Color Hardware recommendations
by Mark Lediard
on
Nov 23, 2007 at 4:47:01 pm
Hi everyone,
Our company is thinking about setting up a dedicated grading room running Color to handle our TV and Commercials work in the UK. Mostly SD but an increasing amount of HD too. We really want to make a 'Wow' room for clients where they get to see their pictures looking great.
I wondered if the forumites here might be able to recommend the best kit to install. We're obviously going to start with a nice hefty Mac Pro and we're keen on the JL Cooper control box - for the price it looks the part.
But what are the best bets for video in and out, monitoring (both professional grade and client monitor) storage and other things like lighting.
In short can we put together here an ideal system for Color.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 23, 2007 at 4:54:26 pm
AJA Kona boards are the best for your external monitoring and also for any I/O. The Kona 3 is the all everything Up / Down / Cross Conversion SD / HD box and that's what we run primarily.
For video monitoring, I've been testing the TV Logic 24" display and it is simply the best LCD panel I've seen to replace a CRT yet. And the price is $8,000 (U.S). You can get the 17" version for arounf $3,000 (U.S.) We tested ours with the 62% ND Filter and it was flat out outstanding. Excellent contrast, excellent detail in the darks and overall the best image we've seen other than our Sony CRT monitor.
The Panasonic 1700W / 2600W are the second choice, but they are lacking the contrast and sharpness of the TV Logic. For color itself, it's very very good and probably the best monitor for their price range.
For client "Wow" go with the Panasonic Pro Plasma series. I run a 50" in one room and the 42" in the other room. They match up very nicely with both Sony CRT's and the TV Logic displays so the color is very true on them.
For storage we run the MaxxDigital ProAV SAS/SATA arrays primarily. 8TB units that run almost 500MB/s Write and over 450MB/s Read so they are full capable all the way to 2K. And all of this is in RAID 5. Put them into RAID 0 and they are even faster, but we like the protection of RAID 5. They come bundled with the Atto R380 host controller.
I don't run any control surfaces so I can't help you there, but plenty of folks on this forum do so you'll get input from them.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Noah Kadner on Nov 23, 2007 at 5:46:39 pm
Agree with Walter- but not sure what your final budget is. For wow- there's also a projector. 1080p Panasonic PT-AE2000U Projector can do amazing stuff and be fed right from the Kona.
Finally, regarding control surfaces the JL Cooper is fine but the Tangent Devices goes above and beyond it. If you're planning to do color correction day in and day out, you hands and your clients will thank you for this:
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by JP Owens on Nov 23, 2007 at 6:59:24 pm
You should consider a real grade monitor like an eCinema, or 2nd best CineTal.
On the issue of panels, I've never tried the Coopers except at NAB. I run the Tangent BK/TS/K combination and it feels like a daVinci. My impression is that Tangent is Formula One while Cooper is NASCAR. Not that that 's a bad thing... just different classes.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 23, 2007 at 9:25:39 pm
[JP Owens]"You should consider a real grade monitor like an eCinema, or 2nd best CineTal."
TV Logics are better than eCinema, at least the eCinemas I saw out at NAB. The TV Logic 24" in our suite was equal to the Sony broadcast CRT, if not sharper. That's what makes them so amazing at $8,000. The "CRT Replacment" from eCinema starts around $24,000.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Martin Euredjian on Nov 23, 2007 at 11:09:48 pm
> TV Logics are better than eCinema, at least the eCinemas I saw out at NAB. The TV Logic 24" in our suite was equal to the Sony broadcast CRT, if not sharper. That's what makes them so amazing at $8,000. The "CRT Replacment" from eCinema starts around $24,000.
Hmmm. Not sure what you saw at NAB. Besides, only a comprehensive side-by-side comparison could result in such categorical statements. This is just about impossible at NAB. I intend to change this, BTW, during NAB2008. We will make it a point to have other manufacturers' products available in a special "shootout" section of our booth. Featured manufacturers will be invited to come adjust their monitors every day in order to ensure that they perform to their specifications.
