COLOUR GRADING IN CAMERA

Last week I talked about the advantages of getting your image how you want it 'in camera', this saves me a lot of post production work, especially when it comes to grading. A lot of projects I work on have to have a fast turn around and I know that a good deal of that will be grading the footage right at the end to give it its final look and bring out the colours and depth that the production needs.

Raw Camera Image (Ungraded/Corrected) Slasher House 2

As a general rule, I try to get my image as close to the final product and the truth is, these days, I do very little colour correction after the fact as well. There are a lot of reasons for this, but mainly because its the that I personally like to work. As usual, Its not the right way or the wrong way, just my way.

As chance would have it a friend of ours, Georgie Smibert (Who played Deputy Howells in our latest feature film 'Cleaver : Killer Clown' and our Short 'Slaypril Fools Day 5' ) needed to shoot an audition for a film role she was applying for. As recompense to our actors giving up their time to work on our stuff we're always happy to help with showreel and audition stuff  (A good habit for No budget filmmakers to get into) and she wanted to shoot the audition as a 'scene'.

We made the choice to shoot the scene as if we would shoot it on a set, but just from her angle, as if it were just that take from the overall coverage, this was mainly so the other actors didn't distract from her performance.

Now Georgie was going to cut it herself on a basic windows editor (Movie Maker I think) and so therefore I knew she wouldn't have access to correction tools or anything like that. So we decided that we would get the footage that she needed ready to go straight from camera, but it also gave me a chance to take some reference pictures in terms of how I approach colour grading.

I do my colour grading and correction 'in camera', before I even start shooting, I hate to rely on post for 'anything' and as such I approach shooting in a very practical way, so that, for the most part, I'm just making cuts and not spending weeks on trying to get colours, tones, grades right. I think about it at the time (or usually months before hand) and then make sure I get the desired image there and then.

Original 'Flat' set up for room to Grade/Colour Correct

The camera I use currently is the Panasonic G7, which give me unbelievable control over everything from Curves, to Contrast to Saturation to Colour Temperature and beyond. All things that I would tweak in post otherwise I can now just do in the camera itself. I used to a lot of this on the Canon 600d too, although that gave me a little less control overall, its still had an unbelievable amount of control via its picture profiles and my last 3 features were shot on it, I had to do very little in way of correction or grading in post even on Canon's Rebel series. I'm fairly new to the G7, but so far it makes controlling my image input a breeze.

'In Camera' Colour Correction

To me the change is very noticeable and a much nicer image. I added a 'hair light' at the rear just to bring out Georgie a little more. But that was a cool LED with no gels or filters or anything, all the colour came and depth came from just working with the cameras Profile settings to get the desired level of Contrast and Saturation and of course Colour temperature and White Balance. I also enhanced the sharpness a little too, but thats really just lends a hand with focus and as we weren't doing any post at all this would really be my only chance to fix that.

The biggest thing I've found is the use of white balance and how it drastically effects the tone of the image, I was always advised to balance to white of existing light in the room, but really experimenting with the colour balance opens up a world of style right in your camera. I may do a colour chart to demonstrate how balancing to different colours effects the image, if you want something like this, let me know in the comments below, I tried finding one online, but so far, no luck.

Anyway back to Georgie's Audition, the scene in question was quite light and fairly comedic, So I went for a brighter, lighter colour to keep the tone light, pushing the cameras colour temperature toward a warmer Orange tone. If I were doing a Horror or a Sci-Fi or a Thriller I would make a drastically different choice in terms of what colours I would balance to. This is how I apply a grade 'in camera'. 

Now, obviously this approach gives you less control in Post, but for me that is the intention. It forces me think about the decisions I make and, of course, it forces me to be a little more prepared. Now balancing to different colours can give your image a completely different feel. I'll make these choices fairly early on in larger productions and do tests with lights/gels etc to get the look that I'm after. 

Adam Dillon (Nathan from Slasher House) dropped in on his way to the Premiere of our other new feature Hollower last weekend and I stole a moment from him to demonstrate the approach and the drastic difference it can make. I had my camera set for a a few different looks I'd been working on.

