Best LUTs for Weapon?

[brian hanson]

Hey guys, I am curious as to what everyone's preferred LUTs are for Weapon in camera and post?

I have not yet made use of the feature and am interested in learning more . . .

 

[Marc Wielage]

I'm a big fan of not using a LUT at all and just using a good colorist, but that's me.

For dailies, I'd use whatever the latest RedColor and RedGamma color science defaults are.

 

[Bob Gundu]

I'm a big fan of not using a LUT at all and just using a good colorist, but that's me.

For dailies, I'd use whatever the latest RedColor and RedGamma color science defaults are.

+1.

 

[Jake Wilganowski]

I use a modified lut that emulates a Kodak stock along with some modified redlogfilm settings, and it blows the balls off any standard gamma/color in camera. I absolutely love it. No I won't share

 

[Stuart Graham]

Hi Brian,
I always use LUT's in camera, either loaded ones from ADOBE, RCX or simple ones created using the tools available through the touchscreen.
Via external source like ADOBE I find .cube the best format as they seem not to have a file name character limit (unlike .3dl's which often don't load well either & are limited to short names only)

For what it's worth; I love the fact that you can have your touchscreen see this LUT or choose to view the RC view instead, this quick & easy LUT creating ability is for me one of the main reasons I prefer to shoot RED, it's a true Cinematographers camera...I just wish changing the OLPF's was a bit quicker

Stu.

 

[Phil Holland]

I use a modified lut that emulates a Kodak stock along with some modified redlogfilm settings, and it blows the balls off any standard gamma/color in camera. I absolutely love it. No I won't share

Same-ish.

Depending on the gig I often have LUTs at the ready to push out rushes and dailies. With Weapon I've been experimenting with using the LUTs in camera a bit as well.

My most used are something similar to what Jake has and one I like that "thickens" the image mainly by knocking the highlights down a smidge and doing some fun things to the darker areas that lead up to the midtones. The job I'm on now all gets 3D LUTs on the dailies before they go to the client with the occasional unique grade.

 

[Kris Tait]

Hi Phil,
wont ask for the secret sauce obviously, but the way you described its effect on the image is pretty enticing. Can you share a frame grab to see what you're describing? New or old would do.
Thanks
Kris

 

[Michael Hastings]

What happened to the sharing community? Some of us that are less experienced with high end film production are trying to get the best looking image we can out of this camera in the face of stiff competition from arri that seems to have the upper hand in getting the image that high end productions prefer.

Then we have panavision claiming a better way.

Yet some users seem to have discovered better ways than the stock looks red can give us but are content to let the rest of the Red cameras linger in third place (or worse) ?

i have always been open about sharing whatever knowledge I have (and some would say its considerable) for getting the best images underwater (which may be just as complex) and I thought this forum was like that as well?

I don't mean this to be too harsh - just curious.

 

[Medavoym]

PHIL -

ON THE SAME PAGE EXACTLY as Michael.

I remember reading a longer post of yours saying how your LUTs are your secret sauce and you will never ever release it, it's part of your business plan etc etc
This is not a dig at you. I couldn't care less about your LUTs. I am talking about a principle here.

I am talking about Steve Yedlin as well, who famously did a lot of tests matching Alexa to 35mm and will NOT release any of his findings because, well, they belong to HIM.

Everyone -- check MINUTE 28.02 of this wonderful documentary about James Wong Howe below:

https://vimeo.com/15815385

He was a true cinematographer. CINEMATOGRAPHER. And he's not alone. All the famous, good cinematographers do the same. They share. There are numerous, famous stories of cinematographers inventing something or doing something unusual to achieve a particular result and then sharing it, instead of keeping it a secret. In fact, it's part of the NOBILITY of this profession. Famously, Kubrick (not a DP per se, but almost!) spilled all the beans on his amazing, incredibly innovative effects for "2001", in American Cinematographer, to everyone's surprise.

Phil - I know you will be quick to explain yourself, and you would be right. I totally agree with you. It probably doesn't make sense to share anything if you care about your business plan.

Again, I am talking about a principle.

Are you a CINEMATOGRAPHER or are you a business man? Are you an artist in love with this amazing profession, or are you someone trying to make money out of using a camera?

There is a big difference. The first part assumes nobility, a love for images in general, a love for the profession and a love for your colleagues. The second - a love for profits no matter what.

