color/raw workflow in resolve 15 (free)

[codemonkey]

So, I converted my raw stuff to prores4444.   But i Have some questions I'm new to this... what order should I do things in...

I have an xrite.  Should I set the xrite first then convert to rec709 then additional grade   / lut stuff? 
 
I searched for this but  couldn't find it. 

Also a question, do you always do additional grading stuff after calibrating with an xrite?  It seems like it'd just fix the levels ?  and that would be it ? I could understand more artsy coloring for a desired look?

thanks - m

[Dmytro_ua]

Just export in DNG (it's RAW) and use X-Rite section in Davinci, and grade everything in Davinci as RAW. Why do you convert to prores4444 before grading?

[KirbyLikes525]

I have a similar workflow except to 422 using MLV App.

MLV App to set exposure and conform to rec. 709, resize from 1856x1044 to 1920x1080 on export to Pro Res 422 > white balance, edit, and grade in Adobe Premiere > Done.

This is what works for me having tried the cinema DNG workflow first.

[codemonkey]

Just export in DNG (it's RAW) and use X-Rite section in Davinci, and grade everything in Davinci as RAW. Why do you convert to prores4444 before grading?

Unfortunately I shot in hdr which isn't supported in the free version of resolve. 

[masc]

Wasn't this nearly the same discussion?! https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=24306.0

MLV App to set exposure and conform to rec. 709, resize from 1856x1044 to 1920x1080 on export to Pro Res 422 > white balance, edit, and grade in Adobe Premiere > Done.

If you export to any ProRes format, Whitebalance is the most important to setup before! After converting to ProRes, WB is burned in and can't be corrected without big quality loss afterwards - no matter which program used.

[codemonkey]

Wasn't this nearly the same discussion?! https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=24306.0
If you export to any ProRes format, Whitebalance is the most important to setup before! After converting to ProRes, WB is burned in and can't be corrected without big quality loss afterwards - no matter which program used.

thanks for pointing that out.  i wanted to stay in raw in resolve, but there's no way around that when i shot in hdr. 

is there an easier way to automatically adjust white balance in mlvapp with with a colorpicker thing with a white

is there something better than prores4444 for editing in resolve? 

[masc]

i wanted to stay in raw in resolve, but there's no way around that when i shot in hdr. 

Correct.

is there an easier way to automatically adjust white balance in mlvapp with with a colorpicker thing with a white

There are just the 2 sliders and the picker. If you set the WB manually in your camera, MLVApp will load this information automatically.

is there something better than prores4444 for editing in resolve? 

In general: cdng. But not (out of the box) for HDR. You could write a small script which sorts odd and even dng files in 2 folders. Those 2 folders are imported as 2 clips in Resolve. In Resolve you blend the 2 clips somehow.

[KirbyLikes525]

If you export to any ProRes format, Whitebalance is the most important to setup before! After converting to ProRes, WB is burned in and can't be corrected without big quality loss afterwards - no matter which program used.

I've had no issues and great results white balancing ProRes after export - definitely no big quality loss. This is what intermediate codecs such as Apple ProRes, DNxHD/R, and MXF were made for. That implies color grading is a big quality loss which isn't the case and the beauty of intermediate codecs being 10 bit - the less you bake in the more flexibility you have during color grading (which includes WB). If it was that detrimental it wouldn't be a workflow excepted in the industry.

[masc]

I've had no issues and great results white balancing ProRes after export - definitely no big quality loss. This is what intermediate codecs such as Apple ProRes, DNxHD/R, and MXF were made for.

Exactly not. Please learn the functionality behind those formats. These are lossy formats with burned in WB. After WB is burned in, it is nearly impossible to correct WB without further quality loss. Have a look on the maths and technical data. And if it doesn't matter, why using RAW at all?! Flexible WB is one of the most important strengths of RAW!

