Premiere Pro, dpx, film scan and other stuff.

[Jay Young]

I have searched high and low. No one seems to have anything useful to say, other than not knowing how to use buzz words correctly.

 

I use Premiere Pro, I like Premiere Pro. I do not like FCP, I do not like Avid. I started with Premiere Pro and I don't really care to change.

 

Why is there no information out there about using Premiere Pro and film?

 

I'm sure that lots of people will say that Final Cut is so very much better than sugar covered gold, and that Avid is like an intimate moment. I'm not going to buy another expensive software piece, so please don't ask.

 

So, if I have a lab scan my negatives into dpx at 2k, and then edit in Premiere pro, and then render back out to dpx at 2k, is that good enough for a film out?

 

Also, if I want to color correct myself, from the 2k dpx files, I know I don't have something as amazing as Apple "Color", can I use my Adobe suite? I'm sure the DI equipment, and real colorist/grader at the lab will do a better job, and I'm sure that working with the lab, they can use my edited dpx files (I hope).

 

Just in case you want to know, because someone will ask, even tho it really doesn't matter, the project will have the following technical details:

 

Regular-16mm anamorphic 2x acquisition.

Final out (hopefully) film, as well as DVD/Blue-ray disk, followed by an internet release after the festival circuit.

Final aspect ratio will be 2.66:1 or (2048x771 2k unsqueezed / 1920x723 HD unsqueezed / 1440x542 online unsqueezed)

 

Also note that even tho it is Anamorphic Regular-16, I DO NOT WANT a standard Definition scan. I would like as much information as I can get to work with (although 4k I feel is overkill).

 

Thoughts? THANKS!

[David Mullen ASC]

I'm not an editor nor a colorist, nor do I use Premiere Pro, can't answer any of those questions.

 

I will say that if you serious intend a film-out, it means keeping the Log format of the original DPX RGB scan and using a LUT to create a Rec.709 gamma version for blu-ray and other electronic HD presentations. Or it means color-correcting two versions from scratch, one with the correct gamma for monitor viewing and another for film-out left in Log space.

 

Without calibrated equipment set-up in conjunction with the lab doing the film-out, you can't expect the colors and contrast you create on your monitor to translate accurately into a film-out, odds are high that it will all have to be re-color-corrected by the lab before they can film it out.

 

You have a better shot at doing the blu-ray version yourself just because it's easier to play it back on various monitors to check your work.

 

As for the scan itself, any number of places can do a 2K scan of 16mm, it doesn't matter if it has a squeeze to it, that's your concern. They just scan the frames and give you the data.

 

Personally... I'd give up on the idea of doing a film-out, just create a good HD version in broadcast gamma if this is going to blu-ray and the internet. Then you can get a basic 10-bit Log 1920 x 1080 HD video transfer, unsqueezed and letterboxed to 2.66 : 1 inside 16x9.

[Chris Burke]

I have searched high and low. No one seems to have anything useful to say, other than not knowing how to use buzz words correctly.

 

I use Premiere Pro, I like Premiere Pro. I do not like FCP, I do not like Avid. I started with Premiere Pro and I don't really care to change.

 

Why is there no information out there about using Premiere Pro and film?

 

I'm sure that lots of people will say that Final Cut is so very much better than sugar covered gold, and that Avid is like an intimate moment. I'm not going to buy another expensive software piece, so please don't ask.

 

So, if I have a lab scan my negatives into dpx at 2k, and then edit in Premiere pro, and then render back out to dpx at 2k, is that good enough for a film out?

 

Also, if I want to color correct myself, from the 2k dpx files, I know I don't have something as amazing as Apple "Color", can I use my Adobe suite? I'm sure the DI equipment, and real colorist/grader at the lab will do a better job, and I'm sure that working with the lab, they can use my edited dpx files (I hope).

 

Just in case you want to know, because someone will ask, even tho it really doesn't matter, the project will have the following technical details:

 

Regular-16mm anamorphic 2x acquisition.

Final out (hopefully) film, as well as DVD/Blue-ray disk, followed by an internet release after the festival circuit.

Final aspect ratio will be 2.66:1 or (2048x771 2k unsqueezed / 1920x723 HD unsqueezed / 1440x542 online unsqueezed)

 

Also note that even tho it is Anamorphic Regular-16, I DO NOT WANT a standard Definition scan. I would like as much information as I can get to work with (although 4k I feel is overkill).

 

Thoughts? THANKS!

 

 

like david said, HD scan may be better, plus if you get a flex file, can't you make a cut list and eventually a contact print? It so, it will be better looking than a 2k film out and a 2k scan will not be that much better than an HD scan. Depending upon the scanner.