So this what the original 'Normal' image looks like. Set for the the rooms natural White Balance. A fairly standard shot. To grade it i would probably pull the curves out to make the shot a little more 'Flat', like in the first example (The G7 isn't really the best for shooting flat images, so you work with what you've got) but this is pretty close to how I would shoot, if I were preparing to do colour work in post. As you can see its a fairly bland image in terms of colour. Below I've worked on some quick picture profiles, just to show how much of difference shifting colour can change the tone and style of an image. 

Obviously its a fairly quick example. On set I'd take much more time in lighting my subject and  surroundings first, but for the sake of a quick reference of what I'm talking about, this should demonstrate it fine.

All of these images are raw JPEG frames from the camera (The Panasonic G7 allows you to save stills straight from the footage in camera), uploaded straight from the card. As you can see each Grade changes the mood of the image dramatically, each one of these grades was created 'in camera' by adjusting the cameras visual settings. I used a cool LED to give me a little back light, but that was it. My camera only stores 4 looks, but really the looks you can create using just your camera are almost infinite. This is before I've even started to bring other colours into the mix using gels/filters etc.

I understand some people just won't understand my approach, its extremely counter intuitive to the way most people have become used to working, you just have to look at a modern standard film workflow and how big a part 'grading' and 'colour correction' play in that to know why this approach won't suit everyone. It 'sometimes' doesn't suit what I'm doing either, as I talked about last week. If I can though, this is my preferred way to work, to me I see it like painting on set and its a lot of fun. 

This is just one of the many ways I work, and it suites me, it might not suit you, but for me filmmaking has always been about thinking outside the box and trying things that are new to me.  

MJ

IF YOU FIND THIS BLOG USEFUL. PLEASE SHARE. You can keep up to date with our filming goings on at our FACEBOOK PAGE :)

TO GRADE OR NOT TO GRADE

I was recently asked by a filmmaker friend, if he should shoot flat to give him some room to colour correct and grade in post or if he should use physical lighting to get the look he wanted. I thought it was an interesting question and it had me look at how I approach that aspect of filmmaking and how and why that has changed since I started making movies. 

Ungraded shot from
Code of Silence Music Video

If you've seen any of my work, you'll know how important colour is to me when I'm putting together ANY project. It is one of the first things I consider when I begin pre production. A lot of inspiration for this comes from Italian Director Dario Argento and his use of colour thematically across his work in the 70's and 80's as well as the fact that I grew up reading comic book and 'marvelling' at their use of vibrant colour as a language. As result colour always seemed like an equally important aspect of any visual medium to me. Especially filmmaking. 

Graded shot from Sinnergod/Blaze Bayley video 2012

Its strange to think that, even as short a time ago as the late 90's, colour wasn't given a lot of thought when putting together the look of a film. Go back and look at almost any big budget film shot in the 90's, they all have a the very same, flat, grey cinematic look, that not exclusive, but for the most part. I mean back in the early 2000's David Fincher was still considered a stylised 'out there' director and he was certainly one the directors who paved the way for this line of thought that 'colour' was, in many ways, as important as anything when telling a story. 

As we come closer to the new 20's, every film that appears in theatres is now heavily 'stylised' in its own right, a far cry from their 90's counterparts. Grading is now a permanent part of the workflow and it looks like its here to stay. So today I wanted to talk about my approach to colour and grading and how it has evolved over the last few years since I started making feature length films.

*Please remember, as with resolution, lighting, lens choice and compression, Colour and grading is a very small part of what makes an image look 'cinematic'.

TO GRADE OR NOT TO GRADE

Since I started filmmaking I've graded hundreds of projects. Being an early adopter of programs like HITFILM (Back when it was called AlamDV over a decade and a half ago) one of the programs primary functions outside of VFX was colour grading and it was a new an exciting tool for us as backyard filmmakers. Soon everyone was adopting it and grading became a huge part of the no budget workflow in a world where there had been no room for it before and it opened up a world of possibilities for us as visual storytellers.