Anyhow, on the subject of being "better" or "worst" than brand X. Well, we have four price/performance levels FX, PRO, DCM and DPX. The FX monitors come in at about $6K (resellers might be running end-of-the-year specials below this). The TV Logic product compares to our lowest performance monitor, the FX class, except that TVL runs $8K to $10K, depending on configuration.
Yes, our DPX true CRT replacement isn't cheap. It runs about $37K. When that level of performance is required there's nothing else that compares.
I'd like to focus on this statement:
> The TV Logic 24" in our suite was equal to the Sony broadcast CRT, if not sharper.
The TVL 24 delivers a contrast ratio of about 800, maybe 900 to 1 when calibrated (1,000 to 1 theoretical, but somewhat less after calibration). How can this "equal" a CRT at 15,000 to 1?
In terms of luminance, this means an LCD delivering "glow-in-the-dark" blacks at 0.038fL vs. a CRT at 0.002fL ... the difference is vast, particularly in a proper dark viewing environment. TVL blacks are nearly TWENTY TIMES brighter than those produced by a CRT.
Again, side-by-side comparisons like the one that took place at the Editor's Lounge here in Los Angeles, is the best venue for comparison. Be careful about making categorical assertions about anything you see at a tradeshow.
Martin Euredjian
eCinema Systems, Inc.
www.ecinemasystems.com
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 23, 2007 at 11:16:06 pm
[Martin Euredjian]"Again, side-by-side comparisons like the one that took place at the Editor's Lounge here in Los Angeles, is the best venue for comparison. Be careful about making categorical assertions about anything you see at a tradeshow."
My statement on the TV Logic is based on a one week test with a TV Logic 24" Display sitting next to my Sony CRT Monitor. We also added a Panasonic 1700W for two days for good measure. All of this in my facility with footage that had already been CC'd using the Sony and with new footage for comparison.
My statement on the eCinemas are based on what I saw at NAB. I was very underwhelmed by what they called a "CRT replacement."
The TV Logic was first brought to my attention on this very forum by someone who saw it at IBC. After reading that, I found a local dealer who not only brought in the demo unit, but brought the TV Logic rep to spend two hours going over everything on the unit.
I will have a full review soon for the Cow, but I stand by my statement that the TV Logic is a CRT Replacement that is as sharp or sharper than a Sony broadcast CRT with fully accurate colors. This from a first hand test.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Martin Euredjian on Nov 23, 2007 at 11:29:18 pm
Fair enough.
Stop by the booth during NAB'08 and your opinion will change in a radical way. If you lived here in Los Angeles I'd offer to buy you lunch and spend a couple of hours in our lab truly evaluating things critically.
See you next year! :-)
Martin Euredjian
eCinema Systems, Inc.
www.ecinemasystems.com
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 23, 2007 at 11:37:35 pm
[Martin Euredjian]"
Stop by the booth during NAB'08 and your opinion will change in a radical way. If you lived here in Los Angeles I'd offer to buy you lunch and spend a couple of hours in our lab truly evaluating things critically."
Appreciate the offer, but honestly if I'm going to be looking at a $37,000 monitor, it would be waste of both of our time. There is no way I could justify one of those monitors. We're looking to purchase two to three over the next 12 months.
If it looks better than the demo monitor you had last year, I'm sure you'll get a market for it.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Martin Euredjian on Nov 24, 2007 at 4:10:58 am
You misunderstood. I am proposing that, if you think that TVL is "good" our FX monitor for $6K will surprise you and our PRO for $10K will most definitely blow it away.
The DPX can only be justified by those who need that level of performance. You obviously don't. Nothing wrong with that.
Martin Euredjian
eCinema Systems, Inc.
www.ecinemasystems.com
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 24, 2007 at 12:30:43 pm
[Martin Euredjian]"
You misunderstood. I am proposing that, if you think that TVL is "good" our FX monitor for $6K will surprise you and our PRO for $10K will most definitely blow it away."
Thanks for the clarification. Then I will most definitely stop by in April. thanks!
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Mark Lediard on Nov 23, 2007 at 11:20:27 pm
Thanks for the information everyone.
A couple of things:
1. I'm not sure we can get the TV Logic monitors here in the UK yet - but I'm still investigating. A cost effective option for us maybe to use a SD Sony SDI CRT (we already have these) for critical viewing and a large plasma for the client.
