"Wunderbaum" - Grading techniques
I thought it might be helpful for one to befriend the nodes in Resolve.
Doing a long and complex project I had time to develop a grading tree that became my standard tool for every job now.
Here is how it looks :
The nodes on the left deal with the technical aspects and technical corrections.
Also the Contrast nodes are more to get the images right at the first place.
I then deal with the overall mood and the use of external masks.
The last part contains predefined masks to darken and lighten the image to embrace the action or focus on the acting.
During grading I add nodes if required to track faces or isolate more colors, but this tree covers 90% of the work required out of the box.
Its much easier to adjust the curves and the keys with the panels only than making the nodes, activating the windows or keys, select a color and THEN tweak it.
The only thing I have to do is activate the node.
All effects are adjusted with the POST MIX slider afterwards to either reduce or enhance the desired effect.
Thanks to Blackmagic for making the slider bigger now :)
Hope this gives you an idea for future grading jobs.
A slice of color...
DaVinci 8.0.1 OSX 10.7
MacPro 5.1 2x2,4 24GB
RAID0 8TB eSata 6TB
GTX 470 / GT 120
Extreme 3D+ WAVE
Do you have realtime with all nodes on? + external matte?
I like the idea to have this "texts" in davinci, can help to remember what a node do.
Thanks for sharing!
hi sascha, thx for sharing this "wunderbaum" :)
by the way, are you speaking german?
and: the idea is good, tried things like this before, but still the problem with those "all in one" nodes is the toggle all nodes on/off, isn't it? each time i want to take a look on the original, those not used nodes will turn on again, therefore this technique was driving me nuts...
how do you handle this issue?
I always Make a version 0 with the pure ungraded version to show the client where we came from.
Whenever they ask for drastic changes I also make a new version.
Flicking through them is like before and after in in-between
The other befit of the Wunderbaum is the group grading works on it too
A slice of color...
DaVinci 8.0.1 OSX 10.7
MacPro 5.1 2x2,4 24GB
RAID0 8TB eSata 6TB
GTX 470 / GT 120
Extreme 3D+ WAVE
DaVinci Resolve 8.0, FCS3, FCPX
MacPro5,1, 2x2.93 32GB, Software Raid
ATI Radeon HD 5770/NVIDIA Quadro 4000
Multibridge Extreme, Tangent Wave
I'm sorry, but this is the most ridiculous thing I had ever seen in my life. How are you supposed to grade with this monstrosity? I had shots, where I had to use over 20 layers of correction and I can immediately see what had been done on any layer. And, yes, every layer can be a serial, a parallel types with a key mixer in Resolve parlance. Just look the pictures of nodes and layers and judge for yourself, which one would you rather use?:-)
I see an editing system with a lot of timecode info that belongs into a media browser tab
I am coming from Scratch and used Cyborg earlier, so I totally like the big button world, but Nucoda never got me .
Maybe it's my Fusion roots that make me dig the node graph , and yes, I really think it's easier to understand especially if you never saw the project, but know the structure.
A slice of color...
DaVinci 8.0.1 OSX 10.7
MacPro 5.1 2x2,4 24GB
RAID0 8TB eSata 6TB
GTX 470 / GT 120
Extreme 3D+ WAVE
I'm not arguing with your methods of operating Resolve. If you find it efficient to use it the way you described it with given tools, more power to you. My argument is more fundamental. Fusion is a compositing software, as is Nike and Smoke/Flame. They all mostly use nodes and that makes perfect sense. Using nodes for color grading is not efficient nor is it productive. BM needs to rethink the whole Resolve interface paradigm. Perfect example of inefficient interface is AE. It still uses layers paradigm for compositing. May be AE and Resolve should swap they interfaces:-)
definitely resolve...this thing you put up makes no sense to me at all.........
While Sascha's node tree looks fairly complicated for most grades its really nothing compared to Jakes image.
You seriously work like that?!
"Just look the pictures of nodes and layers and judge for yourself, which one would you rather use?:-)"
Thats not a serious question right??
When did colour grading become a series of numbers and lists that need to be deciphered? Totally takes all the fun away........
The nodes take almost no time at all to get used to and for most grades you'd probably never need the complexity of Sascha's structure, although it obviously works for him. Day to day stuff you'd remove half of that structure for the same result, and as he says this covers everything he needs and then winds it back by disabling accordingly.
Danny Scotting - Senior Colourist
Post Op Group Sydney
With due respect, I really have no idea what is your point.
