Sage

11 minutes ago, ykt.net said:

@JeremyDulac And how can I get it ? 

Did you give the 65x go ahead (in the email)? I'm presently inundated with V3 emails and stuck at work, but I will get up to speed later tonight*

16 minutes ago, katlis said:

Another awesome update, thanks @Sage! Here's some 10-bit 60p stills showing off 1) V-Log w/ Prores PRE 2) Main 3) Linear 4) Properly white balanced Linear. Although I like the warmth of the original "sunny" WB  No luma adjustments on these! 

Looks stunning. I quite like the warm WB as well - I wonder if it might be matched with a correction following the neutral conversion?

7 hours ago, ykt.net said:

Hi everyone ! What's the difference between 33x and 64x ? And also, all your manuals are for Premiere and Davinci only. Have anyone tried it with FCPX ? There are [PRE]'s for Premiere to fix, and I am wondering about FCPX, do I need to apply this [PRE] files too ? And one more question about LUT's for LogC Alexa, where I can buy it or test it ? Thanks.

Indeed, I'd like to write a guide for FCPX (I'll need to get something better than a Mac Air for it). I assume it doesn't have the unique color space distortions that Premiere does, but I haven't measured it (to make PREs)

65x65x65 is eight times the resolution of 33x33x33 (cubed). The files are ten times larger, and being a fan of efficiency, I wanted to stay with 33x. It gets 90% of the way there, and combined with tetrahedral interpolation (available in Resolve), it can be very smooth. I recoded the color engine to work at 65x (which cleanly downsamples to a cubed 33x), so that the calculation could be done at this finer resolution. But I tested the 65x files against 33x, and the accurate nuance and smoothness (especially in programs with trilinear interpolation, like Premiere) of 65x was simply better. It is subtle, but I decided that the trade off of 10x larger files was minor for those who wanted the utmost in quality (personally, I will only use 65x, but the 33x option is always there)

@JeremyDulac Thank you Jeremy for the kind words! 65x all the way ;)

On 10/17/2018 at 11:45 AM, Wild Ranger said:

@Sage Sure! here are Vlog stills.

Here they are with the new V3 Main, and levels set per the Pdf, with WB correction as best I could:

6 hours ago, dxotic said:

Sage,

Thanks for updating the PDF with recommended settings plus the Waveform guides are very useful, well explained and much needed! ☝️

Sure thing, indeed the Pdf is a big step forward. I think you'll like V3 as well

V3 has been in the works since July, and its a whole new ballpark

5 hours ago, kye said:

Now I have a question!

Would these two workflows provide the same colour and gamut?

1. ARRI Alexa recording in LogC -> standard LogC to Rec709 conversion
2. GH5 in HLG -> HLG (Pre) LUT -> Main LUT

If so, then in theory these two would also be the same:

1. ARRI Alexa recording in LogC -> LogC to Rec709 conversion via a film conversion LUT in Resolve
2. GH5 in HLG -> HLG (Pre) LUT -> Main LUT -> Rec709 to LogC conversion -> LogC to Rec709 conversion via a film conversion LUT in Resolve

Or have a missed something?

There are a bunch of LUTs that expect a LogC input and this seems like the best way to get a LogC output while still maintaining the Alexa 'look'.

Ah, by Main I'm referring to the end in itself of Alexa color. If a film conversion route is the goal, the LogC variation is the way to go.

Main is different from LogC+R709 - its much nicer. It has the R709 primaries built in, and a film styled envelope that is often associated with Alexa color.

3 hours ago, mirekti said:

Wouldn’t this negate usage of warming filter? If I put a warming filter and then click on WB correction it should take that warmth out, right?

I mean this is just an idea I had, I know it is far from perfect compared to using a reference card. Usually shade and cloudy days need more warmth so I was thinking of using neutral filter on sunny and warming on cloudy days. I guess I’ll need to try it out.

Yes, to a large extent it will (though it will likely impact color rendition). GHa needs a neutral white balance to work. After the footage is converted, then it can be safely warmed as desired (and paired with a desat)

@DBounce Indeed; with great dynamic range cameras with quality 10 bit codecs, it is easy to overexpose using the practices that were ideal with more compressed, low DR cameras not long ago. Here, we have highlight range, alas, much like film, and shadows don't hide the kind of compression monsters of yore. Though underexposure is still to be avoided*

19 minutes ago, mirekti said:

Sorry, but still a bit confused here. When I capture in vLog then I simply apply GHa Daylight for example, but I could also go from vLog to LogC (without applying Daylight), and then find LUTs for LogC and apply them on top of it, is that the point?