2. We run Blackmagic cards on the rest of our FCP suites. Would having a Kona card present us with any media problems - Or is it as simple as running the Blackmagic codec on the Kona system and vice versa? In short can we transfer media or will we need to recapture.
3. Still trying to get price comparisons on Tangent Vs JL Cooper - It does look like you get more functionality for you money with the JL Cooper.
I'd like to continue this after the weekend and once I've done a little more research
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 23, 2007 at 11:34:19 pm
[Mark Lediard]"1. I'm not sure we can get the TV Logic monitors here in the UK yet - but I'm still investigating. A cost effective option for us maybe to use a SD Sony SDI CRT (we already have these) for critical viewing and a large plasma for the client."
They have a fairly limited distribution channel. We're fortunate to have one here in Atlanta.
[Mark Lediard]"
2. We run Blackmagic cards on the rest of our FCP suites. Would having a Kona card present us with any media problems - Or is it as simple as running the Blackmagic codec on the Kona system and vice versa? In short can we transfer media or will we need to recapture."
You could when BMD wrote the drivers for AJA. Not entirely sure what you can easily move to a Kona system. You can actually give AJA a holler via email to their Support Team and they can tell you exactly what will and won't work.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Tom Bridges on Nov 24, 2007 at 11:08:22 am
[Mark Lediard]"1. I'm not sure we can get the TV Logic monitors here in the UK yet - but I'm still investigating. A cost effective option for us maybe to use a SD Sony SDI CRT (we already have these) for critical viewing and a large plasma for the client. "
Yes you can. We have a demo unit sitting in our grading suite right now. Give Stefan at Pyser-SGI a call
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Mark Lediard on Nov 26, 2007 at 8:07:36 pm
Thanks for the info Tom,
We're based in Newcastle upon Tyne. I'll be dropping Stefan at Pyser a line very soon. I'd love to get a look at a TV logic monitor in action and hopefully making a decision before Christmas
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Michael Lindsay on Nov 24, 2007 at 1:01:00 pm
Hi Mark Lediard
In my online edit suite I have a BVMD 20 inch monitor (HD but will only clearly resolve 720p at best) I'm adding a Pioneer LX508 plasma for client and pixel peeping. I have tested this plasma and it is the 'only' consumer (
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Martin Euredjian on Nov 24, 2007 at 7:30:55 pm
> Martin Euredjian is very helpful, technically coherent, and honest (as much as salesmen can be) and would consider his products when my BVMD gives up..
Thanks for that. Well, sort of. I'm not a salesman, although I do play one on TV from time to time. I'm the founder and lead designer of our products. I was a Telecine engineer in Hollywood for over twenty years before starting eCinema...for that reason I tend to be very precise about my requirements and opinions of what is and is not adequate for grading. Also, because I am not a salesman but rather a practitioner who has "shifted careers" I tend to be very passionate about the subject, probably to a fault.
Admitedly there are a wide range of grading applications today. And, a good deal of them might not have to strive for the standards impossed by telecine/di level facilities. Still, it is my opinon that being mindful of the differences is quite valuable for anyone wanting to play in this domain.
Martin Euredjian
eCinema Systems, Inc.
www.ecinemasystems.com
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Sean McKee on Nov 26, 2007 at 8:52:09 am
Regarding Martin's monitors, I was going to be the first to put one in a telecine suite almost 2 years ago, and had it side by side with a Sony 24" BVMD CRT. Pretty damn close and impressive. Its a great product and he's a damn good salesman, we had the PR ready to go. Unfortunately, he was having growing pains at the time (before any of them had really shipped), couldnt get it fast enough, and we needed to get rolling, so we got the Sony 32" BVMD CRT. Martin's new batch with built in scopes, etc., looks to be promising, is $37K for the largest one? That would be a nice replacement...