May be you can decipher your post for me:-)
Personally, I'd rather use a Baselight, whose interface is probably simpler, clearer, and more immediately descriptive than either one. But that's not what this conversation is about.
You don't like the node orientation, I get it. But before you claim to have the high road as to what Blackmagic "should" or "should not" do, you should probably consider that there are an awful lot of Resolve users who are quite happy and don't happen to share your affinity for a layer based interface. That doesn't make you wrong, and it doesn't make them right, but different products exist for a number of reasons. Each company uses its own design ideas and customer (and potential customer) feedback to design something they feel works well for those customers and is extensible enough to add new features in the future without forcing a complete redesign. Most Resolve users probably feel the interface is just fine the way it is. You don't happen to agree. That doesn't mean the company should change it simply because one potential customer doesn't like it.
Perhaps you would prefer that they go the Apple route and release Resolve Pro X. I'm sure that would go over well...
Everyone have personal preferences. If you had read my earlier response a bit more careful, you would have seen, that my complains are always of a personal nature. As you prefer Baselight, I prefer FilmMaster, but by not much. Again, either choice isn't more correct, that other, it's just that, a personal choice. My dislike of inefficiency of Resolve interface, again, is my personal choice. I, just like you, have a perfect right to state my opinion and it's up to BM to take it or to ignore it. Said that, I'm using Resolve as is and quite enjoying it. But it doesn't mean, that it can't be better.
As my last point, Mike, I'd like to remind you, that you were one of the most strident opponents of the idea of having color wheels on the Resolve on the RedUser, going as far as using Baselight's interface as an example of having sliders. So, I'd say the proof is in the pudding- BM listened to me and I ended up being right. So, I'm going to continue to state my opinions:-)
>I'd like to remind you, that you were one of the most strident opponents of the idea of having color >wheels on the Resolve on the RedUser, going as far as using Baselight's interface as an example of having >sliders.
Huh???? I don't remember ever saying such a thing. You might be confusing me with someone else, but I honestly don't recall ever having such a discussion.
I did read your post quite carefully, and although you were understandably voicing an opinion, it doesn't always come across that way when you say things like "Blackmagic needs to rethink the whole Resolve interface paradigm," and go on about how bad nodes are for color correction. Whether you realize it or not, you do come on pretty strong and rather unbending on these things, and that doesn't lend a reader to understand that it's just a simple opinion. Take it from someone who's often been accused of doing the same thing.
No, I didn't confuse you with anyone, as your post was directed at me, as is this one. I really do not feel like spending time looking for your post on the RedUser. But the fact remains, that you were dead set against color wheels on a Resolve and you had used Baselight ( the system you used on daily basis) as an example of another grading platform being used successfully with sliding controls. It is clear, that you find present Resolve perfectly usable, as many traditional users of Davinci do. It is not my intent to change your mind, as you often come across as a person very much set in you ways. Nevertheless, Introduction of color wheels is a clear indication, that BM is intent on improving the interface and a vindication of my questioning of present state of the interface. Said that, judging from the name of this tread, I suspect that there is great deal of happy Resolve users, which is totally understandable. I do not post here as a prank or as a troll. From my personal experience I see a great deal of inefficiency in a present Resolve interface. Having some experience on other grading platforms, I feel, that Resolve and it's users could greatly benefit from rethinking of the interface paradigm. Resolve quickly running out of a real estate with tabs and bringing new tools, like log grading, doesn't bode well for the future. How many more tabs could we have? While using Lustre, Baselight or Nucoda, I'm constantly mindful of different design philosophies of those platforms and change the way I operate them. I find every one of those have great deal to offer, as well as negatives, as no system is perfect. I can't offer the same assessment on Resolve. I feel, that there is general lack of unifying design philosophy, that is conducive to the development of muscle memory. I realize, that MC Color or Wave is a part of a problem, but even with DV panel," -,+ ripple value" don't quite rises to the level of simplicity and sophistication of the three above mentioned systems.
I also post, because I'm hoping to engage users, like you, in genuine discussion on a relative use of different systems, as I suspect there are some aspects of Resolve, that I'd probably missed. There is no shame in admitting shortcomings, but all I see, so far, are users, that are enamored with every aspect of Resolve. Well, I'm not...
>> I really do not feel like spending time looking for your post on the RedUser. But the fact remains, that >>you were dead set against color wheels on a Resolve and you had used Baselight ( the system you used >>on daily basis) as an example of another grading platform being used successfully with sliding controls.
