Are people becoming obsessed with CC/Grading?

There is a bit of personal back story to be honest. I spent the last couple of days playing with Da Vinci Resolve getting stressed out with it and in the end concluded its too much bother and takes my focus off editing and telling a story.

I know color correction is an important part of storytelling but I feel like everyone's focus these days is on CC and resolve. I concluded that I can get great results tweaking even the basic tools in FCPX to get professional results that make the BM image pop. I don't know if anyone else feels the same but i'm just about tired silly of the filmmaking discussion centred around CC and very little else. It's like the film community now has an awesome camera and image and has turned it's pixel peeping now toward CC. In the wrong hands its the new Magic Bullet technicolor LSD trip. Maybe I'm just being lazy...


Disclaimer: Da Vinci Resolve is awesome software in the hands of talented colourists.

I only dive into Resolve at the end of the process. So it never distracts from the editing process.

For me colour correction is just one part. Thats a process of fixing and matching shots. You can do that in almost any NLE.

Resolve let's me add another layer to the story once the edit is done and locked down. This is where grading comes in.

Resolve gives me the tools for creating a look and helping lead the eye in the scene.

Not every project needs that. Many only need the CC part that can be done in the NLE.

I spent the last couple of days playing with Da Vinci Resolve getting stressed out with it and in the end concluded its too much bother and takes my focus off editing and telling a story.

I don't get it.
CC is the next step, AFTER you are done with your edit and have achieved picture-lock.
So how can CC take your focus a way form editing?

And no, I don't think anybody is "obsessed" with CC, but when you have a BMC the camera isn't gonna do that for you anymore, you outsourced it from the camera to the post. Personally I like that, since I got much more and better control over my images now.

Before that, 99% of all cameras where blackboxes with little access and control of the parameters that make your image. Picture profiles and some menu points was all you had. Much like you shoot Video mode with the BMC.

Of course how you both describe Grading is the correct way to think about it, a last layer (an important one) that adds to the story and in the top end professional world is often passed off to a dedicated colorist anyway.

My point is whenever any work gets shown now the focus seems to be on 'the grade'. Very little discussion is focused on editing pace, camera angles, lighting, audio, talent etc. I'm not saying its wrong I'm just saying the pendulum seems to of swung in the direction of raising color in the minds of filmakers. My only concern is that it seems to of become the new pixel peeping with amateurs focusing on grading more than they probably should do.


I guess I crave more discussion on film theory than simply image making. I mean even the creative purpose of grading seems a little bit lost in telling a specific story, even the most basic discussion of warm and cold colors and how they affect the viewers mood is not in people thinking. It's just about getting a 'killer look' with very little thinking about why? For DOP's and editors then I understand the focus but some of us want to be all round filmmakers where grading is as you both have said the icing on a cake, not THE cake.

I think you nailed it. We saw pretty much exactly the same thing when digital SLRs rather suddenly became affordable to everyone and their uncle. A lot of people were suckered into the marketing spiels telling them that all they needed to make great pictures was a great camera, and most of those people didn't want to bother with things like learning photography, so they instead became obsessed with the tech specs and the next upgrade, using the progress of technology as an excuse for not doing anything with that technology.

We're going to see a *lot* of test shots with cameras like the Black Magic family, and with the pocket a lot of crappy cinematography shot by people who will claim that it's great because they shot it in RAW or ProRes, even though they got so obsessed by the technology that they didn't get around to doing things like tell a story.

It's a little off topic but i was also downloading LIGHTWORKS a couple of days ago to try it out. Now this is the editing software that many of the biggest movies of the last 20 years have been edited on including Scorsese's work. There is some quite 'basic' grading tools on it but are actually very powerful if you want to be creative. I almost decided to learn and use it, the only reason holding me back is a few things like audio sync which is done automatically in FCPX.

I only say this stuff cause I personally found myself getting too obsessed with getting my head around the latest software instead of focusing on being creative and mastering something a bit more simple so I can focus on the bigger picture not technical stuff. Maybe for others the technical stuff comes easy and it's part of their character and we need technically minded people but I just wanted to share, maybe a few people feel the same, I dunno.

