PDA

View Full Version : Balancing color with macbeth chart



ChrisL
01-11-2013, 02:34 PM
hello, I am processing raw dng's from the BMC and would like to balance the color by clicking on a grey card / Macbeth color chart that I put in the scene. This is my workflow for stills in C1 Pro / Lightroom. How can I do this in Resolve?

morgan_moore
01-11-2013, 02:59 PM
Im interested in this too. IMO it is the proper grown up way to start working a raw image.

Adobe speedgrade offers the facility, but I dont know about Resolve.. I dont think so, which I find baffling.

S

Martin
01-11-2013, 10:50 PM
if you shoot a color chart i believe you can use the color picker and 'auto color' function in resolve to get in the ballpark. I believe it is command-A (or control-a in windows) or the A in a circle in your LGG color wheel control tab, auto color is in the bottom left.

Brad Ferrell
01-12-2013, 11:32 AM
I think it's alt-a

morgan_moore
01-12-2013, 01:11 PM
that is nothing like locking to a 24 colour chart I guess

S

ChrisL
01-12-2013, 02:46 PM
that is nothing like locking to a 24 colour chart I guess

S

Agreed

David
01-12-2013, 05:23 PM
I'm not suggesting a Macbeth or X-Rite color chart is useless but if you would like to really take charge of your color in a professional way, DSC Labs is the way to go. DSC Lab charts are useful to a professional colorist to get your colors locked down quickly by providing colors that actually mean something on a vector scope. I would not waste any time on a Macbeth or X-Rite chart and go straight to DSC Labs.

morgan_moore
01-12-2013, 06:30 PM
Im guessing ChrisL comes from stills , like me, and probably is, therefore, by default a 'professional colorist'

Are you aware that proper stills raw software can lock the raw file straight onto the colours, 24 or the new one which has more. Pixel per pixel colour accurate?

A gregtag is the standard start point for 'normalising' a set of raw images if your client cares about accurate colour, usually with one click, without even looking at the scopes.

If there is another system that does this for (raw) video, especially in resolve, please enlighten me/us

S

adam777
01-12-2013, 10:53 PM
I'm not suggesting a Macbeth or X-Rite color chart is useless but if you would like to really take charge of your color in a professional way, DSC Labs is the way to go. DSC Lab charts are useful to a professional colorist to get your colors locked down quickly by providing colors that actually mean something on a vector scope. I would not waste any time on a Macbeth or X-Rite chart and go straight to DSC Labs.

Hi David & Morgan

Which color chart should us newbies be looking at?

http://dsclabs-us.intelex.ca/store.php?category_id=9

Kevin Marshall
01-12-2013, 11:42 PM
It would be kind of a crazy workaround, but would there be any way to extract a LUT out of software that profiles a camera using a Macbeth chart? I'm a bit lost in the stills world, but I know I've used a plugin for Lightroom that created a profile for a camera based on an image with a chart in frame, and I know Photoshop has been used to change LUT formats...is there some way to connect the two?

CaptainHook
01-13-2013, 01:16 AM
Yes, make your adjustments in Lightroom/PS/C1/whatever and then apply them to the trim_lut0.dpx file from Resolve, then import the processed version into Resolve and generate a LUT from it. I've done this for various things and it works pretty well. Haven't tried with a macbeth chart though. Just make sure any colour management is turned off before importing the trim_lut0.dpx file so it doesn't get converted on import.

morgan_moore
01-13-2013, 02:14 AM
For me, and Im not the OP, I would want a way of doing this really fast, because im gonna do it on 'every' shot

The function is to equalise changing light, its not a one off camera profile that I am trying to create.

S

razz16mm
01-13-2013, 09:56 AM
For me, and Im not the OP, I would want a way of doing this really fast, because im gonna do it on 'every' shot

The function is to equalise changing light, its not a one off camera profile that I am trying to create.

S

Kodak 18% gray card works just fine for fast white balance corrections.

morgan_moore
01-13-2013, 10:10 AM
fine may not be good enough

I mean whats the point of the cost and data hassles of shooting raw if you cant control the total workflow in a professional, repeatable, consistent manner.

