Color grading: "you're doing it all wrong!"

entilza72 wrote on 1/16/2010, 5:39 AM

Hi team,

Looking for some workflow advice from some grading pros ...

Having done many Vegas short projects (around the 5 to 10 minute mark), I thought I was ready with a clever Vegas-specific color grading workflow for a much longer project. Boy, was I wrong!

The problem I am trying to solve:
Each scene may have a distinctive look. Changing the look via the effects "tab" on each video clip is too time consuming, especially when you have to make adjustments scene-wide. You might visit 50 clips just to adjust a minor value, and that value may be adjusted many times, making for hundreds of adjustments.

The supposed solution:
Ensure each scene occupies its own video track, and make the color grade via that track's effects tab instead. That way, the grade applies track-wide, and because we've limited the track to one scene only (or all scenes requiring the same grade), any changes will impact the entire scene, not just one shot.

Sounds great. So with this workflow in mind, I set out. Some time later, I discovered the >>UNEXPECTED CLANGER<< ...

Because I am now opperating on multiple video tracks, cross fades between scenes no longer work as expected. So instead, I "fade" the upper video track out from scene A, allowing the lower video track from scene B to show through. This has an almost identical outcome as a cross fade. This works fine until you cross fade between tracks that have obviously different grades. The grade of the upper track applies until it is ended, no matter how much it is faded out. This impacts the lower track that is now visible after the upper track has faded out.

In my example, I had a blue grade on the upper track, with very crushed blacks. I had an orange grade on the lower track and soft milky blacks. As the image faded out from the upper track, the lower track began to show through, but with the heavy crushed blacks of the upper track. Once the upper video clip ended (long after it had faded out), only then did the lower track's grade take over, changing the heavy crushed blacks to soft milky blacks. The sudden switch in a single frame was EXTREMELY obvious.

I understand why Vegas does this (video effects from higher tracks take priority and are active as long as there is media in the time line, even if that media is not visible). But I must say, this behaviour (applying a higher track's grade, even when the media is 100% faded out) is unexpected.

So - after that long story - does anyone have any suggestions for how to apply grades for entrie scenes and allowing changes to be made easily, without resorting to tweaking each clip?

I tried saving grade settings, but when you change the setting, you have to re-load the saved setting for each clip for it to take effect.

Cheers,
Jason

Comments

farss wrote on 1/16/2010, 5:52 AM

You're doing it correctly but I think you're wrong about the problem you are seeing.

When you fade out track 1 are you also fading in track 2?

If not then what you are creating is a fade into not a cross fade or a dissolve.

Bob.

Jay Gladwell wrote on 1/16/2010, 6:07 AM

I'm not going to be of much help because I don't fully understand your workflow.

In another thread, the topic of using proper terminology came up as it pertains to clear communication. You talk about adjusting "scenes." Actually, you are (I think) talking about "shots." From smallest to largest the elements are:

Frame - a single still image.

Shot - from camera on to camera off (several frames).

Scene - a series of related shots (according to place or time).

Sequence - a series of scenes dealing with a single topic or idea.

So you're grading shots, not scenes per se.

"Changing the look via the effects "tab" on each video clip is too time consuming, especially when you have to make adjustments scene-wide."

That's the way it's done. There is no "quick and easy fix" to this process.

"You might visit 50 clips just to adjust a minor value, and that value may be adjusted many times, making for hundreds of adjustments."

Why? Make the adjustments as necessary in the first shot of the scene, give that setting a name and save it. Move to the next shot and simply apply the saved setting.

"... I am now opperating on multiple video tracks..."

Why?

entilza72 wrote on 1/16/2010, 6:33 AM

Hi Jay,

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

By the terminology you have stated above, I am grading Scenes (as I said).

I'm not sure why you think I'm grading shots - I'm certainly not grading individual shots - that's exactly what I want to avoid doing. I am trying to improve the speed of the workflow by applying the same grade over numerous shots without having to visit each shot.

" "... I am now opperating on multiple video tracks..." "

" Why?"

By grouping shots that are to be graded the same into one video channel, and applying the grade across the entire channel, it saves a bunch of time, especially when you have to come back and make changes.

As I stated, if I have a scene with 50 shots, I have to go into 50 effects tabs, open up 3 different effects per tab (just picking a typical example for me, say "levels", "color curves" and "Color Corrector"), and load a preset for each of those 3 effects. Therefore I have made roughly 450 operations just to grade that scene (50 x 1 x 3 x 3), when I could have made roughly 7 operations to make the same grading change via a track instead.

It gets worse when the director comes in and says "I like the grade, but I want to crush the blacks a tiny bit more and lose a flea's leg off that blue". I'd now have to open the tab of the first shot, adjust the color, save, adjust the black, save, and (the killer) reopen EVERY shot and reload the new save (because it keeps the old data, despite the saved preset changing). So, we'll call that just over 100 additional changes, instead of just 3.

