Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Robbie Carman on Jan 11, 2010 at 10:33:26 pm
[Peter Wollsey]"The UI seems more responsive"
I would agree with this on a whole but there is something to be said for new and shiny always feels that way. The only thing that is dramatically slower for me for some reason is thumbnail generation. Can take upwards of two min. But then again I'm working on some projects that have 1200 shots in the first act of the show (10-12min) gotta love crazy cutting!
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Chandler Kauffman on Jan 12, 2010 at 11:33:52 pm
I'm about to upgrade to Final Cut Studio 3 from 2. I had nothing but frustration trying to get Color to work on my MacBook Pro, it would crash and lose all of my work as soon as I tried to render. After a lot of time on the phone someone from Pro Apps told me it wasn't designed to work on MBP's and that my system couldn't handle it. This was when my computer was brand new, 2.4GHz dual core, 4gb of Ram and 7200 hardrive.
I gave up when a friend at a major post house told me they were having Color problems and went back to their old workflow.
My question is, have there been any improvements with Color? Any tips to getting the most out of the FCS 3 version? I'll be grading XDCAM 1080P footage.
Thanks
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by walter biscardi on Jan 12, 2010 at 11:39:59 pm
[Chandler Kauffman]"I had nothing but frustration trying to get Color to work on my MacBook Pro"
Other than training other folks or doing quick, on set "looks" I would never recommend anyone use Color on a Macbook Pro. Heck I don't even recommend it on an iMac except maybe the latest 27".
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author. HD Post and Production Biscardi Creative Media
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Uli Plank on Jan 13, 2010 at 8:22:01 am
Because it's not up to it, neither the screen nor the GPU. Even in a MacPro you'll want to upgrade you graphics card, preferrably to an ATI 4800.
That said, Color 1.5 works stable for us day in day out. Even 1.0.4 was stable if you followed Walter Biscardi's tutorial here at the cow on how to prepare your timeline.
A few precautions apply when working with fooatge from the RED One.
Director of the Institute of Media Research (IMF) at Braunschweig University of Arts
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by walter biscardi on Jan 13, 2010 at 1:37:05 pm
[Chandler Kauffman]"Wow a ringing endorsement! Why do you not recommend it?"
Too slow to properly run Color. You need a fast MacPro, faster drives than you can ever connect to a laptop AND you simply can't get the graphics card performance from a laptop. There is nothing on a laptop that comes close to a multi-core, multi-processor Mac Pro running a very fast graphics card like the ATI 4870.
No way to properly view your footage to a professional monitor (or even a regular TV) via a proper video card from AJA or BMD.
Last but not least, it's very stable running on a Mac Pro. We've probably now done well over 200, maybe 300 projects in Color now. Everything from feature films to 2 minute news stories. It's a very stable product with the correct setup.
I would edit all day long on a MacBook Pro, but never do a Color session.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author. HD Post and Production Biscardi Creative Media
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Peter Wollsey on Jan 13, 2010 at 6:14:58 pm
Although generally a Mac Pro is the way to go for Color I have recently setup a second home grading suite using a 15" Macbook Pro (2.8ghz with express card slot) and graded and rendered a half hour Discovery Channel show on it yesterday (DVCPro HD 1080i).
I can't say if it will work with your particular MacBook Pro - but it simply does work fine with mine.
I have a Matrox MX02 connected to the Express Card slot which gives me HDI-SDI out to a FSI monitor. I have a Tangent Wave control surface connected via USB. My media was on a Graid drive connected via FW800.
I have compared the HD-SDI signal from the MATROX on my laptop to the KONA 3 on my tower in a side by side comparison and they look the same.
Responsiveness of my laptop system is only slightly inferior to the tower system.
I would say in terms of the actual color grading process, the main drawback is that the trackballs on the Tangent Wave are not as responsive or smooth as those on the Cooper Eclipse on my main station - but this has nothing to do with the laptop and in fact I could hook up the Eclipse to my laptop if this was practical for my situation.
The render times are slower but I rendered the half hour DVCPro HD (1080i 59.94) show in about 3 hours - which is fine for me as I deliver the show the next day - grade and render to be ready for next morning.
I did not crash once.
Nothing unexpected or weird happened.
This system also handles ProRes and ProResHQ - although the render times do get slower.
If you set it up just right and are not trying to do 2k work (I think the limit would be 1080i ProResHQ), then a MacBook Pro with Express Card slot can work - maybe different models of MacBook Pro have different video cards so I can't say this will work with your particular machine.
I believe my experience demonstrates that what some people have said about the MacBook Pro and Color is simply not necessarily correct.
