I've done a few experiments, and the results are promising. Using curves, I raise the blacks and lower the whites, and make a few other adjustments. When I apply the basic Panasonic VLOG LUT to the footage, it's a fairly close match. But I'd really like a LUT that does this.

Are there any LUTs that reduce Rec 709 footage to something that's fairly close to uncorrected VLOG footage?

So when grading @driftwood's V-log Shogun footage, I discovered that the Panasonic provided Varicam V-log LUT did an ok job of remapping the luminance and color values into a linear space, but didn't put the highlights quite where i though they should go. (unless of course the footage was really that grossly underexposed, which might be the case, but maybe no)

So I remember Panny saying something about V-log being very close to Cineon, so I tried that, and it delivers a very nice image with a lot of density in the image, but pretty dark. (Again might be underexposure)

S-log did a really nice job of mapping out a full range, but until I shoot bracketed footage and determine just where the sweet spots are, there's no way to tell which LUTs are best for putting V-log L into Linear to begin grading.

http://doblu.com/2016/07/21/vigilante-diaries-blu-ray-review

Discs like Vigilante Diaries are why people will spend tens of thousands on their home theater. It’s an in-your-face demo with perfect contrast and amazing color saturation. "

I need some advice here, can I somehow adapt my workflow to stay in AdobeRGB profile of the Dell monitor, and to have an accurate representation of colors in my editing and grading software (resolve)?

I don't have an external grading monitor, nor I plan to get one anytime soon. I don't need absolute accuracy here, only some decent reference point.

https://designvisualuff.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/if-its-purple-someones-gonna-diethe-power-of-color-in-visual-storytelling-2005.pdf

It's a useful guide to why colours are chosen, and, how they have worked their way into our visual literacy. It reads easily and one can easily see the points raised in the context of each film discussed.

Putting that new knowledge into practice seems way more difficult, since you'll find orange and green used in many different ways - context is everything (probably).

I would say the PDF is well worth a glance over a cuppa.

"Your request (xxxx) has been received. Due to our current development schedule response time can be up to 21 days. If your request is urgent please go through our knowlege base articles or post to our forums at http://support.vision-color.com. To add additional comments, reply to this email."

Based on comments on their website other users have encountered the same problem (https://visioncolor.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/115000159505-Can-t-install-ImpulZ). It is difficult to understand why it should take three weeks to email out a link to a properly functioning working installer for ImpulZ. Btw, my follow-up email from 21 March was ignored.

So be mindful that when you buy software from VisionColor. If you are bit unlucky -- just like me and many other users who upgraded to macOS Sierra -- you may not be able to use your product very long.

It was described in the following paper "Automated Colour Grading using Colour Distribution Transfer” by F. Pitié & al.

Although there already were other similar techniques, none of them seemed as promising as this one because not only was the color palette of the source image transferred to the target image, but also its average luminance and contrast. I decided to give it a try. I programmed the algorithm with of few tweaks of my own and applied it to a bunch of random photos taken from the Internet.

Below is a Vimeo video showing the results of the experiment:

• in the first part I applied the look of 70 different source images onto the same target image,
• in the second part I did the opposite: I applied the look of one unique source image onto 70 different target images,
• finally in the last part I cross-processed a few pairs of images, exchanging their roles as source or target,
• all photos were processed with the same standard parameters and the results are raw without any post-processing.

Bottom line: although the technique doesn’t work every time, it has a high success rate and delivers very convincing results on stills.

Next step: see if it holds up on real footage.

Vimeo clip (password: photolook) :

Enjoy!

I believe in free speech, the open exchange of ideas and information. I believe in a free market, and competition. And I value those who are unafraid to challenge established methods and platforms; ColorGHear would not exist without these windows of freedom. I came out of the dark with a lot of crazy ideas and techniques that many scoffed at, but were again and again proven effective. As have others with their ideas.

That being said; the downside of free speech is that everyone believes their opinions and ideas are just as valid as everyone else's, and should carry equal weight. But there are such things as bad ideas and bad opinions. Add in trolls and those whose aim is not to add to the discussion, but to just fan the flames of discourse, and the result is a frustrating forum and a lot of bad information you have to waste time sifting through.

I hope to change that. I won't act against anyone just because they disagree with me, only if I feel that the posted information is counter productive and will erode the integrity of the discussion. In the past I have myself engaged in inflammatory posts in an effort to get people to really question things. I can't say I won't ever do that again. If you allow yourselves to get locked into one dimensional thinking, then I may become inspired to pry your minds open again. :) But for the most part, I'm passed that.

Let's try to make this category a valuable and reliable resource people can count on for solid info and techniques along with the crazy ideas that push the envelope. Just be able to back up your crazy idea(s) with some evidence that it is actually effective... or you'll likely meet with some pushback.

So here's a few things I think are important to focus on to keep the art of color grading moving forward:

Reliable and consistent ACES workflow ideas.

Reliable and consistent V-log and S-log (and any other log) Workflows.

Complete abandonment of outdated linear video capture for Log.... and accordingly; complete abandonment of platforms and capture systems that don't utilize LUT viewing technology.

