The below was written by a well regarded (and very nice) DP, which does not necessarily make him an expert of finishing systems.

"My one experience with an HD feature being color-corrected on an AVID DS or Symphony was not pleasant, since I was used to color-correcting in real-time on a DaVinci with a trained colorist.

I don't know the current capabilities of the AVID approach... I just know that color-correction should be done by trained professionals using calibrated monitors and scopes in order to meet broadcast standards, or digital cinema standards, no matter what the software being used.

The only practical issue is how fast does the system render color-correction decisions and can it save reference frames for split-screen reviewing -- and how advanced are its "Power Windows" capabilities."

It seems like he's lumping DS and Symphony together, even though they are very different programs. And of course using calibrated monitors and talented colorists is important.

But the comment alludes to how DS compares with more specialized programs when it comes to color correction, namely DaVinci and Lustre. I realze DS has so many other features like impressive audio, good cutting and titling. But as a color correction platform, can it compete with the best of the best?

P.S. I asked a ? in regards to DS versus SCRATCH, and Mike and others were very helpful in explaining many of DS's capabilities. But it's not all that clear how the different platforms match-up just on the basis of color correction. I'm working on documentary, so the effects will be minimal... I don't need to create smoke coming out of a building. But I do want a lot of control over how the final images look.

Thanks all very much.

BTW, Lucas from Assimilate said this about DS back in March of '07 on reduser.net:

"DS Nitris is not a color grading package. You can do very successful color grading with DS, and it does have very good grading tools. But it is not a dedicated color grading tool. It has minimal realtime color layering capability, cannot import 3D LUTs, does not support any kind of panel, and cannot directly support 2K or 4K.

Most customers, when walking into a "color bay," expect a standard set of tools for realtime color correction which DS does not have.

Neither does Smoke, for that matter. Lustre is a tool that is a true color grading platform."

By no means negative, but do you agree with his comments? Not trying to stir the pot here, just trying to get a handle on things. Thanks again.

Well, the problem I see with some of the statements above, is that grading is not an island. If you put a specialist up against a generalist, the specialist better be faster. However, every grade I've ever done also included, keying, paint, titles and some amount of editing. Some of the features I've worked on have been pre-graded on DS and then, using my grade as reference, been finished on the bigger boxes.There are projects that I've sent out to daVinci, Pablo and Baselight, once to Lustre and a few to Scratch.

The clients I work with, consider it a wash. The time gained in the grading suite is lost waiting to book another room to take care of the crew reflected in the glossy car, or stabilizing the establishing shot. If you are trying to compare the grading suites to Symphony or DS, some of the points are valid, especially when comparing to Symphony. However, with DS, you can work in 2k and 4k, with unlimited power windows and reference frames, with conform of effects from your Avid bins(try grading through a lens flare or glow effect), with luts(I'm sure they must be working on 3D luts by now). The downsides I've run into are no board support and the color of the interface, other than that, I have 2K and 4K 4:4:4 plus a whole host of specialized tools to help me.

Michael

"... The downsides I've run into are no board support ..."

Assuming here you mean control surfaces.  I've been hammering on Avid about this for a long time, especially now that we have DS Assist.  For many jobs, we could have a near "tapeless" workflow ...

Exactly.

Michael

BobbyMurcerFan:

color-correction should be done by trained professionals using calibrated monitors and scopes in order to meet broadcast standards

Just addressing a few specific points (simply because Michael and Randall didn't), the DP is correct about the above point.  He's also correct that it has nothing to do with the platform being used for the grade.

BobbyMurcerFan:

The only practical issue is how fast does the system render color-correction decisions

DS - all CCs that don't use "Power windows" are realtime. Rendering of anything that requires it is extremely fast.  I regularly process a 1Hr show that has multiple layers of CCs, composites with a slightly blurred chroma (a great look that we've saved off as a preset called "Instant sex"), keys, layers etc in around 45 minutes total.

 On the subject of "Power Windows" - a DaVinci 'invention' - DS would by comparison have "Uber-Power Windows".  You can do so much more than just draw a shape and CC inside it.

BobbyMurcerFan:

It seems like he's lumping DS and Symphony together

From the standpoint of the CC tool itself that's a fair comparison.  However, as Michael points out, in the real world you have to do so much more than simply grade a shot and that's where DS's power really shines.

BobbyMurcerFan:

I'm working on documentary, so the effects will be minimal...

In that case, it would appear that either Symphony or DS would fit your needs although as both Michael and I have pointed out, in the real world you'll come across a shot where you say "Oh, I wish that lamp-post wasn't there".  With Symphony (or indeed any specialist grading tool) you'll just have to put up with it; in DS you paint it out.

Hope that helps,

Regards,
Tone :)

It's comparing apples to monkeys really.

DS is a finishing tool. It sits alongside applications like Smoke and eQ. They have powerful CC tools, but they are not grading suites.

Compare DaVinci to Baselight, or Lustre, or Scrach, Apple Color even.