We had also looked at Final Touch 2K (at that time) along with everything else except Baselight and another Euro system that the name escapes me. Might have even considered it had Bob Sliga not tried to roast me and spread misinformation on the TIG (look it up), effectively making himself look like an ... and Roland Wood professed to me 'f*%k all you high end film guys that know the difference between the density of different emulsion layers and the dyes on the film, you just blew half a million dollars of my marketing by your comments, etc... I've made so much money already, blaa blaa,'. This was after I posted an honest review of the software at the time to the TIG, which pointed out some workflow flaws. Hmm, just the company that we wanted to invest in right? So we bought a da Vinci Resolve system and have been quite happy. Now that FT/Color is free with FC Studio, its worth a revisit to play with, but for all the people saying it can do anything a da Vinci does, I'd be happy to put them side by side and bring a dose of reality. I guess I didn't blow his marketing dollars, cause Roland got his green suitcase when he sold to Apple. Hell, maybe I even helped that sale happen by bringing the software to the forefront of a very public and heated discussion. I'll be happy to get a check Roland....
Not trying to be troll here or get way off topic, just trying to point out the fact that there is a reason why facilities spend six figures on certain systems, depending on their needs. The high end systems really do deliver in features/performance where it is needed. I would venture to say that many Color users don't need that level for independent projects. But most A-list directors and ad agencies need the immediate feedback, or the job done yesterday, and their work justifies the need for the high end.
Fact is, there are resellers hawking $75K Color turnkey systems. If you're going to pony up that much for that, save a bit more and look at a da Vinci or some such system. I'm sure there are deals to be had.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 26, 2007 at 1:21:31 pm
[Sean McKee]"Now that FT/Color is free with FC Studio, its worth a revisit to play with, but for all the people saying it can do anything a da Vinci does, I'd be happy to put them side by side and bring a dose of reality."
As I've said before, I'm repeating this from local daVinci artists who now work with Color. And a few daVinci artists I've had conversations with via the web. None of them connected to Apple, all of them long time daVinci artists. What I hear the most is "I lose the realtime, but the workflow and options are better with Final Touch (now color).
If you have the need and budgets that allow for a daVinci, then absolutely, nothing beats realtime, "get it done yesterday." But the growing reality, especially in broadcast television, is that "get it done cheap" is vastly out-pacing "get it done now and here's the budget to do that."
Just like all the editing systems out there, there are pros and cons to all the color grading options. There's most likely something to fit every budget and need.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Sean McKee on Nov 26, 2007 at 2:31:08 pm
Well, we're not doing color correction/enhancement for broadcast television (except for a few projects I am Executive Producer for), but rather film restoration for the studios and new feature coloring, mostly at 2K and 4K. So these needs may be different.
I must personally disagree with the other former daVinci artists you quote who declare a better workflow in FT/Color. And when I am making this comparison, I am speaking not of a daVinci 2K system used for telecine transfer or tape-to-tape, but rather a daVinci Resolve system, which is a file-based system, so you have to ingest the footage first, then color correct, then render, then output, same as FT/Color. They may say this now that Color is basically free, telling their clients FT/Color is better as they may be trying to break out on their own as independent colorists away from the expensive post facility structure, but 99.9% I'm sure would rather drive a daVinci if given the choice.
Walter, have you worked on or near a daVinci? You mention what other people have said, but your web site PR promotes your facility upgrades touting 'daVinci style' color correction. I'm just curious if you have a point of reference, because you are certainly using the name daVinci to help sell your company and the features of another system...
On a totally different note, since I mentioned 'driving' a daVinci, Walter, I happen to be an exotic car guy, and I purchased the Lamborghini 40th Anniversary DVD your company edited. At least I now know who you are and the type of work your company does. Since I'm now WAAAAY off topic, I'll reserve further comment.
At the end of the day, you are right, different tool for different jobs, but aside from the real time issue, I still haven't seen a workflow advantage in FT/Color.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 26, 2007 at 3:27:58 pm
[Sean McKee]"I must personally disagree with the other former daVinci artists you quote who declare a better workflow in FT/Color."
Everybody's workflow is different, all of us have our own needs and opinions.
[Sean McKee]"Walter, have you worked on or near a daVinci?"
I have sat in on multiple daVinci sessions and talk regularly to several artist in town.
