Thread: LUT DOWNLOAD: Comet_Trails

Page 2 of 15 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 144
  1. #11  
    too young to know what the hvx 'mojo' is about but I do prefer this over captainhooks LUT as a starting point. great work kholi!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,345
    Quote Originally Posted by ChristianHubbard View Post
    too young to know what the hvx 'mojo' is about but I do prefer this over captainhooks LUT as a starting point. great work kholi!
    Ehhhhh you MIIIIGHT want to try the LUT before you make that call haha. I think Cap's LUT gets you about 90% there, and it's just saturation a lot of the time. This one's more like you're still working with LOG and you'll need to decide if you're going to use a curve first, or primaries for luma, then you can get to the color work.

    But thanks for sure! Hopefully will have a chance to get some footage this week to show.

    SKYPE (best way to talk to me): Camera_Kholi | twitter
    Avery and Pete: Superseeds Feature Film Trailer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member CaptainHook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,186
    This is looking good Kholi, i like the idea that its used as an input LUT that keeps you log -> you then add an output lut to get you to "709" and do whatever you want/need in between.

    Could be interesting to mix and match input/output LUTs to achieve various looks. Or even look to create LUTs with the approach of:

    [INPUT LUT] - attempts to get the source into a more 'neutral' image removing green bias etc. (addresses 'known concerns' of the given camera)

    [LOOK LUT] - added into a node in the colour page with the idea of shaping the 'look' - users could create the own recipes etc and share

    [OUTPUT LUT] - to get out of LOG into whatever space needed like "709" etc. Remains fairly 'neutral' so user can skip the 'Look' LUT if they want to cook their own colour or just have a more 'neutral' image. I would then see both my LUT and your PanaMojo being made/modified to work as the middle "Look" LUT that you add to get the kind of vibe you want/need.

    Similar to the approach of ACES but still 'abusing' LUTs to try and create/share looks.
    Might seem overly complicated but i like the idea that if done well, the LOOK LUT and OUTPUT LUT could be camera agnostic and the INPUT LUT updated to work with say the upcoming BM4K, or any other camera the user wants. Then you still have the same 'look', and the input LUT is used to try match cameras (and you still do what a colourist mostly does manually in the colour page with matching shots etc). Perhaps it is just 're-inventing' ACES somewhat, but i also like the idea that it's community driven and people can share their work and benefit from each other and also get a bigger pool of "looks" with potentially less work in the long run.
    Blackmagic Design
    My BMD LUTs.

    **Any post by me prior to Aug 2014 was before i started working for Blackmagic**
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,345
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainHook View Post
    Might seem overly complicated but i like the idea that if done well, the LOOK LUT and OUTPUT LUT could be camera agnostic and the INPUT LUT updated to work with say the upcoming BM4K, or any other camera the user wants.

    I actually don't think it's over complicated at all. It was a thought that I had, but had no idea how to put it into words... this is pretty much it. So we have become accustomed to ETTR, but that's not what everyone DP will want to do. The "LOOK LUT" could offer a solution to ETTR, and then one for exposing on the nose, so to speak. Definitely agree with you, all in all.

    Perhaps the main thing's just to profile each camera with the same LUT (as you said, corrections for camera idiosyncrasies).

    That is definitely more work than I thought it could be, though, because you have to check a lot of different types of footage before you can even call it "okay" for working with output LUTs.

    x.x

    SKYPE (best way to talk to me): Camera_Kholi | twitter
    Avery and Pete: Superseeds Feature Film Trailer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #15  
    Senior Member CaptainHook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,186
    Quote Originally Posted by Kholi View Post
    That is definitely more work than I thought it could be, though, because you have to check a lot of different types of footage before you can even call it "okay" for working with output LUTs.
    Yep! The majority of time i spent on my LUT was hours of jumping around as much footage (and as varied as possible) making adjustments. Ultimately you have to comprise the "ideal" version of it since that's so shot specific and let the user take it the rest of the way with the footage they have. But this is a good thing anyway as you want people to still retain their own individual look, while helping out others not as comfortable working with colour. Originally i built it for myself to speed up my BMCC workflow, when i realized how useful it actually was i shared it. :P

    I'm going to investigate this INPUT->LOOK->OUTPUT idea next week when i have more time.
    Blackmagic Design
    My BMD LUTs.