[KirbyLikes525]

No, exactly. You're saying the entire industry of television and film is doing it wrong by working with intermediate codecs and that's simply not the case. Math and technical show 10 bit intermediate codecs to be 'virtually lossless' - exact technical term. Yes, editing raw is most ideal but you will have to pay the bit-piper eventually either in file storage or cpu load but definitely when exporting to 8 bit to be viewed by any current digital device.

Using RAW is about having your own control over the data's fidelity as it's compressed on it's way to the final export and the "generation" approach to audio and video mastering and transcoding is a time-tested workflow - I never said perfect! Again, editing raw is ideal but not always practical in storage and cpu performance which is where the 10 bit intermediate codecs come in. Master audio recordings are the best quality to listen to but distributing masters on 1/4" (or larger) reels to consumers to be played back is not practical which is why we had 1/8" cassettes and eventually CDs as consumer media. Even WAV files aren't distributed for the same reason which is why we have mp3.

There's more than one viable workflow when dealing with raw but you're eventually going to get down to 8 bits no matter what and the only thing that matters is that you control the data compression on the way there.

[masc]

The film industry which uses such codecs sets a correct WB before buring the picture data into such a codec. At least if they like to have correct colors. But do how you like it...
Now we recorded the RAW data and we have it very easy to get the best out of it... and you recommend to not use it.  Sure... is possible.

[Kharak]

I'd be pretty bummed out if I bought a CD album and it was mp3 files on it.

@kirby, you have a lot of misconceptions regarding codecs and workflow pipelines. I suggest you take the advice you've got from masc and use it. You are factually wrong about setting WB after prores export, you are degrading your image by doing so. Atleast set the WB in the ballpark of correct before exporting to Prores.

10 bit intermediate codecs are not close to be "virtually lossless". Even BRAW (Blackmagic Raw) 12 bit 3:1, 6:1 and 12:1 are not "virtually lossless" they are lossy.

[KirbyLikes525]

The film industry which uses such codecs sets a correct WB before buring the picture data into such a codec.

Not totally true. In smaller production houses, if the same person responsible for converting the raw also edits/colors the video then yeah, that can happen. But in larger production houses where those positions are done by different people then no. No one touches color, including WB, before the colorists which is typically after editing and the media is already in a 10 bit ProRes/DNxHD(R)/MXF file.

At least if they like to have correct colors. But do how you like it...
Now we recorded the RAW data and we have it very easy to get the best out of it... and you recommend to not use it.  Sure... is possible.

The only "correct colors" is how you want it to look in the end when color grading: warm, cool, teal/orange, etc. You can WB and color grade for accuracy but for entertainment it's done mostly for style.

I'm not trying to change your workflow or anyone else that has a workflow set in stone. I'm just offering my ProRes workflow to someone trying to refine their own ProRes workflow.

[KirbyLikes525]

I'd be pretty bummed out if I bought a CD album and it was mp3 files on it.

The point is mp3 doesn't have the fidelity of CDs which doesn't have the fidelity of digital reel-to-reel masters. mp3s and CDs are for mass distribution with controlled compression of data via "generations"

@kirby, you have a lot of misconceptions regarding codecs and workflow pipelines. I suggest you take the advice you've got from masc and use it. You are factually wrong about setting WB after prores export, you are degrading your image by doing so. Atleast set the WB in the ballpark of correct before exporting to Prores.

This is industry standard stuff. Don't take my word, research the workflow of your favorite professional camera that shoots RAW such as ARRI.

10 bit intermediate codecs are not close to be "virtually lossless". Even BRAW (Blackmagic Raw) 12 bit 3:1, 6:1 and 12:1 are not "virtually lossless" they are lossy.

I never brought up Blackmagic Raw for that reason. It's just a name, and it's compressed so not raw. And yes, virtually lossless is lossy BUT the term "virutally lossless" is a technical term used for codecs that can accurately represent the raw data to a defined technical standard - it's not a loose term.

[Dmytro_ua]

Not totally true. In smaller production houses, if the same person responsible for converting the raw also edits/colors the video then yeah, that can happen. But in larger production houses where those positions are done by different people then no. No one touches color, including WB, before the colorists which is typically after editing and the media is already in a 10 bit ProRes/DNxHD(R)/MXF file.