ChrisL
01-13-2013, 11:19 AM
For me, and Im not the OP, I would want a way of doing this really fast, because im gonna do it on 'every' shot

The function is to equalise changing light, its not a one off camera profile that I am trying to create.

S

Exactly. It needs to be easy.

With my stills workflow I begin every new shot with a grey card. When I open the files in Capture One I begin by clicking the grey point with the eyedropper tool and balance the color to neutral. Then I typically warm it up from there.

So I guess my question is answered; you cannot do that in Resolve? If I remember correctly even iMovie gave you the ability to neutralize the color by clicking a grey card.

Morgan, you are correct, I am a stills guy making the transition to video.

morgan_moore
01-13-2013, 11:26 AM
Can you not even click gray in Resolve! ? !

I mean thats a total requirement surely! (I had not thought to look for it, still taking first steps in resolve)

I do grey in C1 with my D3 for location jobs and use the macbeth card with my sinarback in the studio (such jobs tend to be more colour critical)

I can completely see the need for accuracy as I want to bring the BMC into the studio and do real moving models on white to replace the still shots my clients currently use (filiming uprights no doubt!)

That sort of accuracy seems to be the purpose of moving down the raw motion road?

BTW this is an interesting read and shows why the motion world dont do macbath (but dont seems to be across an automated alternative!) http://provideocoalition.com/aadams/story/what-good-is-a-macbeth-colorchecker-chart

S

Macielle
01-13-2013, 01:35 PM
I use the Passport Checker with the Spyder 3 Pro calibrator and i like the results. The passport checker is a bit small but it gets the job done if you place it in the shot in a good position.

morgan_moore
01-13-2013, 02:02 PM
How do you tie the values from your checker into your raw software?

this should be one click/automated

S

razz16mm
01-16-2013, 06:08 PM
Adobe DNG profile editor lets you automatically color profile a DNG camera with a Macbeth chart or create custom color profiles. Was hosted at Adobe labs as a beta, now it is in release as a free download from Adobe support. Link to the manual, which will link you to the download if you want to play with it.

http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/cs6/DNGProfile_EditorDocumentation.pdf

They just released a Mac version too. Works with most raw processor software that accepts camera profiles. The Macbeth chart section deals with creating default color profiles for daylight and tungsten or a mix of the two, but there is no reason you couldn't do custom profiles for LED or fluorescent lighting using the chart too. Color profiles determine how the footage will map color from CIE raw color space to RGB or YUV image color space during the debayer conversion.

Scopes are useful primarily for making sure your final video output is within legal limits, but don't really help much for color profiling raw footage.

morgan_moore
01-16-2013, 06:18 PM
I dont see the 'need' to profile a camera. My vision is to profile the scene (the shot)

Light changes all the time, sun-half sun, older bulbs being warmer, whatever.

The idea as I see it is to be able to match a one shot of a card, whichever make, to another shot of the same card simply and quickly, (its one click in my raw camera sofware, sinar, then copy that look to other shots)

This means in stills can shoot a portrait in London on one day with one set of rented lights and match it to a shot taken in New York the next week with another set of rented lights, possibly with a different camera?

Seems like that is foreign concept to video people or am I missing something..

S

Peter J. DeCrescenzo
01-17-2013, 01:38 AM
Hi Sam: I'd be interested in your take on this article comparing Macbeth & "OneShot" charts:
http://provideocoalition.com/aadams/story/what-good-is-a-macbeth-colorchecker-chart

morgan_moore
01-17-2013, 02:14 AM
Hi Sam: I'd be interested in your take on this article comparing Macbeth & "OneShot" charts:
http://provideocoalition.com/aadams/story/what-good-is-a-macbeth-colorchecker-chart

Thanks for pointing us to that article - it is well worth everyone taking a read. I had actually read and digested that (before you posted but since the opening of this thread) , hence having used the phrase "a chart, of any brand" in my last post.

It is quite apparent that for manually matching using scopes the DSC chart is the better tool than the macbeth as that is what it is designed to do - the DSC presents pattches that align up with known spots on the scopes

I will certainly get one.