Sorry I am picking on you. You don't deserve it.

But like Michael, I am wondering where did the spirit that you see in James Hong Howe go... Maybe we have to accept that we are part of a new generation which has been trained well to only care about money, and leave other higher, spiritual standards behind.

 

[Jon Carr]

I'm very big into doing everything in camera. So I made LUTs that emulates Kodak 5207 and 5219 perfectly that I usually use as for almost everything I shoot. Also have some more "exotic" stocks for when I want to get more stylistic. It gives the colorist a good based on how we want the end product to look. And it helps a lot on set to be closer to what the look you want. So other departments can work with the look your going for.

 

[Jake Wilganowski]

Well, some folks could do the hard work themselves instead of asking for a free ride. It took me lots of testing to come up with my sauce. And guys, Phil doesn't owe anyone anything, he's done more and given more than anyone

 

[Mat_G]

Great for base LUTs, then just do a mask for skin tones so they don't get wonky on you.
http://www.vision-color.com/impulz/

 

[Michael Lindsay]

I am talking about Steve Yedlin as well, who famously did a lot of tests matching Alexa to 35mm and will NOT release any of his findings because, well, they belong to HIM.

Steve Yedlin shared basically everything!!... what he didn't do is spend a lot of his own money and time building an easy to use tool for everyone to badly mimic his aproach. His aproach needs more than a LUT.. for example there was halation introduced which is out side the scope of a LUT.

If you want an easy to use 'special LUT' take one of the freely avaible print emulation LUTs out there and dilute them a little.. (Latice can do this).

Part of the reason some people don't share custom handbuilt LUTS is that they are one small component of an approach. The Lighting and exposing technique guided by specific taste is predicated/assumed in the use of the LUT... and even though an exposing aproach is shareable Taste and lighting are less so...

 

[Michael Hastings]

Well, some folks could do the hard work themselves instead of asking for a free ride. It took me lots of testing to come up with my sauce. And guys, Phil doesn't owe anyone anything, he's done more and given more than anyone

Didn't want to start any kind of sh*t storm.

And you are right Phil or anyone else doesn't owe anyone anything - and he has already done a tremendous service with all of his tests, charts, etc.

But I can't tell you how many thousands (literally) of hours I have spent explaining dome ports, virtual image, underwater filters, underwater lighting, white balance, RAW recording, differences between cameras, lenses, seals, controls, waterproof connectors, various techniques, etc. etc. to people I knew would never be buying something from me.

On Reduser, I use as an example David Mullen, a cinematographer that has now made it into the top of the cinematography field yet has thousands of educational posts here and has never seemed to hold anything back.

I guess I just feel that for the past ten years (I ordered RED1 at first NAB2006) I have been a loyal RED customer (purchasing every generation of RED) and REDUSER contributor - but for the past six years we have been chasing Arri for the "look and feel" of an image that seems to be preferred by the highest levels of the industry. In part that choice seems to be that it is easier to get to the end result image from Alexa footage and so far RED has not yet been able to make that easy for us - yet it seems that Panavision and certain Redusers have gotten closer. No they don't OWE us anything but it would be nice to SHARE information that would seem to get us all closer as well.

It might even help the overall acceptance of RED cameras if more/most users got footage that was closer to what seems to be desired.

I just bought Phil's online field guide a few weeks ago - and would be happy to invest a few dollars in a LUT package if that would help compensate.

 

[Phil Holland]

What happened to the sharing community? Some of us that are less experienced with high end film production are trying to get the best looking image we can out of this camera in the face of stiff competition from arri that seems to have the upper hand in getting the image that high end productions prefer.

Then we have panavision claiming a better way.

Yet some users seem to have discovered better ways than the stock looks red can give us but are content to let the rest of the Red cameras linger in third place (or worse) ?

i have always been open about sharing whatever knowledge I have (and some would say its considerable) for getting the best images underwater (which may be just as complex) and I thought this forum was like that as well?

I don't mean this to be too harsh - just curious.

PHIL -

ON THE SAME PAGE EXACTLY as Michael.

I remember reading a longer post of yours saying how your LUTs are your secret sauce and you will never ever release it, it's part of your business plan etc etc
This is not a dig at you. I couldn't care less about your LUTs. I am talking about a principle here.

