Colour is the least understood stage of post-production and the one that most visibly separates professional work from everything else. It is also routinely reduced to a single click, which is why so much competently shot footage still looks like footage.
Correction and grading are two different jobs
Colour correction is technical. Every shot gets balanced — exposure set, white balance neutralised, contrast normalised — so the whole timeline starts from an honest, consistent base. Nothing creative happens here. It is the equivalent of tuning an instrument.
Colour grading is creative. Once everything is neutral, the look gets built: warmth pushed or pulled, contrast shaped, specific colours isolated and steered, attention directed within the frame.
Grading without correcting first is the most common mistake in amateur post. Apply a look to shots that were never balanced and you amplify the inconsistencies rather than hiding them — which is exactly why a LUT makes some shots look great and others look broken.
Why a LUT is not a grade
A LUT is a fixed mathematical transform. It applies the same adjustment to every frame regardless of what is in it. That works when the footage exactly matches the conditions the LUT was built for, and falls apart the moment anything differs — different camera, different light, different skin tone.
A grade is shot-by-shot. It responds to what is actually in the frame. That is the entire difference, and it is why one takes seconds and the other takes days.
What the work actually consists of
Shot matching
The unglamorous majority of the job. Footage from two cameras, or from the same camera three hours apart, will not match. Making a sequence feel like one continuous piece — rather than a collection of clips — is most of what a colorist is being paid for, and it is invisible when done well.
Skin tones
The most important and most frequently botched element. Skin has a very narrow range of believable values, and audiences detect errors instantly even when they cannot name them.
This is where stock LUTs fail hardest. Most are built and tested against a narrow range of complexions, which is why they so often render darker skin muddy, grey or oddly orange. Correcting for that is qualifier and secondary work — isolating skin and treating it independently of the rest of the frame, shot by shot.
Secondaries and power windows
Isolating a region — a face, a sky, a jacket — and adjusting only that. This is how attention gets directed. A subtle brightening of the face against a darkened surround reads as nothing in particular to the viewer, which is the point.
Film emulation
Halation, grain structure and print response, when the project calls for it. Used well it is nearly imperceptible. Used heavily it becomes the subject of the image rather than a property of it.
When you need a dedicated colorist
- Footage from multiple cameras or shot across several days
- Skin tones that need to be right across a range of complexions
- A specific reference or look the project has to match
- Anything representing a brand or artist long-term
- Delivery to broadcast or streaming with technical colour specs
You probably do not need one for straightforward single-camera coverage where consistency is the only requirement — a competent correction pass will do.
What to send a colorist
- Camera originals, not transcodes or exports. Every generation of compression removes latitude the grade needs.
- A locked edit. Grading a cut that then changes means grading it twice.
- Visual references. Stills, a film title, a previous piece. "Make it cinematic" communicates nothing; a frame communicates everything.
- Your delivery specs. Codec, colour space and destination platform, up front.
Working with me
I grade my own productions and take standalone colour work for other filmmakers, editors and agencies — in Baltimore or remotely from anywhere. Send thirty seconds of representative footage and you will get an honest read on what the grade can achieve before anything is booked.
Frequently asked
Correction is technical — balancing exposure, white balance and contrast so every shot is neutral and consistent. Grading is creative — building the look that gives a piece its mood. Correction must come first; applying a look to uncorrected footage amplifies inconsistencies rather than hiding them.
No. A LUT is a fixed transform applied identically to every frame regardless of content. A grade is built shot by shot in response to what is actually in each frame. That is why a LUT can make some shots look good and others look broken.
You likely do if the project uses multiple cameras, was shot across several days, needs accurate skin tones across a range of complexions, has to match a specific reference, or represents a brand long-term. Straightforward single-camera work often only needs a correction pass.
Camera original files rather than transcodes, a locked edit that will not change, specific visual references, and your delivery specifications including codec and colour space.
Most stock LUTs are built and tested against a narrow range of complexions. Applied broadly they frequently render darker skin muddy, grey or unnaturally warm. Fixing this requires isolating skin with qualifiers and grading it independently, shot by shot.