Professionals are making so much effort in every aspect: light, brightness, color balance, test charts, etc - before they even turn on the camera. Then WB is set into camera. Thats why it is already neutral and absolutely correct.
If they shoot RAW, believe me, no one will mess the colors

[lostfeliz]

Sure. An episodic DP will have the white balance very much controlled. But we're not using industry standard like Arri RAW. We're using Canon DSLRs. Getting Canon 5diii RAW video graded in Resolve is much more challenging for me than grading RAW stills in Lightroom. Even with all the workflows I've read about and tried, I still find that Resolve and DSLR RAW video files aren't easy to gel together.

[KirbyLikes525]

Professionals are making so much effort in every aspect: light, brightness, color balance, test charts, etc - before they even turn on the camera. Then WB is set into camera. Thats why it is already neutral and absolutely correct.
If they shoot RAW, believe me, no one will mess the colors

Raw is before camera processing, including WB. Camera processing options can be applied if the processing program has the capability which MLV App does. Neutral is in the data captured, not the lighting. And "correct" is subjective to the colorist.

[KirbyLikes525]

Sure. An episodic DP will have the white balance very much controlled. But we're not using industry standard like Arri RAW. We're using Canon DSLRs. Getting Canon 5diii RAW video graded in Resolve is much more challenging for me than grading RAW stills in Lightroom. Even with all the workflows I've read about and tried, I still find that Resolve and DSLR RAW video files aren't easy to gel together.

WB isn't baked into RAW, remember? And RAW workflow is raw workflow no matter the camera which is my point. And workflow shouldn't be measured for best or worst but efficiency. And if your workflow isn't 'easy to gel together' have you tried ProRes? That's not meant for ppl with a solid cDNG workflow already.

[Dmytro_ua]

And "correct" is subjective to the colorist.

"Correct" - I mean at least set by a neutral grey card. At that point such video can be graded to any style. But almost impossible vice versa.
But you can do whatever you want.

[masc]

RAW data is data captured from the sensor before any processing. ProRes is processed and lossy compressed data. 10bit RAW includes more usable data than 10bit ProRes. If one force converts with wrong parameters (e.g. wrong WB), one looses important data forever. So having recorded RAW before is nearly useless. ProRes is nothing bad, if used the right way. If mp3 is good for you and diskspace is another problem... why not recording H.264 and converting to ProRes Has nearly the same effect but is much easier.

I think we tried to explain it often enough now...

[JADURCA]

My experience is that the better you have all set starting from colors, even counting lighting (daylight or tungsten, avoiding light mixing with the key light, gels, shadows highlights) the better would be the final product. RAW is such an convenient tool, specially with White Balance. Got all the information you need to make enormous corrections and still have great quality at the end. When we talk about quality, is all about how the pixels end in the final product. Does it still look like the original one we saw in RAW format or it looks all messy? Quality is one thing and artistic look is other. At the end both of them counts.

[JADURCA]

@masc


When you said WB manually, its the manual using Kelvin numbers or the manual from the camera when using a grey card? So MLVApp load White Balance calibration automatically!? Cool!

Thanks in advance!

[masc]

@JADURCA:
Totally agree.
MLVApp reads the manually set WB settings from MLV files. They should be there, if you use anything else than "AWB". It should also work for the "K" mode, I think I tested that in past. I did not test the grey card mode, so I can't tell if that works too.
Edit: no success for greycard mode. But "K" mode works as expected.

[JADURCA]

That explains an irregularity I had with WB a few months ago. So is better to use a grey card in the scene, like a clapper o colorchecker , so that WB can be adjusted using the drop eye tool withing MLV App.

[masc]

So is better to use a grey card in the scene, like a clapper o colorchecker , so that WB can be adjusted using the drop eye tool withing MLV App.

This should work without problems. Film the grey card, set WB in MLVApp, copy just WB, paste on the clips of that scene, ready.