Im still baffled that the process of matching whatever card has to be done manually (if that is the case) by a colourist.. that puts video workflow a significant step behind my 2005 stills camera (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=eyelike+emotion+22&hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&tbo=d&rls=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=O6X3UKOSG8TC0QWmxYGIBQ&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAA&biw=1823&bih=840#hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&tbo=d&rls=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=sinarback+54+lv&oq=sinarback+54+lv&gs_l=img.3...14463.20874.0.21084.15.13.0.2.2.0.104 .999.10j2.12.0...0.0...1c.1.8fKF-MaHoxA&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.41018144,d.d2k&fp=3f13690e4fa1b09f&biw=1823&bih=840) as far as I can see it.

S

Frank Glencairn
01-17-2013, 04:24 AM
Call me an heretic, but I think it's way overrated.

Let's say you have your London and New York shots and your put the colors and grey in the targets for both shots - though they are technically matching, they still can look completely different and not the same location at all. Which puts you back to square one, and you have to match the shots anyway.

I can see some benefit when you have a strong color cast (vapor sodium lights etc.) and want to get rid of it.
But even than, I found tweaking by hand does a better job, than just picking WB.

If anything, it's just a starting point.

And, just for the record: Even 18% grey is pretty much disputed.

http://www.ryanewalters.com/Blog/blog.php?id=3551583675371023276

razz16mm
01-17-2013, 09:27 AM
Thanks for pointing us to that article - it is well worth everyone taking a read. I had actually read and digested that (before you posted but since the opening of this thread) , hence having used the phrase "a chart, of any brand" in my last post.

It is quite apparent that for manually matching using scopes the DSC chart is the better tool than the macbeth as that is what it is designed to do - the DSC presents pattches that align up with known spots on the scopes

I will certainly get one.

Im still baffled that the process of matching whatever card has to be done manually (if that is the case) by a colourist.. that puts video workflow a significant step behind my 2005 stills camera (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=eyelike+emotion+22&hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&tbo=d&rls=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=O6X3UKOSG8TC0QWmxYGIBQ&ved=0CAoQ_AUoAA&biw=1823&bih=840#hl=en&safe=off&client=safari&tbo=d&rls=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=sinarback+54+lv&oq=sinarback+54+lv&gs_l=img.3...14463.20874.0.21084.15.13.0.2.2.0.104 .999.10j2.12.0...0.0...1c.1.8fKF-MaHoxA&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.41018144,d.d2k&fp=3f13690e4fa1b09f&biw=1823&bih=840) as far as I can see it.

S

Agreed. I am not impressed so far with the raw processing capabilities of Resolve. I would love to see Adobe add the ability in Lightroom to export DNG frame sequences to a range of video codecs.
Video scopes have limited utility for raw images that far exceed their DR and gamut.

I like the idea of the Oneshot card for video centric workflows. It will make things a bit easier for video folks to get neutral balanced color.
But I think for raw a more stills like workflow is going to get better results until the motion industry catches up with raw technology a bit more. Nick's Lightroom grades look better to me than most of what I see out of Resolve. Other than insuring compliance with video standards, scopes aren't much help with grading for a look or matching non standard color palettes.

Suzy and I taught a workshop last Saturday on photographing art work for online entry submission to exhibitions to the Appalachian pastel society. We used Photoshop elements to correct both JPEGS and raw images. If your camera profile is reasonably accurate all it takes in raw is using the WB dropper on a neutral gray value in the image to get pretty close. There is a separate issue with picking color palettes that reproduce well as some pigments don't photograph as the eye sees them. This can be a problem for print making.
But we recommended shooting outdoors in direct sun for best color quality or with good quality tungsten lighting indoors as a second choice.

morgan_moore
01-17-2013, 06:40 PM
Frank it's not really about over rated or not

In stills (print) and doubtless broadcast there is a chain and if it breaks everyone will look to cover their ass

Edit: I mean when it all falls over I can the prove with numbers that the colour was right when the images left my tenure

ChrisL
01-17-2013, 06:51 PM
"Agreed. I am not impressed so far with the raw processing capabilities of Resolve. I would love to see Adobe add the ability in Lightroom to export DNG frame sequences to a range of video codecs.
Video scopes have limited utility for raw images that far exceed their DR and gamut.

