bruce alan greene

Members
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

1 Follower

About bruce alan greene

  • Rank
    Newbie
  • Birthday 01/01/1960

Personal Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

210 profile views
  1. I've made a little reel from my last project on which I worked as DP and Colorist... https://vimeo.com/313896311
  2. This is a tough one. If you're projecting on a screen in a room that is not dark (you need to see the living room), then a calibration may not work so well. The screen will be contaminated by the room light. I think you might be better served using a wall of displays rather than a projector.
  3. I think.... If you are using "false colors" for exposure, you are not a Colorist. Nothing wrong with it, if it works for you, but it's not really how it's done. For photoshop, color grading, etc. This method completely discards any "art" of color correction. Because... there is NO perfect exposure for faces. Every scene is different
  4. I am happy with my colorist credit at the end of the movie. But, I'm also the DP, so I don't care. I'm responsible for the entire photographic process, for good or not
  5. If you're looking for a "saturated" look... you may find that all kinds of color reflections from sets, costumes, grass etc reflect on the face. With enough saturation, you're going to see multi colored faces. Film origination is less sensitive to this as it tends to push tones towards the color of what we think of as skin. It's not as accurate, but many find it more pleasing.
  6. How many hours did we use on "Babushka" Sasha? BTW, you did a wonderful job!
  7. I don't know Steve's Luts, so let's just stay with the Resolve REC709/2383 preview LUT. Yes, if you are grading through this LUT you will need to adjust your original Log footage to make a pleasing image through this LUT. If you have your 2383 preview LUT in the middle of your node tree, than you can make further corrections after the LUT if you wish, using traditional Lift, gamma, gain controls. If you are not pleased with your results using this LUT to de-log your material (assuming it's Log in the first place!), you can use a LUT provided by the camera manufacturer. This will give a much more neutral representation of your image than the 2383 preview LUT. But you do not need to use any LUT at all, or, as I sometime do when I want a bit of the "film look" I use the 2383 LUT set at maybe 30% effect. And even at 30%, I need to grade for this LUT. In your case, you are using a tool that is designed for making a film negative in a workflow that is not making a film negative. You are not "doing something wrong" that makes the green colors unpleasant. If you see unpleasant colors when you use the LUT then, don't use the LUT, or you will need to grade for this LUT. There are also LUTs that take an existing REC709 gamma 2.2 image and simulate a film print. But they are derived from the preview LUT and might not make you really happy either. But, you could apply this LUT at just 25% or something like that and get a filmish "feel" without going too far off base. I really think that if you really want to start with a kind of normal image, from LogC camera original, than use one of the manufacturer's LUTs and start with that. I know that Marc likes to do the basic color matrix correction himself by eye, but, from my experience, I like to start with the manufacturer's LUT and make it wrong by eye from there (to my tastes of course!) If you like what you're doing with the 2383 LUT and making your corrections for it, than you can keep doing that. But I think eventually, all your work will have the limitation of this "look" and you will want to try something different.
  8. Anton, thank you for the blunt reply! Just kidding... I have personally gone through the process of creating master files for output to Arri laser film recorder, using these kind of LUT's for previewing what a film print would look like from this negative. The color grade one does on a computer for output to film recorder is fundamentally different than the grade for video or digital theatrical display. These LUTs are quite good (within the variances that Marc mentions) at predicting what the film print will look like. Usually some adjustment of the printer lights at the laboratory is also necessary to make the best print. When starting such a project, one needs to decide at the beginning what the most important delivery will be. Film print or DCP or home displays. If it is film print, than the grading was often done in log space while viewing the preview LUT for the print stock. But this is kind of a moot point these days as film print delivery is dead. In our case, way way back in 2012, we graded for REC709 as our master. For the film print this render was converted to Log C and viewed with the film print preview LUT. Another pass was made to optimize the film for film out. Short test negatives and answer prints were made at the lab, and then further adjustment of the Log curve was made to make the best film print. And the best film print did not look identical to the DCP or home version. The idea was the best film print, and not the REC709 recreated poorly on the film negative/print. You are most likely correct that a grade for REC709 (from Log) will have yellow greenery when viewed in the film emulation LUT. Also the shadows will be quite cyan as well. Remember that the film print stock is designed for optical printing from camera original analog negatives, not digital capture. So, shooting film in the camera and printing to 2383 will yield pleasing color. The print emulation LUT is designed to show what happens when a digital file is forced onto the print stock. It is up to you to fix any color issues before recording the final master negative in the film recorder. It seems to me, you are trying to use these LUTs for something for which they are not intended. So, I should ask you Anton, what are you trying to achieve here? Clarify that and I'm sure you will get some good suggestions here on this forum.
  9. These LUTs were designed to be used with scanned film negative, not Arri LogC. And they are designed not to make your digital file look like film, but to preview what you will see on a film print after printing your digital file to a film negative. And they are useful for that if one is creating their own LOG master for an Arri laser for example. These LUTs do have the "benefit "of limiting your colorspace to the intersection of REC709 and a film print. I sometimes use these LUTs to do just this (usually at far from full opacity). But they do not create a color graded image on their own. One still has to do that. The color grade that fits into this LUT will not be the same color grade that fits directly into REC709. -Bruce Alan Greene DP/Colorist