Mike Curtis of
hdforindies.com and I have been having an ongoing discussion regarding the future of Shake. I'm blogging it for purposes of prosperity.
Desktop Digital Intermediates:
Hi Mike,
Been reading your site for some time. Most enjoyable. Just a few comments on your latest entry about desktop "DI" work.
Firstly, from what I understand, Motion and FCP integrate closely, much like LiveType and FCP. Motion project files are treated like clips within FCP, and any changes made to the motion project are automatically reflected in FCP. Hopefully, FCP5 will see greater workgroup
Secondly, I'm curious to what you understand as 'desktop DI' and why you see it as a revolutionary. If you're acquiring on digital and finishing to digital, then why is having a digital editorial/post process particularly revolutionary? It ain't. DI for features are revolutionary because they offer tools to DoPs/Directors that tape-finish projects have had available for years. For the HD digikids (us), what DI offers is nothing more than what we've been doing for the last five years (If not longer).
If. oth, what you're really talking about is building a desktop system which could handle film acquired material and output to film, either at 2K, 4K or 6K then we'll be talkin' something significant for the 'indie' crowd who actually prefer to acquire and finish on film.
Mike then said:
Yeah, I'm talking about the latter.
there is some nice handoff between FCP & Motion, but there are some limits from what I saw demo'd at NAB.
Motion should ship in no more than 90 days, and I'll have a lot more to say at that time.
-mike
This discussion then lead into the Future of Shake:
Hey Mike,
Put this in the informed speculation category. One of my good mates is a shake op, arguably he's one of Australia's best (worked on Sky Captain, ROTK, Paycheck etc.). He's been complaining that Shake development has flounded since Apple bought the program. Yeah, they released 3 and 3.5, but he seems them as incremental improvements more than anything. He was watching a stream from Apple about CoreImage... and suddenly it clicked for him. He got me to watch the stream and we had a bit of a chat about Shake.
He thinks Shake 4 will be a BIG leap. It'll use the same node-based workflow as traditional Shake - but that may be about it. He suspects it'll make extensive use of CoreImage to accelerate overall process. It'll have be support for Quicktime, particularly 10 bit images (you have to use image sequences to get 10bit into Shake). He has some more Shake specific ideas of what we'll happen, but I'm not a shake op so I was a bit 'wha?'.
What I felt was important about the discussion was that it suggested the possibility of using Shake in a desktop DI setting with greater ease. Already one the labs over here already do some DI work using Shake... So making Shake better suited for that purpose would be great for HD Indies. After all, it already HAS a robust colour correction engine and support for 'power windows'. Only difference between what Shake can achieve now and a Da Vinci is that the latter is real time.... and is usually accompanied by a whole bunch of 'oooh ahhh' theatrics. If Shake can start using a GPU for real time previews then it'll be able to give a Da Vinci some run for its money.
From: Mike
To: Stu
The more I hear about Core Image stuff, the better it gets. And Apple could certainly get around that file sequence crap to get 10 bit working there. Have you come across any hard evidence (my blog speculations don't count) that discuss 10 bit (or greater) capabilities in Core Image? That'd be HUGE for FCP as well.
If there were a professional handoff/link between FCP and Shake 4, that'd be awesome too - the ability to open FCP projects in Shake (or at least an export from FCP) and do meaningful color correction that could fold back into FCP would be KILLER!
The $150,000 Nucoda color correction DI station is all based around realtime manipulation of images using carefully calibrated RT graphics card stuff.
Apple could blow the market out of the water...if they felt the market was worth it. We do have to keep in mind heavy DI work is a very, very, very small market. But if there were a high quality way to FINISH the film on Macs, and plenty of other tools to make encourage houses to stay Mac heavy....then that's a market.
Mike Curtis
HD For Indies - Hi Def Filmmaking & Post for Independent Filmmakers
http://www.hdforindies.com
mike@hdforindies.com
From: Stu
To: Mike
The more I hear about Core Image stuff, the better it gets. And Apple could certainly get around that file sequence crap to get 10 bit working there. Have you come across any hard evidence (my blog speculations don't count) that discuss 10 bit (or greater) capabilities in Core Image? That'd be HUGE for FCP as well.
Not at all. Perhaps if one of us has the time, it'd be worth searching the ADC forums? If Motion is any indication, then CI may only be 8bit currently. Seems a ridiculous limitation though - if I were apple, I'd use CI to make bit-depth as variable as possible. Don't want to run into the same limitations as Quicktime eventually did with audio.