[CaptainHook]

I'm obsessed with colour, have been for a decade or so. But i tend to get obsessive about everything i do. Or maybe it's just 'passionate'? Either way, you started a thread in a post production section of company that creates grading software. I think it stands to reason plenty of people here are at minimum interested in colour and will discuss it. Doesn't mean we're not obsessive about other areas too. Just prob not the best place to discuss those.

I was really aware that this was probably the last place you want to even seem like your bashing color grading, as popular as pork chop at a Bar Mitzah.

But I think I was clear I wasn't against colorists (even obsessed ones) or Resolve etc, just questioning the assumption that EVERYONE involved in filmmaking is a professional colorist. BM is now a Camera making company, it's seems legitimate to be interested in that side of the company than just the post side.

[CaptainHook]

Sure, but maybe this thread would at least make more sense in the cinematography section?

I think since Resolve Lite has been free and the Blackmagic Cameras have gotten Resolve into the hands of more users the popularity and interest of it has grown. Many people shooting these days probably need/want to do everything from pre-pro to post, so becoming informed on all of it isn't surprising. Especially since for many they have little experience grading so this is all new and will require more of their time initially. I'm sure something will come and replace it after some time. And again i think this forum might skew the impression of what people are interested in. Head to some other forums and it's barely discussed.

most of the time on large projects there are people assigned or hired for those jobs.

there is nothing bad about anybody want to progress their craft....if that was the case we would still be shooting videos with those cameras that were basically a VCR with a lens.

[CaptainHook]

most of the time on large projects there are people assigned or hired for those jobs.

Yep, but i would wager most people buying BMD cameras are not on large projects. So for many i'm guessing they're doing it all themselves or with friends.

Probably this should be in off topic, actually I didnt even notice there was an off topic section.

most of the time on large projects there are people assigned or hired for those jobs.

Yep, but i would wager most people buying BMD cameras are not on large projects. So for many i'm guessing they're doing it all themselves or with friends.

Like me - a one man band - so I try to be a jack of all trades and master of them all!

Rob

Many only need the CC part that can be done in the NLE.







______________________
Aion Kinah Kaufen

One can only hope that each member involved from pre to post is manically obsessed with their role and work.

The end result is the director's vision. Any and all avenues towards reaching that vision will be utilized.

With all my respect, i don't understand why it's a problem to be obsessed with colors. To me it sounds like "why people are becoming obsessed with sound design/music composition" or "why people are becoming obsessed with lenses/lighting"

Color theory (CC/Grading) also has a dramatic purpose, it gives the mood and is a huge part of the storytelling process. Some tools are basics and technically more affordable than other but when you have a huge mood intent, basics tools won't be really accurate. For me Davinci is one of the most accurate tools i've never used for all basics and tricky situations.

People choose the most available tools for their project, depending on their OS, their Hardware, their knowledge and their Affinity. sometimes Affinity alone will beat all obstacles.

I really don't get the point here.

Disclaimer: Da Vinci Resolve is awesome software in the hands of talented colourists.

It's also awesome for those who are not talented colourists too. It is quirky to start off with because it does have its own GUI conventions. Once you persevere, it becomes second nature and you realise how powerful the software really is.

Jules

Disclaimer: Da Vinci Resolve is awesome software in the hands of talented colourists.

It's also awesome for those who are not talented colourists too. It is quirky to start off with because it does have its own GUI conventions. Once you persevere, it becomes second nature and you realise how powerful the software really is.

Jules

yeah the problem isn't with talented colorists its with the amateurs that slap things on their footage and don't have the technical know how or eye to recognise what looks horrible. I'm afraid if I say this its going to be insulting to people and a bit rough but I see a lot of this kind of stuff.



Now I'm sure the original LUT is great for some, personally I can't stand the vividness of it but thats a taste issue and it seems hily regarded. But my point is I see loads of stuff that looks like an acid trip on Pandora cause people just threw Luts and colours on and hoped they would look nice and don't have the know how or eye to nuance the grade. Saying that there are a few guys on Vimeo that are producing some really great images from Resolve and various LUTS even though they seem relatively amateur. I guess in the end however great the tools with get, they won't make anyone an artist, which I guess will always has and will be the case.