PW
Do not use Color unless you have a compatible video I/O device and broadcast monitor.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by rene hazekamp on Jan 13, 2010 at 7:41:52 pm
So, Peter ?
You proved it's possible to grade on something else than a macpro not that it's recommandable.
I think the Biscardi man is right, If you want to colorgrade a video it's likely that you're better of with a macpro (four core, good graphicscard for instance) even when you're grading on the road in your
18 % grey painted trailer with automatic window blinds.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Peter Wollsey on Jan 13, 2010 at 7:55:24 pm
Sure.......
Also preferable to grade on a realtime grading system with audio, better tracking and masking tools etc.....
But this will cost you more money.....
My Mac Pro system is better - but my Macbook Pro system delivers the same final product in only a little more time (on the formats it is capable of handling)
PW
Do not use Color unless you have a compatible video I/O device and broadcast monitor.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by rene hazekamp on Jan 13, 2010 at 9:42:03 pm
Peter
Sorry you missed the point
My fault
The point was that with all the gear you mention (the wave, the matox, the fsi monitor, the 24'' thing)
and all the stuff you don't mention (the colour controlled roomlighting stuff, the trailer with automatic blinds) the price difference between the cheapest mac pro( with the ati card ) and macbook is indifferent.
Certainly when you take the cheaper ( internal) harddrives (that are really really handy) and a cheaper sdi/video card in account, then the macpro configuration would probably be cheaper and certainly faster.
So that might be the reason why some people recommend macpro's for colour,
which doesn't mean that you should be unhappy with your stuff.
Never be unhappy with what you got, my friend.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Bob Sliga on Jan 14, 2010 at 5:09:05 pm
Color was not designed for a laptop. It is entirely dependent on the graphics card. The fact that Color can run on a Mac Book Pro is proof the laptops are powerful.
But I would in No Way try to use a laptop. I'm surprised know one has mentioned how small Color's UI looks using a laptop and how readability is sacrificed. Color's UI is frustrating enough when you can see it on a large cinema display let alone a small laptop.
Using Color with the proper hardware, a prepped FCP sequence and you will have happy results. If you do not your milage will vary. Heck, I got away with a Re-conform yesterday using Color 1.0.4, the app never ceases to amaze me.
My 2 cents.
Bob Sliga
Freelance Colorist & Apple Color Trainer
FC Studio 3 Color Expert
Scone Looks™ for Color 1.5.x Now Available
483 Primary, Secondary and CFX Looks and Grades usable with Interlace and Progressive footage.
See the Preview at
For Details email sconelooks@comcast.net and type Question in the Subject field.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Peter Wollsey on Jan 14, 2010 at 5:38:45 pm
Hi Bob,
Appreciate your contributions always but.....
I mentioned I use a 24" Dell for the main UI (scopes go on my laptop monitor)
It's fine for people to maintain this prejudice that you should never do this - but I actually have experience grading broadcast material with my laptop, using the setup described and I know for a fact the experience of grading on my laptop setup is only slightly inferior to my primary grading suite using a tower and that the final rendered results are indistinguishable (rendering out using floating point on my laptop).
Additionally, a few years ago before Color came out I graded a couple of shows on Final Touch using a G5 and I would say that my laptop system is more stable and faster in most if not all respects than the G5 / Final Touch setup that everyone was using 3 or 4 years ago for broadcast material.
The moderators and many contributors here have more experience and knowledge than me on many, many aspect of color grading, Color itself, video technology etc. However I feel I have more knowledge about operating Color with a laptop than anyone who hasn't actually done it with the right setup.
A properly configured Mac Pro suite is better, but a properly configured MacBook Pro (with Expresscard Slot) can work very well for the right formats and types of production. Tommorrow I will be grading and rendering out a History Channel show with my laptop suite.
PW
Do not use Color unless you have a compatible video I/O device and broadcast monitor.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by walter biscardi on Jan 14, 2010 at 7:42:01 pm
[Peter Wollsey]"Additionally, a few years ago before Color came out I graded a couple of shows on Final Touch using a G5 and I would say that my laptop system is more stable and faster in most if not all respects than the G5 / Final Touch setup that everyone was using 3 or 4 years ago for broadcast material."
So did I. With an AJA Kona 2 video card feeding a professional CRT monitor and very fast hard drive arrays. Can't put a Kona card or any other proper video card in a laptop. Can't connect the same high speed media arrays to a laptop either.
You're comparing apples and oranges here.
