The importance of grading to bring out a more pleasing image

[Doug Jensen]

Doug, do you make your stock footage available in log/RAW/ungraded, graded or both?

That's an easy one to answer, always graded to look the best I can make it. No exceptions. In some circumstances I'll even submit alternative grades when I can get away with it.

[Doug Jensen]

The aperture can only be in one position at the moment of exposure.

EXACTLY!!!! I've been trying to get people to understand that point for years. You have to capture the entire scene with a single exposure, so using a zone system outdoors, or in any uncontrolled lighting situation is impossible. On a similar note, false color is also totally meaningless in outdoors or uncontrolled lighting. Personally, I use zebras to expose for bright reflected whites and everything else can fall where it may. Which is all the more reason to get fluent with grading, because in post you can definitely use a "zone" type of system to bring out different tones in the final image. But it can't be done in camera unless you have control over all the lighting.

[jcadge]

Sorry for the misunderstanding Run & Gun, Ansel Adam’s zone system has NO application when shooting video, we were talking about how Ansel Adams’ prints were beautiful and I wanted to point out some of that was due to how he exposed & developed the FILM.

I totally agree with Doug about grading, these days especially filming outdoors, I always film in RAW/Log, not with a baked in look like rec 709. You need to capture the most information possible giving you more options to grade a nice image.

When shooting film Ansel Adam’s Zone System used film processing to help obtain a better negative, basically speaking when you push film you increase the contrast and when you pull film you decrease the contrast. He had to decide on one aperture and expose & develop accordingly which gave him a better starting point for making the perfect print.

Doug, I haven’t shot stock in years, are you mainly shooting RF or RM video stock these days?

[Doug Jensen]

Doug, I haven’t shot stock in years, are you mainly shooting RF or RM video stock these days?

99.9% Royalty Free. The whole industry is moving that way and I prefer it. I may have a few old RM clips at Getty but I don't think they earn anything at all. I don't even submit to Getty anymore. The goal these days is to have clips sell as frequently as possible, rather than trying to make a big score from a handful of sales.

[Run&Gun]

That's an easy one to answer, always graded to look the best I can make it. No exceptions. In some circumstances I'll even submit alternative grades when I can get away with it.

I always want my footage/images to be seen in their best light (no pun intended. Or was it...). But I was just curious if anyone ever wanted the log/RAW version of any clips, so that they could grade them to integrate better with the overall program they may be used in.

[Run&Gun]

Sorry for the misunderstanding Run & Gun, Ansel Adam’s zone system has NO application when shooting video, we were talking about how Ansel Adams’ prints were beautiful and I wanted to point out some of that was due to how he exposed & developed the FILM.

I totally agree with Doug about grading, these days especially filming outdoors, I always film in RAW/Log, not with a baked in look like rec 709. You need to capture the most information possible giving you more options to grade a nice image.

When shooting film Ansel Adam’s Zone System used film processing to help obtain a better negative, basically speaking when you push film you increase the contrast and when you pull film you decrease the contrast. He had to decide on one aperture and expose & develop accordingly which gave him a better starting point for making the perfect print.

Doug, I haven’t shot stock in years, are you mainly shooting RF or RM video stock these days?

I wasn't directing the comment at you. Just kind of making a generalized comment about the way that I often see or perceive the Zone System being presented.

[Doug Jensen]

I always want my footage/images to be seen in their best light (no pun intended. Or was it...). But I was just curious if anyone ever wanted the log/RAW version of any clips, so that they could grade them to integrate better with the overall program they may be used in.

The BBC tracked me down a couple of times and bought ungraded footage directly from me, based on what they saw at one of the stock agencies. But I'd never upload the ungraded.

[groveChuck]

Some nice grades there Doug, and great reach on that 200-600!

Where are you shooting from, the causeway or the media site? Do you have creds?

