Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 71
  1. Collapse Details
    #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Worldwide
    Posts
    2,375
    Default
    Sam, charts like that only have a limited use as there are so many elements that contribute to perceived sharpness, not just lens and aperture, but shutter, lighting, camera movement, colour rendition, codec and monitor to name a few obvious ones. I prefer to trust my eyes and experience.
    www.liamhall.net
    TWITTER: @wordsbyliam
    INSTAGRAM: @picsbyliam


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Posts
    8,071
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Liam Hall View Post
    Sam, charts like that only have a limited use as there are so many elements that contribute to perceived sharpness, not just lens and aperture, but shutter, lighting, camera movement, colour rendition, codec and monitor to name a few obvious ones. I prefer to trust my eyes and experience.
    Yep they have one purpose.. demonstration of micro detail. Here we can see the F5 falling apart at 3.4k, demonstrating the futility or worse of sending the camera a signal of more that 3.4k - if you dont like the rainbow effect one needs to keep the input signal below 3 k.
    Last edited by morgan_moore; 09-14-2017 at 03:14 AM.


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #43
    Senior Member starcentral's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    6,451
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by balazer View Post
    To say that adjusting the black, mid, and white points of the red, green, and blue channels is the best form of basic color correction is to totally dismiss the value of color science, color management, and color processing of raw images. You are saying you can get better color with those old simple tools than by getting the gain and white balance right in your camera. You are saying that raw image processors need not bother with exposure or white balance sliders.

    The argument is ridiculous on its face, and makes me think you've never really tried using color management or color science for color correction.

    I have no doubt you are quite adept with the old simple tools, in large part because you have a lot of experience and you know how to get things almost perfect in the camera. I think you overestimate other people's abilities. I respect what you do and I think a lot of people here really value your opinions, but in this case I think this is not good advice for the average user.

    For a guy with "a million dumb basic questions about LUTs", more advanced color correction is going to help him get better images with less effort. And after the basic color correction is done, you still have the option of adjusting the black, mid, and white points of the red, green, and blue channels, for example if you want to do different things to the shadows and highlights. But you shouldn't start with those adjustments. There's a reason every raw image processor has its exposure and white balance sliders way up at the top of the color correction controls. Logarist provides these basic controls with more ease and accuracy than the simple tools you're talking about. And it removes the complications of guessing which LUTs match your camera's color space, the difference between video levels and data levels, what to do with super-whites, and which color correction controls you should start with, because I've figured out all of that for you. And it's free, so why not try it? I made Logarist because I believe it's a better way of color correcting and a lot of people can benefit from it.
    For you to even suggest color correction is not possible or that you can not white balance or set exposure by using color density based tools such as curves, lift/gamma/gain, 3-way tells me you honestly have no idea what you are talking about.. Nearly all, if not all professional coloring software tools are based on these "simple" underlying principles. This is strangely ironic coming from someone who developed a plugin for color correction and claims to know about color science and color management. So I guess you know more than Adobe, BlackMagic Design, Lightspace, etc.. ?

    In a pinch if your tool works for people that's great but when asked I will always recommend that people take the time to learn the proper tools so that when they need to get further with their work they can. Same as myself and others will recommend people do not use LUTs for grading - just look at the issues it's causing Lenny who started this thread in the first place. Doing things the right way is called being smart and practical, it saves time in the long run. You already acknowledged that with your tool if its not enough someone can still go in later and adjust selective points across the various channels - if they are going to have to learn how to do that anyway then white balancing and exposure adjustment isn't realistically going to take a lot more knowledge. Please don't underestimate people's ability to learn, especially with community forums like this one where we all chime in and help one another. (not to mention all the free YouTube videos out there)


    I tested your plugin and it horribly clipped my slog images from my Sony F55 compared to just putting the Sony LC709A LUT on it.

    original slog3 image


    Sony LC709A


    logarist BT.709


    I also tested your slider controls and found that you are sliding/skewing the entire channel data up and down right off the IRE scale. This will introduce channel clipping and as a result a loss of video information which is very bad for video. Especially for higher DR scenes or as elements within a scene change and light values move around. When you use proper tools based around lift/gamma/gain or curves data values are squashed or expanded as to preserve data which is the number one goal when performing color correction and especially when you are dealing with 8-bit or 10-bit video files in tiny Rec709 space that on top of it all is compressed with codec.

    I can definitively say that your tool actually performs nothing like the exposure tools found in Adobe Camera RAW or Adobe Lightroom. In these professional tools data values are never truncated. I certainly hope more people become aware of the problems your plugin can create and are very careful using it, or as I had suggested learn how to use the proper tools.

    And thanks for voting down all my posts trying to point out some simple and true facts.
    Last edited by starcentral; 09-15-2017 at 10:13 AM.
    Dennis Hingsberg


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    195
    Default
    The black point of S-Log3 is 3.5%. For your scopes to be showing values below 3.5% either something is wrong with the footage before the scope was applied, or it's an out-of-gamut very saturated dark green that's supposed to be gamut clipped in the gamut transformation. I can't say which without seeing actual images. Let me know if you want help understanding that.

    Quote Originally Posted by starcentral View Post
    I also tested your slider controls and found that you are sliding/skewing the entire channel data up and down right off the IRE scale. This will introduce channel clipping and as a result a loss of video information which is very bad for video.
    It's not an IRE scale anymore after the Logarist input LUT is applied. It's a log color space, and it doesn't stop at 0.0 or 1.0. The Logarist color controls are appropriate for a log color space. It's very similar to ACEScc, if you've ever used that.