Disclaimer: Da Vinci Resolve is awesome software in the hands of talented colourists.

It's also awesome for those who are not talented colourists too. It is quirky to start off with because it does have its own GUI conventions. Once you persevere, it becomes second nature and you realise how powerful the software really is.

Jules

yeah the problem isn't with talented colorists its with the amateurs that slap things on their footage and don't have the technical know how or eye to recognise what looks horrible. I'm afraid if I say this its going to be insulting to people and a bit rough but I see a lot of this kind of stuff.

While I certainly understand where the sentiment arises from, I cannot agree with it on any basis whatsoever. Resolve is a tool. That's it. However one chooses to apply the use of such a tool is their artistic right. Films, and color grading/cinematography in general is all about aesthetic appeal and thus makes it an entirely subjective and the degree to which one implementation of grading is "better" or "worse" is entirely relative to each individual. This mentality is stifling and I personally find it restrictive, when any team member imposes this kind of axiom. It's akin to suggesting that one must be well-versed in reading sheet music and understanding theory in order to be a valid musician, which is certainly not the case.

I realize that this thread's intention is to create discussion, so my input is merely an inquiry. Is suggesting that a grade looks "horrible" because it does not meet your standard of technical proficiency, seem rather presumptuous? I'm not asserting that you are, but looking outside in, as they say, doesn't it seem quite silly? If anyone were to come to me and tell me how to use my tools for my art, I'd tell them straight to get the hell out.

But then again, I'm a different kind of crazy.

I don't know, what do you suppose?

You know if you take the statement all art is subjective then I can without any valid criticism say that Home Alone 3 is a far better movie than The Godfather.



And you might not need to read music to play an instrument well but you sure as hell need to play/use an instrument/tool well to make it sound good. Do you think Hendrix didn't know any chords?

You know if you take the statement all art is subjective then I can without any valid criticism say that Home Alone 3 is a far better movie than The Godfather.

Yes you most certainly can, and I wouldn't have a problem with it. It's not my job nor place to dictate which film improved your life and why.

And you might not need to read music to play an instrument well but you sure as hell need to play/use an instrument/tool well to make it sound good. Do you think Hendrix didn't know any chords?

Of course he did, but Hendrix by admission didn't care much for theory and it definitely showed in his bizarre chord construction and intermixing of modes. But then what is a chord but an arbitrary group of notes? And a scale, an arbitrary sequence of them?

The principal difference between our opinions is that you believe that an individual at the height of their skill is an "artist" and I simply believe that everyone is. Following a standard where popular opinion dictates a socially relative level of skill is really besides the point. The case either way, the culmination is a direct implication to the purpose made in your OP.

Are people becoming obsessed with CC/Grading?

Perhaps. Perhaps not. There's no way to say empirically, but does it matter? I can't really say. If they are, that's fine. If not, then that's fine too.

... following this kind of reasoning, if anybody is an "artist", anybody can write a story, be a cinematographer, director, screenwriter, CC, editor, sound designer and make a 100mil movie. Why we bother then to define "directors" or "actors" and pay them as such? Anybody can do it, right?

Yes, there are exceptions, but those are created by exceptional people.

Who try to learn a craft and excel in that craft, will perform better than another artist in the perform of the same task.

Style came and goes: now a days i see TONS of movies where the camera keep moving like the only camera operators left are all in the final stage of Parkinson: is a visual tool/style? Yes. however is becoming more and more a crouch.

A movie that I will not mention was tailored for young teen audience (a comedy) and they where almost done. The production did a screening test and literally the audience vomit due to the motion sickness. Now they are doing vfx to stabilize most of the shots.... A job well done by "artists"

The reason why the industry pays a famous director and actor as much as they are paid is simply because that is the amount which a studio/investor feels they are worth in proportion to the potential profit they can generate. Does their "artistic skill" play a role in it? Absolutely, and largely in part because their art is a standard shared and enjoyed by many who are willing to pay for it. But that inclination is no reason to adhere to a mindset which ostracizes and marginalizes people with drastically different perceptions of filmmaking, or any other art form for that matter.

