[Tig] Premature Death of SR

Color dwooldridge at mac.com
Mon Mar 21 17:05:54 GMT 2011


I agree with Crag,

Bashing film on the TIG / Telecine Internet Group.   What are you thinking? 
Maybe you should go lurk on the Red user group.. 

These days a mixed bag is the norm..   
Some shots just don't work with digital (rolling shutter) some shots don't work shooting film.. (the camera size) 
I still love well exposed film.. "Grain like ants.."  Not on any of the features I've worked on lately.. 
Well, maybe the occasional unexposed shot that gets pushed way to far..   With film at least I have the range to hit the mark.. 

Anyway,
I'll be happy to work with whatever the filmmaker decides to use.   A frame is a frame...  :) 


Darin Wooldridge
DI Colorist _ Technical strategist
Technicolor Digital Intermediates
818-653-3918-cell
DI.Colorist at me.com



On Mar 21, 2011, at 5:13 AM, G. Conners wrote:

> Sohonet http://www.sohonet.co.uk sponsors the TIG.
> Digital Vision is patron of the TIG.
> Marquise Technologies supports the TIG.
> Colorist Directory at http://tig.colorist.org/wiki/Category:Colorist
> ====
> 
> I'm with you guys, Craig hit it on the head. Remember the House MD episode
> shot with the Canon 5D? It cost just as much to shoot digitally as it
> currently does on 35MM. They had to do a ton of post processing to try to
> get it to look like film. It was interesting to watch I thought but it
> didn't save them any money and didn't look like film. I spent a few years in
> the episodic world, I don't think they're ready to jump on the digital
> bandwagon. Someone on an earlier Tig post said, basically episodic TV has a
> work flow in place that works well and is very predictable.
> 
> They're not dropping film anytime soon because digital is cheaper. Many
> editors end up with a lot more to look at on digital shoots, much of which
> is useless. Shooting a show digitally that takes twice as long to post &
> process and costs just as much, what's the point. The post world in general
> is driven by the bottom line, digital doesn't cut it at this point for the
> episodic part of television.
> 
> Greg Conners
> Freelance Color Grading Artist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Greg Conners, Freelance Color Grading Artist
> 
> Online Resume - http://www.linkedin.com/in/gconners
> 
> 
> IMDB Credits - http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2178122/
> 
> Show Demos - http://exposureroom.com/members/hdcolorist/videos/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Wise men talk because they have something to say, fools talk because they
> have to say something"
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Paul Korver <paul at cinelicious.tv> wrote:
> 
>> Sohonet http://www.sohonet.co.uk
>> 
>> sponsors the TIG.
>> Digital Vision is patron of the TIG.
>> Marquise Technologies supports the TIG.
>> Colorist Directory at http://tig.colorist.org/wiki/Category:Colorist
>> 
>> 
>> ====
>> 
>> Here Here Craig.  I'm all for tapeless workflows (from digital or film),
>> but free digital dailies??  Maybe Jeff wouldn't mind if Cinelicious and
>> Optimus just sent all the Phantom CINE 2K Raw files over to Color Image Post
>> for grading output to DNxHD with matching timecode for editorial.  That 6:1
>> ratio should be free right? :)  Apparently Jeff is speaking as the
>> owner-operator of a new post house that has chosen not to invest in telecine
>> or film scanning equipment.  Nothing wrong with that of course... quite
>> common lately... but it sort of gives some insight into why he is so down on
>> film.
>> 
>> Paul "not tired of grain" Korver
>> Principal
>> Cinelicious
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 20, 2011, at 10:40 PM, Craig Leffel wrote:
>> 
>> Sohonet http://www.sohonet.co.uk
>>> 
>>> sponsors the TIG.
>>> Digital Vision is patron of the TIG.
>>> Marquise Technologies supports the TIG.
>>> Colorist Directory at http://tig.colorist.org/wiki/Category:Colorist
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ====
>>> 
>>> Dude.
>>> 
>>> You do no one any good deed by posting here that digital processing and or
>>> shooting is automatically cheaper than film. Sure, I'm as tired of grain as
>>> the next guy, and there are digital formats I absolutely love.. But you
>>> don't have to pay for dailies? Really? Who pays for the editorial files to
>>> get made from R3d to Pro-res or Dnxhd? No waiting? what planet do you live
>>> on? Sure, if someone wants to edit directly with no lut, or straight off
>>> in-camera qt's, or if they really only want to edit in FCP.... I sorta get
>>> your point, which I think is weak at best. I don't know any commercial
>>> editor that doesn't want files to look good, be exactly right to edit with,
>>> and match TC to a higher res file for finish than what they are editing in.
>>> I realize that it's not the norm, but it certainly is in commercial land....
>>> And digital acquisition quite often means confused, time consuming, and
>>> costs a lot more to make / convert proper elements and store them / ship
>>> them. At least in my line of work. And you magically don't have to worry
>>> about digital storage for 50 years? Do you know something about storage
>>> arrays I don't??? Film is less archival and costs more to store than Digital
>>> files?? Really? 50 years?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Craig Leffel
>>> Senior colorist / Partner
>>> Optimus
>>> Chicago / Santa Monica
>>> 
>>>   ¥¥<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>> This has been a Tablet like transmission.
>>> 
>>> On Mar 20, 2011, at 8:20 PM, "Jeff and Jill Jones" <jeff-jones at att.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I'm sure film makers are rushing to add more
>>>> expense to their post (shooting film). You get to wait for your dailies.
>>>> . .
>>>> pay for lab processing. . . pay for a telecine suite to grade in. . .
>>>> have
>>>> film grain moving like ants over your image on an LCD or plasma and find
>>>> a
>>>> place to correctly store your film for what? . . Fifty years. That's not
>>>> too
>>>> big of an expense I guess. (sarcasm in use)
>>>> 
>>>> Jeff Jones
>>>> Colorist
>>>> Color Image Post
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> http://reels.colorist.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> http://tig.colorist.org/wiki3
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> http://reels.colorist.org
>> 
>> 
>> http://tig.colorist.org/wiki3
>> 
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> http://reels.colorist.org
> http://tig.colorist.org/wiki3



More information about the Tig mailing list