I'm glad you're able to get away with charging people for grading on a laptop, but I would never do that with my clients. Show them some ideas and potential looks, sure, but not a final product that are paying me for. For that it has to be a desktop with a proper video card feeding a proper signal to a proper professional display.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author. HD Post and Production Biscardi Creative Media
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Peter Wollsey on Jan 14, 2010 at 8:13:20 pm
Ok Walter,
I don't want to sound rude, but this is getting annoying....
The following statement is not accurate and seems to demonstrate that you have not comprehended what I have written:
"it has to be a desktop with a proper video card feeding a proper signal to a proper professional display"
I am using a Matrox MX02 LE card that is feeding an HD-SDI signal to a FSI monitor. As already stated I have sat my FSI monitor next to my tower with KONA 3 and my laptop with MX02 LE and switched between the KONA output and the MX02 output, looking at the same footage, and I can not see any difference. Do you know of any technical / engineering difference between the MX02 LE and the KONA 3 that means the signal / image quality I am looking at is any different or inferior???
It seems to me that I "have a laptop with a proper video card feeding a proper signal to a proper professional display"
There is no difference between the results I get from my laptop with MX02 LE and my tower with KONA3.
As I have acknowledged I have not tested and probably would not attempt to use the laptop setup with anything more demanding than 1080i ProRes HQ.
Faster drives make for faster renders and better playback - but this does not effect the quality of results for the project or client - just speed. If we really need realtime playback we can just view in FCP .
What recent testing have you done that demonstrates that a properly configured laptop produces inferior viewing or rendered results compared to a tower?
Your post suggests I am somehow deceiving my clients and "getting away" with something - actually I have researched and tested my system thoroughly, comparing viewing and renders with those produced from a recent Mac Pro with KONA 3.
I have said several times that a MAC PRO will give you the potential for faster performance and to deal with more demanding formats like 2k or uncompressed (although theoretically I could even do uncompressed HD - but on a firewire 800 Graid I imagine the system would choke up and be glacially slow - so I would not suggest this ).
My laptop setup works for professional broadcast grading. It is not a "Rolls Royce system", or an "Audi system" like my Mac Pro - but the latest Toyota or Honda gets the job done as well.
No disrespect to you personally Walter - you provide lots of great advice and information here - but on this one I believe you are wrong.
PW
Do not use Color unless you have a compatible video I/O device and broadcast monitor.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by walter biscardi on Jan 14, 2010 at 8:26:41 pm
[Peter Wollsey]"It seems to me that I "have a laptop with a proper video card feeding a proper signal to a proper professional display"
There is no difference between the results I get from my laptop with MX02 LE and my tower with KONA3."
Actually there is if you read up on your graphics card in the laptop. That card is dithering and otherwise "cleaning up" the video signal. In other words it is masking noise that is in the video to make it the cleanest possible image for output.
This is great when you're watching movies or internet videos off your laptop to a video monitor. You want that image to be cleaned up. But when you're color grading or finishing a project, you WANT to see all that noise, if it's in there.
We discovered this during research to install 27" iMacs in some of our new edit suites. I was going to have them drive 17" FSI monitors via the DVI output, but then we discovered there was all this dithering and cleaning up inherrant to the graphics card. So I'm still going to do the iMacs as editing machines, but we're going to feed them directly to our Panasonic Pro Plasmas just for client viewing.
When it's time to finish one of the iMac projects, we'll switch over to one of our towers running the AJA Kona 3 and LHi cards.
[Peter Wollsey]"No disrespect to you personally Walter - you provide lots of great advice and information here - but on this one I believe you are wrong."
No disrepect taken, discussion is what this forum is all about and you have certainly spent time setting up your system. As I said, I did not know about all the dithering and clean up going on with the graphics card until we started digging into the iMacs which are essentially the same systems as the MacBook Pros.
So any video device that's connected to the DVI output of any of those machines is not going to get the same signal as the video card output of a tower.
And I'm not saying you're "getting away" with anything. If clients are happy with your work and they're paying you, then it works for you. I'm saying I would never do that here.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author. HD Post and Production Biscardi Creative Media
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Peter Wollsey on Jan 14, 2010 at 8:34:27 pm
Walter,
I think you misunderstand the MX02 LE product.
It does not connect to the DVI (DisplayPort) output.
It plugs into the ExpressCard slot of my computer.
I presume that it therefore does not feed the signal through the processing that goes into the DVI (Displayport) output. However I am not an engineer with knowledge about how this works on a deep level so I could be wrong here. I don't know how the signal gets from the Nvidia card in my computer to the ExpressCard slot - but I do know that the IMACs you mention do not have an Express Card slot, so however you tested your output from them, it was not via an Express Card slot.