So now we're up to 550 operations, vs 10.

And that's just a scene. What happens when the changes apply to 50 scenes? 27500 operations vs 50, that's what!

Grading shot-by-shot is great for finessing, but completely impractical for feature length projects shot by professional DPs.

The point of my original post: I'm trying to find a "scene-wide" grading workflow that doesn't have the problem I described in my opening post. Otherwise, the workflow I describe works well for me and saves a TON of time on big projects.

Cheers,
Jason

entilza72 wrote on 1/16/2010, 6:37 AM

Hi Bob/farss,

I have tried both options you state:

Fade into (lower track on full), and cross fade (lower track fades up from 0).

There are subtle differences in the image, but both have the same weird grading effect.

I have also tried changing the composit type from Alpha to Add. Again, subtle differences (I think from memory the fade into no longer works, and it needs to be a true cross fade) but the same weird grading overhang from the previous shot occurs, until the shot has completely ended, regardless of when it actually faded out.

Did my description of the problem make sense to you (it seems like it did) - or do I need to try again? :-)

Cheers,
Jason

Jay Gladwell wrote on 1/16/2010, 6:54 AM

"Grading shot-by-shot is great for finessing, but completely impractical for feature length projects shot by professional DPs."

No, that's how it's done on "professional motion pictures."

What you're attempting to do is an A-B edit. Vegas was not designed for this.

rs170a wrote on 1/16/2010, 7:09 AM

Each scene may have a distinctive look. Changing the look via the effects "tab" on each video clip is too time consuming,...

Drop a clip from the scene on the timeline, figure out the grading for it, save this as a preset and then apply it to all the clips from that scene while they're still in Project Media.
Assuming you have all your clips labeled appropriately (scene 1 - clip 1, scene 1 - clip 2, etc.), this shouldn't take long at all.

Mike

entilza72 wrote on 1/16/2010, 7:35 AM

Jay,

I've sat in on plenty of "professional motion pictures" as you put it, and MoW grading sessions conducted by people who grade for a living, and it is most definately not done shot by shot. It can be, when needed, but it starts at the macro level and is broken down into smaller micro grades or even shots when needed.

Shot by shot takes too much time. Time is money, even on the biggest budget features.

But I am talking about dedicated grading systems where workflow is king, not Vegas. I'm trying to replicate this on Vegas.

Vegas has its own quirks, of course, and its preset system is downright unfriendly when it comes to making or applying blanket changes (see my previous post on why changing a preset saves you little time). Hence my quest. What I seek may very well be impossible in Vegas. The process I describe is close to working well, so close, my Vegas nose tells me I'm just missing a little something (perhaps something to do with compositing modes) that will make it work.

Or I could be barking up the wrong tree (which is what you're saying I am doing).

Hence sounding it out here in the first place.

Cheers,
Jason

Tim L wrote on 1/16/2010, 7:47 AM

Jason,

I understand what you are doing and it seems completely reasonable to me to use a separate track for each color grade, so that you have a single, master grade applied to multiple shots.

Have you tried doing the fade-ins and fade-outs with a Composite Level envelope on the track? I don't know if it will help but its worth a try. It will be more tedious than using simple event fades, but maybe it will work since it applies to the track as a whole.

Also, regarding Bob's (farss) comments about fade in / fade out. I was curious about the differences, so I just tried a little experiment with simple generated media. To me, it looks like when you have the media on two separate tracks, a fade-out or fade-in on ONLY the top track (leaving lower track non-faded) looks identical to a crossfade when both media are overlapping on the same track. Fading out the upper track while fading in the lower track looks different from the other two -- dips to black more during the fade. (I rendered 3 short clips, used cookie cutter to put side by side by side and TwoTracksFadeBoth is the odd man out.).

It looks to me that fading only the upper track (not both) matches a regular crossfade.

Tim L

entilza72 wrote on 1/16/2010, 7:48 AM

Hi Mike,

Interesting approach - I've never actually applied an effect via the Project Media window before. This allows you to easily multi-select and apply effects in bulk - something I used to complain was missing from Vegas. And its been there all along! :-/

This is workable for the project, as the files are named by scene, shot, take.

The only downside is it is disconnected from the visual workflow of the project - you'd almost need to go though and write out a "map" of what grades apply to what scene & shot combos.

Thanks for showing me something new!

But for those track experts out there - I'd dearly love to know if I can avoid the track "grade priority" problem I describe. Out of 3 respondents, it generally seems to sound like it isn't workable in Vegas

Cheers,
Jason

entilza72 wrote on 1/16/2010, 7:54 AM

Hi Tim,

Thanks for the suggestion (using comp levels). It's 2am now, so I've got to call it a night, but I'll be sure to get back to the forum with some results. (I love reading threads and seeing conclusions).