Support for 16bit linear RGB would be wonderful. Would make working with that reel-stream device awesome.
Apple could blow the market out of the water...if they felt the market was worth it. We do have to keep in mind heavy DI work is a very, very, very small market. But if there were a high quality way to FINISH the film on Macs, and plenty of other tools to make encourage houses to stay Mac heavy....then that's a market.
Exactly. I also think Apple's interested in creating -new- markets. If they managed to make Shake a viable DI tool, it also means its a viable 2K/4K HD tool.... Suddenly that becomes very interesting for a lot of people. I have no interest in owning Shake currently... if, however, they made it work with FCP then I'd be much more interested. I'm sure I'm not the only one in the same position.
From: Mike
To: Stu
If Motion is any indication, then CI may only be 8bit currently.
Well, graphics cards are 8 bit, and we have to work with that.
From: Stu
To: Mike
Well, graphics cards are 8 bit, and we have to work with that.
Bastards.
From: Mike
To: Stu
: )
Yeah. And it would be a HUGE shift to get 10 bit (or anything else) working on graphics cards, the premise of the whole industry would have to shift.
And now that everybody is moving to LCD panels, and they've only recently been physically capable of 256 shades (you could feed'em whatever but they didn't really show more than X amount of colors, less than 16.7 million), it makes it any even tougher (or at least vastly more) expensive proposition to get from 8 bit to 10 bit. So back to CRT's I'd imagine.
But 8 bit displayed with more bits handled internally would be cool. Truncate the bits at first, and as power is available, dither.
From: Stu
To: Mike
Yeah. And it would be a HUGE shift to get 10 bit (or anything else) working on graphics cards, the
Perhaps they won't bother. Simply use 8bit for preview but render in 10/16bit ? That seems to be the most important consideration.
And now that everybody is moving to LCD panels, and they've only recently been physically capable of 256 shades (you could feed'em whatever but they didn't really show more than X amount of colors, less than 16.7 million), it makes it any even tougher (or at least vastly more) expensive proposition to get from 8 bit to 10 bit. So back to CRT's I'd imagine.
I believe tha tsome companies are now making LCD HR units - expensive but apparently you can work in 16bit linear? People use them to work with Cineon (mapped to 16bit) I believe.
Stu.
From: Mike
To: Stu
I just read Martin's thing on CML about "2 years until"
What's out now that's useful? Frontniche? About $10K for 23" LCD.
As for 8 bit viewing and 10/16 bit for render, we still need to see it at some point to see the results.
From: Stu
To: Mike
What's out now that's useful? Frontniche? About $10K for 23" LCD.
NFI!
I spoke to the guys reselling Nucoda in Australia and they're recommending to their clients a dual display setup. A 23" LCD (HP or Apple) for pixel-res and a standard def CRT for colour accuracy. This is on a $250,000AU grading machine. So there's certainly market for thin CRT (which I think you blogged about ?) to stop people using two monitors.
As for 8 bit viewing and 10/16 bit for render, we still need to see it at some point to see the results.
True. But if the rumours about Shake *are* true and Motion was built as a 'tech test' for technology destined for Shake, I don't think Apple can afford to not allow 10bit/16bit output. Weta just bought 10 licences of Nuke. Sure, that's a drop in their massive ocean, but it seems a lot of facilities and compositors are growing anxious about the stagnation of Shake and are looking at alternatives (Fusion and Nuke, primarily). Especially when competitors are spreading FUD about the future of Shake on linux. Apple needs to add Z-Space to compete and then something else again to capture new customers AND get them to switch to OS X. CoreImage integration for real-time previews seems sensible, as long as output remains flexible. Seems that the only way they can do it to maintain linux compatibility anyway.
Stu.
From: Mike
To: Stu
NFI - what's that stand for?
So how do we view the results of our 10/16 bit render on our 8 bit screens? How can we tell if it's banding or not on our 8bit displays?
Glad to hear about the Nucoda stuff - that clarifies something I was thinking about the other day.
The only missing piece is that BlackMagic doesn't do 3:2 pulldown for 24fps, and Kona2 isn't working in 4:4:4 yet.
From: Stu
To: Mike
NFI - what's that stand for?
No F'ing Idea.
So how do we view the results of our 10/16 bit render on our 8 bit screens? How can we tell if it's banding or not on our 8bit displays?