    I can definitively say that your tool actually performs nothing like the exposure tools found in Adobe Camera RAW or Adobe Lightroom. In these professional tools data values are never truncated.
    There are certainly cases where Adobe Camera Raw and Lightroom truncate. The output does not have unlimited dynamic range or gamut. The highlights get clipped at some point in the output rendering, and the gamut when you reduce to the size of the display gamut. That's how it's supposed to work. The idea is to record more picture information than you need, and decide later how to use all of it.


    2 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #45
    Senior Member moldcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,192
    Default
    Guys, I'm by far less knowledgeable in digital acquisition, color science etc. than (most of) you here, but I'd like to add just two observations to this interesting thread:

    1. Sharpening.
    Well - based on my experience with various 4K cams so far (am comparing the FS7, A7Rii and GH5 which I own) - sharpening in post is only required (and brings more good than harm to the picture) when:

    a) the picture from the camera is soft to begin with (sounds obvious, eh?) Well - if any of the 3 cameras I mentioned ever gives a picture that calls for sharpening, it's only my FS7 (especially in Cine EI mode for obvious reasons). Both A7Rii and GH5 produce such a sharp picture with their default internal sharpening setting that during grade, adding more would look ridiculous (in fact, I tend to set internal sharpening to some minus values in these two cams)

    b) when I zoom-into the 4K picture (either for cropping/panning/re-framing, or as a result of using strong stabilization settings). But even then, 0.46 is way too much even with the FS7 picture (ugly electronic edges instead of details); I usually leave it at 0.48 for the FS7 or 0.49 for the other cameras (plus the latter is very seldom needed)

    2. Logarist workflow
    As I mentioned several times elsewhere, i used to be so disappointed with many other LUT-based methods that for a long time my Resolve workflow was based 100% on RCM (with some ACES projects now and then, but mainly for experimentation purposes). After starting to use Logarist LUTs on input and output, I was amazed with 3 things:

    a) the much nicer roll-off and color saturation of my highlights
    b) the super-intuitive behavior of the color wheels in LOG mode
    c) the easiness of matching the FS7 look not only with that of my A7Rii, but also the GH5

    Just my $0.03; thank you

    Piotr
    Last edited by moldcad; 09-16-2017 at 12:40 AM.
    Camera: Sony PXW-FS7 (plus A7Rii & GH5 B-cams), Shogun Inferno; lenses: Sony 28-135mm F4, FE 28mm F2, FE 50mm F1.8; Canon 16-35mm & 24-70mm F4 on Speed Booster; MFT Leica 35-100mm F2.8
    Editing System: DaVinci Resolve Studio; Asus X-99 Pro/USB31; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; 480 GB SSD system drive; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G driving calibrated Samsung SUHD grading/delivery monitor


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    289
    Default
    I just tried Logarist very briefly on the same clips I previously corrected in Lumetri with LUT's made by me in LUTCalc for Slog3 material. This is very preliminary but the basic LUT technique worked pretty well and I felt it got me into the right ball park faster than I did with the exposure modified LUT's I made in LUTCalc. I modified the initial Legalist corrections with various tools in Lumetri (especially Saturation) and very quickly had a look similar to what I did previously. Certainly no clipping but the clips I used didn't have a full range of 14 stops.
    Last edited by LennyLevy; 09-19-2017 at 01:16 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Posts
    8,071
    Default
    Piotr

    All my comments about sharpening have referred to shooting EI which disables sharpening in camera.

    I am suspicious that even setting sharpening to 0 on "baked" cameras properly disables it.

    My 46-47 comment was from memory 47-49 May be better


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #48
    Senior Member moldcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,192
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by morgan_moore View Post
    Piotr

    All my comments about sharpening have referred to shooting EI which disables sharpening in camera.

    I am suspicious that even setting sharpening to 0 on "baked" cameras properly disables it.

    My 46-47 comment was from memory 47-49 May be better
    Sure you're right, Sam - the FS7 softness is the most striking in CineEI where you can't crank the sharpness up in the camera (I have edited my previous post to reflect this). But even in Custom, with HG7 I use sometimes in low-light situations, increasing the internal sharpness in the Picture Profile will never give me amount of fine detail comparable with either GH5 or A7Rii (in their default settings).

    Piotr
    Camera: Sony PXW-FS7 (plus A7Rii & GH5 B-cams), Shogun Inferno; lenses: Sony 28-135mm F4, FE 28mm F2, FE 50mm F1.8; Canon 16-35mm & 24-70mm F4 on Speed Booster; MFT Leica 35-100mm F2.8
    Editing System: DaVinci Resolve Studio; Asus X-99 Pro/USB31; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; 480 GB SSD system drive; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G driving calibrated Samsung SUHD grading/delivery monitor


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Posts
    8,071
    Default
    Hg settings are reasonably grown up. The consumer cams are dialled to jump off the screen in a manner that we find as putrid as a cheap consumer monitor in "image enhancement" mode


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #50
    Senior Member moldcad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,192
    Default
    True about the "image enhancement" settings of prosumer devices (my Samsung UHD TV even has "shop display mode" in the menu, haha) - but the sharpness of the A7Rii is simply higher than FS7's; you can see it even with detail dialed down in the former's and up in the latter's PP...

    Piotr
    Camera: Sony PXW-FS7 (plus A7Rii & GH5 B-cams), Shogun Inferno; lenses: Sony 28-135mm F4, FE 28mm F2, FE 50mm F1.8; Canon 16-35mm & 24-70mm F4 on Speed Booster; MFT Leica 35-100mm F2.8
    Editing System: DaVinci Resolve Studio; Asus X-99 Pro/USB31; i7-5960X CPU; 64 GB RAM; 2x GTX 1080 8GB GPU; 480 GB SSD system drive; 4x 3TB WD Black in RAID 0; 1TB M.2 NVMe cache drive; Decklink 4K Extreme 12G driving calibrated Samsung SUHD grading/delivery monitor


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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