Gamma Shift when outputting to ProRes (422)

[Dillon Novak]

I've searched around here and have seen similar posts, but nothing so far has been able to help me. This is my very first time using REDcine.


The question is why am I getting a lightened version of what I am seeing in RCX?

It looks as if QT is set at 1.8 and the image in RCX is 2.2, but this is not the case for QT.
I have opened the ProRes file in a variety of programs and the results remain consistent.

I even opened it in FCP, where it looked fine.

But, that is with the Gamma Correction on Accurate and not Approximate.
Once I set it back to Approximate, it returns to the washed out version.

I'm sure this is very simple to fix. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

 

[M Most]

The question is why am I getting a lightened version of what I am seeing in RCX?
I'm sure this is very simple to fix. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

Use Quicktime 7 player instead of the default Quickime X.

Some time before we all die, Apple might get around to fixing this. Hasn't happened yet, though.

 

[Dillon Novak]

Thank you. Yeah it looks fine in QT 7. So does that mean the footage is fine, it's just QT X? And I should then edit with FCP's Gamma Correction on Accurate?

I had thought it was the other way around....maybe I have got it backwards...

 

[M Most]

Thank you. Yeah it looks fine in QT 7. So does that mean the footage is fine, it's just QT X? And I should then edit with FCP's Gamma Correction on Accurate?

I had thought it was the other way around....maybe I have got it backwards...

There is no such thing as "accurate" in the world of Quicktime. There is only the values you're getting passed to whatever delivery and display format you're using. If your delivery format is HD video, you must look at it on an HD monitor through a proper video output card (Kona 3, Blackmagic, etc.). If your deliver format is the Web, you must look at it fully encoded to whatever codec you're going to deliver it in, hopefully in a Web browser enabled player. The only thing that's really accurate is a histogram, which will tell you without question where your digital image levels are. Video scopes will also do this, but only if you place them on the monitor path, external to the computer.

The more confusing issue is that Apple changes the way it interprets levels based on the codec being used. So the same material presented to the Quicktime player in, say, H.264 vs. ProRes will be interpreted differently, because Apple still thinks we want to see something that looks "good" rather than something that's accurate.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

The more confusing issue is that Apple changes the way it interprets levels based on the codec being used. So the same material presented to the Quicktime player in, say, H.264 vs. ProRes will be interpreted differently, because Apple still thinks we want to see something that looks "good" rather than something that's accurate.

In fairness to Apple, most people really do want to see something that looks good. Making it look good should be automagical.

The problem is that Apple doesn't allow those of us responsible for making it look good to turn off the consumer features so we can get accurate views.

 

[Joe Taylor]

I made the HUGE mistake in regrading a large percentage of my Red footage to look "correct" when played in Quicktime since most of the material I send out will be played mostly in QT players. I must have wasted 40 hrs of my life for this nonsense. Apple (Steve Jobs), I know you are not reading this, but please, get it right. You're only letting your brand name down.

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

I made the HUGE mistake in regrading a large percentage of my Red footage to look "correct" when played in Quicktime since most of the material I send out will be played mostly in QT players. I must have wasted 40 hrs of my life for this nonsense. Apple (Steve Jobs), I know you are not reading this, but please, get it right. You're only letting your brand name down.

How are you guys rendering out for QT?

I usually recommend working in FCP to be followed with rendering in Compressor. Compressor "fixes" the FCP output to be correct for the output format.

Outputting via Quicktime Export in FCP doesn't generate the results most folks want. If you use that option FCP expects the output to be for use within FCP or other Apple pro video.

Its confusing and wrong, but you can deliver the results you want in that tool chain.

So I guess I am asking if we all know that and are complaining about having to know arcane BS and jump through hoops, or if people are having trouble delivering the results they need to deliver?

 

[MarcoLomiler]

5 years later from the beggining of this thread , i am experiencing this problem.
my footage looks great on Davinci , export DPX to Premiere , render the final in prores422HQ , whem i open the file on Premiere its perfect , but when a play it back on quicktime it looks desaturated and gamma shifted.
its anoying.

 

[David Battistella]

Prores 4444 will not do this. It's hq.

 

[MarcoLomiler]

iam having problens with miraizon 4444 , macro blocks on the upper quarter of the screen

 

[MarcoLomiler]

but the point here is , the prores422HQ playback on premiere looks exactly the way it came from davinci , but the same file playedback on quicktime , looks desaturated and hgamma shifted.

 

[Phil Holland]

This particular "thing" is not new and has existed for years. Do what this video says to fix it:

No, that's not a solution in my mind, but it's what there "is" at the moment.

 

[David Battistella]

Make sure your qt render settings are not set to automatic.

 

[MarcoLomiler]

Phill , your the man.
Thank you.

By the way , on miraizon 4444 iam experiencing some heavy pixalate on the upper quarter of the screen.
Did you have a solution for this?

I am using Media encoder.

David , i always check ITU 709 HD.

 

[David Battistella]

There is a video setting for gamma that can be set to automatic when using RCX. That is the one I meant. See if there is something similar in the media encoder.

This is gamma issue has been around for a while, the other option is an alternate output codec.

phil was spot on with the video he posted

 

[MarcoLomiler]

Thnaks David , i am using Windows 8 , and premiere , and them i did buy the Miraizon solution.

 

[MarcoLomiler]

iam trying animation and H264 buray.



1 minute file from RED prores4444 is around 3gb
animation around 13gb
H264 Bluray aroung 500mb

 

[Bill Sepaniak]

Sort of interesting. When I rendered out a ProRes using the latest beta of RCX and then opened the file in QT to make the gamma adjustments as shown in the video posted by Phil, it indicated that the codec was Miraizon.

 

[Phil Holland]

Sort of interesting. When I rendered out a ProRes using the latest beta of RCX and then opened the file in QT to make the gamma adjustments as shown in the video posted by Phil, it indicated that the codec was Miraizon.

Not entirely sure that means a damn thing actually. I have QTs from before Miraizon existed that come up like that in the Movie Inspector. And I don't see that in the headers.