The problem arose for me when I started to notice a trend, a well documented trend, that you've most likely come across before. All films started to look the same and when Hollywood finally took the tool to its full extension we started to notice that every film came with the same look. 

That 'Orange and Teal' thing that you now see on every big budget movie that hits theatres in this day and age. I hated it. Not the grading itself, I actually really like the look of a lot of these films, but just the fact that all films both low and high budget started to all just look exactly the same and in the medium of visual storytellers that is dangerous ground to walk on. In many ways, 'grading' films has made us lazy, its become the go to tool of the 'fix it in post' generation.

TO GRADE

When I made Slasher House (back in 2010) I didn't have the equipment or the know how to really get the look that I wanted for the film. I had a clear idea of what I wanted and how the final film should appear on screen, but I was left with the option of lighting it flat and colour grading it in post. The film, for better or worse, is known for its 'nuclear' grade' and, for the most part, taking the grading approach and pushing it as far as I did really helped get the film noticed. But for me, I just wasn't happy. It didn't feel natural, it felt artificial. It felt lazy.

Ungraded shot from +Slasher House 2010

Final Grade from +Slasher House 2010

 Grading is an extremely useful tool, when I'm pushed for time on set its sometimes easier for me to shoot with a flat profile and spend my time in post just getting close to the look I want. It is an extremely powerful in terms of setting tone and it can help tremendously if you are relying on your post production time.

Graded shot from the MychoTV web series. 2011.

I directed a web series in 2011, and we had very little on set time. Sometimes about 2 hours to shoot entire sequences and we just didn't have the time or the equipment to light the way I would want to, so shooting flat and taking care of it in post was the best way to go. Its very much the same story on a lot of music shoots, with limited time with bands or performers, I'll make the choice to shoot flat as possible and do the work in post afterwards. For short form stuff, its an approach that works great for me, but in terms of how I want stuff to look, its still a compromise.

The same thing happens when I'm shooting bright, daylight exteriors. Apart from work with colour temperature, there isn't really too much I can do in terms of lighting when I'm working on a low/no budget. So I'll usually make the choice to shoot smart with available light, shoot with a flat or neutral profile and make any adjustments in post if needed.  

For me, this comes with drawbacks, It feels artificial at times and thats not the aesthetic I look for when I'm shooting. After doing this for a couple of years I decided to rethink my approach.

NOT TO GRADE

Ungraded shot used in Legacy of Thorn 2013

For my next feature in 2013, Legacy of Thorn, I was determined to evolve the look of the film and made the choice very early on that I wanted everything to be as physical as possible and I decided that I wouldn't stop with just pour practical effects. I decided that I would shoot everything as I wanted it to appear in the final film 'in camera'. The result was far better, it felt more natural, more real. I'd never been happier with how one of my films looked and I knew, for me, that this was the way I wanted to do things from here on in.

The next too features I worked on had very little in the way of colour correction at all. In fact Cleaver : Killer Clown, had none apart from a couple of slight colour balance shifts and some adjustment to brightness and contrast in the odd shot to match colour, but again, for the most part the film footage you see on screen is the footage I shot in camera with nothing altered. 

Ungraded shot from Cleaver : Killer Clown 2014

After getting through 2 films using almost no colour correction at all, I felt that I had found comfortable space to work in, that really worked for me and the style that I wanted to bring to my films. Using combination of lighting, gels and colour temperature in camera I found it easy to get the look I wanted without ever having to run it through colour software at all. This had some huge benefits for me.

Ungraded shot from Hollower 2015

First off, because I was doing it this way it made me think about the film and its colours in a lot more depth, right down to props, costumes and even hair colour of my actors. The approach 'forced' me to look at how I was using colour to help tell stories and best of all, saved me, literal weeks in post production because the footage was as close as I wanted it to final product meaning that a large part of my post workflow suddenly just disappeared.



