"A Verse Before Dying" - AF-100 Western Short

To be perfectly honest, I don't think there would have been much at all gained from an external recorder. In my past experiences with the external recorders, the main benefit you see from them is in high-motion, high-detail scenes, which the AF-100 nailed with the on-board codec. And there's also the benefit of going from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 color, but that doesn't really seem to deliver much "room" in shadow detail, from what I've seen. Like Jan said, it's not a $5,000 Arri Alexa, and there are always going to be things that cameras costing three, four and ten times as much as the AF-100 can deliver that the AF-100 won't quite measure up to. But I've been more than happy with the quality of the images we were able to get from the AF-100, and I'm just as happy knowing that there are cameras like the EPIC and Alexa out there, if I feel like I need what they offer.

As far as workflow goes, we (obviously) recorded AVCCAM in-camera, then transcoded (via Log & Transfer) into ProResHQ for editing. These ProResHQ files were then provided directly to the colorist, who worked with them in Baselight before laying them off with color correction. The EDL from Final Cut was then re-assembled with the color-corrected clips, giving us our current "online" picture. ...

Thanx so much for posting up about CC workflow and particularly that it was in a high end color suite (Baselight) . Exactly what I have been waiting to hear reports about . Looking real good. Congrats.

If your Colorist has any opinion about working directly with the source codec...I would be keen to know what it is.

Pro res is kind of out for Windows based editors so I am still thinking about what I would use as a DI.
 
If you are on Premiere you can edit with the native codec.
Well, actually, if you're on practically *any* editor you can edit with the native codec. Premiere CS5, Vegas, EDIUS (and EDIUS Neo), SpeedEdit, they all support native codec editing. The question is whether it's a satisfactory experience or not. On EDIUS and CS5, it cuts like butter on an appropriately-fast system. On Vegas, not so much.

You can actually edit native codec on the Apple editors too, but you'd have to run the ClipWrap 2.0 utility to transform the .MTS files into .MOV files. That won't change the underlying video data, but it changes the file format into one that the Apple NLE will work with. And I think most folks who've tried it have reported that the overall experience is not as satisfactory as when using an editing codec such as ProRes.

Same unwrap-rewrap trick might work with Avid, although I'm not sure on that.
 
Last edited:
If you are on Premiere you can edit with the native codec.

I am aware of that but my question related to high end (ie.not Premiere NLE) post production.

The Colorist in this project did his work in FilmBase from Pro Res files.
What would I have given him from a Windows system?
Could he have worked with AVCHD source files?

Just trying to establish a potential workflow.
 
I am aware of that but my question related to high end (ie.not Premiere NLE) post production.

The Colorist in this project did his work in FilmBase from Pro Res files.
What would I have given him from a Windows system?
Could he have worked with AVCHD source files?

Just trying to establish a potential workflow.

I know he can work with ProRes (FCP), DNxHD (Avid) and .MXF files. I've asked him for a more complete run-down of options.

UPDATED

The following file formats are also compatible with the Baselight system…
DPX
R3D (transcoded to DPX)
.cine
ARRIRAW
Phantom RAW
 
But you cannot encode them in Windows. That is the problem.

It would be great......but yeah no encoding Pro res.....I've only used it when the edit comes from FCP and then I convert it to some kind of still sequence, from tga to dpx, or to a .mov with the animation codec (terabyte hungry codec hahahha)....
 
I know he can work with ProRes (FCP), DNxHD (Avid) and .MXF files. I've asked him for a more complete run-down of options.

UPDATED

The following file formats are also compatible with the Baselight system…
DPX
R3D (transcoded to DPX)
.cine
ARRIRAW
Phantom RAW

Thank you.

Its DNxHD (Avid) and .MXF files that I will need focus on as soon as I can run my own tests. (plus seq file types tiff , tga)

I would be adverse to going too far down the ProRes route.
( Although I can edit it... I cant export it and I wouldnt trust Apple not to lock it up even further than it already is and destroy my cross platform workflows)
 
I'm with you on this, I've bored of apple's philosophy when it comes to its codecs.......
I would be adverse to going too far down the ProRes route.
( Although I can edit it... I cant export it and I wouldnt trust Apple not to lock it up even further than it already is and destroy my cross platform workflows)
 
UPDATED AGAIN!!!!

Oscar just informed me that he cannot use DNxHD files in Baselight. .MXF is the way to go for Avid users, it appears.
 
I thought this was worth sharing…

Our co-executive producer, Barry Green, brought an Ultra-16 modified GSMO to the shoot, so we decided to shoot some side-by-side shots with the AF-100 and Kodak Vision 16mm film.

I don't have the raw film footage, so what you will see is a series of four different shots, with AF-100 raw footage first, followed by color-corrected film, and then the color-corrected AF-100 footage.

Workflow for the AF-100 footage was… Shoot native AVCCAM. Transcode to ProResHQ. Color-correct files in Baselight. Output corrected HQ files. Assemble in Final Cut.

Workflow for film was. Shoot film, and hope you got it. Transfer via 2K ArriScan to ProResHQ. Color-correct files in Baselight. Output corrected HQ file. Assemble in Final Cut.

 
Very interesting! This is what I wanted to see. Thanks!

With the AF100 you don't need to check the gate! :bath:
 
Hey, how come when the kid sits up in the bed, there's not a big ol' blob of hair on the AF100 footage?

:evil:

Excellent, thanks for putting that together; looking forward to playing around with the raw files!
 
Back
Top