HVX Compositing Test

B

Beanstalk

New member
http://www.dayslaidwaste.com

The inspiration of this piece was to test what kind of CG could be done with the HVX, including that of colour correction. We chose a Star Wars theme because, hell, it's just an easily recognizable sci-fi world to mimic.

Please let me know your thoughts on the piece as reading the comments from all the previous posts has made me a more conscious-shooter.

My thanks,

-Aizick
 
CGI was good, colour grading sucks ass your losing way to much dynamic range !!!
 
Last edited:
I liked the look of the color grading, very interesting, lent to the dark emotion of the scene. "lousing"? Is that really a word?
 
High contrasr stuff often looks videoish to my eyes, this clip looked good, but was waaay to small and compressed to really say anything about the CC or CGI... the light sabers looked fine though, but with so many SW fan flicks around it gets kind of boring (no offence...)
 
BenB said:
I liked the look of the color grading, very interesting, lent to the dark emotion of the scene. "lousing"? Is that really a word?
Click to expand...

How is over exposed blown out colour adding dark emotion to the scene ? (Yeah sorry I cant spell for **** but one thing I do know is grading and to be honest if you think that looks good then your fired !)
Their also seems to be some confusion between what is colour correction and what is colour grading !
Please see thread for an example of decent colour grading http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=79306
 
Last edited:
4mat said:
How is over exposed blown out colour adding dark emotion to the scene ? (Yeah sorry I cant spell for shi* but one thing I do know is grading and to be honest if you think that looks good then your fired !)
Their also seems to be some confusion between what is colour correction and what is colour grading !
Please see thread for an example of decent colour grading http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=79306
Click to expand...

CC just is shorter than typing "grading", even when in 99% of the cases I´m talking about grading the image and not correcting eg wrong WB...
Anyhow the blown out sky really is a no-no, if not done deliberately out of artistic choice...
As for spelling: it´s a forum, why does anyone bother about spelling at all?
Many on this forum don´t even speak a decent english cause they´re from all over the world.
I´d rather see good footage than some nicely written ego trip...
 
so....what is the difference between color grading and color correction?

i assume color grading is enhancing the contrast/colors/etc and overall image and color correction is for example taking an annoying shine reflection off someones face?

jus want to be on the same page here.
 
I'd say grading and colour correction very different processes, colour correction speaks for itself while grading is more additive/creative, i'd say your pretty much on the same page. Some editors correct as they grade, others will correct first and grade later if needed or requested (grading meaning changing/altering the original stock footage to achive a different look or feel).
 
The terms can be interchangeable in a forum like this. They are in most common casual conversation with film makers I have had. But to put too fine of a point on it, color correction can be done at any point in the production process. On set with gels and such, in post with grading software.

Color Grading, also known as Color Timing, is purely a post production process. But grading and timing and correction all refer to the same mechanical process when we're talking about post production specifically. BUT you don't do grading or timing during production.

Now, there is additive and subtractive and telecine grading, or timing. It all tries to achieve the same result. Then there's Primary Color Correction and Secondary Color Correction. And according to the APTS book on CC'ing, all these terms mean the same thing in post.

So to be technical, in post, it's grading or timing or correction, it's all just achieving the same objective, controling the color and lighting to give the scene a specific look.

So reguardless of what you call it, we still know what you're talking about.

Now, if we were on a feature production, we'd all have a boss to tell us which term to use, and we'd be talking about what a hard ass that boss was, and not technical terms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_correction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_grading
 
I liked it alot. The color grading reminded me of Domino/Man on Fire (which damn sure don't look videoish). I can't understand why people are nit picking anyway, this is art and its made to taste...the artist taste.
 
Wow, this was cool. The website with the pictures of the actors looks absolutely terrible so I expected something awful. But you almost had me believing that this was really a story from the star wars world. I was really wondering what was up with that girl. I would've liked a longer and more exciting/original light saber battle because what was shot looked good. It was like the Yoda battle from Ep2. It was over too fast! Anyway, congrats. Shoot some more of these stories. I assume you'll only get better.
 
Yeah you graded the crap out of it. Besides that, the opening sequence was fun to watch, good shot selection, edit and framing. The action was nice and actually refreshing for a fan film. Sorry, though, but why did that jedi go down and drown so fast?
I watched it without the sound so forgive me if that was explained in vo or something.
 
cinebuddy said:
I liked it alot. The color grading reminded me of Domino/Man on Fire (which damn sure don't look videoish). I can't understand why people are nit picking anyway, this is art and its made to taste...the artist taste.
Click to expand...
Well, maybe the movies you mentioned don´look videoish, because they were shot on film...?
And if you´re part of the "art is art is art" BS fraction you simply shouldn´t go to a public forum and ask for criticism. Period.
 
