Uprezzing before colour correcting?

M

markyf

Well-known member
Right away I know this is not the way to do things, but the thing is I don't have a reliable NTSC monitor to use, I only have a Matrox MXO. So if I'm taking a film shot on a GL2, can I do the uprezz first and then the colour correction/grading so that I don't have to rent a broadcast monitor? What is the harm in doing this?
 
HD does not display the same as SD. Different technologies, different tonal and color responses, etc. You can approximate it, but if you want to be accurate you have to use a good SD monitor.
 
Are you planning on outputting HD? Or SD? Uprezzing to HD to color correct, then to output to HD makes zero sense.
 
uprezzing from SD-HD makes zero sense to me anyway... Your just going to make the film look grimey, it never works as well as just telling people its SD in the first place, and then atleast the image is sharp and dosnt look like your watching a film that has been kitted into a fluffy jumper, like upscaled footage looks.
 
hoarp001 said:
uprezzing from SD-HD makes zero sense to me anyway... Your just going to make the film look grimey, it never works as well as just telling people its SD in the first place, and then atleast the image is sharp and dosnt look like your watching a film that has been kitted into a fluffy jumper, like upscaled footage looks.
Click to expand...

I've see some amazing uprezzed footage on this site. I've seen DVX footage that I could have sworn was HVX. Hunter Richards' African footage comes to mind.
 
You are taking 720x480 footage, blowing it up 3 to 5 times it's size, adding compression, color correcting it in an HD space (701), then downconverting it again, adding compression..and outputting in a completely different color space than the HD you color corrected.

Well, do what you want to. But that is the absolute wrong way to do this.
 
Shane, you have these weird habit of inferring things from posts that were never said. It's happened numerous times. Of course I wouldn't downconvert it back to SD, that would be stupid.

I obviously should have articulated my question better but what I see a lot of people doing on this site is mastering their SD footage to HD once edited. I was just wondering if you could put this last step first, since I have nothing to properly monitor SD footage on but I do have something proper to monitor HD footage on. Obviously it's a compromise, you can tell that I knew this from my first post.
 
Well, I did ask what you were mastering to, and you have yet to respond to that question. I did say that uprezzing to HD then downconverting again to SD (that I typO'd as HD) as a general statement. Because a lot of people actually do that. But I didn't assume that was what you were doing until you asked "how so" to my SD to HD to SD comment. But, because it was a typo, you questioned why going from SD to HD to HD output was bad. Simple miscommunication.

Now. How do you intend to master this uprezzed footage?
 
Thanks Shane. I am under the impression, perhaps wrongly, that most films are uprezzed for projection. If this is the case, what format is most widely used?

How would you rate colour correcting SD footage using the MXO DV NTSC setting and scaling the footage to fill the screen? Will this give me accuracy?
 
Projection where? I have no clue as I don't do this sort of thing. I work on broadcast shows.

Scaling DV to fit the Apple displays is yucky. Downright icky. Don't do it. Either keep it small and SQUINT, or get an NTSC monitor.
 
I've been looking around. Very hard to find a good broadcast monitor used unless you have a grand to spend. My cheapest option is the JVC TM-H150CGU is $465 at B&H. I am driving to New York in about a month.

Again, though, not to try and infuriate you Shane, but do I really need an NTSC monitor if I have the Matrox? I did some research and Matrox Technical Support claims that colour is in no way affected by scaling. There is also this article at DVcreators.net that claims:

Pixel-for-pixel monitoring is not all that important for color correction, but it is very important for compositing, keying, motion graphics and other visual effects, so if you’re buying a monitor, consider that if you shoot greenscreen or do a lot of motion graphics or CG work.

I'm not trying to be cheap, I just don't foresee myself having much use for an NTSC monitor beyond this 35 minute short I'm finishing. I plan on moving into HD from now on, which is why I set up the Matrox system.

Are there other considerations beyond simple colour correction (pardon me I'm Canadian) that I'm neglecting. I've also ran into some Graeme Nattress posts where he talks a lot about his plug-ins being able to improve a DV image. Are there tools for sharpening and other effects which would make it very beneficial to have a true NTSC monitor?

Thanks for the patience!
 
Do you want to do things right? Or half-assed? If right, then get the right equipment. If half-assed, then use the Matrox and ACD to color correct your SD. I am not mad...you aren't infuriating me. I am giving you advice and you can choose to do with it what you will. But to think that you are getting any level of profession viewing is absurd. The MXO and ACD is fine with HD. It is on the lower end of broadcast quality color correction because the ACD is, after all, a computer monitor, and not a professional level HD monitor. But, it works fine for many purposes. But to then try to correct SD on that...blown up...and think that you are approaching professional level...that is wrong thinking.

All the sharpening tools aside, that is not the issue. The issue is the image that is being produced on that monitor is not something I would trust...not SD. HD, yes, SD, no. Even if you play it back pixel-for-pixel, that is not what this setup is designed for. It is meant for HD...Matrox will tell you that.

But do what you want. Just don't think it is right, because it isn't. Rent a monitor if you must.
 
ebay is amazing for gear.
i picked up a used JVC TM-H150CGU monitor for $250.

i recently shot some HDV footage and was amazed that i was able to monitor
with the JVC. can anyone explain this?

by no means am i complaining! i just thought you had to have an HD monitor.

-shot using canon HV10
-transcoded into pro res

shawn
 
Ebay is amazing for production monitors if you're in L.A. Getting one shipped across the border and to Toronto will add a couple of hundred bucks. There's also really nowhere to rent them here. I think I might just buy the JVC in New York and sell it when I'm done.

Shane, you're right. I don't think it's being half-assed when you've been multiple thousand in debt for a year and a half from your short and can't bear the thought of adding more debt, but this is the best way to do it. I'm sure I will thank you in the future for your unwillingness to compromise.
 
Marky...get someone else to color correct. Or RENT a monitor. People do this all the time. I mean, you spent this much money on your film already, why muck it up in the end? Makes no sense. This is why people shoot films, then let others edit...others who have the proper equipment, so you don't have to go out and buy it all.

I spend all my money in post...the only HD camera I have is on loan. I am a POST guy...therefore I can spend what I need on post. There is a CAMERA guy that people hire, or get to work for free, who has all the camera stuff.

ANWAY, if this is all shoe string and duct tape, then you gotta use what you gotta use. Just know it ain't ideal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top