It's not a "fact" because I never said anything of the sort. And you know as well as I do that Baselight does not use "sliding controls," in fact, it has color wheels that can be switched to sliders, although frankly, I don't really use either except for occasional feedback. So if you want to keep claiming I said such things, you're going to need to find that because as far as I'm concerned I never did. Frankly, it's just not something I feel all that strongly about.
>>It is not my intent to change your mind, as you often come across as a person very much set in you >>ways.
We have never met, but I've rarely run across someone who has such an inaccurate view of who I am and how I think. However, you're entitled to your opinion.
>>I feel, that Resolve and it's users could greatly benefit from rethinking of the interface paradigm. >>Resolve quickly running out of a real estate with tabs and bringing new tools, like log grading, >>doesn't bode well for the future. How many more tabs could we have?
There is a lot less interaction with tabs if you have the DaVinci panels, which the interface was basically designed to be used with, even prior to Blackmagic's purchase of the company. While it is true that Blackmagic through their pricing policies has now repositioned Resolve to also appeal to a much more price sensitive market, and thus a lot more users who are going to be interacting with the program through the screen display rather than a dedicated panel, the design philosophy is based on what it's based on. If they want to change that, fine. But you seem to be implying that it's simply bad design, and I would say that it's a legacy design that was never meant to be used the way it's now being used by many of their newer customers. Perhaps it should be re-thought a bit based on the new user base. Perhaps they will. Perhaps not.
>>Nevertheless, Introduction of color wheels is a clear indication, that BM is intent on improving the >>interface and a vindication of my questioning of present state of the interface.
You seem to want to take some kind of personal credit for this. I would guess that it was done because of a number of customer requests, probably from some customers with a number of systems, because that's usually how features get added to programs. Personal "vindication"? Cmon, Jake, get over yourself at least a little bit.
>>There is no shame in admitting shortcomings, but all I see, so far, are users, that are enamored with >>every aspect of Resolve. Well, I'm not...
Neither am I. I like a lot of things about it, but I find fault with a lot of things as well. No log based controls (probably the single biggest one). A multitrack timeline that doesn't allow combining multiple timelines or tracks from other timelines, as well as not allowing conforming into a specific targeted track. No simple way to copy or paste only one node. No ability to display multiple windows for conforming or comparing on the video output. No way to play the conformed timeline against the offline on the output video (stills only). No ability to automatically replicate transforms (i.e., blowups and repositions, or even flips and flops) from either Final Cut XML's or Avid AAFs. Additional node necessary to do an inside and outside correction at the same time. Some of these things will likely be addressed, some are inherent in the program's philosophy and design. All are annoying. The users you mention who are "enamored" with it are likely those who have never used anything else other than perhaps Apple Color and editing programs. They are not Baselight, Lustre, Film Master, or Pablo guys, and are as a group probably a lot less experienced than you, me, or a lot of people both of us know. From their perspective, Resolve is something that is far beyond anything they thought they would ever have, especially at what is considered by professionals to be a ridiculous price point.
As I said, you were arguing against any need for change in the interface and championing a present state. See for yourself. Yes, the Baselight statement is there too...
Of coarse, it would be silly of me to take a personal credit for introduction of color wheel. See, the idea of these conversations, is to convey my hopes and desires to the powers in charge and hope I can make a compelling enough case for a need to change. All I'm saying is one my ideas, so far, were deemed good enough to be on the side of change and yours weren't...
You keep bringing up the point, that Resolve was designed to work mostly with the DV panel and that is true. What is also true is the overwhelming majority users of Resolve and participants of this blog have no intention to purchase $30k panel, ever. So, this argument, that somehow it's fault of the users, that do not have a full featured panel is disingenuous. It's a fact, that right now, those users have to resort to using various hardware add ons (G13, Shuttle Pro, etc), in addition to Wave and MC Color panels, just to be able to grade.
Jake, you really need to stop putting words in my mouth and attaching your own personal interpretations to everything I say. I re-read that entire thread and the only thing I did was try to explain why the Resolve interface was as it was. Your post that prompted my response basically stated that the interface sucked, that nodes were useless, and that it should all be changed to be what some other program(s) are. I pointed out that the design was a legacy design that worked pretty well for those who the design was aimed at, which until Blackmagic completely repositioned the product was professional colorists, largely in facilities, and largely using DaVinci's control panels. I didn't "argue" or "champion" anything. I basically said that change is fine, but is was what it was for some good reasons.