I'm not extemely familiar with SCRATCH or DS, but I believe they'd compare closer than DaVinci - SCRATCH can have NLE tools (it's an extra option) and other finishing tool, but at it's core is a grading application. It perhaps depends most on what the majority of the workload will be. I think DS is probably a more capable finishing tool, with reasonable grading tools. SCRATCH is probably a more capable grading suite, with reasonable finishing tools.

I'm not sure of specific tools in DS these days, but the grading tools have been very similar to Symphony. In the hands of the right editor/colorist, you can achieve just as good results as a colorist running something like daVinci. DS and Sym are geared towards 601/709 color space, so the comparisons have to stop there, since you can't working in fancy LUTs and so on.

Scratch is neither an NLE nor a grading tool per se. Scratch is made up of a series of optional modules that include conforming, grading, reformatting and plug-ins. It is designed to work by assembling image sequences from networked or local drives into a timeline that reflects a cut-list or EDL. That's the first module you get AFAIK and everything else is built upon that. The editorial tools are very limited. You can add color grading to that or you can use other color grading systems in conjunction with Scratch. The color grading module is quite good, so many folks use it as the "hero suite" and staff it with a good colorist.

The big advantage daVinci offers is real-time processing, but that is mainly true of daVinci 2K and older hardware-based versions. The main complaints in the DP's quote seem to be lack of a still store for reference frames and rendering. All software based systems (including Scratch) require render and most of these units have ways of working with reference images in the hands of the right operator. Sounds like the original problem was more operator inexperience - mixed with incorrect expectations/assumptions - than anything else.

- Oliver

OliverPeters:

DS and Sym are geared towards 601/709 color space

True of Phony, not of DS, and particularly not with the forthcoming version.

Regards,
Tone :)

Tony,

You are right. I stand corrected. Unfortunately we don't know if the original quote was referring to SN or DS or even which version.

- Oliver

I'm sorry to say that as a DS user and a DP, in IMHO, DS is not a dedicated grading tool. In dedicated I mean : what a DP can work with while finishing his work : Grading.

You can use DS to grade but do it alone without pressure. Today you can't ask any DP or client to wait for a render... even for a secondary CC (selective CC)!!!

Com'on Color does various secondary and blurs in RT!

DS is not a CC tool in the PoV of a DP and not a DI tool for any film post house out there (yes it can conform 2k/4k).

A lot of people (including me) would love to see AVID take this box and push it to a real DI tool.

Patrick

tresch:

IMHO, DS is not a dedicated grading tool

No one said it was. We said it could be used to grade and the results with the right operator could be good. I've done grading with a client in the room on both Symphony and DS and they've been happy with the results. I'm not sure what you mean by "a DP can work with". DPs are the client in the room. The colorist should first and foremost reproduce what the DP had in mind when the shot was filmed or taped. That can be done with the primaries. Beyond that it's all playing in an attempt to "recolor" and "relight" the shot in post. Most good colorists are much farther ahead of most DPs in what can be done in post. Unless a DP has spent a lot of time directing transfer sessions for commercials in daVinci rooms, they really don't know much about what is possible. Your background as both a DP and a DS operator is highly unusual.

tresch:

Today you can't ask any DP or client to wait for a render... even for a secondary CC (selective CC)!!!

I do it all the time on FCP, Color and Media Composer jobs. The trade-off is price per hour and most clients are used to that. I've done DIs (as a client) in a Scratch room used for conform and grading and I can certainly tell you that tons of time was spent on rendering. Yes, you could see grading in RT, but not with guaranteed frame rate nor sync audio.

tresch:

Com'on Color does various secondary and blurs in RT!

Not on the systems I've used, plus I find the quality of the blurs unacceptable.

Would a daVinci be better? Most likely, but that depends on operator. I've supervised plenty of daVinci sessions where the colorist was brain dead and I felt like yanking him out of the chair and doing it myself.  ;-)

- Oliver

tresch:

you can't ask any DP or client to wait for a render... even for a secondary CC

Well, at IBC you'll see.....

... oh no, the NDA Police have got me again...

T ;-)

There is an Ad in this months Televisual magazine (Uk Trade Mag) showing a picture of the control surface of the Pandora Revolution grading system, and revealing that they are launching a new product called "Revo Express"

The Ad says "A whole new level for non-linear data grading in association with Avid and PCIe"

"For your invitation to a private demonstration in London on the 11th and 12th August email revoexpress@pandora-int.com"

I am in Rome, so I cannot attend. Could someone else go and then tell us all about it.......

The league of DI work ask for more than primary HSL adjustement. So CC is a creative process more like a painter adding the Finaltouch to his work....

I see the potiencial of DS over any Phony or Scratch (wich can't play sound BTW) or Davinci, Lustre, Baselight... Is that it integrates the best UI (IMHO) with the most versatile tools: conforming, editing, compositing, now it has to make a huge step forward to break the limitations that have being burrying DS since 2005. Keep on developping compositing / restauring tools and kick the ass of the CC tool to reach n1 level!

You can CC on Media Composer if you like to work on a platform with a 1998 standard. This is not what the leading NL company in the world has to put as goals in the 21st century.

Patrick