Re: Color Warper vs Apple Color by Joe Murray on Dec 4, 2007 at 3:07:52 am
Apple Color is a great tool for color grading a show shot by shot, but inside a compositing app like combustion you need color tools so you can color correct in the context of your composite. It would be counterproductive to color correct greenscreen shots in Color since you need to see them in context, not isolated.
Re: Color Warper vs Apple Color by Alan Okey on Dec 4, 2007 at 3:28:47 am
[Joe Murray]"Apple Color is a great tool for color grading a show shot by shot, but inside a compositing app like combustion you need color tools so you can color correct in the context of your composite. It would be counterproductive to color correct greenscreen shots in Color since you need to see them in context, not isolated."
Absolutely, I agree 100%.
The important distinction is to recognize that the tools are optimized for similar tasks in completely different workflows. I'm not knocking the Color Warper, I'm just pointing out that it's there for tweaking a shot as opposed to grading a feature.
Re: Color Warper vs Apple Color by bones on Dec 4, 2007 at 2:25:10 pm
Its not much of a question, it is like asking what the difference is between Color and Levels in Photoshop. As I said in another thread, the Colour Warper is a whole different level of colour correction, where Color uses very standard algorithms to do it's work. You can do amazing things with the Colour Warper, whereas you can just do the same old stuff with Color.
Re: Color Warper vs Apple Color by Alan Okey on Dec 4, 2007 at 5:02:01 pm
[bones]"You can do amazing things with the Colour Warper, whereas you can just do the same old stuff with Color."
"Because Autodesk uses Magic Fairy Dust (tm) to do its amazing work, while Color (developed with professional colorsits) is simply a blunt tool made by dim-witted trolls!"
I'm guessing you've never used Color or Final Touch. I've used the Colour Warper, and it's possible to achieve the same results with Color just as easily. It's great to have that kind of power available in Combustion, but the capabilities are not exclusive to the CW.
Re: Color Warper vs Apple Color by bones on Dec 5, 2007 at 6:41:08 am
[Alan Okey]""Because Autodesk uses Magic Fairy Dust (tm) to do its amazing work, while Color (developed with professional colorsits) is simply a blunt tool made by dim-witted trolls!"" Actually, the Colour Warper uses proprietary algorithms, whereas from everything I've seen, Color uses the same old algorithms as everyone else. Colorists know about workflow, they don't, in my experience, know about the algorithms that drive their tools. If you've done side-by-side comparisons, I will happily accept your conclusions but I have done side-by-sides against the mighty Discreet Colour Corrector, and it looks like krap compared to the Colour Warper. I'm sure that with time and patience, you can tweak other tools to achieve the same results the Colour Warper can with a single adjustment, but that hardly makes for a favourable comparison.
BTW, I just encountered a Flash banner for Combustion2008 on the front page of the Autodesk website, so it is getting some coverage.
Re: Color Warper vs Apple Color by Alan Okey on Dec 5, 2007 at 7:56:21 am
[bones]"I'm sure that with time and patience, you can tweak other tools to achieve the same results the Colour Warper can with a single adjustment, but that hardly makes for a favourable comparison. "
It really is an apples to oranges comparison. While Color is optimized for a color grading workflow, its masks and tracking can't hold a candle to Combustion. That's true for Color and even for the venerable daVinci systems, whose Power Windows are blunt instruments compared to Combustion's masking and tracking capabilities.
If you need to get really precise in very selective secondary corrections (tracking talent, complex roto shapes, etc.) then there's no substitute for Combustion's tool set. Likewise, Combustion isn't optimized for tackling long sequences and showing instant results at near-realtime because of its RAM caching architecture.
Re: Color Warper vs Apple Color by ryan kelly on Dec 5, 2007 at 7:57:39 pm
sorry... it's there - it works if you click on the link in the "what's new" section but not if you select the colour warper link in the "contents" section.
Re: Color Warper vs Apple Color by Alan Okey on Dec 7, 2007 at 10:25:56 am
[bmwcow]"What I was expecting, which I so far have not seen, is some info about whether C2008 is Leopard compatible or not. "
The 2008 demo seems to run just fine on Leopard. The only issue is that it crashes when quitting the application, but version 4.05 does this as well. Everything else seems fine so far.
Re: Color Warper vs Apple Color by Danko Dolch on May 28, 2009 at 9:36:26 am
Just to avoid confusion:
color warper only works for low quality 8bit footage
- on higher than 8bit/channel footage color warper settings get corrupt while saving a workspace - no fix or work around availabe exept manualy exporting and importing all color warper settings by hand to an external settings file each time a setting is changed or the workspace is reloaded (nothing practical for daily work :-(