Didnt really like it. Im a huge star wars fan and didnt see any real connection to the story except lightsaber fights.

sorry dude. 1 star out of 5
 
If I can add my $0.01 to Ben's excellent post . . .

When I say "correction" on a set, I usually mean for someone to color-correct a light source (light, window, etc.). This typically calls for covering a light or a window with color correction gel, often either CTB ("blue" daylight correction) or CTO ("orange" Tungsten correction). Actually, straight Tungsten correction is another gel--CTO is a bit warmer than straight Tungsten correction. If I were to mention "correction" in an edit bay, I would typically mean to color-correct an erroneous white balance.
 
Spartacus said:
Well, maybe the movies you mentioned don´look videoish, because they were shot on film...?
And if you´re part of the "art is art is art" BS fraction you simply shouldn´t go to a public forum and ask for criticism. Period.
Click to expand...

You are rude. A lot of people use this forum to gain knowledge, others use it as a poor attempt to elevate themselves over others.

Help your fellow learning filmmaker to do his craft better not jump through your hoops.

Your footage was good. I agree that the substance of story was poor but as this was a test of your CC and CG abilities. I think you did pretty good.

I would explore mood creating with your color choices more than DR in outdoor shots like these. Indoor or night shooting lends itself to crushing blacks like u did.

Also it felt too saturated for a war scene. My 2 cents...
 
Last edited:
Not bad at all. I can see the points about the CC, but what stood out to me was the wardrobe. I'm a huge Star Wars fan, but you lost me at the close ups of both of their WalMart type shoes. I know its a small detail, but the small details will help or hurt your storytelling.
 
Spartacus said:
And if you´re part of the "art is art is art" BS fraction you simply shouldn´t go to a public forum and ask for criticism. Period.
Click to expand...

All video/film is art. It's not needed for our survival. It's a recreation we happen to be lucky enough to be able to con other folks into paying for.

Thank you for informing the rest of us that going to a public forum titled "Screen Grabs/Clips of HVX Footage" in order to ask for constructive critisism about "art" is wrong, Spartucus. Cause we can all see that you've offered the best advice here today!

Keep up the great work of your own, which is by your own admission, is not art. I guess all the art BS I produce is not worthy of you. Thanks, I won't bother you with my own footage here, according to your logic.

Way to go, bra. We're all so glad you, at least, do not do art for art's sake, i.e. "video" work. Cause only stupid people who hang out on stupid forums about stupid "art" done on a stupid camera like the HVX/DVX do that. Good thing no one here does art for art's sake! Cause video is nessisary for our survival, and thus, is not art!

Fact is, I don't know anyone who does video that is not art for art's sake. Oh wait, by your own admission, you're NOT an artist doing art for the sake of art. So, what exactly do you do for a living?
 
BenB said:
All video/film is art. It's not needed for our survival. It's a recreation we happen to be lucky enough to be able to con other folks into paying for.

Thank you for informing the rest of us that going to a public forum titled "Screen Grabs/Clips of HVX Footage" in order to ask for constructive critisism about "art" is wrong, Spartucus. Cause we can all see that you've offered the best advice here today!

Keep up the great work of your own, which is by your own admission, is not art. I guess all the art BS I produce is not worthy of you. Thanks, I won't bother you with my own footage here, according to your logic.

Way to go, bra. We're all so glad you, at least, do not do art for art's sake, i.e. "video" work. Cause only stupid people who hang out on stupid forums about stupid "art" done on a stupid camera like the HVX/DVX do that. Good thing no one here does art for art's sake! Cause video is nessisary for our survival, and thus, is not art!

Fact is, I don't know anyone who does video that is not art for art's sake. Oh wait, by your own admission, you're NOT an artist doing art for the sake of art. So, what exactly do you do for a living?
Click to expand...

Dear BenB,
your definitely are an artist, may I even call you a master of irony?

To clarify my point (maybe my english didn´t really bring across what I was trying to say, It´s not my mother language):
The best thing to expect from a public forum when showing your work is constructive criticism.
I stated what I liked about the flic and what I didn´t like.
As a beginner I´d rather have someone tell me that my CC is a bit of and simply doesn´t sell my case as I was hoping to, than have ten post saying "Oh that was sth nice!" and not telling why.
So again: if your only out for admiration, are not interested in what others think of your work and see no reason why to improve your craft because it´s all art isn´t it?
- why bother and come to a public forum?
Funny that the starter of this thread didn´t seem offended by people telling him his CC is off or the saber fight could be better.
Maybe he even sat down and turned the saturation down and brought back the highlights?
L´art pour l´art is fine, I consider a lot of aspects of my work as artistic - but I´m not trying to sell a bad key or clipped highlights as a way of expressing my inner self...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top