PW
Do not use Color unless you have a compatible video I/O device and broadcast monitor.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Peter Wollsey on Jan 14, 2010 at 9:25:44 pm
Well as I stated - I compared KONA 3 to MATROX MX02 LE HDI-SDI and could not see any difference.
We've probably exhausted this topic....
To be honest I think some people here have entrenched ideas on this that they will not shift from in spite of evidence that there is an adequate, legitimate, technically sound and practical way to make this work.
I feel I have answered every significant issue raised against my system but I guess I can't expect people to say "Hey....you've changed my mind - the technology does make this workable now - I see that you have made professional grading on a laptop a workable and sensible option (although not the optimum setup)......let me bow down before your genius and wisdom."
Oh well.....I tried.....hope these posts help someone else out there....
Over and out!
PW
Do not use Color unless you have a compatible video I/O device and broadcast monitor.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Bob Sliga on Jan 14, 2010 at 8:08:03 pm
Hi Peter,
I'm not saying anything bad about what you are doing. In fact I applaud it. Your pulling off something that most people wouldn't attempt and you are having repeated success. I think that is cool. When I was with FinalTouch I showed a lot of the functions on my 15" Mac Book Pro. But real sluggish obviously.
I was late on the thread and didn't see you mentioned you used a 24" Dell for the UI.
Biggest problems I run into when I go to other peoples systems to grade is their graphics cards is not powerful enough for Color.
What I'm saying is for color correction I wouldn't do it.
When I left Apple I bought the baddest Mac Pro that was available that worked well with Color with an ATI 4870. I haven't had any problems and I like it that way.
I'm glad you have success using the laptop in your workflow.
Bob Sliga
Freelance Colorist & Apple Color Trainer
FC Studio 3 Color Expert
Scone Looks™ for Color 1.5.x Now Available
483 Primary, Secondary and CFX Looks and Grades usable with Interlace and Progressive footage.
See the Preview at
For Details email sconelooks@comcast.net and type Question in the Subject field.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Ron James on Feb 23, 2010 at 1:12:06 am
"Sorry you missed the point
My fault
The point was that with all the gear you mention (the wave, the matox, the fsi monitor, the 24'' thing)"
Wow, rene, could you be anymore more condescending? ;O)
I myself have been working on a budget for years on small projects and have turned out a lot better-looking end-product than a lot of so-called "professionals" with their zillion dollar setups.
I also work on a top of the line Mac Pro setup with the best video processor we could get (my day job) and Color 1.5 is still flaky at best, IMO. I feel lucky if I haven't lost all my grades by the end of a project. So let's stay grounded in reality here if we can.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Bob Sliga on Feb 23, 2010 at 2:14:09 pm
Color Flaky at best.
Come on...
Color 1.0 had issues but saying color 1.5 is flaky at best is no where near accurate.
Losing your grades?? How do you lose all your grades by the end of the project?
Reading the manual provides insight to what Color needs to work correctly.
Work within Colors recommended workflow and Color works just fine.
I've done numerous jobs with Color and have had no problems delivering a product with the high end color corrections that are expected from much more expensive color correction systems.
So don't blame the tool. Maybe its your workflow that is giving you flaky results.
Bob Sliga
Freelance Colorist & Apple Color Trainer
FC Studio 3 Color Expert
Basic Training for Color and Advanced Training for Color Now in Post
Scone Looks™ for Color 1.5.x Now Available
See the Preview at
To buy the looks:
Send the appropriate payment via Paypal, (account name is: sconelooks@comcast.net) with "Buy Looks" in the PayPal Subject field, and your choice (Primary, Secondary, or CFX & Grades) in the Paypal Message field? Primary Looks $49 Secondary Looks $49 CFX and Grades $49. Or all 3 for $110. When I receive the email from PayPal, I send out the files.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by walter biscardi on Feb 23, 2010 at 2:16:07 pm
[Bob Sliga]"Color Flaky at best.
Come on...
Color 1.0 had issues but saying color 1.5 is flaky at best is no where near accurate.
Losing your grades?? How do you lose all your grades by the end of the project?"
I have to agree on this. I see issues when people don't use a proper workflow to / from Color. But as far as stability and useability, it's solid.
I was trying to figure out the losing the grades thing too. I've never seen that happen, even in the old Final Touch days. Can't even imagine how this would happen.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author. HD Post and Production Biscardi Creative Media
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Bob Sliga on Feb 23, 2010 at 3:07:58 pm
I had an entire project of grades disappear from me one time just before I was about to render after a restart at a clients facility.
I opened the project and it was like I just opened the project for the first time. What I discovered was the grades were still intact in the shot folder but not being displayed in the project. So I renamed the project and sent the new named project to Color. Then imported color corrections from the original project. Everything loaded into the new project and then I rendered.
