Return-Path: Received: from gateway05.websitewelcome.com ([69.93.164.10] verified) by media-motion.tv (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.10) with ESMTP id 4908499 for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 19:15:36 +0100 Received: by gateway05.websitewelcome.com (Postfix, from userid 5007) id 8EA00976E2AC2; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 12:19:13 -0600 (CST) Received: from alpina.websitewelcome.com (alpina.websitewelcome.com [74.54.176.2]) by gateway05.websitewelcome.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83D06976E2A7B for ; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 12:19:13 -0600 (CST) Received: from [199.21.106.72] (port=62211 helo=[192.168.0.19]) by alpina.websitewelcome.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TcgnR-0007Xx-6z for AE-List@media-motion.tv; Sun, 25 Nov 2012 12:19:13 -0600 Subject: Re: [AE] Arri flat References: From: Chris Meyer Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-55D17D78-D2E2-4AB0-B75A-AF5EBDC37B9F X-Mailer: iPad Mail (9B206) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 11:19:15 -0700 To: After Effects Mail List Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - alpina.websitewelcome.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - media-motion.tv X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - crishdesign.com X-BWhitelist: no X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Source-Sender: ([192.168.0.19]) [199.21.106.72]:62211 X-Source-Auth: chris@crishdesign.com X-Email-Count: 1 X-Source-Cap: Y3Jpc2h3ZWI7Y3Jpc2h3ZWI7YWxwaW5hLndlYnNpdGV3ZWxjb21lLmNvbQ== --Apple-Mail-55D17D78-D2E2-4AB0-B75A-AF5EBDC37B9F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I've been traveling and am late to this conversation, so sorry if the follow= ing proves to be irrelevant to the current discussion. I went down this path with ARRI a year or so ago, and had trouble getting de= finitive answers, but here are the two ARRIRAW to "normal" workflows. ARRI has a LUT generator on their web site to convert from ARRIRAW to Rec709= with choices for highlight rolloff etc. Then use the resulting LUT in AE's A= pply Color LUT effect. The alternative approach is to use AE's Cineon Converter effect to go from l= og to normal, and do massaging with Levels etc. I've seen FCP experts suggest a combination of Levels etc. to go from log to= normal, and that's...less than optimal. - Chris On Nov 25, 2012, at 10:58 AM, Jim Curtis wrote: > I touched on this already, but what I've done is to put a first instance o= f levels on the clips or an adjustment layer to get the levels on a WFM in t= he ballpark of 1-100. Then, I add a second instance of other plugs (I like = Frishchluft FL Curves best) for fine tuning. >=20 > What you render to depends on where you're going. I was doing broadcast s= pots, so I rendered to ProRes422 (in RGB color space) and made MPEG2 for dis= tribution via DG and ExtremeReach from those. >=20 > To be honest, I don't know if that's a great method, but the footage looks= great, and I love the expanded dynamic range and the minimizing of clipping= in the whites that I often see with lesser capture formats. =20 >=20 > Monitoring: I have a calibrated HP DreamColor display and a Sony Trinitro= n CRT hooked up to a Kona for accurate monitoring. I use an Apple Cinema Di= splay for my computer monitor, and I can attest that the images are vastly d= ifferent between the computer display and the broadcast monitors. What look= s right on the broadcast monitors is super-saturated on the ACD (using the d= efault Cinema HD Apple profile - not flat). =20 >=20 > You can check yourself by looking at the scopes in Ae bundled Color Finess= e, if you don't have any other scopes available. Or, you can check your wor= k by using the scopes in Pr, if you have that. I run Synthetic Apps Test Ge= ar full-time in Ae. >=20 > I'm sure you're aware that home HDTVs have picture settings that alter the= contrast, saturation, etc. Whether your HDTV gives you an accurate look de= pends on many settings and the hardware feeding your HDMI signal. But, if t= hat's all you have, then see if your output compares favorably to what you w= atch on TV. If it looks right, maybe it is right. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Nov 25, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Teddy Gage wrote: >=20 >> ok looks like it is 4444, 276 mbps. I wasn't aware the arri encoded direc= tly to prores so that solves one problem, namely what I thought was a bad tr= anscode. Looks like these clips are direct from camera. >>=20 >> Now what's the best way for this footage to make the round trip, FX-wise,= without destroying the integrity of the 10bit 4444? I'm thinking: >>=20 >> - convert to log c color space / 32bpc to work in. Match all FX footage /= roto / stock elements to the log c preview? >> - render back out to lossless QTs in 10bit YUV from AE=20 >> - do I render in video color space or should I render out in the log c pr= ofile?=20 >>=20 >> I don't have an HD monitor, I have a high-end "graphics" monitor (the eiz= o CG222, extremely flat response, color accurate, 99%+ of adobe RGB) but to g= et an accurate final preview I may throw it onto my HDTV (not ideal, I know,= but at least should give me an idea what I'm looking at, right?) >>=20 >> Any other tips / gotchas would be greatly appreciated. >> -TG >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Jim Curtis wrote: >> You can tell if it's 422 or 4444 by looking at the clip info in the Ae Pr= oject pane, or by using Get Info in QT Player. >>=20 >> The Alexa footage I've worked with (just three projects, so I'm no expert= ), the camera was connected to a cinedeck via 2 BNC cables, and the native f= ootage was ProRes4444+, or IOW, no transcoding was done or necessary. =20 >>=20 >> If it was recorded to ArriRaw and transcoded with settings "baked," you h= ave been robbed of the post-production benefits of recording in RAW. >>=20 >>=20 >> On Nov 25, 2012, at 9:40 AM, Teddy Gage wrote: >>=20 >>> OK so j. Penzer said the arri is using log c color space. This is the an= swer I was looking for. Here's my concern. I am ingesting prores transcodes,= not the original camera files. The histogram for this footage in 32bpc is c= ompressed on both sides and very clipped in the middle >>> a) I am concerned the editor didn't do the transcodes properly. I'm not e= ven sure whether they were converted to 8 bit 4:2:2 or 10bit 4:4:4. I am, un= fortunately, one of the more tech savvy people on production. Is there any w= ay to figure this out? >>>=20 >>> B) how should I handle final outputs? Should I use color space conversi= on back to log c on export so it's consistent in fcp? Does fcp do this conve= rsion automatically?=20 >>>=20 >>> Thanks! >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> --=20 >> Animator & Editor >> www.teddygage.com >> Brooklyn >>=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail-55D17D78-D2E2-4AB0-B75A-AF5EBDC37B9F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
I've been traveling and am= late to this conversation, so sorry if the following proves to be irrelevan= t to the current discussion.

