I have a video clip (not animation) that is uncompressed quicktime.  I know the color range is 0-255, so that would be RGB.

Is it best to import as RGB and let Avid bring the levels down to 601 on import, or import as 601 and throw a broadcast safe effect on it?  Those 2 methods give different results when looking at a scope.  What's the best choice?

addition to the initial post.  The Broadcast safe effect just clips the white and black levels.  Rather, adjusting the setup and gain to bring the video clip into acceptable range.

But still, which is the best method?

When you import, in the Import Settings, you are telling the Avid what color space the clip or image has.  That way Avid knows which way to handle the color space.  

I prefer to import as RGB (if the clip is RGB) because if you add the Broadcast Safe effect its just one more thing to render, plus you may forget to add the effect on some clips.   

If the visual content of your video clip is video footage, import at 601. If your visual content is primarily or exclusively computer graphics, import at RGB.

BTW, always use 601 when importing color bars.

Larry Rubin:

If the visual content of your video clip is video footage, import at 601.

So import as 601 and then color correct to bring into legal limits... cuzz as it stands, after import as 601, it's way out of bounds

lmerino:

So import as 601 and then color correct to bring into legal limits...

That's exactly right - I have to deal with this same issue every single day.

Where is the video footage from?  Doesn't FCP and Premiere work in RGB color space?  If so, then you would have to import that type of footage as RGB.  

I spent pretty much the whole day yesterday exporting QTs out of a clients old M100 system, but I made sure that it was 601 before doing anything.  Imported into Avid as 601 and it looks fine.  

The video clip is actually a quicktime in the DNxHD codec, but even from eyeballing it I can tell that it was exported from Avid as RGB so that the luminance is expanded out to RGB levels.

From what I can tell, if I import as 601, I can color correct the clip to bring the values down to 16-235.  Perhaps in the future this will give me some flexibility in having those values below 16 and above 235.  But, I have to remember to color correct each edit most of the time.

The flip side is that I could import as RGB and have Avid automatically correct the clip to be within 16-235 and not have to color correct each clip, but lose flexibility of over range values.

lmerino:

Larry Rubin:

If the visual content of your video clip is video footage, import at 601.

So import as 601 and then color correct to bring into legal limits... cuzz as it stands, after import as 601, it's way out of bounds

If you import an RGB signal as 601/709 you will need to add a colorgrade to correct it before you do anything else; you're ensuring that you have to add a possibly needless effect to achieve something that Avid can already do for you transparently.

FCP can be set up to provide either RGB or 601/709 output, but since it insulates the user from what it's really doing to a large extent, a lot of FCP editors aren't aware of the 601/709 setting.  It's quite common to get RGB media from that source.

To add to that confusion, I have also read that Quicktime, at times, really does encode the video at 601 levels, but when you play back the clip it expands it out to RGB on the fly.  So you really don't know what it may be.

jwrl:

a lot of FCP editors aren't aware of the 601/709 setting.  It's quite common to get RGB media from that source.

No doubt.  Probably 70% of the files I receieve from FCP folks are RGB and when you ask them to send 601 they have no idea what you're talking about.

The "it looks fine on my laptop" crowd has taken over.

The differences between levels of RGB vs 601 are very clearly evident when comparing the two on a WAVEFORM MONITOR. It shocks me how many people in this business today have absolutely no idea what a waveform monitor is, let alone how it is used - and it's the only tool you have that tells you the rock solid truth about your levels - every other display lies to you. If you're highly concerned about picture quality, a waveform monitor is essential to your tools.

Yea I was taking classes and they had a waveform monitor but never taught us how to use it. I wanted to know about it because I knew it was important, but they never got around to it. They just kept with the basics. Thats why I am on here so much, to learn.

dew:

Yea I was taking classes and they had a waveform monitor but never taught us how to use it. I wanted to know about it because I knew it was important, but they never got around to it. They just kept with the basics. Thats why I am on here so much, to learn.

Make a search about waveform monitors on the internet. There is useful information about it.

Yea, I gave editing classed a few years ago and nobody knew how to use it. Me, I learned to use a waveform and a vectorscope when I did linear editing.

The "it looks fine on my laptop" crowd has taken over.

Gripe number 300 about younger editors. We hire freelance editors on occasion, these guys never look at a scope during color correction. When I take over for final color, the producer will say I really like the look it had prior to your correction. I have to reply "great but it was totally illegal". Blacks smashed below 0 and colors blown off the scope.