[Tig] Re: Lustre Review
sklein54 at earthlink.net
Wed Mar 23 21:42:47 GMT 2005
Not to further propogate but, established colorists (colourists for those who are inclined) are in demand to their clients, Cinematographers and Directors as trusted and powerful collaborators in the filmaking process. This can range from the faith it takes on set to light for the close-up and just pull back for the master cause you know it'll be handled to making the day because you know they can match in the last page of the script that would have to wait for the next shooting day if they were working with someone they didn't trust.
It's also inventing a new look and feeling for a piece, testing it and selling it's concepts and cost to the studio. Why would the studio want to take high priced talent and their rates into an arena that they are essentially not needed for? Can a 'super-editor' learn this wealth of experience and where the guardrails are? Yes. Are they artists who deal with this and only this aspect day in and day out for years and sometimes decades? No.
Specialization, my friend.
That's why there's a rudder man and a rigger (and a captain) on a race yacht. It's better it you want to win
From: Studio Post Telecine <telecine at studiopost.com>
Sent: Mar 23, 2005 12:17 PM
To: tig at tig.colorist.org
Subject: [Tig] Re: Lustre Review
Thanks to Chris Genereaux for supporting the TIG.
As a colourist facing the changing times it is indeed interesting to see a
sort-of hands-on review, but it would appear that the reviewer is 'going
from the literature' to a certain extent.
ROFLMAO at 'producers avoiding facilities that 'lack Lustre'... thats a good
But I am intrigued by the suggestion... to whit...
"Many systems developers I???ve spoken to share the view that DI systems
should not infringe upon the editing domain, and that DI systems should keep
editing capabilities to a minimum. I have no doubt that this is a view
propagated by colourists, who have no desire to learn a lot of complicated
editing tools that they will never use."
If you've spent any time with some of the white papers produced on this
subject (ie., but not restricted to, digitalPraxis, et.al.) that colourists
should, for the most part, be eliminated from production. The real work
should instead be done by a super-editor, who will take care of the colour
as the project takes shape. Why else include 'colour correction' tools on
Symphony, DS, etc.(a lot of complicated ... tools that <editors> will never
use.)... or would this be yet another view propagated by colourists?
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 6 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
participate in the tig wiki pages at http://tig.colorist.org/wiki
Tig mailing list
Tig at tig.colorist.org
More information about the Tig