I like the idea of the Oneshot card for video centric workflows. It will make things a bit easier for video folks to get neutral balanced color.
But I think for raw a more stills like workflow is going to get better results until the motion industry catches up with raw technology a bit more. Nick's Lightroom grades look better to me than most of what I see out of Resolve. Other than insuring compliance with video standards, scopes aren't much help with grading for a look or matching non standard color palettes.
"

Yup, I have opened up my DNG's in C1 Pro and Lightroom and can get a MUCH better graded file in those software suites. The file looks way better before I even do anything.

Back to the macbeth/grey card debate; it is such a nice workflow to simply click the grey card and neutralize color, and then add your style to that. Typically I just warm it up from there if it is truly neutral.

nickjbedford
01-17-2013, 07:08 PM
I find it too easy to break the image in Resolve when grading DNGs. Honestly, I don't prefer their colour controls at all to Adobe or other "Photographic" raw converters. Those converters have proper controls for highlight restoration, shadow restoration, whites, blacks, vibrance, (edge) clarity, split toning, noise reduction etc but the major difference is that using those highlight, shadow and other controls doesn't break the image.

Not to mention I can't even see full 1080p images in Resolve. Mine displays DNGs as if they were shot on a VGA resolution camera with no options or work arounds to display a smooth full res image. I can't colour grade when the footage looks like bog!

Eh, after processing raw stills (which is basically how you need to treat DNG shots) in dedicated photographic raw converters, my personal opinion is that Resolve and working with DNGs could be made a lot better.

That's my current thoughts anyway.

CaptainHook
01-17-2013, 09:36 PM
Not to mention I can't even see full 1080p images in Resolve.

You posted that before in your thread when you got your camera.. did you read my reply? Did any of it help? Either way you're not using Resolve 'correctly' or as suggested since i assume you're not using a dedicated video i/o card into a grading monitor? So if you're not using the program how it's intended, what can you expect? But i'm still sure you can get a full res image to display as i can:

http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?2408-My-BMCC-Experience&p=44252&viewfull=1#post44252

(bottom of page 5)


As for preferences over colour controls, that's going to be down to the individual obviously. I've been retouching stills for about 10 years in photoshop and only using resolve since the start of last year (i had used Apple Color prior) and for moving image i WAY prefer to use Resolve (DNG's or not) than C1 or LR. For a start, a grade can 'feel' quite different in motion to a still frame. I've actually always wished the colour wheels and some features of Resolve were in C1 or photoshop and of course aspects from PS/C1 in Resolve but everyone has their own wishlist. I mean i pretty much never use the highlight recovery tools in LR/C1 and i hate the clarity slider so i can do without seeing them in Resolve. But i'm aware others may love them. I really like getting a quick starting point in the DNG tab in Resolve, than getting to work with the colour tools as it is now, but i guess it's because the controls some find missing in Resolve are ones i never use for stills anyway as i think there's better (although more time consuming) ways to go about it.

Maybe what many people want is an 'Apple/Adobe' type approach in resolve in which most things happen automatically with a few points and clicks, but resolve is still currently geared more towards people that want total control without the software making guesses for them. Its the same with the camera not doing any NR itself etc because in BMD's mind the user should make that decision. With the way BMD seem to be heading with Resolve they'll need to find a happy medium without alienating either 'power uses' or 'casual users' though. V8 made a lot progress in softening the learning curve to Resolve so i imagine it will get there. But there's also the possibility that maybe Resolve just isn't right for the 'masses' right now and they should choose a different app for grading raws in motion.

While some may want to treat DNG's like they're raw stills, i don't think its the best way to APPROACH grading moving images. It seems like a lot of still photographers want the moving image world to change to their way of working, instead of learning how each other work and maybe meeting somewhere in the middle if need be.

Juan Melara
01-18-2013, 01:11 AM
Unless you need absolute scientific accuracy - for example creating camera equalisation LUTs etc, shooting DSC, Macbeth or WB cards just isn't necessary.

75% of the time the correct WB/tint as picked from a gray card is not actually the WB/tint that will create the best image further along the line. I set WB/tint and equalise the image based on what will create the best image and what will make that image easier to correct/grade in nodes down stream, e.g. to make secondary qualifications cleaner and easier.

