Personal View site logo
FilmConvert software
  • 98 Replies sorted by
  • BMPCC profiles are up :)

  • Noto to hijack this thread but if someone is using it mainly for film grain, just check this tutorial from Matt Scott. Despite of Edius use he gives free a hires scan of a film grain. Very handy and useful

  • @LongJohnSilver cool!! If someone with Edius makes an export of the project please let me know so I can test crazy Matthew's film scan homebrew and whatnot organicnesss :P

  • The 4k film grain is just a clip. You can use it in your nle. He is using Edius to show the endless option you have.

  • The 4k film grain is just a clip. You can use it in your nle. He is using Edius to show the endless option you have.

    no it's not, patched friend :D, a readme text, a png and and an edius project file • I'm not that lazy :P

    From the downloaded package:
    In order to open this proect and render 32 seconds of own 4K film grain, you need the latest vesion of EDIUS (EDIUS 7).
    Just Google "EDIUS 7 DEMO" and download the free 30 day trial. It'a awesome! For over 20hours of free tutorials, visit my blog


    Omniscient Vitaliy sorry for deviation, as someone else may be interested... and also, in a way many people mix a recipe of filmconvert + film scanned grain stuff

  • Ok sorry. I will render it soon

  • Anyone cares to test Resolve 10 beta with the FilmConvert OFX plugin

    My computer can't handle Resolve 10 or I would do it myself.

  • Don't know if I'm right, but to my eyes Motiva RealPerception plug-in gives much more authentic film/cinematic look than FilmConvert.

  • Their tools aren't specifically designed for the same thing. Their tools are primarily aimed at "taking the curse off" of CGI imagery though several of their image processing functions are still valid for equally synthetic or otherwise uninteresting digital camera footage. It is not an attempt to specifically re-map video footage to the specific response of known film stocks.

    They're not comparable products and, in fact, these tools look more complimentary than anything. It's easy enough to understand how someone might not make the distinction. The goal and desire for digital imagery to "look like film" or more cinematic is one that's been going on for more than a decade and almost always done poorly besides a few tools like Magic Bullet and, more recently, Film Convert.

  • I succumbed to FilmConvert and bought a copy to grade my GH2 files. This is the first "look" plugin that I've bought, as I was impressed by the examples and reviews that I saw. It's not an effect, but more of an organic extension of my shots that helps to tell the story. BTW, there's a 25% off, Black Friday sale today… Here's a short test I made:

  • BTW If you first get a single plugin (25% off or 149$), then the upgrade to the whole bundle is 56$ only. This way the total would be 205$ or about 32% off.

  • I decided to run my own test for the film emulator plug-in Film Convert and I wanted to use footage I typically capture during family gatherings. As such I pulled clips from Thanksgiving 2013 that were shot handheld and hand focused with AWB, S Mode on 1/60th shutter and auto ISO/aperture using the amazing Panasonic GX7 in 1080p@24fps and standard color profile set to 0,0,0,0.

    I started with a 1 minute vignette and systemically applied various Film Convert motion picture film emulation effects ( I used the GH3 profile as a stand-in as the GX7 and GH3 standard modes are very close):

    • 00:00 Original GX7 Footage from Camera in Standard Mode 0,0,0,0
    • 01:01 Grain Tests in Kodiak 5027 Mode (8mm, Super 16, Super 35, FullAp)
    • 01:32 Kodak Vision 3 250D 5207
    • 02:35 Kodak Vision 3 200T 5213
    • 03:37 Fuji Vivid 8543
    • 04:41 Fuji Eterna 8553
    • 05:44 Fuji Reala 8563
    • 06:47 4-way Split Screen w/ Original, Kodiak 5027, Fuji Vivd, Fuji Eterna

  • Another test, this time showing GoPro protune side by side with Film Convert's Kodak 5207:

  • Are there any specs for each of those "Film settings"...what defines for example "Kodak Vision 3 250D 5207"

    I'm trying the demo now and I really really like it because it gets the job done, if you expose right in the camera you can make a footage look really good with this...seems like a nice piece of software. I have ADHD so I need results quick and easy :)

    Did this in 10 seconds, no way I get it done this fast in DaVinci...and since I don't plan on pursuing career of Pro Colorist, this is good enough :)

    Sequence 01.Still001.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 1M
    Sequence 01.Still002.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 662K
  • Can someone explain the Filmconvert Standalone Workflow with the Canon C300 to me? I have Film Convert Pro latest version and when I stick in the SD card with C100 footage, it shows up fine in the program. When I connect my CompactFlash card from the C300 however, it will not detect the files.

  • @Riker what defines each negative stock is their measurement of reference values after being photographed on that film stock and then scanned. By shooting the same reference (color/gray charts) on a digital camera you get the difference between that specific camera and a particular film stock. Now you can push one towards the other, in this case the digital footage is pushed towards the film measurement.

  • Hi everyone, first post and sorry for my english..

    Im starting to use filmconvert for my g6 videos. In Camera Settings it has the gh2 and gh3 but dont have the g6.. Have i use one of those two or is better Standard sRGB?

    The GH3 has exactly the same Profiles as the G6, but i hear that the G6 is more than the GH2... i dont know.. please help im new on video!

  • I'd suggest starting with a GH2 profile. The GH3 is a completely different animal while the G6 is at least based on the same sensor family as the GH2. The GH3 uses a cold Sony chip.

  • Ok, thanks!

  • Hi guys is anyone else having problems with filmconvert 2.16 not showing up in premiere pro and only after effects?

  • Im using the Sony A7s Rec709 profiles for my A6000 and it seems to be a pretty good match. Im a little confused about the Rec709-800 and pro profile settings, though. Am I correct that the 800 profiles attempt to recover the superwhites? I didnt notice much difference when using them, so maybe Im incorrect about that. What about the regular vs "pro" profiles? What effect does "pro" have?