16 and 32 bit color correction - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > And Now, For Something Completely Different... > The Archives > 2nd Unit Television

2nd Unit Television
Companion discussion forum for the 2nd Unit TV web site.


 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old November 1st, 2007, 12:35 AM   #16
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,719
Glenn thank you for confirming what I have always found to be true. I agree about the 8 bit yuv part. This is why I usually try to work in 8 bit RGB although with camera footage this gets kind of hard to do.
Thomas Smet is offline  
Old November 1st, 2007, 07:19 AM   #17
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
Glenn...

Aren't there some other benefits to 10 bit processing that haven't been mentioned? If you work in 10-bit space for CCing, banding is less than when working in 8-bit, regardless of the bit depth of the original file? If output has to go back to 8-bit space, the tradeoff then becomes one of how well the conversion is dithered back to 8-bit.

Or have I missed the point of Thomas' question.
Bill Ravens is offline  
Old November 1st, 2007, 11:46 AM   #18
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,750
Er... it depends on what you're talking about??

You need to specify where the 10-bit is occuring. Is it:
A- Converting your 8-bit Y'CbCr footage to a 10-bit intermediate. (There might be different ways of doing this. The simplest way of doing this... padding with 0s... doesn't help you.)
B- What bit depth you're passing from filter to filter.
C- If you render to an intermediate here (e.g. render to new track), what is the bit depth of the intermediate.
D- Output bit depth. e.g. 8-bit R'G'B', 10-bit SDI, etc. etc.

Last edited by Glenn Chan; November 1st, 2007 at 12:33 PM.
Glenn Chan is offline  
Old November 1st, 2007, 12:29 PM   #19
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
I'm assuming what I would consider to be the optimised workflow, i.e.:

1-Original m2t file is 8 bit, converted to 10 bit intermediate(like with CFHD)
2-CC in vegas8 with 32 bit float
3-output back to 8 bit space, WMV or short form MPEG2 for SD-DVD distribution.
Bill Ravens is offline  
Old November 1st, 2007, 06:51 PM   #20
Trustee
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 1,719
I think it only helps if you convert to a 10 bit format first.

For example if you load a 8 bit image into Photoshop and switch the color mode to 16 bit it doesn't help at all. I tried this in After Effects as well. I will have to try a few other programs but I think it pretty much comes down to it takes too much processing which is what a intermediate format does anyway. Since the video is getting converted they can try to blend and smooth the bit depth. At least this is how I think they are doing it. Kind of how if you convert a 24 bit image to a 8 bit image and you can add dithering so you do not see the banding.

As far as I can tell though if you just pop in a 8 bit format and try to work with it in a 10 bit color space you will not really gain anything at all. Unless there is a color tool out there that will up sample the color depth on the fly in RT but I don't think there is.
Thomas Smet is offline  
Old November 1st, 2007, 07:11 PM   #21
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,750
??

(I don't understand your last message Thomas.)

Quote:
1-Original m2t file is 8 bit, converted to 10 bit intermediate(like with CFHD)
2-CC in vegas8 with 32 bit float
3-output back to 8 bit space, WMV or short form MPEG2 for SD-DVD distribution.
I don't think step #1 necessarily helps. I haven't tested Cineform carefully though.

As far as outputting goes, you might want to output to a Cineform intermediate (or some other high quality format). From there make all the versions you need. For Vegas, you'll need to pay attention to levels and color space conversions.
Glenn Chan is offline  
Old November 1st, 2007, 08:33 PM   #22
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
Yeah....
Mostly just my theoretical workflow. I've made the same experiment in Photoshop. Start with an 8 bit image. perform a CC on the image and look at the histogram...banding all over the place as the color gamut gets stretched out. Upgrade the original to 16 bit and do the same CC. Look at the histogram and you'll see the banding is nowhere near as bad. I suppose the upgrading process extrapolates a lot of color data where there wasn't any in the 8 bit image. You NEVER get something for nothing...one of the laws of physics. But, you can minimize the price(penalty) you pay.You guys understand the internal processing better than I do. Why oh why isn't CFHD used as a delivery format? I'd gladly suffer shorter record lengths in exchange for higher quality images. Guess it's the same reason there aren't pro-sumer videocams on the market with CF card media.
Bill Ravens is offline  
Old November 1st, 2007, 08:52 PM   #23
Inner Circle
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,750
Quote:
Why oh why isn't CFHD used as a delivery format? I'd gladly suffer shorter record lengths in exchange for higher quality images.
For various workflow reasons it might be a bad idea.

A- No RS-422 control. (Until recently.)
Most systems work off RS-422 control + SDI... one of the widely-supported standards in the broadcast industry. And I mean a real standard that works 100%, unlike HDV or MXF.
B- Sending hard drives around can be more expensive, and you don't have that archive solution / shelf life.
C- File format incompatibilities and other software incompatibilities would break the system.
D- No insert editing. (Convenient...) And the "deck" doesn't add timecode burns in real-time, which is useful when you need to make screeners of your master.
Glenn Chan is offline  
Old November 5th, 2007, 11:34 PM   #24
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 565
I wanted to state that VEGAS now supports 32 Bit calculation (optional, find it under "properties")

ULI
Uli Mors is offline  
Old November 23rd, 2007, 10:48 AM   #25
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Los Angeles, Ca USA
Posts: 542
I've used waveforms since the early 90's. I don't believe that the 0 to 100 IRE scale can be correctly configured in a linear fashion when it comes to codec assimilation. So all of these color correction systems are flawed because they mistakenly think that the codecs should be linearly allocated.
Alessandro Machi is offline  
Old November 23rd, 2007, 10:56 AM   #26
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: santa fe, nm
Posts: 3,264
Images: 10
SMS acknowledges the inaccuracies inherent in a nonlinear gamma by allowing you to select linear gamma or gamma 2.22 with 32 bit floating point math. There are other issues related to using a linear gamma that keep it from being "mainstream" as you suggest.
Bill Ravens is offline  
 

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > And Now, For Something Completely Different... > The Archives > 2nd Unit Television

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:14 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network