[Sean McKee]"facility upgrades touting 'daVinci style' color correction. I'm just curious if you have a point of reference, because you are certainly using the name daVinci to help sell your company and the features of another system..."
It is comparable to a daVinci color correction product in my opinion and the opinion of multiple color artists I work with and communicate with and also our clients who have use daVinci services in the past.
Those upgrades were from two years ago and at the time, Final Touch HD was a $5,000 investment and was one way to set our facility apart from others in town. Now that it's free to all, just having it is not that big of a deal. Of course, having it and knowing how to operate it is another matter altogether.
Sadly, our website was supposed to have completely re-launched in April 2007, but our web designer never completed the design and since we have simply been too busy to re-work it. Plans are now in place to re-launch the site in time for NAB 2008. Then I'll be going in and moving a lot of stuff to archives and what-not so we can keep the information more current. the work schedule has just been insane so our website has suffered.
[Sean McKee]"On a totally different note, since I mentioned 'driving' a daVinci, Walter, I happen to be an exotic car guy, and I purchased the Lamborghini 40th Anniversary DVD your company edited. At least I now know who you are and the type of work your company does. Since I'm now WAAAAY off topic, I'll reserve further comment."
That project has a VERY long story and nothing I would discuss in a public forum. All I can tell you is the production plan that was presented to the client (who was also the Producer) and what was ultimately created on that DVD are two vastly different things.
Any issues you have with that project can be addressed to the Producer at www.lambodvd.com.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Martin Euredjian on Nov 26, 2007 at 3:53:57 pm
Hi Sean! Yes, the DCM23 did pretty well back then. The new DPX-class, when set side-by-side with a BVM-D24 CRT is an almost perfect match. I say "almost perfect" because it has twice the resolution and actually --if you can believe it-- produces slightly better blacks than a CRT. $37K is the DPX24, the DPX40 is $60K.
> roast me and spread misinformation on the TIG
Unfortunately the TIG got derailed several years ago. I got my share of battle scars from that list. As it became useless to me (and many others) I abandoned it and have never posted nor visited the list for at least a couple of years. Probably all the better because I now roam a number of lists and will selectively post from time to time.
Mike Orton, Steve Shaw and I started another list called "DI TechNET" http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/di-tech-net/ This list is a non-profit technical/engineering focused list (not a user/operator list) for the field of DI. Anyone can join, but we try to keep it to the technical.
Martin Euredjian
eCinema Systems, Inc.
www.ecinemasystems.com
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Martin Euredjian on Nov 26, 2007 at 3:42:10 pm
Be careful with plasma technology for color grading monitors. They suffer from at least three problems:
1- Poor lowlights detail, sometimes evidenced as noise added to an otherwise clean image
2- All plasmas have the wrong gamma curve. Rather than a smooth gamma of somewhere between 2.2 and 2.4 you get a weird "S" curve due to the need to enhance blacks and whites
3- White point luminance often changes based on image content. A brighter image causes the plasma display to reduce white point luminance due to power supply limitations. A darker image might produce whites that are several times brighter than a properly calibrated display would.
They do look nice and they are great viewing monitors. However they are far from being acceptable for the critical evaluation of images.
Martin Euredjian
eCinema Systems, Inc.
www.ecinemasystems.com
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Mark Lediard on Nov 26, 2007 at 8:47:40 pm
Thanks for all the responses everybody and the great info. I'm following up on some the suggestions now.
I seem to have inadvertently stirred up a bit of a hornets nest here, though looking back over some of the other threads here one that seems to have been buzzing for a while.
To clarify; we're not going to try and offer something that will directly compete with a daVinci - a least not in price. We are a regional company and wouldn't last long by charging London rates. We've always held an advantage by trying to be cost effective and clever. We were the first company up here to go FCP over AVID and to realise that cheaper desktop systems could, in the right hands, be just as effective as expensive turnkey solutions. The release of Color (it should be Colour by the way - note to Apple) has again given us the option to add something that just wasn't a possibility for us before - a dedicated grading suite. And while this won't necessarily compete with the best London can offer it will help us improve our offering to clients and the quality of our output.