I am talking about Steve Yedlin as well, who famously did a lot of tests matching Alexa to 35mm and will NOT release any of his findings because, well, they belong to HIM.

He was a true cinematographer. CINEMATOGRAPHER. And he's not alone. All the famous, good cinematographers do the same. They share. There are numerous, famous stories of cinematographers inventing something or doing something unusual to achieve a particular result and then sharing it, instead of keeping it a secret. In fact, it's part of the NOBILITY of this profession. Famously, Kubrick (not a DP per se, but almost!) spilled all the beans on his amazing, incredibly innovative effects for "2001", in American Cinematographer, to everyone's surprise.

Phil - I know you will be quick to explain yourself, and you would be right. I totally agree with you. It probably doesn't make sense to share anything if you care about your business plan.

Again, I am talking about a principle.

Are you a CINEMATOGRAPHER or are you a business man? Are you an artist in love with this amazing profession, or are you someone trying to make money out of using a camera?

There is a big difference. The first part assumes nobility, a love for images in general, a love for the profession and a love for your colleagues. The second - a love for profits no matter what.

Sorry I am picking on you. You don't deserve it.

But like Michael, I am wondering where did the spirit that you see in James Hong Howe go... Maybe we have to accept that we are part of a new generation which has been trained well to only care about money, and leave other higher, spiritual standards behind.

I have no problem explaining my perspective on "this".

First and foremost I do believe in assisting and educating the filmmaking community. Between my rather clear efforts here on REDuser.net to help others towards capturing the highest quality images out of these cameras I have also been instructing workshops since 2004, contributed to REDucation, held public RED Workshops, have done quite a few private camera tutelage sessions, mentored several students through NYFA and other schools, and instructed a course for several years at the Gnomon School of Visual Effects (where I did indeed go thoroughly into Post Color Workflow as that was part of the course).

I strongly feel I am the direct result of many very experienced and talented individuals essentially mentoring me to help advance my own knowledge, critical thinking process, abilities, and skill set. Especially with the particular journey I've had in the industry and my continued path.

I don't think there's anybody here or who knows me that would question my love for the industry or this community in particular. In the case of REDuser, we're talking thousands of hours here.


As for Color and my LUTs. I have absolutely no problem educating others regarding Color Workflow and 3D LUT creation/usage, but I do have a problem with giving out my LUTs.

Why?

They are indeed "my work". And what I mean by that is that some of these are over a decade old that I've used on features and productions of the past. Some of these I've gone to extreme lengths to develop, specifically any film stock emulation as it took time/effort/money to shoot, scan in, read in tonal response curves, create color profiles, and develop those looks. And even worse some of these are the result of years of tinkering and late night experiments to produce something in a real form that merely started as a feeling, especially the aggressive grades.

I draw everyday. I have no problem educating others how to draw, but I do have every problem in the world with drawing what will end up as other's people work for them. That in essence is what my 3D LUTs are to me. You are asking me to paint your painting, which I'm not going to do. As for helping guide those into how to paint their own pictures, that's all good.

To Mike's question regarding if I'm a Cinematographer, Artist, or Businessman. I'm a bit less focused on the separation of those concepts as in my mind I am "all of the above" and you'd have to be if you are going to make it in this industry. Even more likely, you'll have to achieve a balance of all of these notions to find a level of success.

Just an example, I spend about half my time developing original content these days. You wouldn't ask for one of my screenplays or pitches and there's no way in hell you'd leave the saloon with one in your hands while I'm still breathing. But you can certainly sit next to me at the bar and we discuss story, plot, and character development when enjoying a gin and tonic with our pistols holstered.


As a Cine-Art-Busi-dude: at the end of the day people hire me for my abilities, ideas, and expertise towards creating compelling motion pictures.


Hope that sort of explains it.

And a total side note, while it's too early to say anything about it, I am working on something that indeed will "help" on this front to some degree. However, for now these needs to be super skunkworks as it is still in development.

Hi Phil,
wont ask for the secret sauce obviously, but the way you described its effect on the image is pretty enticing. Can you share a frame grab to see what you're describing? New or old would do.

Sure. Taking color out of the equation, this shows the tonal notes I'm speaking of:

Color version:

What you see w/ DRAGONcolor/REDgamma4 here is very much a natural representation of what the shot was color-wise.

