Scene Files vs. Color Grading?

D

dan1066

Member
New user here, tried a quick search for this, perhaps someone else has a link...

What are the advantages to setting up your scene file to shoot the original footage with an extreme color shift ala. some of the settings in http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=101419 (Goldeneye as the first example...) vs. color grading in your editing app such as FCP?

Thanks,

Dan
 
Well, doing it in camera is technically better because there will be no image degradation from your software color grading (as DV cannot stand up to much). Doing this extreme a look in camera can come back to bite you if you are not 100% committed to it.
 
Last edited:
There is also nothing to say that just because you capture in DV, that you have to edit and grade in DV.

I tend to not want a "look" in-camera, but many people do. It's a choice. I tend to set up my camera to capture as much data as it possibly can, and worry about a "look" later on in the process.
 
The thing about using Goldeneye (or any other extreme setting) is you're going to introduce noise to the image. Any tweaking of chroma phase or temp will do this.

It's all a matter of personal preference. How much time do you want to spend grading? How willing are you to commit to a look? What some of my screen grabs don't show are all the nuances that occur as light and exposure change. You may like a look when it's got a ton of light thrown at it. You may not like it as much when the contrast goes down. You may find it more difficult to match down the road.

Again - all a matter of preference. As I've mentioned elsewhere, Nancy Schreiber hated the idea of tweaking after-the-fact. When she shot "November", she wanted everything done in-camera.

Regarding the DV workflow, you could drop your edited sequence into an uncompressed timeline and render out your color grade that way.

Shoot some tests and do them in a variety of lighting situations. Best of luck.....
 
Color Grading in Post does not have to be, and should not be a lossy process. It can be, but if you use the right codec, you're fine.

The most important thing to watch with your camera settings isn't color, it's your luma (or value). With smaller chip cameras, if you use a preset that drops your blacks and raises your Hilights to fake some kind of film curve, then you run the risk of underexposing mids and overexposing your his. That means - 1) you have to bring up your mids and darks in post, adding a lot of visual noise. 2) If you clip in either direction, that information is lost and you can't do any color correction to it in post without it looking like crap.

As for the hue. Technically, if you lean in any color direction, you can bring it back in another direction in post color grading. Of course, you have to have a good eye, and it's not always easy to bring something back from some extreme look. I wouldn't recommend it.

Generally speaking, if you know what you are doing with a camera, and you like the looks in camera, go for it. You're making your choice right there. It will save you some time in post, but odds are your still gonna do some grading to get things to match anyway.

However, the industry is shifting rapidly to a workflow that shoots clean and relies more heavily on color grading. It's mainly a control thing. More people involved in a project can see more options of how to make the footage look. Generally, unless people really, really, really know what they want, they like options.

Me, personally, I color grade everything I do in Color and FCP now using Pro Rez. I shoot 1080p on the HVX. I've found that, if you use the Ansel Adam's zone system, and make 60IRE your key level... you'll be in good shape in post. Things may look a little bright, but it's way better to drop everything a stop than to have to raise your mids - that is noise town.
 
PerroneFord said:
There is also nothing to say that just because you capture in DV, that you have to edit and grade in DV.

Pardon me is this takes us off topic, but what does the above mean? When I capture in DV on my DVX, do I have other options for the format in which I edit this footage?

I, too, have had the question about in-camera vs. post. It seems to me that getting the best image possible in camera and then color grading in post leaves one with many more options. But I do dig the fact that there is so damn much room on the DVX for experimentation.

Cheers.
Click to expand...
 
flimflamfilms said:
Pardon me is this takes us off topic, but what does the above mean? When I capture in DV on my DVX, do I have other options for the format in which I edit this footage?
Click to expand...

My workflow is to capture and rought edit in DV, and then move to uncompressed AVI (4:4:4) before changing a single frame. Chroma Median technique from the DV Rebel's Guide to get smoother colors, and color correct from there. DV can be pushed quite far if once you smooth the chroma to reduce the DV artifacts.
 
Thanks for the insight from all. Indeed, getting out and testing certainly has taken much of my time these past few days. I'm going to look into the DV Rebel's guide as well.

Zoostory, I come from a still photo background - 60ire... is that the equiv. to the 18% grey in using the zone system? Another if I may, the 'marker' - is that displaying the ire or a 'panasonic' number (such as with focus.) The manual seem to describe the latter being the case.

Thanks again... and BTW - Fevercity (and all that post settings,) - thanks for the starting points and inspiration, if you will.

Dan
 
dan1066 said:
Thanks again... and BTW - Fevercity (and all that post settings,) - thanks for the starting points and inspiration, if you will.

Dan
Click to expand...

Hey, Dan - thanks for thanking me. I was just having fun. The in-camera 'looks' were a large part of what drew me to the DVX. The challenge was just beginning on that "what the?!??!?!" area of the learning curve. It drove me crazy that I didn't 'get' what all those menu settings did.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, there's a weird cycle to the process.... You get so sick of tweaking / staring at the monitor and scopes that you just want a setting file to do it in-camera. Then you see how limiting settings alone can be and you want to push it further in post. You may end up undo'ing your settings just to get back to baseline for more processing. Round and round...

Maybe it has something to do with left-brain / right brain or something or how much of a control freak you are. Just like with still photography, some people go PhotoShop crazy. Some photogs build elaborate filter stacks and go with the camera original. Again - all a matter of personal preference.

Been a while since I cooked a batch. Maybe now that spring's here (sort of - snowed today), I'll get back out there.

Peace.......
 
renegadewill said:
I've noticed that you seriously need to torch your subject is you have crazy incam settings.
Click to expand...

Indeed. To be honest, I can't say that I've actually used any of the wacky ones for a shoot other than testing. Just wanted to see how far I could push the camera. With that much in-camera manipulation comes noise. I just figured incremental tweaks to my 'base' settings would get old pretty quick as a series of posts.
 
Noise, big deal. Have you guys seen 35mm projection lately? Films are covered in grain. It doesn't matter because you're caught up in the story. We get obesessed with noise because we stare at these images for hours (or days, or worse), but the viewer doesn't notice in most cases.
 
so if I were to shot something with the intent to color grade in post, what would be an ideal setting?
 
There really is not ideal setting, it's all relative. Go on youtube and look at all of boring dvx footage that was shot with the factory settings, and no cc. It's really obvious. It doesn't even look special, like modied dvx footage can.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top