That's exactly right, that's what @Wild Ranger does often. That said, Main/Soft are almost always the best way to go, in my opinion (for Arri color), over the LogC route

1 hour ago, mirekti said:

This could sound silly, but why is this done? Is there something out there that I should prefer to go to LogC? 

You've got GHa, which includes the 'LogC' variation. This is different from color management in that it is a measured conversion that specifically matches the end result of GH5 color sci to the end result of Alexa color sci, capturing sensor and WB+light source results (just like the HLG to VLog). This is a lot more accurate in terms of color and rolloff. The subsequent film conversion, which would have been made to an Alexa end result, will be a lot more accurate as a result.

LogC, in itself, is ideal for film conversions, because they have kept it rigorously defined since the camera's initial release, and companies tend to put their best efforts into supporting Arri, while other cameras are unsupported or roughly so. For example, Panasonic's VLog implementation shifts with each camera.

@kye That'll certainly do it; swap the VLog to LogC transform for GHa LogC in Mirekti's case. Big HLG to VLog update incoming.

17 hours ago, hypp said:

@Sage In a previous post, someone asked

and you answered 

Is there any information about this yet? 

Not yet - the ball is in Blackmagic's court, so to speak. It seems their release is quite delayed

16 hours ago, mirekti said:

@Sage Does your LUT change only color or it also affects contrast? For example if I put a Tiffen Pro Mist filter in front of my lens would it mess it up? I was thinking of using a regular one for daylight and warming one for shade and keep the white balance in camera on daylight all the time. Does this make any sense?

Both color and contrast, and diffusion is a fantastic idea - I recommend the fractional ones. With regards to WB, it needs to be set to the light coming in. If there is a warming filter, it will change the white point, and WB needs to be set (if WB is north of 4300K, use the Day conversion, and south, the Tun). The most 'automatic' approach, so to speak, is to use AWB, and make minor corrections in post per shot as need be. Its great to film a reference neutral white card for every scene, so that WB for the key light can be picked/confirmed in post.

@Wild Ranger Nice - can you share VLog stills (with the Pre if in Premiere)

1 hour ago, mirekti said:

Oh, I might have missed the point here. Does this mean PRE is only to be used with Premiere and in Resolve it is not needed no matter the codec used?

No PRE is needed for raw VLog in Resolve

A PRE is needed in Resolve for: HLG, Cine-D, and VLog wrapped in ProRes/DNX (or for wrapped VLog, 'data levels' can be set to Full/Data for the clip)

14 hours ago, will_fowkes said:

I made another video using the LUT again @Sage, this time using the LUT at 100 strength.

I'm planning on making the move to Resolve soon, to have more control over my grade. I assume the LUT can be used in Resolve as well?

https://youtu.be/6UxUGpJvRQs

Love it man; also, I need to get this update out to you

It can be used in Resolve, without the Vlog PRE needed in Premiere (walkthrough in the next Pdf)

@katlis Thanks so much for looking into this! Indeed, Premiere has completely arbitrary and distinct color renderings of every different format. To completely correct for it, I'll have to do new conversions separately for ProRes and DNX (soon as I've got the time)

For the time being, I recommend either using Resolve for ProRes/DNX, or shooting All-I if you use Premiere. And All-I is fantastic (quite similar in spirit to ProRes/DNX)

@kye@TurboRat Daylight is probably preferable in that case - one can use daylight balanced bulbs (or gels) indoors, but the sun is always the sun

Tungsten balanced bulbs with correct WB will be rendered greener with Daylight (very basic summary)

On 10/10/2018 at 10:04 AM, austinchimp said:

@Sage I've been looking at some videos lately showing the benefits of HLG on the newer Sony full frame cameras, and the colours, particularly on skin, look fantastic with very smooth gradation. Have you had time to take a closer look at HLG on the GH5 and do you still think V-Log is better?

I haven't seen many videos with impressive colour shot on the GH5 in HLG, but I wonder if it has some untapped potential. Apart from GHa, V-Log can have a slightly unnatural look to it compared to HLG footage.

