Is frequent slight to moderate image enhancement in post ok? at DVinfo.net

Bryan Roberts · February 24th, 2004, 01:55 PM

Hey all. I was just curious. I love my DVX100a and it always amazes me but when I'm in post, I just always feel that I need to tweak the image to make the images pop and the colors really come out. Do you guys usually change the image some in post to make your images stand out or am I not setting my camera up correctly to have more vibrant images? I mainly find that i need to do post work when things are shot inside at night with only available light- this might be the problem? Thanks.

Chris Hurd · February 24th, 2004, 02:02 PM

Are you looking at it on a video monitor, or your computer monitor? There's a big difference.

Robert Knecht Schmidt · February 24th, 2004, 02:04 PM

Bryan, on the one hand, in the industry what you're referring to is called "grading," and it's performed on every shot by professionals who do only that.

On the other hand, if you're shooting inside at night with the only light coming from a few practicals, you're shooting in a low-light condition, and you're not giving the camera what it needs to capture the best image. When you shortchange your camera on information, that will give you less play in post to make modifications. So, if you want to improve your video quality, consider investing in some lights. You can buy a kit made by a company like Lowel or Cool-Lux, or, there are a few threads here on DVinfo.net on do-it-yourself lighting on the cheap, usually with $50-$100 work lights of the sort you would buy at Home Depot.

John Britt · February 24th, 2004, 03:05 PM

Robert pretty much covered it, but I just wanted to chime in with an additional "Yeah, that's what they do to everything." If you watch the DVD of 28 Days Later, there is some bonus/alternative footage that looks *very* video and unlike the rest of the movie. IIRC, there is at least one alt cut that includes a scene from the movie, but without any post work. There is an obvious difference -- the "alt" version looks so much more like video. They don't make a point of mentioning the difference, but it's pretty obvious. I believe someone here once mentioned that the Lord of Rings DVD also has some "pre-post" bonus footage that showed an amazing difference between the raw shoot and the footage after it went through timing, etc.

The DV series book, "Color Correction for Digital Video," has some great background on timing/color correction, from big-budget movies to TV shows like CSI. I don't know that you necessarily need to buy this book, but if you ever get a chance to skim it, it's a nice read that will definitely give you a good impression of how much work goes into film/video *after* the image is captured.

Marcia Janine Galles · February 24th, 2004, 03:23 PM

John, when you say,

<<The DV series book, "Color Correction for Digital Video," has some great background on timing/color correction, from big-budget movies to TV shows like CSI" >>

I'm curious as to where in the book it goes into this. It just arrived at my door, and am not finding what you make reference to; but it sounds fascinating. Will drop by Blockbuster now and rent 28 Days Later, too. Haven't seen it, but what you say here about the DVD really makes me curious.

Bryan Roberts · February 24th, 2004, 03:23 PM

I'm viewing it on a computer monitor. What I'm currently editing is just a live performance of my friends playing a guitar duet. I just filmed it 4 times from different angles and made them a little music video. So, it'll be staying on computer monitors. Though, my short that I'm still in pre-production for will be put to DVD so I guess I better start thinking about a monitor for that.

Good deal, I was wondering what everyone's techniques were for getting those extra good looking images. I'm running Vegas, Premiere 6.5. Anyone here use a certain tool for making things look cool or do you guys just use the color correction tools?

Thanks everyone...

John Britt · February 24th, 2004, 03:50 PM

<<<-- Originally posted by Marcia Janine Galles : John, when you say,

<<The DV series book, "Color Correction for Digital Video," has some great background on timing/color correction, from big-budget movies to TV shows like CSI" >>

I'm curious as to where in the book it goes into this. -->>>

I don't have my copy with me, but if I recall correctly, there are little anecdotes scattered throughout the book. My favorite is the one about the post studio that wanted to do their color correction and post work in a "home-like" environment -- wood panelling, brick fireplace type stuff -- since that's what the audience's viewing environment (their homes) would look like. They eventually realized that this caused them to become desensitized to warms, reds, browns, etc by the end of the day. Everything they worked on at the beginning of each day looked fine, but footage corrected near the end of work was excessively red, etc...

I also like the conversation with the CSI timer.

(Jeez, I hope I'm thinking of the right book! :D )

Preston Herrick · February 24th, 2004, 11:05 PM

John, no, you're not losing it. CSI: page 5. It is a pretty good book. Much better than the Stuart Blake Jones book.

Bryan Roberts · February 26th, 2004, 01:35 AM

Well, I just got a chance to mess around with the Magic Bullet test version and some of my footage from the DVX100a and all I can say is that I feel sick. This program is really unbelievable. My very video-esque footage (albeit great dvx footage) was magically turned into styleized beauty with the click of a few buttons (and this was just using the presets). Not to say that proper lighting, composition etc. aren't needed but wow, this program can really take footage to the next level, though the render time was astonishingly long on my p4. I really don't know what to say other than wow. "Magic" indeed...

