Blackmagic Forum

I've been grading a series the last two months and was asked early on to help out with onlining as well. Here in my hood, online is a bit of a catch-all that can refer to motion graphics like screen replacements, and can also blend into what I think is more vfx work like muzzle flashes, bullet wounds, sky replacements etc.

Anyway, I've been happy to do what I can, especially as it saves time in round-tripping when I can do something myself, but I can't find a lot of information about if, internationally, onlining is the same role as we define it here.

At what point do you say no and insist on something being passed on to a VFX specialist and what are you happy to handle yourself under the same umbrella as the grading that you were contracted for?

I thought online meant nothing more than switching from proxies to originals, which is a button push in Resolve these days. I would have assumed that all that other stuff is exclusively VFX.

my decision are based on asking myself "is it faster to do it myself, or send out of house"?

muzzle flashes are dead fast & easy compared to manageing exporting plates, QC'n them, file xfering them, downloading the VFX shots, QC'n them, cutting them in and applying grades to them for example

boom shadows / crew reflections etc- if they can be sorted quickly i'll sort them, if they are a PITA , i'll send them away

sky replacements almost always go away, they are a time suk to get right unless you have nothing but hard lines on building edges to roto with trackers

it's cheaper for the producer to tie up a Nuke workstation for a few days than tie up a gradeing suite if there's no speed advantage to useing the heavy iron, and sky replacements are a classic example of something that will not go any faster on a big, fast machine in a cleint faceing room if done to a high standard

muzzle flashes are pretty much brainless after you've done the first 100 of them... (inside Resolve i use Hitfilm's 3d particle gen muzzleflash plugin, and usualy comp 2d smoke plates)

i avoid MoGraph art, that's an insane time suk for a gradeing suite to take on, unless it a commericals and they are happy to pay for the time and want to see the animation in context and RT

Thanks for the info, gents. Yes, that's my approach too. I can fix some things in a matter of minutes and it makes no sense to send them off.

I think as there can be misunderstanding around here of what exactly onlining is, I've been getting requests to do things that are definitely more complex VFX work, and I've been having to explain the difference between simple things like clean-ups and turning a peaceful starry night sky into a thunderstorm. But there's definitely a grey area between the two roles I think, of VFX and colourist.

There's another contract coming up with them shortly and I need to put some boundaries in place re expectations so good to hear where the limits are. Especially as (in this specific case) online was more of a favour and I didn't expect it to be as intensive as it was. Just wrapped the project up and now I can sleep...

Jim Simon wrote:I thought online meant nothing more than switching from proxies to originals, which is a button push in Resolve these days. I would have assumed that all that other stuff is exclusively VFX.

Jim, I'd say traditionally that is true, but as proxy to HQ media is a bit of a no-brainer nowadays (if you're even using proxies), either the online role falls away or is folded into other roles like colourist, motion graphics artist, or VFX, or just well-rounded editor. So can you even charge for online work now? I don't think so unless the title refers to graphics etc. Which is what it means here in South Africa. Do you guys even have online editors in the US?

About the best answer I could give is that I don't often see credits for offline editors any more.

For me, it’s less about what I am capable (or willing) to do, and it’s a lot more about how much time/budget I have been given to do it.

Clients all the time will ask me to do all kinds of weird stuff in color/online sessions. Usually I can handle them by myself easily in the session (eg blemish removals, simple logo/object removals etc), but there are often other tasks that require me to do them outside of Resolve as a full blown VFX task that would go beyond the scope of the agreed upon task of color correction and basic onlining. In these cases, I have no hesitation in saying that I can’t do them, simply because of the time/budget constraints that have been placed on me by the client. I’m always telling my clients “I can do anything you want me to do...you just need to schedule the time and have a budget for me to do it well”.

The expectation for me to stuff vfx/roto oriented tasks into a color session has become such a massive problem when working with agencies, that I always have to confirm with them (in writing) when they initially book time with me that the booked time is only for color and basic finish, and if they may need more extensive “fix it in post” tasks, that they’ll need to budget extra time in the schedule for those things.

If it’s 3:00 PM, and I’m still doing color when the agency drops a last minute request for me to do a ton of logo removals or a face replacement on the talent, and the client presentation is at 5:00 PM, I will tell them I can’t do it. Or I will give them the option of having me leave the current state of the color grade the way it currently is (and stop nitpicking it to death), and have me switch gears to the VFX oriented stuff, if it’s really that important to them. I find this is a better approach, as it properly forces the agency/client to carefully consider and ultimately make the decision to say “no”, and not you.

And for things which are better left to a VFX specialist, I’ll always refer the client to them instead, because it would be irresponsible for me (as an example) to try and pull off a full on 3D modeling/texturing/lighting task myself, even though I have the tools and rudimentary skill to do it myself.

When it comes down to it, the decision to say “no” to these types of things boils down to a combination of both your confidence and ability to do them yourself, and how reasonable the expectations of your client are in getting them done within the budget as well as in time for delivery. For me, time is more important than money when it comes to things like this. You can always negotiate rates for doing requested work. If the client has a flexible deadline, and I have room in my schedule, I will often give long-time, reliable clients a break on things like this as long as they don’t constantly abuse the privilege.

You can’t, however, negotiate the laws of time and space. If the TV station needs the deliverable by 5 PM Friday in order to meet the ad buy for the Super Bowl on Sunday, then you can’t negotiate away that deadline. I will always say no to things that places an unreasonable burden on me to meet an inflexible deadline through no fault of my own.

Dermot Shane wrote:
i avoid MoGraph art, that's an insane time suk for a gradeing suite to take on, unless it a commericals and they are happy to pay for the time and want to see the animation in context and RT

I agree with this. The bigger issue with mogfx is that the outcomes of those tasks are so subjective, and there’s no single, obvious answer to whether you’ve done the task “right”. And the more people that are involved with the approvals, the bigger the time sink becomes. I did motion graphics for the first 15 years of my career, and now I’m totally fine with letting other people have those responsibilities, because I just don’t have the mental and physical bandwidth to deal with mogfx in addition to my color/finish responsibilities.

all of the episodic TV and MoW's have an online editor, i just color and leave the fixes to them
most of the TV commericals and music video's roundtrip back to the editor, often do fixes in the color sessions tho
mainly i conform, grade, title, fix and finish the indie features, so wear both hats on that file
like Mel i have the experience to have a reasonable sense of what i can (and cannot) do in a given timeframe, and let the producer's decide what direction they want me to go in
i usualy point out that they are paying for a gradeing suite with critical monitoring and very fast machines to do something that would be completed about the same time by someone with Nuke in their basement

and i have licences of NukeX, DS, Flame to turn to when Resolve is not a great answer, but rarely need to spark them up in 2021

Hey guys, been undercover for a few days but having read the responses just want to say thanks for the valuable insights and discussion. I think my experience reflects yours mostly and clearly the main skill to learn is when and how to say no, always a weak point for me. Thanks again. Matt

The offline/online nomenclature is obsolete. I avoid the terms altogether and refer to them as creative editorial and picture finishing editorial.

The "online" comes from analog video timing requirement. All equipment used in a tape based "online" bay had to be referenced to the house sync generator or "online."

The equipment outside of such bay didn't need to meet this infrastructure requirement. In the absence of "online" it was referred to as "offline."

What we have today is completely divorced from this engineering concept. Although the setup for creative editorial can be less expensive than the setup for picture finishing, there is no substantial difference in gear used. The roles traditionally reserved for these two operations bleed into one another. How much you of different tasks you take on in the picture finishing depends on your skills, the way your facility works, and the client's expectations.