When will COLOR get its own forum?

dvxhutch

dvxhutch

Well-known member
I was wondering if or when Apple's COLOR could get its own forum? I can think of a few good reasons:

* COLOR is a really unique application among independent filmmakers. It is really the only high end color grading ap available to us.

* There is a lot of confusion between COLOR CORRECTION and COLOR GRADING. I think if FCP users knew more about COLOR'S capabilities, they would use it a lot more.

* Most of us want to achieve a "film look" to our video. One of the best ways to achieve this is through grading, NOT simply color correction. Look at the DVX features that made it to the big screen - LONESOME JIM, IRAQ IN FRAGMENTS, LAND OF PLENTY. All look great because they were shot well and graded professionally. COLOR is the only way to achieve those kind of results without spending hundreds of dollars an hour at a post-house.

* I think a lot of FCP users are apprehensive about using COLOR because they think it's hard to use. It's not. It's just different from what we're used to. But it's actually a really intuitive, yet extremely powerful, piece of software. Having a forum with tutorials and questions would encourage people to use it and see what a difference it makes.

* Typing "color" into search brings up too many results, whereas putting "apple color" or "apple grading" brings up too few. I also think lugging color grading under the "special FX" forum is confusing. Should we ask about COLOR there or in the FCP forum?

Sorry for going on so much but to me, COLOR is one of the most under appreciated tools at our disposal. When the people at apple gave us COLOR for free with FCS2, industry professionals thought they were mad. Formerly known as 'FINAL TOUCH', COLOR was designed to lure people away from the DAVINCI 2K (the ultimate industry color grader) to a software version. But there is method in their madness. I was a PC user for 10 years. I was happy to use PREMIERE instead of FCP, there wasn't a huge difference. But as soon as COLOR came out, I jumped ship, bought a mac, and have never looked back.

There is nothing to compare with it. It's THAT good!
 
I have FCP but no color. I will have to get that and try it out. what is the difference between color grading and color correction. I suck at color correction right now but i am learning.
 
i'd like to see this as well. but what i want even more is for the rat bastards at apple to enable firewire and cinema display for video output. we don't all have thousands of dollars laying around for a high end video card.
 
slimchrisp said:
i'd like to see this as well. but what i want even more is for the rat bastards at apple to enable firewire and cinema display for video output. we don't all have thousands of dollars laying around for a high end video card.
Click to expand...
Actually, you don't need thousands of dollars.

You can pickup a Black Magic Intensity/Pro PCI card and run either HDMI out to HD monitor or SD video out (PRO version) via the Component video/audio outputs.

I tried it out and it works great. And best of all it will only run ya $300 or so.
 
Don't think you'll ever see Firewire out- it's pointless. Why color correct at 5:1 compression and 4:1:1: color space? It's like filming through a burlap bag.

Noah
 
Matrox MXO + 23" ACD and you've got probably the most accurate budget setup available right now.

But more on topic, I don't think there is enough interest in Color to support it's own forum on DVXuser. The Color forum over at the COW doesn't get much activity and Coloruser.net isn't exactly booming w/activity. Color adds a lot to the FCP suite, but it's fallen in a bit of a crack in the FCP user base. The learning curve, workflow/round trip limitations, and associated costs (proper monitoring, etc.,) keep the lower budget users at bay while the higher budget users probably have a coloring solution already in place (either in house or out of house). Low budget post/production has come a long way in the last 10 years in terms of technology, but you've still got to pay the piper sometime.

I'm in the process of learning Color right now (including watching the fine DVD that Noah was a part of :thumbsup:) and while I have a firm grasp of the basics and enjoy using the app I can understand while people haven't jumped into it. Hell, it's even next to impossible to find Apple Color classes in Los Angeles.

Noah,
At least they should have it work w/Firewire so one could use a BOB that connects via FW (like a MOTO V3/4, AJA IoHD, etc.,.).

-A
 
adkimery said:
Matrox MXO + 23" ACD and you've got probably the most accurate budget setup available right now.
Click to expand...

i've gotten this exact advice from several places. since i'm a noob at color grading, can you explain what purpose the mxo serves, assuming i already have the cinema display? what do i loose going straight into the cinema display w/o the mxo?
 
bigbossbmb said:
the Aja ioHD is supported in Color. I believe it is the only FW device though.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes. It is limited to just SD the last I heard though. Is that still correct?

slimchrisp said:
i've gotten this exact advice from several places. since i'm a noob at color grading, can you explain what purpose the mxo serves, assuming i already have the cinema display? what do i loose going straight into the cinema display w/o the mxo?
Click to expand...
What the MXO does, basically, is take the video signal coming off your DVI port and turns it into a standard, broadcast accurate video signal. The MXO was also designed to be used ideally w/a 23" ACD. What this means is the MXO is tied closely to the video signal processing that goes on inside the 23" ACD and compensates for any inaccuracies, and allows you to calibrate the monitor, so that the b'cast quality video signal coming out of the MXO is displayed as accurately as possible on the ACD (with results pretty close to a Sony HD CRT b'cast monitor from what I've read). W/o the MXO you have an inaccurate signal coming of the DVI port on your GFX card being displayed on an inaccurate monitor.