I can see the value in shooting charts/WB cards. But as your grading experience increases you'll find them less and less useful.

What people seem to be forgetting is the temporal factor video has that stills don't. How do you use a chart or WB card to white balance a minute long steadicam shot that travels in and out of mixed lighting? How do use a WB card to white balance a 3 minute long interview with moving clouds overhead varying your colour temperature by +/- 500k and your exposure by 1/2 stop. Thats where the art of grading comes in... Trust your calibrated monitor and trust your eyes.

And if you need and/or rely on a chart to help balance and match two takes from the same scene, then you're going to have big problems when it comes to matching two scenes with which no chart can help - like in Frank's example above.

razz16mm
01-18-2013, 10:08 AM
While some may want to treat DNG's like they're raw stills, i don't think its the best way to APPROACH grading moving images. It seems like a lot of still photographers want the moving image world to change to their way of working, instead of learning how each other work and maybe meeting somewhere in the middle if need be.


Resolve is a very powerful tool, but it was designed primarily for working with encoded RGB/YUV images. The raw processing so far seems primitive by comparison to alternatives. It seems more geared for speed and convenient video work flow than for ultimate image quality.

Raw processing adds a step to the workflow that does not exist with encoded video. Video camera engineers set the color profiles and value curves for you with a video camera. With raw this is done as part of post. It is not avoidable. If you shortchange this step in the process, you will not get the best quality images out of your camera. The raw processing lut determines how the camera maps color and responds to changes in light when you shoot. The grayscale curve applied in the raw processor sets the DR limits of the video including how highlight and shadow detail are rendered and where black and white clip points occur.

Resolve renders Ikonoskop footage with a magenta cast for example. This is not a problem with the camera, but with the color profile Resolve applies in the debayer process. You can color correct this, but having a more accurate camera profile to start with would make things much easier.

CaptainHook
01-18-2013, 04:57 PM
It seems more geared for speed and convenient video work flow than for ultimate image quality.

Are you saying resolve is a sacrifice in ultimate image quality? :confused:
I know some people would like more raw controls, but look at how high end retouchers work with stills. They do BASIC adjustments in raw, then develop the image into 16bit tiff and do the rest of the colour work and retouching in photoshop. The workflow in Resolve to me is very similar. Or think about how you might colour correct Prores from the BMCC in BMDFilm and do the same with RAW - select the BMDFilm option in the DNG tab, set your exposure and WB, then get to work just like you would with any Prores Log footage from any camera that can output a log image.


having a more accurate camera profile to start with would make things much easier.

Are you saying resolve doesn't have an accurate camera profile for it's own BMCC camera as well? Is that what your last 2 paragraphs are about? :confused:
Don't forget Prores out of the BMCC will suffer the same 'inaccurate profile' and 'sacrifice in ultimate image quality' so you probably want to avoid Prores completely if you don't like what Resolve does with the BMCC dngs.

I had assumed it was just some of the raw controls (missing) in Resolve some people had issue with, but if it's the actual debayering and image quality coming out of Resolve that concerns some i'm not sure what to say except perhaps that i would guess a lot of that is operator error or just that expecting something different is throwing them off completely? I think that can happen when people only really work in a 'process' orientated way, and when the steps they're used to doing aren't available or don't produce what they're used to, they get thrown for a loop and get stuck - "Why isn't this working? Something must be broken!". The last place they look is that perhaps their approach isn't suitable in this instance. In music (and in art in general) there's always those people that can create great work with any tool/instrument, because they're not bound by process. They can adapt and make just about anything work for them. I'm not saying there isn't room for improvement in Resolve, but i REALLY hope BMD doesn't modify it's debayering to match LR more. Mostly because i'm generally not a fan of the way LR renders images and colour. Using Capture One as a model for raw image rendering and colour i could get on board with, but personally i like that Resolve and the BMCC have their own 'look' and think they should continue to refine that more. The controls from LR/C1/etc should be considered for sure, but just because some have been frustrated trying to get images they're happy with out of Resolve, doesn't mean everyone has. I genuinely think people need to invest more time into learning Resolve and getting experience with it, or just look at a different app for their needs.