I went down this path w= ith ARRI a year or so ago, and had trouble getting definitive answers, but h= ere are the two ARRIRAW to "normal" workflows.

ARRI= has a LUT generator on their web site to convert from ARRIRAW to Rec709 wit= h choices for highlight rolloff etc. Then use the resulting LUT in AE's Appl= y Color LUT effect.

The alternative approach is to u= se AE's Cineon Converter effect to go from log to normal, and do massaging w= ith Levels etc.

I've seen FCP experts suggest a com= bination of Levels etc. to go from log to normal, and that's...less than opt= imal.

 - Chris




On Nov 25, 2012, at 10:58 AM, Jim Curtis <jpcurtis@me.com> wrote:

I touched on this already, but what I've done is to put a= first instance of levels on the clips or an adjustment layer to get the lev= els on a WFM in the ballpark of 1-100.  Then, I add a second instance o= f other plugs (I like Frishchluft FL Curves best) for fine tuning.

<= /div>
What you render to depends on where you're going.  I was doin= g broadcast spots, so I rendered to ProRes422 (in RGB color space) and made M= PEG2 for distribution via DG and ExtremeReach from those.

To be honest, I don't know if that's a great method, but the footage l= ooks great, and I love the expanded dynamic range and the minimizing of clip= ping in the whites that I often see with lesser capture formats.  
<= div>
Monitoring:  I have a calibrated HP DreamColor displ= ay and a Sony Trinitron CRT hooked up to a Kona for accurate monitoring. &nb= sp;I use an Apple Cinema Display for my computer monitor, and I can attest t= hat the images are vastly different between the computer display and the bro= adcast monitors.  What looks right on the broadcast monitors is super-s= aturated on the ACD (using the default Cinema HD Apple profile - not flat). &= nbsp;

You can check yourself by looking at the scop= es in Ae bundled Color Finesse, if you don't have any other scopes available= .  Or, you can check your work by using the scopes in Pr, if you have t= hat.  I run Synthetic Apps Test Gear full-time in Ae.

I'm sure you're aware that home HDTVs have picture settings that alt= er the contrast, saturation, etc.  Whether your HDTV gives you an accur= ate look depends on many settings and the hardware feeding your HDMI signal.=  But, if that's all you have, then see if your output compares favorab= ly to what you watch on TV.  If it looks right, maybe it is right.




On Nov 25, 2= 012, at 11:26 AM, Teddy Gage wrote:

ok looks like it is 4444, 276 mbps. I wasn't a= ware the arri encoded directly to prores so that solves one problem, namely w= hat I thought was a bad transcode. Looks like these clips are direct from ca= mera.

Now what's the best way for this footage to make the round trip= , FX-wise, without destroying the integrity of the 10bit 4444? I'm thinking:=

- convert to log c color space / 32bpc to work in. Match all FX footage /= roto / stock elements to the log c preview?
- render back out to lossles= s QTs in 10bit YUV from AE
- do I render in video color space or should I= render out in the log c profile?

I don't have an HD monitor, I have a high-end "graphics" monitor (the ei= zo CG222, extremely flat response, color accurate, 99%+ of adobe RGB) but to= get an accurate final preview I may throw it onto my HDTV (not ideal, I kno= w, but at least should give me an idea what I'm looking at, right?)

Any other tips / gotchas would be greatly appreciated.
-TG


On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Jim Curtis= <= jpcurtis@me.com> wrote:
You can te= ll if it's 422 or 4444 by looking at the clip info in the Ae Project pane, o= r by using Get Info in QT Player.

The Alexa footage I've worked with (just three projects, so I= 'm no expert), the camera was connected to a cinedeck via 2 BNC cables, and t= he native footage was ProRes4444+, or IOW, no transcoding was done or necess= ary.  

If it was recorded to ArriRaw and transcoded with settin= gs "baked," you have been robbed of the post-production benefits of recordin= g in RAW.


On Nov 25, 2012, at 9:40 AM, Teddy Gage wrote:

OK so j. Penzer said the arri is using l= og c color space. This is the answer I was looking for. Here's my concern. I= am ingesting prores transcodes, not the original camera files. The histogra= m for this footage in 32bpc is compressed on both sides and very clipped in t= he middle
a) I am concerned the editor didn't do the transcodes properly. I'm not even= sure whether they were converted to 8 bit 4:2:2 or 10bit 4:4:4. I am, unfor= tunately, one of the more tech savvy people on production. Is there any way t= o figure this out?

B) how should I handle final  outp= uts? Should I use color space conversion back to log c on export so it's con= sistent in fcp? Does fcp do this conversion automatically? 

Thanks!





--
Animator & Editor
www.teddygage.com Brooklyn


= --Apple-Mail-55D17D78-D2E2-4AB0-B75A-AF5EBDC37B9F--