They are different artists, with different goals, and different precepts that fulfills them and makes them happy. I don't have to like it, nor do you, or anyone else, and no one has to watch it or pay for it. But to suggest that because they don't have an audience and because they don't generate income in the manner which we've become accustomed to, that they are less worthy as an artist?

It's this kind of thinking that left artists like Kafka, Van Gogh, Robert Johnson, Emily Dickinson and a host of other artists alone, shattered, cast aside and labeled as hacks, fakes, imitators or general talent-less nobodies... Only to discover them years after their deaths to appreciate their contributions?

Steve, we need more people like you on the planet let alone in the industry!

The reason why the industry pays a famous colorist as much as they are paid is simply because that is the amount which a studio/investor feels they are worth in proportion to the potential profit they can generate.

(fix it for you

I totally understand the meaning of the original post..

I'm producing magic videos (tricks, cards, and no.. no rabbit involved) and the industry (in that field) is poluted by productions that make them visible because of grades : no more meaning, no more clever editing.. film yourself in a parking, put a strange hat (no offense to some 2000's musical band) and grade with blue .. you will get the young audience. Ok, it will not respect legal colors, but who cares ? These people just click on a model that look fun in Magic bullet and .. let's roll !

Ok, it works for a while ! I mean, knowing the machinery, the secret behind, and the meaning of why that grade affects the spectator's emotions will always last, and is a secure investment. So yes, that' why I have chosen Resolve and not MagicB.

Yes, Instagram changed expectations !

I totally understand the meaning of the original post..

I'm producing magic videos (tricks, cards, and no.. no rabbit involved) and the industry (in that field) is poluted by productions that make them visible because of grades : no more meaning, no more clever editing.. film yourself in a parking, put a strange hat (no offense to some 2000's musical band) and grade with blue .. you will get the young audience. Ok, it will not respect legal colors, but who cares ? These people just click on a model that look fun in Magic bullet and .. let's roll !

Ok, it works for a while ! I mean, knowing the machinery, the secret behind, and the meaning of why that grade affects the spectator's emotions will always last, and is a secure investment. So yes, that' why I have chosen Resolve and not MagicB.

Yes, Instagram changed expectations !

That could be true for almost anything in this industry... Now is the era of the "found footage": that most of the time it means that you can do sloppy acting, editing, sound, costume designer, heck you don't even need a location or a director per se, just shake the camera as you like and if it is not enough we will use the earthquake plugin afterward, slap weird color (like you mentioned) and voila' the movie is ready for the "i'm so important that I post picture of me naked in internet" general audience...

The reason why the industry pays a famous director and actor as much as they are paid is simply because that is the amount which a studio/investor feels they are worth in proportion to the potential profit they can generate. Does their "artistic skill" play a role in it? Absolutely, and largely in part because their art is a standard shared and enjoyed by many who are willing to pay for it. But that inclination is no reason to adhere to a mindset which ostracizes and marginalizes people with drastically different perceptions of filmmaking, or any other art form for that matter.

They are different artists, with different goals, and different precepts that fulfills them and makes them happy. I don't have to like it, nor do you, or anyone else, and no one has to watch it or pay for it. But to suggest that because they don't have an audience and because they don't generate income in the manner which we've become accustomed to, that they are less worthy as an artist?

It's this kind of thinking that left artists like Kafka, Van Gogh, Robert Johnson, Emily Dickinson and a host of other artists alone, shattered, cast aside and labeled as hacks, fakes, imitators or general talent-less nobodies... Only to discover them years after their deaths to appreciate their contributions?

Yeah Im not sure you can put filmakers and the artists you mentioned in the same discussion. No one is ever going to discover someones vimeo channel in the future and recognise their genius to the world. In film yeah some times you get retrospectives of peoples work and they become more recognised but they had to of been in the limelight in some way at some point during their work. What did Orson Welles say about filmaking, something like, That its the only art form that the artists cant afford the tools.