The Matrox MXO 2 is coming out soon and offers much more functionality then the MXO (it is also more expensive at $1600 vs $1000), but the MXO 2 doesn't do the DVI pass thru (it hooks up to your computer via an expansion card). We'll have to wait until testing to see if Matrox has selected a some lower-end monitors to work it's magic on though to see if the original MXO gets de-throned as the best bang-for-your-buck, accurate budget monitoring solution.


-A

EDIT: Sure post a link as I'm typing all that out... :crybaby: Here is another link to a review of the MXO, Shane Ross.
 
out of curiosity, i've read the mxo doesn't really make a difference for sd color correcting. is that true?
 
For SD color correcting you'd want to use an SD monitor. The MXO would still give you a b'cast quality signal from you DVI port, you just wouldn't want to use the 23" ACD as the monitor. If you are in DV25 land and your final output is back to DV25 then you can monitor via FW so having an MXO isn't required. But if you are working in something higher quality than DV25 and/or you final output is something other than DV25 (DVCpro 50, BetaSP, DigiBeta, etc.,) then you could benefit from finishing in Pro Res or uncompressed sequence and you'd want a device (like the MXO or BM or Kona card) that could allow you to monitor that higher quality signal for reasons that Noah already mentioned.


-A
 
If you are in DV25 land and your final output is back to DV25 then you can monitor via FW so having an MXO isn't required.
Click to expand...

That's really interesting. Could you explain it a little more please? What would be the easiest (and cheapest) setup for using the DVX100 with DV25?

I use COLOR at work on a nice setup (that my boss pays for!) but recently I've been looking into how it performs on the "minimum requirement" macs like the mac book pro and the 24" imac, so that everyone can use it. Double clicking the preview screen to get to full screen and back again is obviously annoying for those used to the dual monitor setup, but if you're not used to that, it's really no big deal.

Of course, you can't see the real changes you're making this way, but by exporting back to FCP, burning a DVD, and watching it through a good TV while watching the preview monitor, you can see the general differences between the two, (ie how the blacks compare) and, with a LOT of practice, accommodate your style when grading on the computer monitor.

Now, my boss and anyone in a professional grading house would fall off their chair laughing at that, but while this method is completely unacceptable for broadcast quality, if you're making DVDs to send to festivals and such, you can get some really nice results, certainly much better than just using the FCP CCs.

Just think of Robert Rodriguez and all the amazing, time consuming ways of doing things he thought of to save money. It blows my mind how he made EL MARIACHI.

Anyone else have any ideas on how to bring COLOR to the masses?
 
adkimery said:
If you are in DV25 land and your final output is back to DV25 then you can monitor via FW so having an MXO isn't required.

-A
Click to expand...

That is true in FCP but not Color. It's still always a better idea to monitor in a better color space than DV and in Color you have got the choice anyway. Some as in Audio editing, CDs are mastered at 16-bit 44.1 Khz but you can bet the vast majority were recorded and mixed at 24-bit 96Khz or better.

Noah
 
If you have a tower and want to use Color the cheapest way to get a signal out of your computer is w/the Blackmagic Intensity Pro card. If you have a laptop or an iMac the cheapest route is the Matrox MXO. You still need something w/at least some degree of accuracy to monitor the video on though.

dvxhutch said:
ONow, my boss and anyone in a professional grading house would fall off their chair laughing at that, but while this method is completely unacceptable for broadcast quality, if you're making DVDs to send to festivals and such, you can get some really nice results, certainly much better than just using the FCP CCs.
Click to expand...
Instead of focusing on slow, convoluted, not so great work arounds to try and hack together a way to use Color why not take that same energy and focus it on gaining access to a "proper" Color bay or earning money so you can buy at least the minimal amount monitoring gear so you can use Color on your personal setup? I'm slightly dumb founded that Apple is basically giving away this formerly $25k app and people are still saying "Well, that's nice... but what more can you give me for $1299?"

Post and production is kinda like running a marathon in that there are many ways to approach it but some ways are obviously better than others.. Yeah, you can do a marathon in flip-flops, baggy jeans, and a hoody but why would you choose to? Instead of spending energy coming up w/creative ways to keep your pants up, your feet from blistering, and the sweat from turning your hoody into a lead weight why not spend that same energy coming up w/ways to earn money so you buy proper running shoes and attire?

