Michael Martinez Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 Hello, I really like the Crimson Workflow but the quality is an issue for me. I dont like the Cineform Workflow but the quality is great i can work with 4k 3k if i want. Crimson quality is 4:2:2 Cineform quality 4:4:4 Please if somebody knows that i can handle Crimson at 4:4:4 please correct me and let me know. Or if somebody knows that i can use Cineform with out going to PC and with out the color correction in After Effects please let me know. Im using a MAC platform: FCP-Redcine Redcine FCP. I WANT TO EDIT IN FCP AND COLOR GRADING IN REDCINE IN RAW QUALITY!!!! THANKS FOR ANY REPLY OR ADVICE IN ADVANCE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Rogers Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Hello, I really like the Crimson Workflow but the quality is an issue for me. I dont like the Cineform Workflow but the quality is great i can work with 4k 3k if i want. Crimson quality is 4:2:2 Cineform quality 4:4:4 Please if somebody knows that i can handle Crimson at 4:4:4 please correct me and let me know. Or if somebody knows that i can use Cineform with out going to PC and with out the color correction in After Effects please let me know. Im using a MAC platform: FCP-Redcine Redcine FCP. I WANT TO EDIT IN FCP AND COLOR GRADING IN REDCINE IN RAW QUALITY!!!! THANKS FOR ANY REPLY OR ADVICE IN ADVANCE. I don't think you really understand what Crimson Workflow really is. All it does is convert FCP XML to RedCine XML and then back to FCP XML when you are done. 4:2:2 and 4:4:4 all depends on how you render the footage out of RedCine. If you want to stay in max quality then I would suggest rendering out to DPX or Tiff files. You can also get Cineform QT plugin for the Mac I believe. Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunleik Groven Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If you know what you do, you can render out your conform and onelight directly from crimson. Much faster than rendering with RC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Martinez Posted September 10, 2008 Author Share Posted September 10, 2008 THANKS GUYS FOR REPLY, IF I USE TIFF OR DPX I WILL NEED A LOT OF STORAGE AND A SPECIAL SET UP OF POST-PRODUCTION. IM TRYING TO DO IT MAXIMUN QUALITY AT A LOW BUDGET. ANY TIPS BESIDES TIFF OR DPX??? THANKS!!! MMR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunleik Groven Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 THANKS GUYS FOR REPLY,IF I USE TIFF OR DPX I WILL NEED A LOT OF STORAGE AND A SPECIAL SET UP OF POST-PRODUCTION. IM TRYING TO DO IT MAXIMUN QUALITY AT A LOW BUDGET. ANY TIPS BESIDES TIFF OR DPX??? THANKS!!! MMR. Maximum quality is actually a relative question. What is your deliveryformat? What do you need? If you want the best gradeability - DPX/TIFF is your answer You could transcode to cineform, but that won't work in Color If you're talking compressed formats, ProRes is probably your best bet. Gunleik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Rogers Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 THANKS GUYS FOR REPLY,IF I USE TIFF OR DPX I WILL NEED A LOT OF STORAGE AND A SPECIAL SET UP OF POST-PRODUCTION. IM TRYING TO DO IT MAXIMUN QUALITY AT A LOW BUDGET. ANY TIPS BESIDES TIFF OR DPX??? When it comes to quality vs price, it's much harder to stay in 4:4:4 for cheap. What are you going out to? Are you going to a film print for theaters, or are you going to SD DVD/TV? If you are going down to SD, then render out to ProRes or 10bit Uncompressed. I really don't know that 4:4:4 is that useful for TV work. Yeah, it'd be nice but if you have a budget, then that's probably out of your reach. Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Martinez Posted September 11, 2008 Author Share Posted September 11, 2008 Thanks guys, THE FINAL DELIVERY IS FOR BROADCAST IN HBO, BUT BEFORE THE FINAL I WANT TO HANDLE THE FOOTAGE ALL THE TIME UNCOMPRESS, FOR EDITING AND COLOR GRADING WITH RED CINE. SORRY IF I LOOK CONFUSE, BUT I HEARD FROM A FRIEND THAT I SHOULD USE CINEFORM BECAUSE IS BETTER THAN CRIMSON. I DONT KNOW IF ITS TRUE OR NOT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE, ANY ONE KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE?? PLEASE... THANKS!! MMR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Mottram Posted September 11, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted September 11, 2008 Thanks guys, THE FINAL DELIVERY IS FOR BROADCAST IN HBO, BUT BEFORE THE FINAL I WANT TO HANDLE THE FOOTAGE ALL THE TIME UNCOMPRESS, FOR EDITING AND COLOR GRADING WITH RED CINE. SORRY IF I LOOK CONFUSE, BUT I HEARD FROM A FRIEND THAT I SHOULD USE CINEFORM BECAUSE IS BETTER THAN CRIMSON. I DONT KNOW IF ITS TRUE OR NOT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE, ANY ONE KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE?? PLEASE... THANKS!! MMR. WHY ARE YOU WRITING THIS POST IN CAPS. IT DOES NOT MAKE YOUR POINT ANY CLEARER. actually what the hell are you talking about. cineform is a codec. crimson is an xml conversion programme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunleik Groven Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 (edited) Thanks guys, THE FINAL DELIVERY IS FOR BROADCAST IN HBO, BUT BEFORE THE FINAL I WANT TO HANDLE THE FOOTAGE ALL THE TIME UNCOMPRESS, FOR EDITING AND COLOR GRADING WITH RED CINE. SORRY IF I LOOK CONFUSE, BUT I HEARD FROM A FRIEND THAT I SHOULD USE CINEFORM BECAUSE IS BETTER THAN CRIMSON. I DONT KNOW