Now technically I actually DO do 'some' form of colour grading, the difference being that I do it 'in camera' before I even shoot anything, but I'll talk more about that next week.

SLASHER HOUSE 2

Graded shot from Slasher House 2010

When it came to Slasher House 2 I was faced with an 'interesting' dilemma. The look of the original film had been popular with the vibrant colours of the grade really standing out as a feature, but I had evolved my filmmaking style since then to use as much in camera lighting as possible. The challenge was taking the style of the original film and recreating it, physically, in camera.

The approach I took was using gels to emulated the colours and choosing costumes and locations as wisely as I could in order to keep the unique colour aesthetic, whilst helping it match the 'in camera' style that we had now employed in our filmmaking. This mixed with adjusting the cameras colour temperature and the contrast/saturation on my 'custom picture profile' helped me get the look I wanted, that has way more depth than I could ever add with a computer in post.

Ungraded shot from Slasher House 2015.

The added bonus of this, now that we're shooting our first 4K film, was that I could cut my footage with very little post processing, meaning I risk very little degradation in the image, which is more common when shooting compressed images. It also means that I can work faster and have a finished product in much less time simply by taking a little extra time on set getting it right.

________________________________________________________________

Overall the most important thing is that this is what works for me personally, everyone has their own style of working and their own way of doing things and above all, you should be finding the approach to the look of your film that makes you the happiest. 

Ultimately my advice to my filmmaker friend was, "do it however YOU want to do it, its your film after all". I understand the importance of both approaches and I've seen some amazingly well graded stuff that puts my stuff to shame, and the same is true when watching people get their look right 'live on set'. It doesn't really matter how you achieve what your looking for, its all about making YOUR films YOUR way. In the end, as always, thats all that really matters.

MJ

IF YOU FIND THIS BLOG USEFUL. PLEASE SHARE. You can keep up to date with our filming goings on at our FACEBOOK PAGE :)

EDITING 4K ON A BUDGET

One of the biggest complaints against using 4K is how it affects workflow when it comes to editing, this concern comes from the fact that shooting in 4k obviously creates way more data to manage. I'll admit that when I decided to make the jump to a camera that shoots 4K I too was concerned about how much it would slow me down, or even if I'd be able to do it at all.

I made the choice of getting a camera that could shoot HD 1080p very well, but gave me the option to shoot 4K when I was ready. 

Now my machines are both Mac, I find their build quality and functionally worth the amount I pay for them, people may disagree but I've edited on both low end Macs and high end PC's and personally have had no end of trouble when it comes to anything powered by Microsoft, which is a shame as their choices in editing software are actually more to my preference. 

My system spec for my 2011 iMac

Either way, this is just my opinion, editing on whatever you're comfortable with should be your main goal.

The truth was, however, that cutting on my 2011 out of the box iMac just wasn't as taxing as I had been led to believe. My machine has cut several features and dozens of music videos using Macs standard Graphics Card and only 4GB RAM. That sounds insane right? But it managed, not only fine, but actually quite fast.

Editing 4k on the other hand, well thats a different matter, but 3 months into editing a 4K feature and the same system handles it just fine. Pulling the footage from an external self powered USB 3.0 harddrive (which are very inexpensive at £60/$90 for 2TB, I consider that to be a very good deal.) and it really doesn't have any problem pulling the footage from it during the edit.

The problem it really has is playing back the footage in realtime. The computer really doesn't like it, even in 'Preview' or 'Quicktime' it struggles. The workaround for me was very simple and it should work in any non linear editor on any system.

Note : I did try this on Final Cut 7, but because of how the program uses your Memory it really just couldn't do it. But it works fine on programs like Hitfilm, Premiere Pro CC and FCPX (and probably Sony Vegas too, although I can't say for sure).   

___________________________________________________________

4K WORK AROUND

Creating ProRes LT proxies I was able to load the footage into a 1080 timeline (all of it) Like a strip of film and then leave it to render. depending on what I've shot, it usually takes around 20 minutes to render the 4K footage for a 3-5 minute scene on my current set up.