I don't know why you take anything I say as a personal challenge. I don't like personal challenges, and I don't try to create them. I usually try to add some perspective when I think there isn't any, which these days is sometimes necessary because there are a lot of new, younger users of this stuff who have no clue as to where any of this came from, and therefore no perspective other than things like Final Cut Pro and Apple Color. Sometimes having that perspective gives one a new outlook. Sometimes not. But I don't issue challenges, and I wish you would do the same.
you got to be kidding...you would need to be a rocket scientist just to figure out what goes where? altho i am warming up to resolve i still love the way color simplifies everything. if you want a secondary you just go into the secondary room and open one...then draw a shape or track it...it's all so simple...this thing you are showing reminds me of some mad professors chemistry class with all the links to this and that.....i understand the concept but there has to be a simpler way....
You can read what every layer does, in plain English nevertheless and yet, in you mind this requires a mind of rocket scientist:-) What i find amusing, is you yourself admit, that you don't understand the Filmmaster's interface, and yet, you still willing to argue which one is superior. And weren't you the one, who was arguing, when I was advocating the need for color wheels, but once they showed in 8.0.1, all of a sudden you're all happy? What can I say, at some point people were happy with tape too... Start exploring some other professional grading platforms (no, Color doesn't count) and you may can start grasping a need to advance the art of color grading.
For the record, Resolve is a great tool with great engineering foundation, but, in my opinion, in dire need of an interface overhaul. Too much of the old Hollywood baggage...
Only if Color had unlimited secondary rooms.. :) But still I'd rather have better performance than better UI anyday for serious jobs.
By the way, I wasn't saying that I dislike the node approach for grading. Actually, I find myself rather enjoy this whole node thing by now after using it for three weeks. I think I now have the hang of it, and I think it makes quite sense when I do certain tasks that I had never thought of before. If BM takes away this node thing from me, I can live with that. But I think I will miss it.
Back on topic, I think what Sascha is showing us is a pretty good demonstration of how one can approach this node structure, not what one should do in every job, IMHO. After a couple weeks of learning the tool, I started building my own set of Power Grades with different labels that are pretty close to what Sascha is doing. However, I just don't save the whole tree to apply on every shot I do. When I need a mask, for example, I bring in just that from the Power Grade room, which is already pre-labeled. Later on when I revisit a certain grade, I can tell what's happening on each node, since they are already all pre-labeled.
Of course, I don't really have a power grade that says "Primary" :-)
Been a good read... i use very similar nodes as my base to start a show with the tool set i am using. Today i'm heading in to screen a feature for myself, last weeks work, ahead of a producer screening in Monday, film reel outputs are starting Monday evening... 100% of this show has node based color correction
i don't use Resolve (yet) am evaluating it for my workflow and ROI.... but without nodes i would be much less interested in Resolve... so best for me if BMD turn a deaf ear to Mr JB's wishes, dreams and desires.
Nodes are key to creating the style of work that my clients are asking for, and that i am happy to provide.. i have a client base that for the most part is very experenced, and are looking at tools that can encompass work beyond what the trad "color suite" can do... works for me.
OK, Mr. JB will bite. As usual, without any reasonable explanation you just give an opinion. Obviously, because it's so easy, everyone can do that. In turn, I'm offering my reasoning behind questioning of wisdom of using present BM approach.
So, here is another example.
If I wanted to move any of the layers/nodes up or down on the grade chain, in Nucoda i just grab it and move it up or down. In Resolve I have to break connections and reconnect manually to achieve the same thing. BTW, if you do that, the node display usually becomes quite messy, so then you need to spend some time fixing that. You have to admit, that it takes much more effort with the Resolve method, than with Nucoda's. So, now, that I gave you a practical example of advantage of the layers approach vs present time node structure of Resolve, can you give me a practical example of why node structure of Resolve is superior to all others color grading platforms?
Personally I wouldn't say it's about nodes or layers being superior.
Grade with what you like... Every system has pros and cons and believe me even my beloved Nucoda has cons. Software grading is still in a fairly primitive stage and you really have to look at what you get for money if you're investing in kit.
They all do very similar things, sure in my opinion Film Master has more tools than Resolve, but Baselight has more customisable tools. It's not even a case of 'horses for courses'.
Personally I prefer layers like in Photoshop, as opposed to Nodes, but to be quite honest, I'll grade with whatever I'm asked to as they'll all do the job perfectly well enough.
