Tiffen DFX or Magic Bullet Suite?

Good question. Being an Avid user I've tried the Tiffen plugins, but not bought them yet - mainly because I own Magic Bullet so can't justify the cost. I have to say after a year or so of using Magic Bullet that I'm a little tired of it. Probably because I'm not expert enough on it, but I do find it tends to deliver a very defined look that is easily identifiable as Magic Bullet. I actually tend to use Mojo more than looks these days as I find Looks too harsh; it seems to do too much damage to the image and overpower it a little, if that makes sense. When I was using the Tiffen plugins I was extremely impressed - they clearly have a great history with filters and most of them are replicated, so when you compare the cost of the plugin versus the cost of buying all those filters physically it's a very good deal, not to mention the fact that it *almost* negates the need for matte boxes on set. I'm not sure if DFX has so many powerful other tools like sharpening, denoising etc, but in general I think it's a very tempting product.
 
Last edited:
Am not familiar with DFX. Own and use the MB suite. Am not a grader or colorist so using Looks allows me to easily play and learn. Hope to graduate to using Colorista as I gain more knowledge.
 
I use Magic Bullet Suite a lot for broadcast promos and commercials. Looks is a huge time saver. Not just the presets but going through each different look option and creating your own is very powerful and easy. The presets are good but they scream "Looks" because everybody uses them without making adjustments to the overall grade. Colorista is very good. It's so good I can't get myself to use Resolve.
I haven't used Tiffen DFX before and just watched the demo of it. Looks pretty good for $599. I think you get more from Magic Bullet but then it cost $799

I really wish FXfactory would support Premiere Pro. I don't get why they still haven't even though After Effects is. With Premiere Pro there is a lack of transition packs. I have FXfactory for FCP and like it a lot. Really need this for news topicals and such. For me these plugins takes the "News" out of the footage even if it steps on it hard it makes it look more interesting/compelling.

I should try the Tiffen DFX demo.
 
Have just taken another look and actually I'm convinced that DFX is the better of the two for a couple of reasons. Firstly, they're replicating industry standard names, so having the gamut of Rosco gels, for instance, is awesome - in DFX I can make decisions based on what I have in my real worldgel case, add a 201 here, a 131 there - brilliant! That's enhanced by the addition of genuine filmstock emulators, so I can pick Kodak, Agfa, Ilford etc. They also do seem to have some good elements that are particularly useful for the AF100/1/2 such as de-banding.
 
I use MB looks and can't imagine to do my CC without it! There is a huge difference in how the image reacts to Premiere's color grading compared to Magic Bullet.
One if my favorite things with Magic bullet is the spot exposure tool, where it allows me to choose where in the image I want to raise the exposure, it gives me such a creative freedom.
 
I never touch MB Looks...I find it too "template"-y for my taste, but I make extensive use of Colorista II. Like Erik, I haven't really made an effort to learn Resolve because so far Colorista meets my needs.
 
The Tiffen filters are really good - most of them anyway - and can really look like on-camera filters, especially the diffusion. Way better than MB (which mostly looks to me like first-time-film student-hey-look-at-me-aren't-I-clever) although I do like some of the film effects if used cautiously - very cautiously.

But I do have a support problem with Tiffen - I originality bought the filters when they were 55MM ($69) before Tiffen bought them out, primarily for the excellent diffusion - then had to pay again ($600) with Tiffen - Then had to pay again for an upgrade to Intel mac ($300) - now have to pay again to use them with FCPX (and they no longer provide support for the older version on 7, so if I load that AP in another computer I've got no filters).

I have well over $4,000 worth of Tiffen glass filters that I've accumulated over the years, so I feel that I have the right to say that Tiffen doesn't care much for its customer base.
.
 
Mac said:
But I do have a support problem with Tiffen - I originality bought the filters when they were 55MM ($69) before Tiffen bought them out, primarily for the excellent diffusion - then had to pay again ($600) with Tiffen - Then had to pay again for an upgrade to Intel mac ($300) - now have to pay again to use them with FCPX (and they no longer provide support for the older version on 7, so if I load that AP in another computer I've got no filters).

I have well over $4,000 worth of Tiffen glass filters that I've accumulated over the years, so I feel that I have the right to say that Tiffen doesn't care much for its customer base.
.
Click to expand...

Same here.
 
Mac said:
The Tiffen filters are really good - most of them anyway - and can really look like on-camera filters, especially the diffusion. Way better than MB (which mostly looks to me like first-time-film student-hey-look-at-me-aren't-I-clever) although I do like some of the film effects if used cautiously - very cautiously.

But I do have a support problem with Tiffen - I originality bought the filters when they were 55MM ($69) before Tiffen bought them out, primarily for the excellent diffusion - then had to pay again ($600) with Tiffen - Then had to pay again for an upgrade to Intel mac ($300) - now have to pay again to use them with FCPX (and they no longer provide support for the older version on 7, so if I load that AP in another computer I've got no filters).

I have well over $4,000 worth of Tiffen glass filters that I've accumulated over the years, so I feel that I have the right to say that Tiffen doesn't care much for its customer base.
.
Click to expand...

I had the same problem with MB ironically - upgraded to MC6 and CS6 and lost all my functioning copies of MB - no free upgrade, so had to pay for a whole new MB package!
 
I have been using Magic Bullet since the complimentary copy I received with my DVX100a. I still use the latest version of the software suite and love it.
 
I've used the Magic Bullet Looks Suite for a while now on FCP and now Avid. Although some presets are wild out of the box, It's really flexible when you dig deeper and learn the controls. Just used the Cosmo filter recently to do post makeup on a face and the client loved it.
 
I think they are really different products actually. One is basically a digital filter box, the other is a gimmick for people who can't do real grading and think cliche looks across the board makes their video look better.
Colorista, although better than Magic Bullet is just another DaVinci wannabe. I think you should always stick with the real thing and do real color grading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top