"Old mate punchin' a dart". Oh man it is satisfying having this content created by a fellow Aussie. Always great videos that are easy to follow along with, to the point and packed with helpful info and insights. Keep up the awesome work mate.
For the skateboard clip you should do most of the grading before the node with the LUT. That way you preserve all the highlight and shadow detail from the log image
@@tomaszbejnarowicz lol Quazi is a tool, you shouldn't watch his videos if you ever plan to do serious colorgrading with an effective workflow (other than making a single frame look good with an overcomplicated node structure)
Another banger dude. Love your work as always. As an Aussie living in Canada for the last 2 1/2 yrs, 'old mate punching a dart' teleports me back home instantly!!
Excellent stuff Lewis. One note, the film print LUTs supplied in DaVinci are designed to use with cineon log. Meaning you can use them not only with the flat cineon scans of your 16mm, but also when applying to digital footage, you can use color space transform to change Red Log or Log C or whatever into cineon gamma for a more accurate transform. Love the stuff, Keep it up man extremely useful content you produce .
REDLogFilm is actually the same response curve as Cineon Film Log so it's fine to have the footage set to that. The only other thing is that REDWideGamut is much larger than Rec.709 making the image very non-saturated if not converted. The DaVinci filmlooks expect Rec.709 colorspace with Cineon Log gamma so for better results it's better to convert RWG to Rec.709 first. I would do it with a CST node before the LUT instead of on the RED raw settings so you have some control for gamut mapping if your footage has out of Rec.709 gamut colors. You could also increase saturation before the LUT but it will be less accurate.
I love that most of the film stock are almost tailor made to be graded, and most look like LOG out of the gate (obviously not technically, but you know). I mean, wouldve KILLED to be able to color grade like this on a computer in the 80s. We spent YEARS trying to fine tune the baths and looking for that "next" revision of the chemistry to really give us the flexibility. We truly live in a great world! I think the tech hit us so hard and so fast we all lost our frame of reference. its nice to see people getting back to the basics, but not be a snob purist about it. these are just tools. hopefully the "reckless" days of abandon are over
Lewis, thank you so much for this! Would love to see another video of just grading 16mm. I've searched everywhere and this is the only video that showed up. Thanks a ton!
That intro tho… Cinematography & color grading skills are simply stunning! Bravo! Super helpful content since it’s really hard to find color grading tutorial for film thanks a tone for that!
So fun intro and it reminded me of the humor and grainydays and also the music😂 great tutorial and interesting to see what your approach is to grading film, it looks so fun as well😍😄
So glad I stumpled across your channel! Thank you for sharing your thoughts and techniques! There's very few cinematographers on youtube and your work is stellar! Greetings from germany!
Workflow is different for everybody and I don’t think there is one particular way,however for the first short I think it would be Cineon Log in CST rather Log C as Films are scanned in Cineon . I am not sure though but it may be worth trying
Came here to say this. But I think you’re also right about workflow. Sure there some best practices but if you get there somehow, thats perf! Crackin videos Lewis!
Thanks for creating this informative presentation, you gave me a good place to start with grading my 16mm feature. Very little information out there for actual film other than digital video makers calling themselves filmmakers.
awesome, love seeing your flow on film. Could be fun to ask your lab to scan it in DPX. A bit of a different workflow, and for sure way less raw (which can really benefit the 16mm look) but a dpx scan just gives you alot more options. I do like to see some of your tricks like Lum-mix, interesting way to balance for tungsten to daylight. i tend to just use the temp slider top left, but im going to try your way.
Some cinematographers will only shoot tungsten film and just adjust colours in the grade, or only shoot daylight, not only as a cost-saving measure, but also because it can produce "better daylight" footage if the colours are changed in post, rather than recorded on actually daylight WB film. But IDK about any of that, it's just what I've heard some say, most notably Sayombhu Mukdeeprom, of course
thank you really much for the cool videos, I find it really interesting that you use the offset to set the black level instead of the lift. Is there any difference? maybe on how the gamma slider reacts? If anyone knows feel free to answer, I am no pro at this
Hey man! This is one of the best c.grading I've seen in much time. That's really good work! I tried to find you in imdb, but there is only this youtube channel. Are you interested in cinematography- film wise?
Thank You For Your Shared Lewis! I have concerns about this,I have a shooting I will shot on 500T, but I will use HMI & tungsten practical light & color tube light, day& night as well. Do u recommend I just correct on the postproduction, and then I don’t loose to much stop for my exposure. I might be exposure as 320 at day time, and 250 at night scenes. So just wanna ask u should use 85 filter to correct the white balance or ?😅
This is more related to the general use of Da Vinci Resolve, but when handling multiple shots for a single scene, must one colour grade each each shot individually (one at a time), or can you grade them all collectively (all at the same time)? Cheers to whoever has an answer :D
Create a “look” using the “timeline” level node graph, then use the “clip” level node graph to grade individual clips. You can also create Groups by selecting multiple shots, right clicking, and adding it into a group or new group. You can divide them up into scenes, camera profiles, etc… just a helpful organizational tool
Lewis.....one question....even Shane Hurlbut said that the old Blackmagic Pocket can give you a very good 16mm footage......with the additional practicality of getting it already in prores or RAW....what do you think, compared to real film? Sometimes it generates some moirée, which i hate, but what are your thoughts?
Could you share the color space you are working with DaVinci as well as the export color space you use? I find your videos have such a good contrast ratio and I don't know how you achive that without getting color and gamma shifts on Mac
Is there any point in colour grading 16mm??? I mean, what with the film stock and stuff it's all there? I can see why one may need to colour correct and do exposure adjustments, but why not just let the film stock speak for itself?
You have at least to convert 16mm film, because if you play it like that, it would look like a log space from a digital cinema camera. This is due to the digitalization of 16mm which is usually done in the cineon space, that is not a common log, because it was designed in the 90s based on print density of film negatives, so it's specifically designed to contain all the data resulting from a digital film scan.
which would you say is the mirrorless that comes closest to the analog filmic look when graded? i mean between cameras like sony's, panasonic, fujifilm etc.
Not sure what he thinks but I have had great results with Sony a6000 with Neutral Creative Style (-3, -3, -3). Shoot with a color chart, add some Cinegrain, and you are very close to 16mm film look (need to set proper white balance, bump saturation a bit, and keep highlights/shadows at reference) but it will look shockingly similar.
What always confuses me with film scans is bit depth... You said the 16mm footage you got back from the lab comes as ProRes 422. When shooting digital and capturing the footage using that codec, you end up with a certain bit depth. As this is only a film scan, what bit depth does this footage come with? Would be nice if anyone could explain.
I haven’t shot 16mm since film school, but I would overexposure by 2 stops and then have the lab pull it back to neutral when developing the film to get a balanced image. That’s what I was taught at the time, but I don’t know if that’s still good practice as the tech has advanced. Anyone else have thoughts on this?
It is awesome how film neg can be overexposed by that much and still look great...now underexposure looks bad and I would prefer digital for an underexposed image.