If someone has a movie to make which requires: editing; grading/color-correction; adding visual effects, what would be the order in which these stages should happen?I'm referring to the standard order in the industry, not unusual workflows.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19
Theoretically-- edit, do effects, color grade. But there are many, many exceptions and special circumstances.
(For example, with digital aquisition the application of LUTs before editing is increasingly common -- the equivalent of the old one lite workprint.)
The operating principle is you don't want to waste time and money processing material you aren't going to use anyway.
Last edited by smrpix; 16th Sep 2013 at 05:20.
The workflow depends n your source, whether you're working "pro" or as an advanced hobbyist. smrpix has the general idea, but should mention that pro's and advanced crazies like many members here would work with lossless media. Encoding and authoring would be last. For example, film source would be digitally transferred to lossles media as a first step. Crummy horrible ugly noisy source such as analog tape or consumer-camera stuff would be transferred/captured to lossless media as well. From there, cutting, denoising (if required), levels correction and color grading, effects (if required), assembly into a complete video, then encoding and authoring. All of the steps that you stipulated should not be worked with lossy encoded media.Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end. -- Henry David Thoreau
Yes, ingest to an editable format comes first.
Nothing wrong with editing low-Rez media provided you intend to replace it.
-editing: in the editing program, what is usually imported (into bins etc.): videos or image sequences? And what format- RAW, TGA, TIFF?
-do effects: what is usually exported from the editing program and imported into the VFX program : videos or image sequences? And what format- RAW, TGA, TIFF?
-color grade: what is usually exported from the VFX program and imported into the color grading program : videos or image sequences? And what format- RAW, TGA, TIFF?
Sorry about the length, just want to have a clear image, as I'm a newbie at this thing.
What software is being used? What is the source?When you say "make am movie" and it's "Hollywood-level", that could be film or video. What software did you have in mind for editing, color grading, effects? The equipment that Hollywood uses has price tags that look like Congressional budget figures. Someone familiar with the pro industry could fill you in on that. Formats such as TIFF and RAW are not those you'd normally find discussed here, and at most hobbyist's levels those are still photo formats, not video. TIFF can be either lossless or compressed. Whether stuff like TGA or TIFF is used by pros, others can advise' both can be used for video editing. A high-end app that would be recommended here for color grading and affects would be After Effects Pro. Pros tend to work with very large frame sizes as masters, often have to work image by image if required. A higher level processor for color would be something like Da Vinci Systems's stuff, which works as both a hardware and software processor, and which most members here couldn't afford.
I'm surprised other someone haven't members have picked up on this thread. But give it a wait.Our inventions are wont to be pretty toys, which distract our attention from serious things. They are but improved means to an unimproved end. -- Henry David Thoreau
Last edited by smrpix; 16th Sep 2013 at 13:35.
Just to add to some of the comments:
It was mentioned in your other thread, that there are many variations and workflows, but usually it's not that linear, where you shoot and one team sends off to another - say where the editor hands off to VFX guys, and they hand off to the colorist. There is usually more back and forth and simultaneous work going on.
It really depends on the type of movie and types of effects being used, but for FX heavy features, usually some shots are sent right away to the FX house , even before shooting has completed on the rest of the feature (they need the extra time to process and do their "magic") e.g this is especially true establishing shots, matte paintings, set extensions, camera projections . Also, FX heavy features often require that some the FX work actually be done before editing (e.g. if you have digital zombies and various dinosaurs or 3D models etc..., it's tough for the editor to edit the scene if the subjects are not even present in the shot yet!) . High end FX work is usually exported in 32bit EXR. Almost all FX work, especially CG, is done using image sequences; FX artsits only export "video" if they are "forced to" by someone else requesting it in the pipeline.
Thanks for the answers.
In this price range, nothing is "burned" . Discs are physically replicated, not "burned" with a laser
For blu-ray and DVD distibution - the compressionist takes the studio "master" (at this point, it's edited, FX composited, graded, and usually a subsampled prores or dnxhd file, 4:2:2 YUV) , and encodes it, usually re-encoding and filtering segments in several stages to improve compression of sections. Grain is usually added at this stage as well. Those segments are then authored usually in scenarist along with menus, features, etc... and a BDCMF image is generated, verified and used for replication
Of course, all this action requires an overall vision and direction.
Hopefully to the target formats (video: H.264, VC-1, MPEG-2 audio: dts, dts-hd, ac3, true-hd, lpcm,...) which are supported by the authoring program which is ment to only author and not reencode the content; if or if not a container is used depends on what the authoring software supports.
I'm always amused by ideas of what is and isn't pro.
- Not everything is uncompressed or lossless. DV is (sadly) still very common, as well as things like ProRes422 or DNxHD.
- "Hollywood" doesn't edit crap. (LA and elsewhere in California, yes.) Hollywood is one of a dozen places where you shoot video, but that's really it. Additionally, these days, places like Vancouver and UK can be more popular than Hollywood because of costs and regional talent.
- The idea that discs are not burned isn't correct anymore. These days you burn small run "on demand" discs as well as press.
- I wish everything was properly colored. It's not. Only primetime big-budget TV, or movies, is color graded worth a crap. (Note that I get the dirty sources. That's why people come to me.)
- There's no one way to do things. There's LOTS of wrong ways (and I see them every week!), but plenty of right ways. My tools of choice can range from hobby tools to pro NLEs like FCP, Premiere and Avid. And yes, I use them all (they're all the same, when you get down to it), though I prefer the Premiere integration with other Adobe tools.
Yep, good topic. Though I've been mostly offline almost a year now (long story), I'd always reply to something like this. Most recently, I was offline for 10 days. Why? The studio was flooded! It just goes to show, there's more than video to consider when doing this kind of work. It could have been much worse had there not been a very stringent procedure in place.
Last edited by budwzr; 23rd Sep 2013 at 11:10.
Hmmm...LordSmurf must be busy fixing another "dirty source" for a bigtime production. Only had time to share a few bulleted points with us.
I'm not online 24/7.
The after has too much contrast, and it's yellow tinted. Are you correcting on a consumer non-IPS computer monitor? Look like it. The blacks are crushed, the highlight are blown out (overexposed). The before has too much blue, and a slight under-contrast issue. It really depends on what you want. Remember 'The Matrix'? It was purposely dim, green, and contrast was pumped up at the low end, little bit on the high end.
I'm guessing you used a "wholesale" type tool (all colors altered), and not a nuanced one. Some of it indeed should be more yellow, but not all tones should be shifted yellow. A lot of ugly oranges jump out on the after.
In terms of "bad" or "good" both before and after is the same. Somewhere in the middle would have been right.
Like the Three Bears.
The consumer/amateur tendency is to overdo things, or get too "fancy" (frilly or nonsense effects). Watch that!
All I'm doing this week is encoding and authoring. You pass the time by watching TV show on the extra monitor.
OK, thanks. Is this one going in the right direction? Or too green? Meh, it's too green. Thanks anyways. There's some kind of fakkakta blue light on the singer making orange on the skin tone.
Last edited by budwzr; 23rd Sep 2013 at 19:04.