IF ITS TRUE OR NOT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE DIFFERENCE, ANY ONE KNOWS THE DIFFERENCE?? PLEASE... THANKS!! MMR. First of all: Cineform is a highly compressed (but apparently very good) 4:4:4 codec. Cineform is also a couple of other things, but as I read you, I guess you're talking about the codec. I might be wrong... Cineform instead of Crimson. :) That's just... confusion really... They're not competing products and don't do the same thing at all... Cineform is a codec. You can transcode your material to cineform and work from that. If you're in FCP it's a bad choice, as Color won't accept cineform timelines. If you're on Adobe, Cineform may do your trick. If you're on AVID, you're basically not really debating Cineform at all. Crimson is a tool to conform your cuts (in FCP for now) to your desired format, involving RedCine (if you want/need) or just RedLine (if you know what you're doing) as a one-light step before online. You can go from there to any finishing solution... But small and 10/12 bit and uncomressed and fullraster chromasampling does NOT go along in the same sentence... Sorry about that. Edited September 11, 2008 by Gunleik Groven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Sprung Posted September 11, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted September 11, 2008 I really don't know that 4:4:4 is that useful for TV work. Right, once you're downstream of any compositing, it's really not cost effective to carry the extra data along. Even on major network shows, 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 are fine. -- J.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Rogers Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Right, once you're downstream of any compositing, it's really not cost effective to carry the extra data along. Even on major network shows, 4:2:0 or 4:2:2 are fine. I'm not sure I'd go as far to say 4:2:0 is fine for a major network show (though, HD stuff gets crammed down into that for broadcast.) Considering that he said HBO, I would say 4:2:2 10 bit uncompressed is all he needs. It will retain all the color information that 4:2:2 has to offer, but should still be smaller than 4:4:4 (at least 4:4:4 uncompressed;)) I would be very interested to find out what "?:?:?" many major TV shows deliver their master in. Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Sprung Posted September 12, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted September 12, 2008 4:2:2 doesn't look any better than 4:2:0. It's really a relic of analog component, where we could only undersample horizontally. In the distant past, before there was memory, undersampling in two directions was impossible. Then came the time when a frame store for NTSC was a big expensive rack full of stuff. It came down to a frame store in one rack unit, and now you can put several minutes of HD on a chip that fits in a shirt pocket. 4:2:2 has lingered though there's no reason for it any more, and there hasn't been for years. -- J.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunleik Groven Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Staying 4:4:4 uncompressed untill CC in 10 bits is really nice, even for a 4:2:0 SD delivery. Finnish as high end as you can. Downsample Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Martinez Posted September 17, 2008 Author Share Posted September 17, 2008 Exactly Gunleik... thats exactly what im trying to do. i know this network tv is 4:2:2 and that 444 is overkill my self, but i want to handle it uncompress all the time, until delivery. im getting the CalDigit Raid Card that cost me $520 this card is one of the best in the market, plus 4 hard drives of 500gb each. i have a Mac Pro 2x 2.8Ghz Quad core intel Xeon and 6 GB of memory 800mhz DDR2. I think this set up will help me to work with Redcine-Final Cut-Crimson. if somebody have any advice please let me know... Thanks! MMR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Keith Mottram Posted September 18, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted September 18, 2008 Exactly Gunleik...thats exactly what im trying to do. i know this network tv is 4:2:2 and that 444 is overkill my self, but i want to handle it uncompress all the time, until delivery. im getting the CalDigit Raid Card that cost me $520 this card is one of the best in the market, plus 4 hard drives of 500gb each. i have a Mac Pro 2x 2.8Ghz Quad core intel Xeon and 6 GB of memory 800mhz DDR2. I think this set up will help me to work with Redcine-Final Cut-Crimson. if somebody have any advice please let me know... Thanks! MMR. 2tb of storage is not enough if you want to work uncompressed. I am recieving about 40- 50gb a day of 1080p pro res on a feature that i'm working on. roughly an hour of footage a day. Facotr in an uncompressed conform and you can see how you will need more. why dont you put 4tb in your mac? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Martinez Posted September 22, 2008 Author Share Posted September 22, 2008 2tb of storage is not enough if you want to work uncompressed. I am recieving about 40- 50gb a day of 1080p pro res on a feature that i'm working on. roughly an hour of footage a day. Facotr in an uncompressed conform and you can see how you will need more. why dont you put 4tb in your mac? Yes, you right i bought 8 hard drives. thanks for reply. have you experienced the crimson workflow?? fcp-crimsoon-redcine?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now