John Brawley
01-18-2013, 05:44 PM
Whilst accurate and neutral is a fine ideal, and probably a nice place to START a grade but as Frank has mentioned, it almost never looks good when you do that. (balance to a grey card).

And you can also get such huge variances with Grey cards just in the way you hold them (do many know of the 70/30 rule?)

And you get a lot of people arguing about even the % value of grey cards. Or the accuracy of the printing....

Grey cards also aren't very good at picking out subtle spikes in colour / spectrum flatness. Which is why grey cards like this (http://fotowand.com/pdfs/4930-4958-eng.pdf) are good. The little magenta / green balls, will show a colour bias that ADD UP to grey, but have a swing. A normal grey card wouldn't show this.

jb

The fotowand site is crazy to navigate. If you want one of these, go to my friend Anders at THE DOP SHOP (http://thedopshop.com/fotowand-color-grey-card-p-37.html)

Peter Chamberlain
01-22-2013, 02:43 AM
Hi all, i have been reading this thread with interest as it touches on one of my pet topics of color space , dynamic range and calibration. There is no doubt that the stills photography industry have been using RAW images quite a lot longer than the film/TV industry and there are opportunities for the moving image guys, all of us, to review our work practice and consider a different approach to the raw images we are now using. There might be good ideas there too.

It's also good for us to see this discussion and consider the merits in relation to other projects we have in the pipeline for Resolve but its also fair to say, most moving image colorists are accustomed to grading every shot to a specific destination color space and dynamic range regardless of the source. It's the end result the DOP or Director or Studio define that is the aim. How you get there is the colorists bread and butter and auto grade is generally not the button they seek.

For the 1000's of projects that we see with no on set charts shot for reference, and don't get me wrong I like charts, all of these projects get finished to the same level of care and finesse as the projects that do use charts. I personally think its a good idea to use a framing and color chart on set at the least as a reference for post, but to say it's 'required' or 'irrelevant' are two ends of the spectrum I don't subscribe to.

From a technical point of view, with the exception of r3d clips that are debayered by CPU using the RED SDK, Resolve debayers the images with our own GPU based debayer algorithms and we use 32 bit floating point processing. There are multiple man years of R&D in those algorithms and we keep tuning them as we learn more. Specific feedback on a image and debayer comparison, with sample, is welcome. [email davincihelp (at) blackmagicdesign (dot) com] We also review the user controls each time we change the process. Once the image is debayered and you have 32 bit float images its usually the destination color space and dynamic range that guides what you can do with the image and for the most part, film and TV delivery specs and the display devices are far short of optimum for viewing but it's where the industry is today.
Peter

CaptainHook
01-22-2013, 03:13 AM
Thanks for posting your thoughts Peter, you're a champion on these forums and it's appreciated. :)

morgan_moore
01-24-2013, 03:17 AM
Hi all, i have been reading this thread with interest as it touches on one of my pet topics of color space , dynamic range and calibration. There is no doubt that the stills photography industry have been using RAW images quite a lot longer than the film/TV industry and there are opportunities for the moving image guys, all of us, to review our work practice and consider a different approach to the raw images we are now using. There might be good ideas there too.

Pete

If you want an accurate vision of how a stills photographer (raw since 2002) thinks things 'should' happen be in touch :) www.sammorganmoore.com


John

Indeed a 'grey' is a start point. In stills we would most certainly add a look on top of that - horrible to say but in fast turnaround jobs (say weddings) that look is often 'out of a can'

Also not all imaging is 'art' - I have various clients making stuff from ship components to shoes even some science experiments and art copying - these people just want accurate colour. I hope to extend my business offer to them away from product stills towards, 360 visuals and the like - that is somewhat challenging with a non raw camera.

S

ChrisL
01-27-2013, 01:28 AM
When I started this thread it was in part because I cannot seem to correct the green tint my BMC / Pro Res footage has. Just adding magenta doesnt do it. I would love to be able to neutralize as I stated before. Any suggestions are welcome.

sam tansey
01-27-2013, 06:32 AM
When I started this thread it was in part because I cannot seem to correct the green tint my BMC / Pro Res footage has. Just adding magenta doesnt do it. I would love to be able to neutralize as I stated before. Any suggestions are welcome.