The culprit was the client had his Color document directory on the raid and not where it belongs, on the boot drive in the Color document folder. (an old bug) Once I made the change to his document folder the problem went away.
So if the previous user is losing his grades he should make sure the Color document folder is in the correct location.
Bottom line and I can't stress it enough. Read the Color manual as you are trying to learn Color. Alexis Van Hurkman worked hard on the manual and it answers most question. It is a fine piece of work.
One other comment I have is don't force Color to work in an unapproved workflow and then blame Color that its not corking correctly.
My 2 cents.
Bob Sliga
Freelance Colorist & Apple Color Trainer
FC Studio 3 Color Expert
Basic Training for Color and Advanced Training for Color Now in Post
Scone Looks™ for Color 1.5.x Now Available
See the Preview at
To buy the looks:
Send the appropriate payment via Paypal, (account name is: sconelooks@comcast.net) with "Buy Looks" in the PayPal Subject field, and your choice (Primary, Secondary, or CFX & Grades) in the Paypal Message field? Primary Looks $49 Secondary Looks $49 CFX and Grades $49. Or all 3 for $110. When I receive the email from PayPal, I send out the files.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Ron James on Feb 23, 2010 at 7:11:48 pm
I think the project file just corrupted. I didn't have time to try and troubleshoot that one, unfortunately. Had to open a backup and re-do the fixes I lost. My workflow is solid. It helped that my jumping off point was your DVD, Robbie Carman's Lynda courses and a *lot* of reading.
"Flaky" is a bad choice of word. I admit. I was just tired after an arduous day of grading some really terrible stuff. 1.5 is most definitely a step up from 1.0.
I think it's an awesome tool, despite the problems I've had.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Ron James on Feb 23, 2010 at 7:05:43 pm
"Maybe its your workflow that is giving you flaky results"
Sorry, no it's not. Mind you, I'm probably pushing the program more than some.
I've had two projects corrupt, once after a clip went into a playback loop which ended with a crash. Sure, I guess it's my workflow. This was at the end of a large project and all my grades were GONE when I re-launched. Thankfully, I had a backup from the night before.
I won't even go into the UI and how clunky it is. Working with keyframes is enough to drive one mad. And round-tripping is just another bag of hurt (XML errors, etc).
Guess what? I'm *blaming the tool* because I'm not the idiot you'd like to make me out to be. Some people other than the cow glitterati know what they're doing, I can assure you.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Bob Sliga on Feb 23, 2010 at 9:19:03 pm
The UI isn't clunky.
It just plain sucks, and I'm being nice about it.
Bob Sliga
Freelance Colorist & Apple Color Trainer
FC Studio 3 Color Expert
Basic Training for Color and Advanced Training for Color Now in Post
Scone Looks™ for Color 1.5.x Now Available
See the Preview at
To buy the looks:
Send the appropriate payment via Paypal, (account name is: sconelooks@comcast.net) with "Buy Looks" in the PayPal Subject field, and your choice (Primary, Secondary, or CFX & Grades) in the Paypal Message field? Primary Looks $49 Secondary Looks $49 CFX and Grades $49. Or all 3 for $110. When I receive the email from PayPal, I send out the files.
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by walter biscardi on Jan 13, 2010 at 8:07:48 pm
[rene hazekamp]"even when you're grading on the road in your
18 % grey painted trailer with automatic window blinds."
How do you know I have one of those? It was just sitting there on the lot and I HAD to have it. Of course I have a good generator that allows me to use the latest 8 core Mac Pro in there so I still don't need the laptop.....
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author. HD Post and Production Biscardi Creative Media
Re: Color 1.5.1 first impression by Andrew Kimery on Jan 14, 2010 at 11:06:21 pm
Peter,
Thanks for sharing your laptop CC'ing setup. Technology is changing so fast that it's hard to keep up sometimes. Not too long ago people running 'big iron' SGI rigs were scoffing at the idea of doing professional compositing on a off-the-shelf desktop computer. I am somewhat surprised though that some Final Cut users, who as a group have been looked down upon so often for not using a 'real' editing system or a 'real' color grading system, aren't more open to alternative workflow ideas.
I'm not an engineer either, but I don't think the way the MXO2 LE gets the video signal from the laptop is really any different than how AJA or Blackmagic get their video signals from a desktop (the MXO2 LE can also be attached to a desktop via a PCIe card FWIW). As I understand it the ExpressCard connects directly to the laptop's PCIe bus just like PCIe cards from AJA or Blackmagic connect directly to the PCIe bus on a tower.
Reply
Like