    **Any post by me prior to Aug 2014 was before i started working for Blackmagic**
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #16  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    164
    Thanks for this work, Kholi. This is something that a lot of people will want, I'm sure. The flesh tones are a bit too magenty for my taste, but I'm sure that's easiely fixable. I appreciate the difficulty of creating a LUT that works with footage shot under many different conditions. Here's a suggestion FWIW. If you knew the exact color temperature of the light source you're shooting with, and you set that temperature in Resolve, you would take the white balance variable out of the equation. Based on my own experience in color correction, you would probably want to create two LUTs - one for 3200K and one for 5600K.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #17  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,345
    Quote Originally Posted by Ralph B View Post
    Thanks for this work, Kholi. This is something that a lot of people will want, I'm sure. The flesh tones are a bit too magenty for my taste, but I'm sure that's easiely fixable. I appreciate the difficulty of creating a LUT that works with footage shot under many different conditions. Here's a suggestion FWIW. If you knew the exact color temperature of the light source you're shooting with, and you set that temperature in Resolve, you would take the white balance variable out of the equation. Based on my own experience in color correction, you would probably want to create two LUTs - one for 3200K and one for 5600K.
    There are two things with skin:

    1. Some people are just naturally "red". That will really confuse the process, but if you go back and look at content shot on film, people are all sorts of shades, red included.

    2. I actually agree with you, though, that it's slightly too magenta. Weird thing's that it's hard to split the difference, I'm just on my way back into the footage archive to see if I can balance this outside of primaries/offset.

    Blackmagic footage... the inherent green cast won't go away with White Balance, it also seems to have an effect on everything else, so that's the main goal of balancing things in the LUT, at least for me!


    And on color temp: I'm not SURE so someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it being an input LUT means that you don't necessarily have to worry about WB versions? However, I know for sure that you have to get extremely close or nail white balance for it to work, unless you're going for something different.

    On the other hand, you should nail white balance, anyway.

    SKYPE (best way to talk to me): Camera_Kholi | twitter
    Avery and Pete: Superseeds Feature Film Trailer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #18  
    Senior Member CaptainHook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,186
    I do kinda think the camera looks better shot in daylight (CMOS and all - weak blue channel, etc) and so optimizing for 3200k is something i've thought about. But i tend to do it in a node before my LUT and i figure getting into the nitty gritty like that is so personal preference anyway.. I always find colour saturation not quite 'right' with tungsten shot footage on the BMCC (and some other cams too).

    Also when shooting 3200k sometimes taking the chroma/luma split further and splitting chroma into separate RGB nodes (can't wait for resolve 10 to make this a one click operation!) and applying more NR to blue channel helps.. Blah blah blah. :P
    Blackmagic Design
    My BMD LUTs.

    **Any post by me prior to Aug 2014 was before i started working for Blackmagic**
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #19  
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,345
    Alright, the posts on Tungsten and Daylight put me on toward figuring out if versions were needed. My conclusion's that for ProRes, yes indeed. I went on to create a 3200, 4500, and 5200/5600 Input LUT. So, if you're anywhere in those you should be able to find a base.

    In the event that you have multiple settings on a few clips, you can set your 3D Output to whatever you'd like in the project settings, then do your 3D Input (3200, 4500, 5200/5600) on the first node of the clip(s).

    Going to investigate a 7400 Kelvin version, as well, for very late day.

    Now, for RAW? Just my personal opinion, but it seemed unnecessary. In the RAW tab, setting tungsten to 3215 and Tint to -7(ish) pretty much does it, and for Daylight, 5200-5600. There doesn't seem to be any need for a kelvin specific LUT when dealing with the RAW.

    Spent four hours last night working on that, then another four this morning trying to figure out this "cyan" and "orange" deal. The Cyan, I don't think it's wise to do in a LUT. It affects too much of the image and should really be a case by case deal, say if you have a blue shirt that's going crazy when you saturate, while someone else's blue hat's okay, doing this in LUT would shift things.

    Key that, or use a HUE vs SAT/LUM curve.

    For the Orange/Red issue, this I've gone and done in the LUT. It's not perfect, but I felt there was a safe compromise between taming far reds (like water bottle labels, signs, etc) and losing some red in the skin (which could become too much, anyway, when saturating). So that's ONE more box checked off.

    At this stage, I really need more footage to test out with. ProRes, DNGs, etc. Footage that isn't my own as I've gone through everything that I have available.

    So, if anyone's reading and you want to help out, upload some DNGs and I'll test with them, or ProRes LOG clips!

    SKYPE (best way to talk to me): Camera_Kholi | twitter
    Avery and Pete: Superseeds Feature Film Trailer
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #20  
    Senior Member thinkingcloud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Austin TX
    Posts
    103
    Kholi, here's a link to a RAW sunset timelapse:

    https://www.dropbox.com/sh/c0on9waa2lpburu/PoOCaS_EHB

    It's a short video, under 10 seconds I believe. It could be a nice test for complex sky colors and wide dynamic range.
    I can't wait to get my hands on that LUT!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •