• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Whats better for Color in a film?

rogypro

rogypro

Would it be better to color correct in post production, or to try to set the color on the cameras settings before you record??

i figure its probably on the camera... but if it doesn't come out the way you want it, wouldn't it be more difficult to fix in post?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
rogypro said:
Would it be better to color correct in post production, or to try to set the color on the cameras settings before you record??

i figure its probably on the camera... but if it doesn't come out the way you want it, wouldn't it be more difficult to fix in post?
Click to expand...

It's not colour correction unless you're doing it after something's been shot. Applying a look or picture profile on the camera can be useful, but it's not going to make your shots match up.

Where possible, I like to record with a flat or 'cine' picture profile on the camera - usually artificial sharpness down as low as it will go, and contrast and saturation reduced slightly. This will give me more latitude and more options in post-production. If you apply a look in-camera, you won't be able to change it drastically at a later date.

So, the best work-practice as far as I'm concerned: record a flat, uncontrasty picture; colour-correct to match different shots in a sequence; grade it/apply a "look".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
thats up to you. like chilipie said, shooting it flat leaves u more options in post production but getting it as close to the final result in camera is the method i prefer so there are just minimal adjustments in post production reducing image degradation.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ernest Worthing said:
reducing image degradation.
Click to expand...
Color grading really isn't image degradation.

Also, if you crank the settings on the camera all out of whack you're pretty much stuck with that -- and are likely clipping some of the image information. At that point, THAT is image degradation.

Light well. Shoot with neutral camera settings, adjust in post. That not only gives you the most 'options' (even though that should ideally be decided long before the camera rolls, since it will dictate costumes and sets) but it also ensures the largest amount of image data actually gets captured.

Don't clip whites or blacks, shadows and highlights should all fall somewhere within the small range that camera can expose at the same time. These can then rather easily be pushed further apart in post. Considering the only tools on board the camera for color control are really saturation and white balance -- I suppose contrast figures in too -- that's not much control. You will be much better off leveraging the power of your post production workflow to dial in the look you're after.

After all, there is a reason it's done that way on high budget features. ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
who's talking abt cranking the settings all out of whack?

a lot of the things we do in post production do degrade the image.

and when i say have confidence in urself and get as close to the final result as possible, i mean a lot of different things like, if u want a blue tint, use gels and have ur lighting looking blue instead of using a preset or filter in post production.

i guess its kinda like the jpeg vs raw debate in photography. i prefer to get as close to the final result as i can but depending on the camera sometimes i find it better to actually shoot flat and correct in post.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
The only thing I would add, is I wouldn't desaturate your image in-camera...you don't want to tweak your colors in-camera. As said above, you want to retain as much image information as possible, so you can play with it in post.

If you desaturate your shot in-camera, you won't be able to pull out the colors you may want later in post.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
My thought is that you get your look in camera... and to know what you need so that your post grading works, shoot a bunch of lighting/grading tests... that way you know what you need in camera and in post...

It'll be a combination of both that gets you the look you want...
Even in the celluloid days ;) Stuff was color graded in post using optical filters in the printer.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
knightly said:
My thought is that you get your look in camera... and to know what you need so that your post grading works, shoot a bunch of lighting/grading tests... that way you know what you need in camera and in post...

It'll be a combination of both that gets you the look you want...
Even in the celluloid days ;) Stuff was color graded in post using optical filters in the printer.
Click to expand...

i know color grading is needed there as well but i was talking about the extent of post production. i understand the reasons behind shooting raw or superflat is u dont have raw capabilities but i think ppl now are just thinking that is the better way to do things when both have their place depending on the equipment and situation.

M1chae1 said:
Most American women have celluloid all over the place.
Click to expand...

rofl! and may god bless them...:bow:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
My goals on set for cinematography are to capture as much information as possible. When I light, I have my post production in mind. Frequently this is by making sure I have well defined Darks, Mids and highlights (all within the latitude of the camera of course)... that way, I know what parts of the image I'll be adjusting later when I am in my color correction.

I recommend that anyone responsible for capturing useable images on set sit down and really play with a color corrector of some sort... push the sliders all the way to one side, then the other, just figure out how far you can push stuff before it goes all fall-aparty. That way when you look at the monitor on set, you can add light to the shadows to give your self information down there, you can dial down the highlights a bit to get them within range... you can make sure your key side of your subject is correctly exposed in camera so that when you have to push or pull them to fit the look you're going for, you have the information (80-85% for light skin, 60-65% for dark). You can make sure that your fill side has enough contrast from the key side that you can manipulate it separately, but that it's close enough that pushing and pulling it won't break the image down.

Generally, you can darken stuff for free, but if you have to lighten something in post, you're risking exposing all of the grainy blecchiness that is video noise. So even if it looks just a touch to cheery in camera, you can change that in post, whereas trying to add light in post will make it look like a horror film (at least for cinematographers).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
knightly said:
...........................
Generally, you can darken stuff for free, but if you have to lighten something in post, you're risking exposing all of the grainy blecchiness that is video noise. So even if it looks just a touch to cheery in camera, you can change that in post, whereas trying to add light in post will make it look like a horror film (at least for cinematographers).
Click to expand...

So true (unless the footage is overexposed: blownout white will become blownout grey ;) )!
Few weeks ago I graded a short film (from a graduating filmstudent) and a lot of shots were heavily underexposed (the 'highlights' at 50 on the 30-100 scale), while some other shots in the same scene were properly lit. I had to light things up a bit: noise-horror!! (It was shot on HDV.) Something I knew would happen, but I had to explain it to the graduating director.

Besides the in-camera vs. post discussion one should not forget the power of art-direction and styling. Art-direction can leave a color out of the picture or make a color dominant. In other words: if you want a 'blueish feel with no warm colors': don't wear burning red trousers and don't use that bright orange designer sofa! ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top