I recently shot a couple of run and gun projects on Cinelike-D and am playing with your conversion to v-log, and it takes a bit of work to get it looking good due to my exposure being a bit consistent, but I love what it does to skin tones.

Yes, VLog is optimal, as the conversion to LogC was done directly for it; the gap for the others will be closing shortly. The data distribution will be a bit different, but the visual result the same* (one could think of the NLEs' color engines as being 32-bit floating point pass-throughs for the raw data distribution of the originating format)

On 10/10/2018 at 11:05 AM, mirekti said:

Does one need to use PRE if DNxHD is use

Do you need to put a new serial (Resolve) and then apply exposure correction or you do it on the same node where you apply conversion?

Yes, if its VLog in DNX (hides the unique flagging of VLog L for correct levels) it would need the ProRes PRE. Mezzanine formats (ProRes/DNX) are best avoided at the moment in Premiere, as PPro distorts the color space (ProRes confirmed). All-I achieves the same end in camera, in the case of the GH5

A new node, after the conversion node, for exp correction for sure (distinct routing)

As the XT3 is 10 bit, it has my attention

@kye Indeed, it would be either VLog, HLG, or Cine-D (with specific settings)

1 In post, a PRE matching the format of the footage (& NLE) is first applied

2 the WB is then corrected with the dedicated WB temp/tint tools of the NLE (exposure wouldn't be corrected here, as it will impact the accuracy of the conversion)

3 Then the conversion is applied, followed by the grade/correction for under/over exposure

17 minutes ago, deezid said:

sounds great.
Still undecided between the Pocket 4K and X-T3 honestly.
The good auto focus and 120p without crop (and still 10 bit) are tempting...

I'd like to get a hold of a Fuji - I wonder if they'll be bringing IBIS into the mix

2 hours ago, hypp said:

Thank you! I'm having a hard time judging if I like the GH5 look or not. Do you know of a fairly easy way to add this Arri Alexa look to the BMPCC 4K for comparison sake? I want to see how the GH5 stack up against BMPCC 4K image quality. 

I'm looking into possibly bringing EC to the P4K; in that case, I'll be able to do just that. The two with EC will have identical color (under daylight or tungsten), because at the core is a measured LogC color science conversion (in contrast with a look). Additionally, I may do conversions to go between the P4K and the GH5, to make them interchangeable. 

3 hours ago, hypp said:

Someone just uploaded some footage comparing the BMPCC 2K, 4K and GH5s and I would like to see how GH5s footage using this lut compares to BM. Could someone test grade this using this lut? Filename: P1034641.mov Much appreciated! 

Sure, here you go - these are the raw conversions (last is the default V35 look-up for reference)

LogC

Soft

Main

Linear

Varicam

2 hours ago, TurboRat said:

@Sage have you encountered gamma shifting after rendering in Premiere. I was using the Emotive Color lut  on Lumetri>Creative like what the manual says, and like what I see on my screen on Premiere.  But after rendering and, i get washed out colors on Quicktime. But playing on VLC looks fine. Problem is, I think after uploading to Youtube / Vimeo, it will follow the Quicktime desaturated look. Any advice on this? Thanks

Indeed, its the classic Quicktime Apple/Windows gamma conflict. Apple has discontinued support for Quicktime; VLC is an optimal player for its efficiency and simplicity. To test the handling of exported files by Vimeo/Youtube, upload the file, and choose 'Private' for the video's visibility as it uploads.

On 10/2/2018 at 12:14 PM, Ryley K said:

@Sage

With the Ninja V coming out soon, how would you use it with the GH5? You're able to bake in LUTs with the Ninja V. Would you suggest doing that at all to get the look straight out of the camera, or add it later still? If we can shoot like that, we'd be able to get a good look in camera and have a quicker turn around time too.

Sure, the key being to get WB right in cam, and use the matching light source conversion. Because mistakes invariably happen in the field, I'd recommend simultaneously recording a Log fall back

21 hours ago, austinchimp said:

The ability to bake in luts in camera would transform the GH5, and pretty much any consumer camera, at little or no cost to the manufacturer. I'm surprised nobody has done it in a video targeted camera yet.

It would end any complaints about colour science.

I heard something to the effect that the P4K would do this. I'm curious if that's the case (might add something like an 'inverse conversion' for regular use)