Complete abandonment of 8 bpc and 16 bpc workspaces for 32bits per channel workspaces.

Abandonment of H264 codecs for H265 and better.

Abandonment of rec709 for rec2020.

Abandonment of 422 8bit capture and delivery, for 10bit 422 and better capture and 444 delivery.

I'd like to see the focus of this category pushed heavily into these areas, as they are the future of what we do with regards to color.

My reasoning for such high quality workflows is that you want to start your delivery with the highest quality file you can possibly produce and then downgrade only as necessary.

Obviously, my question's about matching the color grades. I can't see to find a set of settings or a LUT that would take my GH4 footage and conform it to the standard Panasonic curves in any consistent way. The LUTs that are closest-- the standard Vlog to v35, Balazar's luts-- have two faults: they're a bit greyish in the low end, and they're actually kind of dim, so I have to adjust the floor and boost the low-to-midranges.

Seems to me that there ought to be a LUT that accurately brings the Vlog footage to something very close to Standard. Any suggestions?

Among everything you can use for white balance card PTFE is usually best. Just make sure that it is not too shiny to reflect light spots.

Reason for this is

In visible range it has exceptional uniformity, so it reflect exactly only light source spectrum, contrary to most white paper that can play trick due to UV agents added to boos perceived whiteness. Here is sample of paper (they are all different, btw):

Do not use too thin PTFE items - use 2mm or more.

Price is around $6 for 100x100 sheet.

• http://www.ebay.com/itm/PTFE-Teflon-Film-Sheet-Plate-Thickness-0-3mm-0-5mm-1mm-2mm-3mm-100mm-to-300mm-/371767062871

Do I apply Neat Video on the V-log footage, and then apply a LUT? Or, do I apply a LUT and color correction, and let Neat go to work on the more visible grain and noise?

I'm working on a new color correction system, and looking to do a bit of market research and get user feedback. Participants will get early access to the system.

Please send me a private message to participate.

So what will it cost me ? I would have to send you the hard disk and then get back the finished film.

http://www.baeblemusic.com/musicblog/10-13-2016/baeble-first-play-boomerang-by-jw-cudd.html

Sorry there's no vimeo or youtube link to embed yet... exclusive world premiere nonsense.... as soon as there is a link, I'll embed it.

The ColorChecker Video Workflow with DaVince Resolve

The ColorChecker Video Workflow with Premiere Pro

The ColorChecker Video Workflow with FCPX

When we record video using vlog, slog or clog, does sony, canon and panasonic provide luts for we apply in post production? or we need to develop our custom luts? or we need to buy luts?

I ask this because I think if we need to develop luts it will be a long waste of time... and if we use third part luts maybe it will not have the look we want...

so main question is about if manufacturers provide luts for post production. and, if not, what would be the easy solution...

if someday I surrender myself to slog, vlog or clog, I would like to have easy solution for luts in post... not a waste of time in each scene...

please share your experience with luts,

thanks in advance!

(observation: when I say luts I just what to recover the correct look from the log image, not different grading)

Would appreciate some feedback if it works well on your (Win or Mac) platform.

memPICKER is a pixel picker tool useful for color correction, color grading and color analysis. memPICKER is able to track screen changes with up to 50 individual points and save them into a data file. Download memPICKER as Donationware for OSX and Windows platforms.

• Press 'a' on keyboard to add new pixel location, memPICKER dialog has to be selected
• Double-Click onto displayed values to delete all pixel locations
• Click onto Graph to select pixel location and display its color values
• Click 'Append' button to add RGB values and X,Y location into Data.TXT file.
• Click 'Save' button to save Data.TXT file onto same folder where the application is located.

Below you can see just a quick demonstration about evaluation of Colorchecker Charts (24 pixel points) in Excel for different Camera types.

Source: Studio Test Scenes for different Cameras by dpreview at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-7r-ii/5

http://tv.adobe.com/watch/no-stupid-questions-with-colin-smith/introduction-to-speedgrade/

I'd like to open this thread to share experience. Specially on the gh4 workflow with vlog.

This is what I think is going on. V-log delivers a very flat image, where the darkest elements are greyish, and the lightest elements are bright, but not completely blown out. This enables color graders to "stretch" those values, and thus, have some play with the midrange gamma. But doesn't this mean that the color palette leaves out a lot of value?

I don't mean that it leaves out the highs and lows. It seems to me that if you take a narrow range of luminance, and scale it to a larger range, you don't get pixels with in-between values. Say I have a photo with luminance ranges from 0 to 100, and I scale that to 0-200. Thus, each luminance value would be doubled: 1 becomes 2, 3 becomes 6, 42 becomes 82, etc.) There'd be no real increase in the range of luminances. And in some circumstances, you'd get banding if the jump is too big.

And if this is the case., then why compress the luminances into such a narrow range? Why not scale it to the camera's full luminance range, and preserve as much of the "in -between" luminances as possible? If your camera has a range of, say, 1-1000, then why reduce the image to 300-700?

As I said, I don't think I'm understanding this correctly. Anyone got a good FAQ?