I also thoroughly agree with Walter:
"If you have the need and budgets that allow for a daVinci, then absolutely, nothing beats realtime, "get it done yesterday." But the growing reality, especially in broadcast television, is that "get it done cheap" is vastly out-pacing "get it done now and here's the budget to do that."
and applications like Color help us do this and keep the quality levels reasonably high. So while I have nothing but respect for colourists working at the top of their fields on high end systems we're not trying to directly compete with them. Our hardware choices will probably reflect this.
Thanks again for all the top tips - I've no doubt I'll be back on here again soon with some more questions
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 26, 2007 at 8:57:17 pm
[Mark Lediard]"I seem to have inadvertently stirred up a bit of a hornets nest here, though looking back over some of the other threads here one that seems to have been buzzing for a while."
What's really funny about the "hornet's nest" is I've been through the exact same "nests" when Media 100 came on the scene and Avid users tried to decimate its abilities. Then Final Cut Pro came on the scene and Avid users tried to decimate its abilities.
When something new, and especially cheap, arrives on the market, it's a major threat to the established "way." Funny how the Avid folks forget about the old CMX/Grass Valley/Abekas/Chyron suites being the established "way" before they came along.
Something new is going to come along all the time and those who are used to a certain way and a certain budget are always going to feel threatened in some way. At first I was furious with Apple for giving away Color after I spent $5,000 on Final Touch HD two years ago. (you can go back and read my posts to see)
But now I have three Color suites instead of one and we're just using it like another tool in the old toolbox. We're not full fledges colorists by any means, but we know what looks good on screen and a lot of our clients seem to agree.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by paul Provost on Nov 27, 2007 at 4:42:02 am
ok, i guess i just can't resist on a double thread kill, but why are these high end davinci guys even trolling these posts. if they're finishing the latest harry potter movie at $1000 plus an hour, why bother? if i was making that dough on those jobs this place would be the last thing on my mind.
it's like as if we were going to a videographer/wedding video thread telling people not to use fcp 3 way cc to fix their jobs - "it can't compare to Color - but i guess if you HAVE to use that inferior product for your low end projects, well HUMPPH!"
seems like they feel the dogs nipping at their heels?
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by forilou on Nov 28, 2007 at 12:08:45 am
Hi guy,
This thread tend to be a small guerilla and the first subject is quite off actually. I've been a final touch user but now as my service are more involve in commercial and in VFX design (you know, shoot in green screen, 3d set extension compositing etc) I haven't use it for the last 10 mounth.
But my experience on color said it is a fantastic tools, really. Almost as complete as Davinci, and more. Because of the software, you can track vignette more easily than a DaVinci 2K. And once you can play with primary, secondary, mask inside and outside, fx tree to blur color sat lum, play with softness, you have almost everything.
BUT AND THERE IS A BIG ONE.
Color just don't work. you need to test and test again for each project the workflow with final cut. AND the render time are just crazy. So we can not compare Davinci (a half milion tool) with color (a 0$ software). And I really prefer pay almost 5000$ and get a fast debug software than 0$ and make myself a freak with a customer intensive session. But the problem is I need an advance color tool like color. Recently we purchase a complete apple MacPro and I/0 and fast storage monitor. We run shake (with a 15 000$ plugin package) for compositing, final cut for editing, and XSI for 3D. The only thing I still outsource, as a production commercial compagny is the color grading. And at 800 $/our, it make me feel a sheep. Because we try to do hi-end stuff (with success, as we are more and more busy) but with lighter budget. So paying 7000$ for a hudge color grading session when I can put these money in motion design drive me crazy. BUT, when I see the no bug, realtime feedback of a tight figer of a brillant colorist do a very nice grade, what can I say? We get what you pay for...
So please apple, just charge your software and make it a rocksolid tool. There is almost everything, just the stability, and A BACKGROUND RENDERING!!!!! People are not familiar with rendering in color session.
Do it apple and you gonna jump in "la cour des grands". The only thing we would need is talent...(a not a small part)
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Nov 28, 2007 at 12:47:09 am
[forilou]"Color just don't work. you need to test and test again for each project the workflow with final cut."
Color does work and it works well with the formats that are natively supported. Not really sure what you have to test for each individual project, but we've no issues with it running DVCPro HD and Pro Res in terms of grading and stability.