Then I just work my way through and remove all the footage I don't want and of course you are left with your scene. Its very similar to cutting and arranging a strip of celluloid.

After that I simply copy and paste the footage back into a 4K timeline, which is linking back to the 4K footage and then export. 

Now I have a 4K master that I can use to export my films to HD, whilst having both a better quality image AND my work ready in a higher resolution for when its needed down the line. All done on a low spec, lowest price, out of the box iMac. 

___________________________________________________________

PLEASE NOTE : I am aware of the Proxy media approach (creating a lower quality clip for editing) however this, for some reason, still causes major slowdown on a low spec system, which I assume is down to having an initial 4K timeline. My system even warns me that this will happen when I try it.
This work around is essentially a way of making your own proxies as you need them in your timeline without having a playback issue. 

P.S. Remember to empty your cache when done to remove the unused render files when done with your cut.
___________________________________________________________


Now this probably sounds backwards to most editors out there, and it is, for me too, but its a work around that saves me having to drop money I don't have on extra RAM and the result is fine. 

The fact is, it has made me a more efficient filmmaker, knowing that the more coverage I have to shoot means a more taxing time in the edit means that I shoot what I need to much more efficient standard to make my life easier when I come to cutting the footage. 

Raw footage from Panasonic LX100 : Slasher House 2

Is 4K harder to edit than 1080? Of course it is, you're dealing with 4 times the information and unless you're willing to drop extra cash on your system to make it top notch, then, like every other part of low budget filmmaking, you have to find a way to make it work.

My overall point here, is that, filmmaking overall is a series of challenges. From writing to production to post and you need to keep all of these thing in mind, overlooking the whole journey whilst you're working. It doesn't matter if you're shooting SD, HD, 4K, 8K or 50K, you should be thinking about your whole process from beginning to end and how what you are doing on set will affect your post production. 

Just remember that resolution is a very small part of what makes an image look great.

MJ

IF YOU FIND THIS BLOG USEFUL. PLEASE SHARE. You can keep up to date with our filming goings on at our FACEBOOK PAGE :)

3 REASONS WHY YOU CAN AND SHOULD BE SHOOTING 4K

Before I start let me just say, today, right now, in terms of film production, there isn't a necessity to be using anything more than the standard 1080 HD that ANY camera worth its salt comes fully equipped to shoot. 1080 is perfectly acceptable and then some and it will be for a long time. 4K is not a necessity by any means, At least not yet. That brings me to the main reason I decided to make the jump.

In the late 90's and early 2000's the video revolution was in full swing. Canon had released the XL1, which, thanks to a slew of indie horrors, including Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later (which was actually only partially shot on the XL1) became the go to camera for making video features on the cheap and soon places like Blockbuster had their shelves filled with some inventive (some not so much), low budget horror movies. It was a good time to be a horror fan.

Eventually the HD revolution began as the prices for High Definition tape and cameras finally started to come down and the tech became affordable for your average consumer. In 2009 I made an SD horror feature called Creepsville, exactly the same time the next year I shot my first HD film Slasher House. A year or so later when we started trying to sell them I noticed something disturbing.

A lot of the films I loved as I grew into adulthood were now facing extinction because they were we're shot in SD and without brand recognition they weren't being picked up for rerelease anymore. Most of these titles we're now being deleted from existence, from the point of view of the market anyway. It stands to reason that one day in the not too distant future we'll see the same happen to HD (1080). Which brings me to my first reason.

1. FUTURE PROOFING

For most distributors SD just wasn't an option anymore, they were interested as hell in the High Def film, but they told me in no uncertain terms that "SD just wasn't an option for them anymore" in fact they told me that "Anything produced before 1999 in terms of new films was not worth them taking on". I watched a lot of filmmakers face that struggle as we transitioned into the new High resolution technology (of course there were odd exceptions like Marc Price's Colin that slipped through) and failed to find a home for their Standard Def features.

