Abby Bader

Hello all. Isn't this something all the color managements take care of? Any differences between them?

Thank you Tom. I will read the article :-) 

Adding DNxHD and not DNxHR doesn't make sense to me. DNxHD(HR) is a beautiful format and I believe that it is the future.

One of my clients have a project coming up and wants me to look into the 1900s Photochrome look. I would love some inputs on how to achieve the distinct and painterly look? The film is shot on Alexa 65. 

When the first Resolve was put on the market you had to buy a separate DNxHD license. Avid don't change for it anymore and it's my impression that it slowly takes the position that ProRes have had the last years. 

You are the greatest, thank you!

When you say that the DRT is needed for conversions from HDR (e.g. Log) to SDR (e.g. Rec1886), you mean all cameras that produce logarithmic images like Alexa, RED etc? Or only needed when those cameras are set up for HDR shooting? If that is a camera setting...

Ok great, thank you! So the normalization process going from a a logarithmic file to linear is done in the color space conversion, while the DRT's offer some chroma and contrast adjustments? 

Thank you so much for your detailed explanation. If the normalization (Log --> 709) already is done by setting the working color space to Log ( Arri LogC WideGamut) and viewing space to Red 709, I don't understand why the Photometric DRT should be applied to do the exact same thing? By doing the exact same thing I mean normalizing the Log image like an official ARRI LUT would have done.

45 minutes ago, Andy Minuth said:

The ARRI Photometric is applying the same look, that an official ARRI LUT from LogC to Rec709 would do.

Hi! I need to normalize log material and I wonder if that can be done by transforming the material from one color space to another inside of Baselight or if I need / should apply a DRT. Any thoughts? Abby

I read in the Oblivion article that @Mike Sowa looks at the trailer as a mini version of the movie. That's quite an interesting thought. I know colorists who like to hang the master shots on the wall to see how everything match. A more digital friendy way to do this is to create a timeline with the master shots and use a lightbox feature. 

Great insight @Dylan R. Hopkin! I like to keep it clean, and I prefer not to use plugins unless I need to. I remember the first versions of Resolve and how slow the NR was. I haven't gotten into the feature since the original version because it gave such a bad impression. The feature was überslow and made the system crash every time. 

It could be quite interesting if BMD could make grain that can compete with the real grain plates out there.

Another Bruno Aveillan movie, I like that! 

Personally, I like that the shots jumps between different time, colors, and luma levels.

On 4.9.2016 at 2:40 PM, Gioacchino Gargiulo said:

First, thanks to everyone for replying.

I've tried fixing the original grade, but eventually started again from scratch. 

I think it's a tiny bit better than the previous version, and I tried to simplify the nodes a bit, but I'm still missing a lot of the detail from the original shot for some reason.

Here are the second version and the node structure:

 

Any ideas of how I can fix it?

The devil is in the contrast, but you could be limited by poor dynamic range as you're not working on the original material. That said, I think you've done a great job! Congratulations, I'm looking forward to see your next project!

The first thing to consider when approaching a look like this is the exposure. With higher luma levels you will get access to a color palette that is closer to the orignal look. I would also pay attention to the nice and rich contrast that is missing in your image. Give it another try and come back, ok? Abby