Same way that effects houses are doing it currently. Simultaneously monitoring on production monitors and, if they're smart (which many of them aren't), doing final checks off film - which is what they did on LOTR. But thats what you can do when you have your own lab in house!
Glad to hear about the Nucoda stuff - that clarifies something I was thinking about the other day.
Oh? The LCD/CRT workflow or something else? Nucoda is impressive, although a little moody. They've built it to scale well which is smarter than the lustre system (which is 1K proxies only).
The only missing piece is that BlackMagic doesn't do 3:2 pulldown for 24fps, and Kona2 isn't working in 4:4:4 yet.
Both of those things will happen shortly.
I personally think that stable desktop DI is 2 years away. Is that what Martin was saying?
....and I want to see some GOOD handoff between FCP and Shake then. Like edit with DVCPRO HD and hand off to Shake to link to the uncompressed 10b444 stuff.
Have you tried the FCP XML to Shake conversion tools?
Support for the transitions, FX, color corrections, titles, etc. to hand off to Shake via Export.
Render out of Shake, and get a Pretty File that you could play back out of FCP to tape.
I'd pay for that.
Who wouldn't? Well, smaller production houses wouldn't... but certainly the mid range would. Shake is a far more powerful colour correction tool than FCP... means you could get da vinci like -results- from a desktop system.
BTW, do you mind if I blog this conversation?
Stu.
From: Mike
To: Stu
No F'ing Idea.
Didn't know that acronym. That's like asking vendors if their device has LRF support (little rubber feet).
But thats what you can do when you have your own lab in house!
Now where did I put that in house film lab....or there it is! Slipped under the couch.
Oh? The LCD/CRT workflow or something else? Nucoda is impressive, although a little moody. They've built it to scale well which is smarter than the lustre system (which is 1K proxies only).
Yeah, the SD CRT/LCD approach.
I personally think that stable desktop DI is 2 years away. Is that what Martin was saying?
martin was saying that it'll be a couple of years until LCDs are good enough for critical color work.
Have you tried the FCP XML to Shake conversion tools?
I didn't know there were any. Can you tell me the name of any products for this, or links, or something? First I've heard of it.
BTW, do you mind if I blog this conversation?
Blog this? Ha - I want to do the same thing. Feel free, my friend.
Skimmed yours just now - like your AU digiprojector rant. Also, my favorite choices for HBO miniseries would be Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash and/or The Diamond Age.
To: Mike
From: Stu
Didn't know that acronym. That's like asking vendors if their device has LRF support (little rubber feet).
Heh. Or calling wooden pegs C47s.
martin was saying that it'll be a couple of years until LCDs are good enough for critical color work.
Goes hand in hand, I think.
I didn't know there were any. Can you tell me the name of any products for this, or links, or something? First I've heard of it.
They're all free. I have not used any (yet):
http://www.highend2d.com/shake/tools/
Lists a number of shake tools, including ones to convert EDLs to shake, but the FCP one is:
http://homepage.mac.com/bjornfh/trans/howTo.html
(Its also listed on the 2d site).
I've got a short film coming up that I've been asked to grade, so I might use Shake to grade it , just for gags. Shake compatability interests me from a grading/finishing perspective, rather than a compositing perspective.... outputting image sequences to get them lasered to film.
Blog this? Ha - I want to do the same thing. Feel free, my friend.
Go ahead yourself. Far more people read your site than mine. I just wanted to give mine some production content :)
Skimmed yours just now - like your AU digiprojector rant. Also, my favorite choices for HBO miniseries would be Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash and/or The Diamond Age.
When I first read Snow Crash I was like 'OMG I want to make this movie'. I believe it has been optioned but sat in development hell. Of course, the rights would be beyond my meagre funds. I think it'd suit a movie more than a mini-series... but the Diamond Age would make a *great* mini.
As for the digital projector rant. I think its true. I'm not sure if you've heard much about the Aussie industry, but its in serious shit. Our movies make *no money* in this country. No one sees them. They're total box office flops. We're talking films costing $2mil AU and taking, say, $150,000 at the box office. They won't even make up the lost revenue in the aftermarket. The reasons for this are too complex for the scope of this e-mail... but if we're going to spend tax dollars on making movies, we might as well make the movies cheaper than we do currently. Digital cinema is the way to do this, I think. It also means we might be able to take advantage of our strong post infrastructure without worrying about the cost of film scanning. This is why I think a site like hdforindies.com is so valuable to Australian filmmakers - we're fighting for our survival and we need all the help we can get :)
feed | atom feed | photoFeed