There is now continued interest from distributors in my HD film Slasher House 5 years on, But no distributor wants to touch the SD Creepsville because its not 'viable' for them to try and shift Standard Definition programming anymore, even though ultimately the film wold end up on DVD which is of course Standard Def, distributors now demand a higher quality master.

So with that said, why wouldn't the same eventually happen with 4K? Well, it might, but the life of any films shot on 4k will be longer than anything shot in SD going forward. 4K resolution also boasts the size (from my understanding at least) as cinema screen resolution, which puts it just higher than digital protections lowest standard (2k). There is every reason to believe that we'll sat at this standard for a fairly long time, if not permanently.

2. ITS CHEAPER THAN YOU THINK

"Surely this cinematic quality comes at a price?" We'll yeah it does, but that price doesn't have to break the bank anymore and in 2016 is not really anymore than shooting 1080p. The truth is, that in the last year, 4K has become a very affordable option for everyone. I looked into shooting in higher resolution in 2014 when we came back from the Premiere of Legacy of Thorn and it just wasn't an option for me as a low budget indie with cheapest options being £4000, before adding tens tuff to make them functional.

Today you can start shooting out of the box for as little as £400 (or less if you buy used) as there are now many more options thanks to companies like Sony and Panasonic leading the charge to bring the tech to the everyday consumer. We're now talking the same price as Canon's latest Rebel (T*i) models but with the added bonus of four times the resolution.

The best part is that, this tech is becoming cheaper all the time, its all ready fallen to 10 times less than it was 2 years ago. Next year it'll be available for much less again and pretty soon, shooting in 4K will become the norm and thats a good thing. I mean, even your phones (mainly Samsung) have been shooting 4k for a couple of years now.

I've detailed a list of 4K options in Part 2 of this blog (coming soon) that range from solutions for the penniless filmmaker to something a little fancier for those with a bit more money to spend, but of course I've kept within the low budget ethos of this blog, It really is worth looking at the options out there now as you'll find...

3. IT REALLY IS BETTER THAN HD

Shot from Panasonic LX100 (4K) : Slasher House 2

This seems fairly obvious, as you are working with more resolution. But I often hear, and have been guilty of thinking it myself "How much difference can it make?". I have to say, in a few short months of shooting both HD and UHD (4K), even shooting 4K compressed to a MP4 container, I would say the difference is VERY noticeable and in a very positive way.

I was concerned that it really wouldn't make a difference, and that shooting 4K would ultimately be a large risk with added expense, but the second I got the rushes back from our first shoot I could see a clear jump in quality, even from the 1080 AVCHD that the same camera also shoots.

Shot from Panasonic G7 (4k) : Slasher House 2

Another worry a lot of people have is the expense of things like storage etc, Obviously the files are about 4 times larger. but buying new harddrives didn't break the bank too much as the prices are dropping so dramatically it set me back the same amount as I would have paid 2 years ago for quarter of the storage, so it kind of evens out, I got two 2GB usb3 drives for around £100 (one edit, one backup) and they run fine on my out of the box 2012 Imac (the cheapest you can buy too).

You should take into a account that a low end machine will struggle with 4K playback from time to time and if you don't have a butt load of Ram, you're gonna have a slightly slower machine when it comes to cutting, but I've found a decent work around that I'll talk about in Part 3 (Coming soon).

________________________________________________________

I'll try and cover elements here in more detail over the next couple of weeks.

Please note that 4k is not the be all and end all. Its important that you don't worry about this too much, if moving to 4K is an option, you should certainly consider it for the first reason alone, but its more important that you just keep making movies.

Whether it's on 8/16/35mm film, Analogue Tape, MiniDV, SLR, Compact Camera, your iPhone or a 'Red Max Ninja Dragon T2 Turbo : Street Edition', Don't let technology worry you its all there for one reason. To help you tell stories and in the end it really doesn't matter how you do that as long as you do it well.

MJ

IF YOU FIND THIS BLOG USEFUL. PLEASE SHARE. You can keep up to date with our filming goings on at our FACEBOOK PAGE :)