You may be right about your experiment - I thought I noticed a difference between a "real" 1 track cross fade and a 2 track fade out, where the top track fades out (through) to a solid (100%) track 2. But that was some months ago and I haven't looked closely since, and I certainly wasn't using generated media - generated media might help show truer results.

I also know that the "Add" and "Alpha" comp methods alter the fade effect too. But I'm too tired to be able to post/check firm details now. Will post more in the morning.

Cheers,
Jason

Opampman wrote on 1/16/2010, 8:13 AM

"I've sat in on plenty of "professional motion pictures" as you put it, and MoW grading sessions conducted by people who grade for a living, and it is most definately not done shot by shot. It can be, when needed, but it starts at the macro level and is broken down into smaller micro grades or even shots when needed.

Shot by shot takes too much time. Time is money, even on the biggest budget features."

FWIW, after I was a DP I ran a film laboratory back when film was really film and we never "timed" (graded it's called these days) a film except shot-by-shot. We used one of the first video assists for film, the Hazeltine film timer that allowed us to adjust the color until it matched the previous shot and we always did it shot-by-shot.

rs170a wrote on 1/16/2010, 8:19 AM

Jason, take a look at the SMLuminance dissolve (simulates a film-like optical dissolve) instead of the basic one found in Vegas.

Mike

Jay Gladwell wrote on 1/16/2010, 8:20 AM

"I've sat in on plenty of "professional motion pictures" as you put it, and MoW grading sessions conducted by people who grade for a living, and it is most definately not done shot by shot."

Care to share some titles with us?

Your first referred to "professional DPs." The "professional DPs" at the motion picture labs in the United States do it shot by shot. If you honestly think that major feature films color timed with 10 presets, you are sadly mistaken and ill informed.

robwood wrote on 1/16/2010, 2:26 PM

how u approaching grading can definitely save a lot of time. i'd suggest:

build up a *small* collection of cc's, levels, sharpens, blurs, rgb balances, etc that'll be your goto's for the usual suspects that happen when grading. you'll accumulate these as you go

use tracks as *filters*. assign common effects required for a given project, like rgb or yuv adjust tracks, 2cc adjusts/fixes, multiple camera source balancing, etc. this will reduce the # of fx used.

remember there are four levels you can apply fx on in Vegas:event, clip, track, output.
clip level is very useful as it allows adjustments to every instance on the timeline of a given media. wish i could do this with audio :(

do two passes when you grade, not one. better to flag all problems (markers) then come back. go thru shot-by-shot, do the straight-forward stuff first (balance, sat, luma, etc... this is where the presets you've built up come in)... after 1st pass you'll know what problems there are and (hopefully) had time to think about 'em while getting most of the grading done.

in my opinion (mileage may vary): 2nd pass shouldn't be more than 1/4 of the shots (the fewer the better)... but 2nd pass will take 2-3 times longer than the 1st did, (if u have two days, 1st pass should take half a day).

i always do a quick review after 2nd pass, but its usually real quick, blatant glitches only.

entilza72 wrote on 1/16/2010, 2:26 PM

Well, now that I've had a few hours sleep, I can say ...

Tim L gets the prize!

As he suggested, doing the cross fade between tracks with the comp level of the upper track fixed the problem completely. Doing it that way, there's no sign of any grade being applied from the "upper" track that is fading out (or in).

Yes, its a little more tedious than the convenient cross fade tabs provided in the software, but remember this only needs to be applied where you need to cross fade between differing grades. In the project I'm using, it occurs twice so far in 15 minutes of edited film. So I can live with that! The rest are hard cuts or fade-to-blacks.

Opampman: what you are referring to is what I (and my colleagues) call Color Correction. It may have different names in different parts of the world. And you are right, of course - if you are going to color correct shots, it needs to be on a shot-by-shot basis (otherwise you'll never get a propper correction!). My request above refers to Grading only, which obviously is different. Perhaps there has been some confusion with my title "color grading" - I should have more correctly called it "creative grading". Appologies to you and Jay if that is the case, as color correction was not the goal.

Cheers,
Jason

robwood wrote on 1/16/2010, 2:47 PM

"...what you are referring to is what I (and my colleagues) call Color Correction."

tell ur colleagues its called grading.

Coursedesign wrote on 1/16/2010, 3:02 PM

And labs were sometimes asked to do "one-lights" to save money, i.e. pick a single setting ("lights") and apply it to the whole job (one or more reels).

It even exists in all-digital shooting when grading is done as part of a film scan for example.