Can you do it by eye with a chart? If I wanted to do this I would try correcting grey, then use the HSL curves in resolve to alter the colours that are still carrying the tint.

Also I would use a combination of the raw white balance tool, gamma, gain, lift controls as well as RGB curves rather then just one or the other.

Juan Melara
01-27-2013, 08:12 AM
Can you post a short snippet or even just 1 frame from the prores footage? If we can see what you're working with, it might be easier to help you.

If the grab is high quality enough, I can even give you a Resolve preset with the image balanced correctly. You can then see how it was done.

Peter Chamberlain
01-27-2013, 08:34 PM
When I started this thread it was in part because I cannot seem to correct the green tint my BMC / Pro Res footage has. Just adding magenta doesnt do it. I would love to be able to neutralize as I stated before. Any suggestions are welcome.

Are you using Resolve?
Peter

ChrisL
01-28-2013, 12:31 AM
Can you post a short snippet or even just 1 frame from the prores footage? If we can see what you're working with, it might be easier to help you.

If the grab is high quality enough, I can even give you a Resolve preset with the image balanced correctly. You can then see how it was done.

that is super cool of you. I will upload something tomorrow.

"Are you using Resolve?
Peter"
Yes, I am using Resolve

Peter Chamberlain
01-28-2013, 03:32 AM
Um... if you can post a frame I can have a look. or send me a private link if you like. trimming any colour in or out should be easy with a small push on the trackball... mouse.
Peter

ChrisL
01-28-2013, 12:10 PM
Um... if you can post a frame I can have a look. or send me a private link if you like. trimming any colour in or out should be easy with a small push on the trackball... mouse.
Peter

here is a pro res screengrab ( from a calibrated NEC 241w monitor ) from a recent project in resolve. This shows the green tint and is probably getting some green added from all the grass in the area. In C1 pro I would click on my macbeth chart to neutralize the color and then I would add warmth. What is an easy way to do this in Resolve with Pro Res? If it was raw I would use the green/magenta slider in the Film window but you cant use these tools with pro res. The color wheels seem to let you change the color balance thru the 3 areas ( highlight, mid tone, shadow ) but how can I do it globally?

Here is more footage that shows the green tint and my attempt to correct it:

https://vimeo.com/58647629

Frank Glencairn
01-28-2013, 12:36 PM
Switch to "LOG" in the wheels tab (upper right corner) and there you have a fourth wheel called offset.

jchriston
02-01-2013, 10:02 PM
this post is pretty cool and pretty relevant to this - http://provideocoalition.com/aadams/story/cameras_rough_guide_to_color_grading_with_the_new_ dsc_labs_oneshot/P2

i can see this method working pretty well in resolve to getting us to the "normal" zone as a base, but I'd then agree with frank and john that from that base you probably still need to adjust for each situation

DanKanes
02-02-2013, 01:14 AM
You guys are using the BMD DNG Film mode decoder setting for camera raw right?

This makes _ALL_ the difference in the world working with raw.

By default Resolve is using the default DnG decoding method which makes things _much_ harder to normalize.

The resolve BMD Film decoder method is -absolutely essential-.

Might make a tutorial on this over the weekend.

Fluoro
10-13-2013, 12:48 AM
This thread is very interesting. I'm thinking about buying a colour chart and it seems like an area where everyone has a different opinion. All I know is that sometimes when I'm colour correcting I'm desperate for a part of the scene that has white and black in it so I can start by at least getting those neutral. I was considering the Oneshot from DSC Labs but now I'm thinking I might just go with Macbeth Greyscale Chart:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/465294-REG/
4953

Just seems like a good way to quickly get the colours in the ball park before using your eyes to adjust from there.

razz16mm
10-13-2013, 02:23 PM
I like the X-rite Passport. I has the Macbeth chart, reference white and 18% gray, plus a chart with white chip values that vary slightly in tint so you can easily go cooler or warmer in over all balance from a white balance pick point. Picking your optimum white balance point in raw space before encoding affects how all other color vectors are tracked in the encoded video.
For HD video and Resolve I think the DSC One-shot is a great choice for working with scopes to get your vectors aligned for neutral response as a starting point under uniform color temp lighting setups.

