JeremyDulac

6 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

At the same price, what's the difference between this LUT and the One LUT? (Aside from light source options)

https://www.j-ballard.com/theonelut

 

That lut is literally not in the same universe as the level of work Alex has done here. I doubt that person profiled each camera - it looks more like hue curve adjustments in Resolve.

11 minutes ago, Julien416 said:

But I do not agree with the "it's a one man R&D, cut the guy some slack", he is charging good money for just a lut and it comes with responsabilities and people should be entitled to ask what's going on. 

Good money?! DUDE. The level of math based, highly technical data corrections going into Alex's luts ( I know, I have asked him), and what that costs if you were to use proprietary luts created by a post house - id say you are getting a steal for how high quality these luts are.

Have you ever looked into the work Steve Yedlin is doing? Once you dive down the path of understanding how highly technical transforms are made, you realize why it is so valuable, and that NONE of this work is created in the traditional software we use, like Davinci Resolve.

1 minute ago, RCV said:

 

I am in agreement with you!!!

I don't understand the rebellious-teen-diva-ish tone in some of the demands of this thread that the LUT be ready at their command.  They probably don't understand that Sage is  a one man R&D team, so he has to take his time to fine tune the luts. Plus as someone pointer earlier, updates are going to roll out soon and we don't know how that might affect the LUT as well.  Sage probably has other film demands to attend to, perhaps a full time job? He owes no one any deadline schedule. 

EXACTLY! Well said.

1 hour ago, mirekti said:

What do you think I am, a sponsor? Get real. 
BTW 

 

 

I mean the guy is only one person, and funding the camera rental, while nice, still doesn't pay the bills - which is where the time thing comes in, and Alex clearly has made a decision on what to do first based on the P4k demand. While that may not fit your needs, the Gh5s is becoming the minority, and I just think it is distasteful to act like he should just focus on what you want, because he said it is on the roadmap a long while back. He made no promises, and I am sure he has every intention of getting to it.

I was simply throwing some sarcasm out there.

20 hours ago, mirekti said:

Same here regarding the GH5S.

I can understand this is a time consuming project, but it’s been almost two years.

You should probably put your money where your mouth is and fund him quitting his day job.

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Is there any readily available vND in Europe that worth its price? What are the top 3 options?

Why you put the IR there? Do you believe we need one for the P4K?

What Black Pro Mist do you have? 1/8 is too little? And half is too much? 1/4 is ok if you want to have only one?

I personally have a Hoya Variable ND which has been fantastic is is very affordable.

There is IR pollution when using ND filters on the P4k, not nearly as bad as the Ursa but it is definitely there. I put the IR cut first based on some recommendations i received on filter stacking - I figure since most IR cut filters are over the sensor, it makes sense to have it first?

I use a promist 1/8 and just leave it on all the time. I feel it is a nice balance, sometimes it isn't enough, but it is never too much - and I like being able to leave it on all the time to take the edge off any harshness.

An affordable way to do ND, IMO, is get like a Tiffen or Hoya variable 77mm and then grab like a B+W IR cut filter. Then it is universal, and you aren't spending as much on all in one IRND. Maybe not quite as high quality as all in one options, but I have been stacking a B+W Ir cut, then Black pro mist, and then Variable ND (when needed) for a while and getting great results on the Pocket 4k, never get any reflections. Different lens packages and cameras may have different issues with reflections though, something to be aware of.

On 8/22/2019 at 9:14 PM, Sage said:

I did this to handle unique 97x/129x resolution passes that handle 'super' values beyond floating point 0.0 - 1.0. 

Is this bit going to be useful with highlight recovery?

8 hours ago, drm said:

Thanks for sharing. I have had blown out skies like that recovered when using Highlight Recovery as well. Captain Hook said that Highlight Recovery should really have been called "Highlight Rebuild" because it rebuilds the highlights from the other channels when one of the channels is clipped. He also said that the recovered area is only black/white because they don't know what color to make the recovered areas. So really, we should avoid using Highlight Recovery if we are interested in getting the most accurate image. In your footage, I would much rather have some detail in the sky rather than having it blown out.

At ISO 400, at least the clipping point is a full 100%. At ISOs below 400, the clipping point is lower. As you increase the ISO up to 1000, the area above middle gray increases. So, your sky shot with ISO 1000 should have more detail than the sky shot at ISO 400. I don't think that I have a sky shot handy. Have you tried 400 vs. 1000 on this scene to see if there are noticeable differences?

Right, so I suppose the highlight recovery tool serves two functions? In un-clamping highlights a lower than 400 iso value as Gerald said, and also rebuilding detail in certain clipped situations, but not all.

Does it help to change iso in post to get more highlight detail, or does that only work when exposing? I will try it right now and share.

Update: I just tried it and it doesn't seem to make a difference - in fact I think there may be less detail it seems... which I am wondering if that is because it is not "real" detail and therefore doesn't interact the same with iso in terms of detail in the stops the same?

