Opinions wanted: what's wrong with this screenshot

mainstreetprod

mainstreetprod

Veteran
I'm shooting a historic documentary that included interviews with multiple historians. One of them has a problem with the color in his segment and has told our producer that he wants the interview reshot if not corrected. I haven't communicated directly with him yet, so don't know what his exact complaint is. Maybe ruddy looking skin? Thought I would post the screenshot here and see if there is something wrong that I'm missing. Shot with FS7, no grading so far. Please post your opinion below- thanks!
 
Yes, ruddy or red-ish skin tone would be the first thing. So many cameras trend this way it seems like a constant battle. But, none of us know what he looks like in real life. I can't find anything else a client would spot for a re-shoot.
 
mainstreetprod said:
One of them has a problem with the color in his segment and has told our producer that he wants the interview reshot if not corrected. I haven't communicated directly with him yet, so don't know what his exact complaint is.
Click to expand...
Sorry for being so blunt, but I think posting a picture on this forum of someone you filmed who has a problem with how he looks while you have not even communicated the issue with him is inappropriate.
 
jcs said:
View attachment 137188
Very magenta- missing a lot of green. Fixable with secondaries and masking (maybe a good time to learn Resolve and/or Lumetri advanced techniques in PP CC). Simulated diffusion / surface/bilateral blur will also help (built into the $300 version of Resolve, can also do with diffusion with layers in any NLE). There's a plugin that will do much of this (have played with demo- don't own it): https://digitalanarchy.com/beautyVID/main.html

See also: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=premiere+pro+soften+skin
Click to expand...
Yup, that’s what it needed to my eye. Honestly this will sound like a cheap shot from the Panasonic guy, but the problem with the original shot is that it looks like it was shot with an FS7.
 
Very magenta- missing a lot of green. Fixable with secondaries and masking (maybe a good time to learn Resolve and/or Lumetri advanced techniques in PP CC). Simulated diffusion / surface/bilateral blur will also help (built into the $300 version of Resolve, can also do with diffusion with layers in any NLE). There's a plugin that will do much of this (have played with demo- don't own it): https://digitalanarchy.com/beautyVID/main.html

See also: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=premiere+pro+soften+skin
 
Last edited:
When vanity is involved, who knows what his issue with his image might be.

And to Cary's point, the man dislikes an image of himself so you posted that image online. Kinda funny, actually. "Oh, you hate the picture of yourself? Well then, I'll put it online for all to see. Take that, old coot!"
 
Typical Sony Magenta bias skin tones. That's why I've built my own scene files. If I get shots like this I'll correct them somewhat like this. Re-tone the skin vectors, saturation and luminance plus tone down the overall luminance of the background and adjust all for 0-100 IRE. Plus aim at keeping his hair white as he doesn't have that smokers yellowish tinted white hair in the original shot. Not saying anything here is correct but I prefer to get away from that stock Sony color science. Save having to do it on a shot by shot basis once I have a 'look' the client is happy with I just pump out a correction LUT.

Chris Young
 
Last edited:
Bassman2003 said:
Yes, ruddy or red-ish skin tone would be the first thing. So many cameras trend this way it seems like a constant battle.
Click to expand...

Cameras? or LED lights which are very weak in dark reds. This mean any dark red in the image goes dark which exagerates any skin imperfections.

Im alsmost thinking of going back to an 800 redhead for my key when skin counts.
 
I have to agree with Cary on this. We do have to respect our use of someone's likeness, and take care to not present them in an embarrassing light. That's journalism 101. I doubt he agreed to be on camera so we could discuss how to work over his skin tones toward something more flattering.

That said, there are some wonderful contributions above with very good practical information and insight toward correcting a camera/lighting issue that, in the end, should prove to be beneficial to this person. However, my guess is that your not working on spec, and therefore are not the owner of this footage, so...

Maybe now that you have some good info on how to fix it, perhaps you'll have the good sense to remove the photo? If he is insistent enough to demand a re-shoot, imagine what he might be willing to do if he came across this thread as-is? And if you think that possibility is low, and not worth the effort, well... good luck!
 
morgan_moore said:
Cameras? or LED lights which are very weak in dark reds. This mean any dark red in the image goes dark which exagerates any skin imperfections.

Im alsmost thinking of going back to an 800 redhead for my key when skin counts.
Click to expand...

Also, Lee 188 gels (Cosmo Highlight) and 216 diffusion helps with this... if you don't like the exaggerated warmth, just WB with the Cosmo on the lights. It still does an amazing job of evening out reddish imperfections in skin tones.
 
if you have a light with a spectrum like this.. then no filtration can fix the missing red. Missing red can create blotches on faces especially middle aged caucasians.

b7ach.png
 
Last edited:
I too would be very reticent to have published this - one Rec ent job with a broadway star effectively meant that all the material shot - a mix of video and stills was subject to approvals, and it made life hell - not just the real material, but even his image in other people's facebook posts, meaning I had to get people to remove pictures he featured in, WITHOUT him being cited as the reason. not in our contract with him, but a small clause - just one sentence in his agreement with the production company. It shut down Facebook posting because I had to ban most perfectly sensible and productive posts, with me being the baddie. If he's sensitive about appearance, he will be doubly sensitive at having it discussed. Luckily, we don't know his name, so damage is minimal - but it's really risky in today's stupid world we work in.
 
morgan_moore said:
Cameras? or LED lights which are very weak in dark reds. This mean any dark red in the image goes dark which exagerates any skin imperfections.

Im alsmost thinking of going back to an 800 redhead for my key when skin counts.
Click to expand...
I was speaking of cameras but sure, lights can have an impact. I found out early on that learning how to work with color science is quite important and the camera makers most often do not get it right out of the box.
 
The first thing I thought after seeing the picture: use a magenta killer. Second thought, looks like daylight is mixed with LCD light or tungsten.

But as some comments also showed, it is easy to fix with Davinci.
 
morgan_moore said:
Id say this is DVX - no one apart from a few geeks come here. Of course I dont know the wider picture.
Click to expand...

One seemingly very innocent Google Image Search motivated by "hmm, I wonder what folks have been saying about that video I was in awhile back," and poof... "hmm, what is this DVX site all about?"

We have honestly arrived at a point now where this is well beyond possible, and is in fact plausible. And yes, the search bots do their fair share of crawling through and indexing this little old site as well.
 
mainstreetprod said:
No malice intended, simply wanted opinions and then intended to delete the photos. However, a few have reposted it, so I'm asking the posters to please remove it.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone doubted your intentions, even if some of the criticism came off as a little harsh. Ultimately, it's just another way folks here are trying to help each other out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top