But to me the critical difference is the matrix that translates values to an RGB or YUV encoded color space from the raw CIE space. In CIE space the color values are those of the sensor filters and those aren't pure display space values. The color vectors that produce a particular hue will vary considerably with the actual filter gamuts and slopes which is why cameras have to be profiled and the correct profile used in the raw conversion for accurate color tracking. You can use a chart like the Oneshot that produces correct hue values and vectors for the primaries and secondaries by the scope, but if the camera profile is off, or the lighting has odd spectrum variances you won't get accurate hue tracking for colors that fall between those points.

One of the best things about the BMCC to me is its color matrix in raw. It seems to open in every processor I have tried with reasonably well balanced neutral color and tracking from a simple white balance pick if the lighting isn't seriously wonky. There does seem to be a slight Sony like green bias and saturated reds are hard to get right, but no camera is perfect in this regard and it could be just a product of the Bayer filter values of the sensor they selected being biased for higher luminance sensitivity at the expense of color saturation.

razz16mm
10-13-2013, 02:42 PM
here is a pro res screengrab ( from a calibrated NEC 241w monitor ) from a recent project in resolve. This shows the green tint and is probably getting some green added from all the grass in the area. In C1 pro I would click on my macbeth chart to neutralize the color and then I would add warmth. What is an easy way to do this in Resolve with Pro Res? If it was raw I would use the green/magenta slider in the Film window but you cant use these tools with pro res. The color wheels seem to let you change the color balance thru the 3 areas ( highlight, mid tone, shadow ) but how can I do it globally?

Here is more footage that shows the green tint and my attempt to correct it:

https://vimeo.com/58647629

What color space is your monitor calibrated to?

Steve Wake
10-13-2013, 02:52 PM
+1 X-Rite Passport. The cooler-warmer choices are nice. Also, I know what it's supposed to look like so if it's in the picture (photo for almost all of my use so far) I can quickly figure out how to adjust, and if necessary compare with the actual passport sitting in front of me.

razz16mm
10-13-2013, 03:20 PM
+1 X-Rite Passport. The cooler-warmer choices are nice. Also, I know what it's supposed to look like so if it's in the picture (photo for almost all of my use so far) I can quickly figure out how to adjust, and if necessary compare with the actual passport sitting in front of me.

I like the Macbeth chart color patches for dealing with raw images too. It will show you very quickly if your color profiles are off even if the primaries and secondaries are right.

morgan_moore
10-13-2013, 03:24 PM
The thing about Xrite is that they make a sensible pattern on the WFM, the macbeth does not.

macbeth is super useful where the software can 'lock' to it - afaik that is only Speedgrade in the video world right now (unlike stills world)

http://provideocoalition.com/aadams/story/what-good-is-a-macbeth-colorchecker-chart

S

razz16mm
10-13-2013, 03:40 PM
The thing about Xrite is that they make a sensible pattern on the WFM, the macbeth does not.

macbeth is super useful where the software can 'lock' to it - afaik that is only Speedgrade in the video world right now (unlike stills world)

http://provideocoalition.com/aadams/story/what-good-is-a-macbeth-colorchecker-chart

S

I assume by Xrite you mean the DSC Oneshot? Definitely agree. Macbeth doesn't help you much on a scope. But a scope doesn't help with tweaking raw space camera profiles much either. That is where the Macbeth is valuable.

Steve Wake
10-13-2013, 03:45 PM
I remember how amazed I was the first time I used that I line to guide adjustments. Thanks for the link. Very clearly explained and I'm definitely making the switch to the DSC Labs chart! I like to think I have a pretty good eye for color, but that back and forth does get tiresome.

morgan_moore
10-14-2013, 06:06 AM
I assume by Xrite you mean the DSC Oneshot? Definitely agree. Macbeth doesn't help you much on a scope. But a scope doesn't help with tweaking raw space camera profiles much either. That is where the Macbeth is valuable.

Yep - the old brain is packing up.