer 4444.

Was the r3d footage set to RedLogFilm gamma before transcoding? I wouldn't be happy working with transcodes that have rec709 gamma baked in as some dynamic range would already be lost. This is more important to me than 4444 vs 422HQ.

422hq will be fine unless some heavy grade is required.

Thanks for your input, Paul. Great to know. The R3D footage is RedLogGamma. Thank you, Walter, for your input, too.