Scene-by-scene grading costs more money, so some can only afford a "one-light."

farss wrote on 1/16/2010, 3:19 PM

Two things.
The reason the OP is seeing what he's seeing I think is because one envelope is applied pre FX and the other post FX. Combine that with the compositing bug in Vegas and you will get a difference.

The art of grading got changed thanks to the Digital Intermediate. If you read The DV Rebel's Guide by Stu Maschwitz he explains how to do this using After Effects but you can do the same in Vegas. Basically you correct every shot then you apply a "look" based on the place. If you watch movies such as Black Hawk Down you can see this being done very easily. Different places are graded to a different look. You couldn't do this so easily in the old photochemical chain. If I'm not mistaken though even today different "places" are oftenly shot on different film stocks to get a certain look.

Bob.

entilza72 wrote on 1/16/2010, 3:32 PM

So does anyone here differenciate between color correction and creative grading? Either as a business need/cost, or as a creative process? Yes, they're all grading or timing, but I'm really interested to see if there's no differenciation in some parts of the world.

Yes, 1 Lights, Best Lights, etc, are both cc and grading at the end of the day, but I'm talking about more expensive/advanced projects where days are given over to grading, where the need to color correct is a different (but similar) part of the process to a creative grade that completes the DP's vision.

For me,
cc = correcting shot by shot to ensure shots match density, color, etc.
creative grading = additional coloring, density, grads, windows, fluff, etc to set a mood.

Rob: interesting process in your post. It'd be cool to be a fly on the wall with other Vegas editors to see how people run their shop. Thanks for the insight.

My process is split in two, but into the areas I call color correction, and creative grading. I'll do a cc pass first, individually correcting shots as needed and deliberately ignoring any "looks" the film is supposed to have - I'm only correcting problems and differences. Once the shots look the same, I'll do a creative grade over the top of that, which is what prompted this post about saving time. I also use the markers to highlight problems. I'll then leave grading and go on to something else, and come back for a 2nd pass with a fresh eye. Its frightening how you can sometimes back yourself into a corner and not "see" it.

I also agree with your comment that a 2nd pass should correct less clips, and should take a lot longer. It's the old diminishing returns effect! But it's what differenciates a quality product.

Cheers,
Jason

entilza72 wrote on 1/16/2010, 3:44 PM

Hi Bob,

Yes, most definately things have changed since DI - the split between cc and a creative grade appeared in my neck of the woods right about then. Until then, it was all just "timing".

Hence my sudden interest in how/what others are doing elsewhere. I'd be very suprised if post houses and productions aren't differenciating, at least in terms of business ($$$$$). Its a lot cheaper to color correct as needed, then apply the "look" or grade.

Re: film stocks today, the Kodak Vison 2 and now Vision 3 ranges are all about giving a similar, flat look, ready for DI. Kodak no longer offer different stocks to give different looks. They all look them same. If you want different looking stocks, you need to go to Fuji. Kodak's goal is to have 100 T and 500 T stocks give then same look as a 250 D, because grading is no longer a photochemical process for most productions and consistancy of results (and the maximum lattitude possible) are now the goals when selecting stocks - or at least for Kodak shooters. Kinda takes the romance out of it.

Interesting comment about the bug, and pre/post. I'll do some reading and testing.

Cheers,
Jason

DJPadre wrote on 1/23/2010, 5:57 PM

Jays comment on A-B editing is mostly true, however track A-B options are available in vegas. Its how most Premier users came aboard the vegas ship in fact

in regard to grading, theres NO right or wrong way to do it. You Do what works based on what makes u work faster with less headaches...

frmo copy and paste event attributes through to fx chain presets which u can save through to whether or not u grade a clip or an entire scene etc, its up to u.
I dont understand the hoohaaa u people have as to wat is any "right" way of doing stuff...
if it works for u do it, if it doesnt, change the way u do stuff... very simple concept...

personally when grading, i do it per clip not per track, as some clips might be off a stop or two on luminance which may be the natural way it was shot, but breaks the flow of the sequence and looks out of place. Also mulitcamming colourgrades is imperitiive that exposure levels are uniform before any recolouring is done as even though boh cams may be set to f2.8, the position of the camera and luminance within the shot from that perspective will dictate the actual luminance the camera will pick up. The cam might be at 2.8, but what the human eye sees may SEEM a different value its a human response to seeing something at adifferent viewpoint.

ingvarai wrote on 1/24/2010, 2:45 AM

Jason:
I'm not sure why you think I'm grading shots - I'm certainly not grading individual shots - that's exactly what I want to avoid doing. I am trying to improve the speed of the workflow by applying the same grade over numerous shots without having to visit each shot.

In Vegas you can have an "adjustment layer" above all tracks, the same as you can in After Effects. Not as elegant as in AE, but yes, you can.
Ingvar