Jay Friesen's Blog - Latest Comments

Re: The FCPX Trainwreck: My view? Best thing ever!

Jan — Sun, 07 Aug 2011 20:49:11 -0000

As a long time FCP user I feel like stabbed in the back.
I switched to Premiere now and do grading in the freakishly awesome DaVinci Resolve or Colorista. And After Effects is better for motion graphics anyway - I just have to really learn it now. It is in no way like Motion compared to Premiere which is a lot like FCP 7.
Ah, well.

Re: GH2 HDMI Output

Mail — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:14:50 -0000

Hi, do you have to deinterlace the material? Did you see the typical interlace artifakrkt on a progressive full HD computer monitor?

Re: Cineform, Red and Workflow Thoughts

JayFriesen — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 10:02:31 -0000

Re: Cineform, Red and Workflow Thoughts

JayFriesen — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 10:01:25 -0000

Re: Cineform, Red and Workflow Thoughts

Modern lounge chair — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 08:52:57 -0000

The goal was to stun customers, make workflow more efficient,
provide capacity for growth, and create a building that would look
modern and beautiful for decades to come. It's been more than 12 years
since the $1.5 million, 25000-square-foot, ...

Re: First Thoughts: Avid Color Panel + Resolve

JayFriesen — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 09:44:15 -0000

Re: First Thoughts: Avid Color Panel + Resolve

Chris — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 03:19:34 -0000

So is this the same as the old MC Color panel or is it different?

Re: First Thoughts: Avid Color Panel + Resolve

JayFriesen — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:24:32 -0000

Re: First Thoughts: Avid Color Panel + Resolve

ronen — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:20:57 -0000

Thank you for the review. I was looking for more information from Avid about the panel integration but wasn't able to find anything, so this review is great!

Ronen Pestes
Editor and Finishing Artist
www.ronenpestes.com

Re: ICA: Colorist Strategies Day 1

Jeromy — Tue, 24 May 2011 11:18:16 -0000

Really glad to hear that this is worthwhile for you. Keep rockin' it, bro.

Re: New Doc Grading Project

JayFriesen — Sun, 22 May 2011 10:58:46 -0000

Thanks! Ill get it looked at

Re: Premiere and AVCHDLight (.MTS Files)

butter1093 — Thu, 12 May 2011 09:54:35 -0000

Thanks very much for sharing, it is very useful. i have a tm700, which gives 1080/60p avchd files, and such files are incompatible with mac, i just use Final Mate for Mac to transcode them to ProRes for FCP with perfect quality. I din't use Premiere, if it was installed on mac, i think h.264 MOV for premiere is a good choice.

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

JayFriesen — Fri, 06 May 2011 12:52:52 -0000

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

Bill Travers — Thu, 05 May 2011 23:31:47 -0000

thanks Jay. I'm using LUT Buddy to apply the LUT to my CineStyle footage. Then I make a freeze frame/still to have in my bin for reference when I actually grade just to keep my eyes honest. I'm finding that the LUT is doing a pretty good job at showing the scene as it was, or at least pretty close. thanks!

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

JayFriesen — Tue, 03 May 2011 22:29:43 -0000

99% of users with this pic profile will never need the LUT.
Technicolor included one in their download and references it in their
user guide. While all the information they post is correct, I believe
that a lot of people will think they need it to use the profile. And
as we've all seen with this DSLR revolution, there's a lot of
misinformation on the web and a "shoot first, ask questions later"
attitude.

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

Scott Simmons — Tue, 03 May 2011 21:40:23 -0000

Here's my thing about this technicolor picture setting: the majority of people shooting with this things will be throwing their edits into Color, Resolve or grading right in FCP (many without any kind of calibrated reference monitor). They have no need for a LUT. Seems like this sudden discussions of LUTs abound since this technicolor style appeared. They may be needed for some workflows but not for most, especially in the DSLR world. Right? Wrong?

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

JayFriesen — Tue, 03 May 2011 02:46:13 -0000

Good word man. LUTs being used as intended. Thanks for the comment!

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

Illya laney — Tue, 03 May 2011 02:32:12 -0000

The majority of the time we use LUTs for Log to Lin conversions for Alexa dailies transcodes, for monitoring on set with Alexa using Truelight, and sometimes to set a decent curve for final color with Alexa. That's as creative as I'd like to get with LUTs because in the end, the final colorist is usually going to start from scratch.

I work primarily in television so I don't see LUTs being used in other situations unless someone's trying to calibrate their plasma.

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

JayFriesen — Mon, 02 May 2011 21:07:42 -0000

I agree. This is great stuff. While there are no workflow guidelines
we do have broadcast and d-cinema standards that define the final
result. The best workflow is the one determined from the get go and
followed through the pipeline. Love it man, thanks for the response.

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

ClitnTorres — Mon, 02 May 2011 20:55:06 -0000

I think the source of confusion is in the ambiguity of the math involved. A conversion is not a workflow or an organizational scheme. A conversion is just a way to change color information.

There's nothing wrong with using a conversion to simulate a different output format/medium. Nor is there anything wrong with using a conversion to crush blacks and bring out someone's eye color.

The oddity for us is that the same mathematical technique is used to perform both of those, and there aren't rules established for which conversions go where. It's the Wild West of color science out there right now.

Confused (or desperate, or clever) ideas in individual workflows and techniques is what makes LUT buddy necessary. Basically, by reverse engineering all the changes made, we can collapse a complicated series of adjustments into a single representative LUT, making it easier to share and discuss.

The "real" solution, would be to have strict rules for each step of production and post-production - basically an unambiguous workflow definition. This way, at any point, we could see, analyze, and control, each individual color decision. But the "real" solution doesn't exist because it's not (yet) realistic to operate with so many constraints from the get-go. Nor is it (yet) possible to manage every individual step of the pipeline in a way that doesn't make your head explode because of the enormity of the task.

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

conigs — Mon, 02 May 2011 17:59:32 -0000

I think products like LUT buddy aren't going to make it any more clear. It seems like they're using LUTs to exchange color correction info, not calibration or simulating/correcting for output. It's a product that's needed, I just think using LUTs for an unintended process will only confuse people more.

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

JayFriesen — Mon, 02 May 2011 17:53:41 -0000

Not alone at all! LUTs are pretty basic once you get the premise of them. Most circumstances never require them.

Re: LUTs: Making a Difference

conigs — Mon, 02 May 2011 17:50:21 -0000

I'm far from experienced in using LUTs, but your explanation makes sense. It seems more and more people seem to be applying LUTs for 'looks,' which never made sense to me. Glad to know I'm not alone.

Re: Canon T2i/550D HDMI Output Footages

JayFriesen — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 09:29:25 -0000

I'm sorry, I don't know what you're talking about it. A visual check of the
code does not yield anything out of the ordinary (for a non-coder, non-web
geek).

Re: Canon T2i/550D HDMI Output Footages

Disgruntled 550d bloke — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:47:59 -0000

Jay there's a virus embedded in this page, has been since january, can you get it removed please