February 24th, 2004, 01:55 PM	#1
Bryan Roberts Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 436	Is frequent slight to moderate image enhancement in post ok? Hey all. I was just curious. I love my DVX100a and it always amazes me but when I'm in post, I just always feel that I need to tweak the image to make the images pop and the colors really come out. Do you guys usually change the image some in post to make your images stand out or am I not setting my camera up correctly to have more vibrant images? I mainly find that i need to do post work when things are shot inside at night with only available light- this might be the problem? Thanks.

February 24th, 2004, 02:02 PM	#2
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	Are you looking at it on a video monitor, or your computer monitor? There's a big difference. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

February 24th, 2004, 02:04 PM	#3
Robert Knecht Schmidt Wrangler Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 1,933	Bryan, on the one hand, in the industry what you're referring to is called "grading," and it's performed on every shot by professionals who do only that. On the other hand, if you're shooting inside at night with the only light coming from a few practicals, you're shooting in a low-light condition, and you're not giving the camera what it needs to capture the best image. When you shortchange your camera on information, that will give you less play in post to make modifications. So, if you want to improve your video quality, consider investing in some lights. You can buy a kit made by a company like Lowel or Cool-Lux, or, there are a few threads here on DVinfo.net on do-it-yourself lighting on the cheap, usually with $50-$100 work lights of the sort you would buy at Home Depot. __________________ All the best, Robert K S Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

February 24th, 2004, 03:05 PM	#4
John Britt Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 621	Robert pretty much covered it, but I just wanted to chime in with an additional "Yeah, that's what they do to everything." If you watch the DVD of 28 Days Later, there is some bonus/alternative footage that looks very video and unlike the rest of the movie. IIRC, there is at least one alt cut that includes a scene from the movie, but without any post work. There is an obvious difference -- the "alt" version looks so much more like video. They don't make a point of mentioning the difference, but it's pretty obvious. I believe someone here once mentioned that the Lord of Rings DVD also has some "pre-post" bonus footage that showed an amazing difference between the raw shoot and the footage after it went through timing, etc. The DV series book, "Color Correction for Digital Video," has some great background on timing/color correction, from big-budget movies to TV shows like CSI. I don't know that you necessarily need to buy this book, but if you ever get a chance to skim it, it's a nice read that will definitely give you a good impression of how much work goes into film/video after the image is captured.

February 24th, 2004, 03:23 PM	#5
Marcia Janine Galles Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Camarillo, CA Posts: 340	John, when you say, <<The DV series book, "Color Correction for Digital Video," has some great background on timing/color correction, from big-budget movies to TV shows like CSI" >> I'm curious as to where in the book it goes into this. It just arrived at my door, and am not finding what you make reference to; but it sounds fascinating. Will drop by Blockbuster now and rent 28 Days Later, too. Haven't seen it, but what you say here about the DVD really makes me curious.

February 24th, 2004, 03:50 PM	#7
John Britt Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 621	<<<-- Originally posted by Marcia Janine Galles : John, when you say, <<The DV series book, "Color Correction for Digital Video," has some great background on timing/color correction, from big-budget movies to TV shows like CSI" >> I'm curious as to where in the book it goes into this. -->>> I don't have my copy with me, but if I recall correctly, there are little anecdotes scattered throughout the book. My favorite is the one about the post studio that wanted to do their color correction and post work in a "home-like" environment -- wood panelling, brick fireplace type stuff -- since that's what the audience's viewing environment (their homes) would look like. They eventually realized that this caused them to become desensitized to warms, reds, browns, etc by the end of the day. Everything they worked on at the beginning of each day looked fine, but footage corrected near the end of work was excessively red, etc... I also like the conversation with the CSI timer. (Jeez, I hope I'm thinking of the right book! :D )

February 24th, 2004, 11:05 PM	#8
Preston Herrick Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Wenatchee, WA Posts: 44	John, no, you're not losing it. CSI: page 5. It is a pretty good book. Much better than the Stuart Blake Jones book.

February 26th, 2004, 01:35 AM	#9
Bryan Roberts Major Player Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 436	Well, I just got a chance to mess around with the Magic Bullet test version and some of my footage from the DVX100a and all I can say is that I feel sick. This program is really unbelievable. My very video-esque footage (albeit great dvx footage) was magically turned into styleized beauty with the click of a few buttons (and this was just using the presets). Not to say that proper lighting, composition etc. aren't needed but wow, this program can really take footage to the next level, though the render time was astonishingly long on my p4. I really don't know what to say other than wow. "Magic" indeed...