Since 2002 (when I made my inital investment in FCP 3.5, a Mac G4 tower, and a low-end JVC MiniDV deck) every upgrade to my personal editing system has either been salvaged from the trash been of employers as they upgrade equipment or has been paid for by side projects. When I need new hardware I find a side gig to pay for it. When I need to upgrade my software I find a side gig to pay for it. Some of my peers are like, "Man, I wish I had enough money to buy X, Y, and Z so I could have a better home setup" and I'm like, "Go out work for it. That's what I do."

You can either be passive and hope that opportunity stumbles upon you or you can be active and hunt opportunity down until you find, kill it, and mount it on your wall. Reading Rich Dad, Poor Dad was a mind set changing event for me it years ago and I recommend it to anyone who hasn't read it yet. It made me look at things in a new light. Instead of going, "Gee, it would be nice if I had the money to buy X" I think, "Gee, I want X. Now what do I need to do to be able to buy X?" Sometimes I figure out how to make the money then I buy X and sometimes I realize I need to buy X first and then make the money back after the purchase. And let me tell you that having debt from an equipment purchase is a great motivator to find gigs to make that equipment start paying for itself.

Just think of Robert Rodriguez and all the amazing, time consuming ways of doing things he thought of to save money. It blows my mind how he made EL MARIACHI.
Click to expand...
The thing you have to keep in my about movies like El Mariachi is that after the movie gets picked up there is hundreds of thousands of dollars of post work done. I've heard that El Mariachi got around 1 million dollars spent on it for post and marketing. RR may have gotten the movie in the can for $7k but it took a sh*tload more than that to finish it and successfully get it out into the marketplace.

Apologies for the rant.

Anyone else have any ideas on how to bring COLOR to the masses?
Click to expand...
Color is available to the masses. But like I said before, at some point you have to pay the piper.

NoahK said:
That is true in FCP but not Color. It's still always a better idea to monitor in a better color space than DV and in Color you have got the choice anyway. Some as in Audio editing, CDs are mastered at 16-bit 44.1 Khz but you can bet the vast majority were recorded and mixed at 24-bit 96Khz or better.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that Color could monitor via FW if you were using DV.

The slight flaw w/your audio analogy is that the source material ( 24bit/96k) is higher quality than your final destination (16bit/44.1k) where as w/my DV example the source material and the final destination are the same quality. If your raw footage is DV is there a real world advantage to bumping the footage up to a higher quality along the way before bring it back down to DV for final output?


-A
 
just picked up my 23" cinema display, used for $500. now for the mxo. even if i have to buy the mxo new, that's still only $1500 for a color grading setup. not bad at all.

thanks for the advice guys.
 
adkimery said:
The slight flaw w/your audio analogy is that the source material ( 24bit/96k) is higher quality than your final destination (16bit/44.1k) where as w/my DV example the source material and the final destination are the same quality. If your raw footage is DV is there a real world advantage to bumping the footage up to a higher quality along the way before bring it back down to DV for final output?


-A
Click to expand...

Well there is actually in terms of all of the fx and color correction you can apply in Color which will eat up all of the extra color depth and bandwidth you care to throw at it. Sure you cannot increase the quality of DV 25 per se by bumping it up. But once you work in Color in uncompressed you are going to greatly increase the apparent quality of the image as you apply filters and when that's ultimately dithered back down to DV25 the utility of the extra color depth and quality will be quite apparent.

Just as applying 24-bit filters in audio post will result in better sound in the final(regardless of the original format) than 16-bit. I'm all about oversampling. Most movies are corrected in 2K, even when they are going back down to NTSC 16:9 on DVD- much nicer than if they were simply telecined to NTSC and corrected at that resolution.

Noah
 
Last edited:
NoahK said:
Well there is actually in terms of all of the fx and color correction you can apply in Color which will eat up all of the extra color depth and bandwidth you care to throw at it. Sure you cannot increase the quality of DV 25 per se by bumping it up. But once you work in Color in uncompressed you are going to greatly increase the apparent quality of the image as you apply filters and when that's ultimately dithered back down to DV25 the utility of the extra color depth and quality will be quite apparent. Just as applying 24-bit filters in audio post will result in better sound in the final(regardless of the original format) than 16-bit. I'm all about oversampling. Most movies are corrected in 2K, even when they are going back down to NTSC 16:9 on DVD- much nicer than if they were simply telecined to NTSC and corrected at that resolution.

Noah
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm totally w/you on the advantages of oversampling and why going 35mm->2k->NTSC DVD is better than going 35mm->DigiBeta->NTSC DVD. I also understand the benefits of working w/DV footage in an uncompressed sequence when you final destination is something other than DV. Where I'm muddy though is how advantageous it is to go, for example, from DV->Uncompressed->DV. To me, and I'm totally open to the possibility of being wrong, it seems like that would add a detrimental second round of DV compression to all of the footage.


-A
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top