[forilou]"AND the render time are just crazy."
That is definitely something that Apple has completely screwed up and they really don't seem too interested in fixing. Final Touch HD rendered much faster than Color does. Whenever Apple gets around to fixing this issue, then Color will be more useful to all productions. As it is right now, we only use it on one series, though I'll probably switch that series over to Magic Bullet Looks or Colorista again. 1 hour renders are a heckuva laster per episode than 6 hours.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Michael Sandness on Nov 28, 2007 at 3:57:43 am
Walter,
In the AJA forum you said you were not upgrading to Leopard because the Adobe suite isn't ready for it. As well as AJA. Have you tried installing Leopard on a different disk-partition, anything for Color? I mean just to test?
In my initial renders in Color 1.02 in Leopard 10.5.1, I'm finding renders to be around 60% faster than 1.01 in Tiger. Of course this is with fast fibre channel drives with a write speed of over 500 meg a second. Apples biggest miss in regards to Color this year is not communicating what a proper Mac setup should be used for Color. It was once a requirement to have Fibre Channel drives for FinalTouch. Higher disk write times make a huge difference in render speed in Color.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by forilou on Nov 28, 2007 at 5:43:14 pm
Hi walter,
to stay focus on the solution, why not setup different type of safe workflow. exemple: when working in digital becam for long form project do this, use this codec etc. For HD, offline codec use this, conform in this codec, do this don't do that. JUst a simple and safe way to make color usable for other colorist non-familiar with non-linear buggy software. Because we all loose time by doing the same mistake, we better explain some safe workflow.
After I thing you made a very good training DVD for learn the tools. A tutorial for safe workflow/way-of-get-the-job-done would be SOOO HELPFULL!
thanks we all think color have a fantastic potential, let's make it concrete!
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Son of Light on Dec 3, 2007 at 11:42:53 am
[walter biscardi]"What's really funny about the "hornet's nest" is I've been through the exact same "nests" when Media 100 came on the scene and Avid users tried to decimate its abilities. Then Final Cut Pro came on the scene and Avid users tried to decimate its abilities.
When something new, and especially cheap, arrives on the market, it's a major threat to the established "way." Funny how the Avid folks forget about the old CMX/Grass Valley/Abekas/Chyron suites being the established "way" before they came along.
Something new is going to come along all the time and those who are used to a certain way and a certain budget are always going to feel threatened in some way. At first I was furious with Apple for giving away Color after I spent $5,000 on Final Touch HD two years ago. (you can go back and read my posts to see)"
Color Grading/DI Process is different from Editing Process.
I just wan'na know why you always comparing Color with DaVinci? And you always say DaVinci, but which one (2K/2KPlus/Resolve)?
Why don't you compare Color with Scratch? They both are software-based grading systems. Not like DaVinci (hardware-based).
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Dec 3, 2007 at 2:03:39 pm
[Son of Light]"Color Grading/DI Process is different from Editing Process."
You're absolutely correct. It's also different than Audio Design, Graphic Design, Digital Compositing, SFX, and original music creation.
The similarity is the fact that tools exist today so that anyone can do any of these tasks using a single computer anywhere. In an office, in their home, on the road with a laptop. Now Color Grading has caught up and from the sounds of it on this forum and especially in this thread, Colorists are not happy.
Technology changes and now the "exclusive" world of Color Grading is open to anyone with a Mac and $1,300. Last I heard there were over 1,000,000 registered users of Final Cut Pro. Figure at least half of them have Final Cut Studio 2 and that's a lot of people with Color.
Yep, you really should have the proper Grading monitor and I'm the first to tell you that, but you can certainly learn how to use the software and the theory of color grading without that. And I'm sure a lot of folks will use the software without a proper monitor, without the 18% grey walls (we don't have them) and without the proper color temperature lights, but they will be using the software.
And when they are ready and can afford to properly equip their suites, they will be a leg up on anyone who has never used high quality color grading software.
[Son of Light]"I just wan'na know why you always comparing Color with DaVinci? And you always say DaVinci, but which one (2K/2KPlus/Resolve)?"