[Doug Jensen]

Thanks.
Yes, I have credentials to shoot from KSC or the Space Force Station. However, the actual shooting location for each launch varies, depending on the pad, type of rocket, mission, weather, time of day, booster return or not, and client. Two of this videos in this thread were shot from a location on Loop Road (not the causeway) and one from a public location at the Cape Canaveral National Seashore.

I wish I had the time to get my ass over to Texas for the expected launch of Starship tomorrow morning. That is going to be awesome. Can't wait until they move those monster rockets to KSC.

[morgan_moore]

To some extent adjusting the horrid 'paint' menu in sony cameras was adjusting the image to the scene. And could be eqated to the push pull processeing.

Personally I never was about to be good at it.

Again exposing.. not for the on monitor look but exposing to capture data (using the WFM to choose stop not screen look) is also making the best nagative to take to the 'dark room'
.
this was well explored in the expose Slog 1 stop over era.

--

What is delogging and what is grading?

I guess stage one .. delivering a 'real' image is not grading. Adding artistic looks after is grading.

so - adding lut - not grading
correcting so greay areas are 50-50-50 etc - not grading

pulling secondaries.. is this technical or art??

I guess it is technical cos you might do it on a corporate.

Making blue shadows, grain or a vignette.. grading

I guess work beyond the look of a corporate shoot of a 'popular' TV show is grading the first step is 'correction'

[morgan_moore]

I would argue (in the nicest way) that Dougs opening video is not 'graded' the shots are corrected to look good - that is done well and entirely valuable to the image delivery process.

Now if if had some rocket shots to look like 1968 Kodakchrome (which might be a fun look for a space launch) then that would be grading.

No director woud object to Dougs corrections.

A director.. can comment on a grade.. "I dont like the happy kodachrome ..retro look, make it more cold war"

[morgan_moore]

And this directorial imput is why one has alsways (if possible) shot flat and added artistic in post.

I was on inta and KF are selling some in lens filter that diffuses the highlights.

I would not personally choose that in camera because I think highlight can be diffused (halated) in post and to bake that is dangerous as it might become not what the director wants.. or become 'outdated' as the footage becomes archival.

[CharlesPapert]

I've been looking long and hard at the Scatter app, which is doing really solid recreations of various existing diffusion filters with the added bonus of being able to selectively place within the image via windows. So you can control the halation at one level overall and more or less on highlights like a hot window. At this stage of the game, if I know that I will be able to dictate the look of a project in post I can't see any reason not to do it this way. Working with filters on set is time consuming and creates issues (double reflections of highlights, having to flag off the lens to avoid veiling flare etc). Simplifying that process while adding flexibility later is a real plus. The danger of course is that it can also be removed later, if anyone is wise to it. I think the key is to bake this and whatever else is desired (LUT) in as a basic look onto dailies so the director et all live with the footage during the edit, so they don't get too used to the flat vanilla and decide that's how they want it to stay.

[morgan_moore]

Here ther is a mix of (your) pragmatic realism and stupidity (of the industry)

One should be able to shoot flat and have some form of conversation and agreement about the final look

To some extent you have artistic input and to some extent you are paid to provide footage.

This should be agreed an embarkation on a project and also.. (and this is the big leap) producers need to understand what that agreement is or means!

[CharlesPapert]

Here ther is a mix of (your) pragmatic realism and stupidity (of the industry)

One should be able to shoot flat and have some form of conversation and agreement about the final look

To some extent you have artistic input and to some extent you are paid to provide footage.

This should be agreed an embarkation on a project and also.. (and this is the big leap) producers need to understand what that agreement is or means!

Yes, well. It can vary so widely across the board. Commercials, most typically you hand off the footage and wave it buh-bye, the agency and production company grade it however they please. On the very odd occasion I was invited to color on those. Features and television, most of the time I "get to" oversee the grade, but almost always on my own time. Extremely rarely have I been compensated for color work. There was that one time I negotiated a week of color for a feature, only to be locked out of the process entirely (was the theory that if I wasn't there, they didn't have to pay me?!). I should have sued, of course. I think they just assumed I wouldn't for the "relationship"...

At a certain point, I just gave up the fight.