Highlight recovery needs to be used at 400 iso still when ettr'ing, it seems super whites get clamped. Not sure if maybe Gerald's understanding is off, but you definitely need to use it at 400 iso in my testing.

These images are original, then lowered exposure and then lowered exposure with highlight recovery on.

42 minutes ago, RCV said:

Man! Great pics! Whats your process of converting from BMD Film to Vlog?

Absolute Legend - The man Sage! Started production on my feature....Cant wait to use these on my pocket camera. 

Actually, try this one. Made a few tweaks to things.

GhaToP4k_1_142.2.dpx GhaToP4k_1.142.2.drx

25 minutes ago, RCV said:

Man! Great pics! Whats your process of converting from BMD Film to Vlog?

Absolute Legend - The man Sage! Started production on my feature....Cant wait to use these on my pocket camera. 

Thanks! Here is my powergrade of my process. I shoot raw exclusively, so set colorspace and gamma to Acescct/ap1 in the raw tab. There is also an instance of filmconvert for grain you may or may not have to turn off if you don't have film convert. You can go through each node to see my adjustments. I convert to vlog with a CST.

GhaToP4k_1_234.1.dpx GhaToP4k_1.234.1.drx

3 minutes ago, mercer said:

The first and second grab look great. I don’t think Sage will have to do too many tweaks. 

Thanks! I agree - the GHa lut seems to already play really nice with the P4k...the main workaround right now is in the highlights, since the p4k has more dynamic range, you have to bring down highlights before the lut.

I have been using GHa on my P4k until Alex has the new lut ready. Thought i'd share a few tests - I feel like it is working quite well, and handles over-saturated reds and blues pretty nicely. Looking forward to the official lut

1 minute ago, deezid said:

not using color management or ACES on project level anymore in Resolve. Since version 15.2.3 it is completely messed up (alpha especially).
Switched to using CST or ACES transforms and recently to adjustment layers. Works quite well.

Ahh interesting. Good info, thanks.

Just now, deezid said:

Just switched to ARRI colorspace. Having more luck with dark blues in comparison.
And color separation between yellows and reds is better.

Are you using color managed timeline? Any other settings changed other than just converting to Arri colorspace?

5 minutes ago, deezid said:

looks good.
Already received your Pocket 4K?
Figured out quite a lot dealing with these nasty red and blue highlights...

Either the redipp2 route or using Acescct out of the raw tab have been good solutions for me so far.

20 hours ago, dia3olik said:

Frankly, I'd say skip it and go for a little jewel which is about to explode...

ZCAM E2...same sensor but MUCH more of a camera than the P4K can ever be...

form factor, mindset behind it, 120 fps @ 4K with full sensor readout, build quality, power consumption,

4:3 and 6:5 ANA support, ethernet, wifi, remote control, realtime streaming to mobile via USB-C...you name it...

The only thing i'd debate is how the form factor of a "brain" is better than something with a handgrip? Also, does it not shoot RAW? Wouldn't that be a pretty big difference, especially at a higher price point?

@Wild Ranger Very nice work! I also am a big fan of the colored versions. 

Your lighting is particularly nice also - Are you using any fill on these close-ups or is this all natural light? 

5 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.

33x33 and 65x65 are just container sizes essentially (someone correct me if I am wrong), meaning it allows for more robust and accurate luts the larger the lut size.  Pretty much like a codec allows for more or less bitrate. 33x is usually enough for most work but in the case of EmotiveColor it is such a highly technical and advanced lut that I am going for the 65x, plus my cpu can handle it. 

@ChristianH It is the same. The settings are all there, Alex seems to have just cropped out unused settings. The blend mode is at the bottom of the ofx.

@mercer ah ah that they are! My bad - not sure why i wrote russian. Good info, Mercer. I will be on the lookout for those specs!

@Wild Ranger i didnt realise the 4:3 gave the correct crop! Ill have to try it out!

@Wild Ranger that is awesome! Those old c mount lenses are gorgeous. Did you get any kind of vignetting since the gh5 sensor is bigger? Did you use a viltrox adapter or regular? I had my eye on a 16mm 1.8 c mount but read there would be some vignetting. I really would love to build a collection of Russian Kern c mounts.

@Téodor Spencer These are all using a standard, non-speedbooster adapter. I just got a viltrox woohoo!! Some frames are 4k but most are 2k - but all 4k files were down res’d to 2k. Its cool you get the 16mm vibe too - ive always found the soft and main have very film like saturation response and separation. Add a bit of grain and bring down the blacks and thats pretty much all i do! 

@Ryley K @Téodor Spencer  Hey thank you both! Ummm for lenses these were all from either an old Nikon 28mm 2.8  and a 35mm 2.4 Zeiss Flektogon - I always use a black pro mist 1/8 on all my footage. I don't do too much to get to this look - I follow Alex's methods, adding his olpf simulation on the front end. I then use his curves recommendation  with the 'hue pass-through' method. After that I add some extra contrast and saturation in LAB colorspace to give some extra color separation and then add some film grain. 

Alex has done something truly incredible with this lut in my opinion - He has totally flipped the idea of what a lut is capable of on its head.