In terms of grading, there's a bunch good things going on in the image itself:

- The image is well exposed (exposed to Middle Gray, no clipping or crushing)
- The Dragon Sensor has a lot of Total Captured Dynamic Range
- Weapon Dragon w/ REDCODE RAW is very flexible in the Color Grade

For the curious, the LUT I created/developed for Forged is the "really thick" one.

As a side note. Long ago while studying Sargent's paintings a few artists and myself began digesting great artist's works in black and white as well as color. Interestingly enough when it came to tonal rendering on paper with pencil, graphite, charcoal, or just a black and white painting one thing that was apparent was often the brightness of the surface media used commonly expressed the maximum brightness found within the image. In some cases, especially with paintings, ink, and occasionally graphite work highlights were pushed based the uniform brightness intensity across the image. As we know today in terms of Color Theory and Composition, the Human Eye/Brain is attracted to areas of both Tonal and Color Contrast.

Applying this concept to a Color Grade might also be "fun". For instance, on a couple projects I've been able to grade I kept the catch lights in the eyes as the brightest thing seen on the screen, usually done with a very subtle adjustment.

Oddly with my VFX background I am mostly a "get it in camera" sort of DP and not really a "fix it in post" sort of fellow. However, in camera lighting and exposure often can't produce the subtlety and nuance of a good Color Grade. The tonality of the eye catch light technique is a very good example of this.

 

[Satsuki Murashige]

Professional cinematographers are by necessity both artists and buisnesspeople, I think we can all agree on that. Many have made the business decision not to share their personal LUTs, which are much like custom-made personal filters back in the day. The issue specifically with giving away LUTs is that they require skill, knowledge, special tools, and most importantly a well-developed eye to create, while they require no skill or knowledge to use. Anyone with passing familiarity with a computer can copy and paste them. This rubs many of us the wrong way. To go back to the custom filter analogy, it's as if a fellow DP wanted to know not only where you had the filter made, but also the exact recipe of your filter so they could make a copy. Most of us would freely share the former, but probably not the latter.

We all share our knowledge of the craft, techniques, how something was done. But it's something entirely different to just freely give away special custom-made tools. Imagine if another DP wanted the schematics of one of your custom-built underwater housings so they could make copies - how would you feel about that? Someone who is asking for that is probably not looking to do any hard work for themselves. Cinematography is about problem solving - how we each approach those problems makes our work unique. Once you start relying on formulas and simply copying the work of others, you've got nothing left to offer. Personally, I believe that those in our field who do not recognize this fact are doing damage to the spirit of our profession.

 

[Sabovic Adis]

I'm very big into doing everything in camera. So I made LUTs that emulates Kodak 5207 and 5219 perfectly that I usually use as for almost everything I shoot. Also have some more "exotic" stocks for when I want to get more stylistic. It gives the colorist a good based on how we want the end product to look. And it helps a lot on set to be closer to what the look you want. So other departments can work with the look your going for.

LUT, or it didn't happen! :rofl:

Sorry for this off, everybody! :biggrin:

 

[Jon Carr]

LUT, or it didn't happen! :rofl:

Sorry for this off, everybody! :biggrin:

Nope, my LUT is my LUT.

 

[Ben Scott]

I'm not sure I have read such twaddle in here ever before.

What is all this 'nobility' in artistry crap?

We are craftsmen and women. Crafting images and crafting stories. Art may be something some of us aspire to but it is for others to say if we hit it, and for people who have never met you to try and tell you your personality should be noble? Poppycock. Some of the greatest artists of all time were the ignoblest people one could ever hope to meet and outright scoundrels to boot.

Also, asking for someone else's fish when he spends so much time trying to help you learn to fish for free is rather disingenuous in my opinion.

 

[Brody_B]

Why would we want to copy the same look as other people with a Red?. I guess I just wouldn't want to see everyones videos on here have the same or similar color scheme, that would be booorring in the Red community, regardless if its a couple of the best looking luts. On the business note, years of practice and work that come together with creativity become IP, and IP aint free, and shouldn't be. It inspires others to work hard study and strive for being as good if not better than what they look up to, apposed to just downloading a preset and viola my videos look just like Phils or whoevers. And as much as we want to talk about honor or whatever, money is what allows creative people to create more and better.