Not many colourists would turn down grading a huge Hollywood feature just because Deluxe or Company 3 tell you that the client booked one of their Resolves...
Of coarse you can do pretty much everything with Resolve, that you could do with Nucoda or Baselight. Heck you can make the same claim with Color, given enough time. It's the speed and creative freedom, that is at stake. Having clients sitting beside you and being able to accommodate any of their wishes, immediately, is what will get them to come back again and again. I use FilmMaster because I love it, not because I have to. I can't make the same statement about Resolve...
For me (and i should note again - I don't use Resolve yet) with the tool set i use today, the nodes are an entry point to a great paint system, some 3D tools, and plugs from GenArts and Foundry.. layered timelines get pretty messy with a ton-0-stuff on them... and a ton-0-stuff is the look that makes DP's & producer's happy.
Also i use a pen & tablet rather than a control surface, so playing with the nodes is fairly easy / intuitive with my set-up
Lack of plugs, 3D & paint in Resolve is drag for sure when you are used to haveing them at your finger tips.. but with the rise of folks doing pre-grades in Resolve on Mac, it seems i need to get one up and running to appease my clents... i'm looking, think, evaluating.. thinking i really should have the Linux version, figureing out how to see an ROI.. i digress
Nocoda, Scratch, Baselight, Luster are not driven by my clients... Resolve is...
The upcoming IBC will probaly see some more tools that are tightly intergrated between finishing / VFX / color... what Cyborg2K was pointing the way to a decade ago
And what i hope Resolve becomes for folks like me who work mainly on indie features
Do you work with mattes?, or hdr?
I like the idea of nodes + layers, but if i must decide i prefer nodes. Its more intuitive for me. I only need a text box under the nodes number, like in the power grades or other app like shake. The name is important in a node tree. With shake is very easy to Move the position of one node. You can use groups of nodes (scripts) that make easy to see the tree, etc... I think that resolve can make some improvements in nodes mangement, but i like a lot what we have now.
Mattes? Sure, it's easy. HDR? I know what is HDR, but not sure what is the context of your question. But Nucoda supports Open EXR, so it's not a problem. So is HDRx...
As far as nodes go, I don't care if it's nodes or layers. I was pretty clear on that point already and I'm not going to do it again. If BM comes up with some way to name nodes and may be a pop up with the content of the node, then it's a good start. I'd like to see more suggestions on the subject, instead of "I like nodes, leave them alone". Peter and Rohit are seeing this and users need to use the opportunity to help improve Resolve's interface. Criticism of certain aspects of Resolve doesn't mean disloyalty:-)
Here's a slice of real world context, and what Resolve might do better..
I reviewed a film with producer's, the ONLY comment on all five reels was that the animation on the head title was getting lost once the shot was graded to work in context....
Fortunatly the glows were created in GenArt's Monsters, and fotuntatly i can open up monsters settings created in DF in my machine, answer was to import the script, adjust the element over top of the clean/textless, cut back into timeline and render the shot.. bingo we were all on the beach in 15 min
being able to use Foundry & GenArts plugs would be a huge good thing, as would being able to use the 3D trackers in 3D space, most useful for sky replacements, and that's something we do alot of with digital camera's. 3D trackers are great, but at the end of the day you can only use them inside a 2D enviroment with the current resolve, and you can't use lights on them
Adding grid warps, lighting and textures also helps in finishing/gradeing.. and needs a 3D workspace as well... closer to Pablo / Mystika / Smoke(on Linux) / DS / dear departed Cyborg2K in terms of world view...
I know Resolve's base is a single purpose tool for the specialist, and i know my world view is that of a generalist... but most toolsets do seem to be inching towards the generalist.. do you think Resolve is well advised to lead or closely follow, but not ignore this? I do.. i would like it to be at least close to my current tools, with better gradeing than they offer.
As it is i likely will get one due to the amount of indies, editors, DP, and director's that are already using the 1K version or free version to pre-grade... the question i have to still answer is do i go for the Linux that seems to suit my needs best, but i see as quite limited tool.. or get the Mac version for minimal outlay and get the show through Resolve quickly, use it as a conform tool with CDL only - and then into tools i can really work with?
So at the end of the day, having nodes on offer is a useful tool for me, haveing them fully functional is even better, and might be a tool i could base my workflow around in the future.
hi sascha ,
what is the node :magenta filter " about ?
Davinci Resolve Control Surface
Cubix desktop 4
2 Red Rockets
Panasonic 58PF Plasma