Because that is what Silicon Color original compared their tool to when I was looking at it to begin with. So I went to the daVinci booth at NAB to see for myself and they did indeed look very similar.
Then I invited a daVinci artist to my shop right after we purchased it and he commented, "This is almost like running the daVinci only you have more options than I do." At the time he was running the 2K version and I believe he still does, though have a complete Color Suite in their facility now to compliment the 2 daVinci suites.
Why would I compare a specific version? With Final Cut Pro and Avid, Media 100, Autodesk and so on, I never compare versions. It's just Final Cut Pro vs. whatever.
[Son of Light]"Why don't you compare Color with Scratch? They both are software-based grading systems. Not like DaVinci (hardware-based)."
No experience whatsoever with Scratch, thus no way to compare. I have experience with daVinci artists, sitting in on daVinci sessions. I have experience with Sythetic Aperture products. I have experience with Magic Bullet products. Those I can compare, but Scratch I can't.
You're welcome to enlighten us on the pros and cons of Scratch vs. Color.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Johan Polhem on Dec 3, 2007 at 3:09:44 pm
Mark
Are you sure you want to go down this road?
Building an Apple Color suite so that you can
"wow" clients is a good idea in theory but Id say
not ideal in practice.
For starters, you will not get the same wow as in a flame
as it is not realtime. And Color rendering is mammoth.
Secondly, the application has so many problems that you are not going to want clients around
you watching you swear and pull your hair out.
I was aiming on doing the same Color suite as you but I gave up for now.
I am waiting until Apple finish the application to a level where it is usable, before I operate it in front of clients again.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by walter biscardi on Dec 3, 2007 at 3:25:30 pm
[Johan Polhem]"For starters, you will not get the same wow as in a flame
as it is not realtime. And Color rendering is mammoth."
Depends on what you want to "Wow" your client with. Realtime capabilities that cost more per hour to run or high end color grading tools that can operate in the budget of many more clients. The latter is the "Wow" for my clients and it's a HUGE "Wow" for them.
You absolutely correct on the rendering. Absolutely no excuse for the excessive render times currently experienced with Color. With Final Touch HD the render times were very reasonable and obviously Apple has done something to the app to mess that up.
[Johan Polhem]"Secondly, the application has so many problems that you are not going to want clients around
you watching you swear and pull your hair out."
Depends on your workflow and format you're working with. We are experiencing no issues with DVCPro HD and ProRes. Clients have enjoyed their color grading experiences with us.
Many of the issues seem to be PAL related (as is the case with many of the Final Cut Studio issues) or with people not properly prepping their timelines to go into Color.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media HD and SD Production for Broadcast and Independent Productions.
Re: Color Hardware recommendations by Son of Light on Dec 5, 2007 at 4:56:08 am
[walter biscardi]"The similarity is the fact that tools exist today so that anyone can do any of these tasks using a single computer anywhere. In an office, in their home, on the road with a laptop. Now Color Grading has caught up and from the sounds of it on this forum and especially in this thread, Colorists are not happy."
[walter biscardi]"Because that is what Silicon Color original compared their tool to when I was looking at it to begin with. So I went to the daVinci booth at NAB to see for myself and they did indeed look very similar."
All color grading tools in all color grading systems have the same function, they just have different "nick name". If you compare "Color vs daVinci" just because their tools look very similar, it's not fair.
When people buy daVinci suite they not pay only for the tools. There are a lot more than tools. That's why it so expensive.
Please walter, if you wan'na compare Color with daVinci suite, make a detail explanations. Not only "the tools", but also the render time, I/O, format/resolution, workflow, technical support, etc.
[walter biscardi]"Why would I compare a specific version? With Final Cut Pro and Avid, Media 100, Autodesk and so on, I never compare versions. It's just Final Cut Pro vs. whatever."
2K/2KPlus is different from Resolve. It's not like Color1.0.0/Color1.0.2. That's why if you only have "experience" with 2K please say "Color vs daVinci 2K".
I never underestimate the power of FT/Color, Color Finese, Colorista or Magic Bullet. But they are different from daVinci suite. Period. It's not as simple as you see or imagine.
