REDLogFILM > Rec.709 LUT - Anyone have one? Made one? Graeme?

[Michael Romano]

REDLogFILM > Rec.709 LUT - Anyone have one? Made one they trust? Its so nice having it for the ALEXA, I'd love it for the EPIC.

Specifically for use in Pomfort LiveGrade, Resolve and with BM HDLinks. I like to see the LOG on tap and feed video village 709. I also sometimes get EPIC originated material for final CC that has been transcoded to 2K DPX in the REDLogFILM gamma space. Would be nice to have a starting point. I'm don't think the ALEXA LUT is close enough to trust.

 

[Danai Chutinaton]

Check out Antler Post

http://www.antlerpost.com/Store.html

 

[Michael Romano]

Excellent! Thank you!

 

[Nick Shaw]

Thanks Danai.

I'd love to have some feedback on how people find my REDlogFilm LUTs, and if they think that what I have done regarding black levels (as described in detail in my ReadMe file) makes sense.

On the subject of using Alexa LUTs for REDlogFilm, I personally recommend against it (but I obviously have a vested interest) because Alexa 3D LUTs include a colour matrix which is specific to the Alexa, and may do unexpected things to the colorimetry of RED footage. That said if you like the look of the resulting image aesthetically, it doesn't matter that it's technically "wrong".

 

[Sergio Perez]

Dont know if this is what you're asking, but If you are in Redcine X, go to preferences and thick the "advanced settings" box. After having that selected, go to gamma where you selected redlogfilm and you can select rec 709.

 

[luigivaltulini]

Michael,

same Sergio.. activate rec show advanced controls in REdcine-x preferences..

i use this for television hd1080 , work very welllllll



Luigi

 

[Gabriele Turchi]

hi nick , i have been using your RLF to RG3 , but :

in resolve if i compare 2 versions :
one having RG3 (no other corrections )
the other one having RLF + your curve (RG3 as LUT)

the 2 images are little different ( not too different , a bit of gamma difference i would say , but different )

thanks

g

 

[joe hedge]

Some interesting insight on this process:

http://www.negativespaces.com/blog/2012/10/21/a-video-workflow-for-the-red.html

The main drawback seems to be that the EVF/onboard can't do a separate, rec709 monitoring LUT

 

[Sidney L. Plaut]

maybe its me not getting it, but I don't simply don't understand why Red hasn't provided a Lut-generator on their website. and a LUT to vendors like BM, so it pops up in Resolve and other programs.

Now you can get Sony, Bmc, Arri.... no Red. - this looks very bad when you sit with producers and Directors.

- from the countless posts I have read - the only answer I have seen from Red is, that RedlogFilm just needs a standard Cineon log to rec709 .... To which I can only say :

A lut generator on your website. like the one Arri has or similar. and make it pop up in Resolve

 

[Sidney L. Plaut]

the Advice you are given in regards to just using the old "rec 709" is in my opinion wrong and will limit your dynamic range.

the difference between redGamma2/3 and "rec709" is that the RedGamma's gently makes a curve the highlights whereas the "rec709" Clips them.

 

[Nick Shaw]

the Advice you are given in regards to just using the old "rec 709" is in my opinion wrong and will limit your dynamic range.

the difference between redGamma2/3 and "rec709" is that the RedGamma's gently makes a curve the highlights whereas the "rec709" Clips them.

I agree entirely. The Rec709 options in REDCINE-X are left there for historical reasons, as they were the original options on the RED ONE, so people may want to return to old projects and match settings. However they are superseded, and not recommended.

 

[jake blackstone]

maybe its me not getting it, but I don't simply don't understand why Red hasn't provided a Lut-generator on their website. and a LUT to vendors like BM, so it pops up in Resolve and other programs.

Now you can get Sony, Bmc, Arri.... no Red. - this looks very bad when you sit with producers and Directors.

- from the countless posts I have read - the only answer I have seen from Red is, that RedlogFilm just needs a standard Cineon log to rec709 .... To which I can only say :

A lut generator on your website. like the one Arri has or similar. and make it pop up in Resolve

Totally agree. IMO it's another FU to post people by Red. First, you need to spend $5k on RR, which by the way had no reduction in price in over three years, unlike their cameras. And no assistance at all with proper LUT for use with RedLogFilm, other than " just use standard Cineon LUT". Compare this approach with Arri, providing proper LUT at no charge to everyone for any type of software. So, now everyone uses Arri Alexa LUT for RedLogFilm and then everyone wonders why Red skin tones are funky And Red still can't understand why they're disliked by the post community...

 

[Nick Shaw]

hi nick , i have been using your RLF to RG3 , but :

in resolve if i compare 2 versions :
one having RG3 (no other corrections )
the other one having RLF + your curve (RG3 as LUT)

the 2 images are little different ( not too different , a bit of gamma difference i would say , but different )

It's not a gamma difference, it is a black level difference. It is intentional, and the reasoning behind it is explained in the ReadMe file. I struggled when I wrote that to make the explanation simple and clear. From the fact that many people are still confused, I obviously did not succeed!

 

[jake blackstone]

It's not a gamma difference, it is a black level difference. It is intentional, and the reasoning behind it is explained in the ReadMe file. I struggled when I wrote that to make the explanation simple and clear. From the fact that many people are still confused, I obviously did not succeed!

So Nick. If I understand it correctly, as long as Resolve is set to full range for display, there should be no difference in black levels, between RG2/3 and while your LUT is applied to RLF, right?

 

[Nick Shaw]

So Nick. If I understand it correctly, as long as Resolve is set to full range for display, there should be no difference in black levels, between RG2/3 and while your LUT is applied to RLF, right?

No. There will be a difference and it is intentional.

All the REDgamma curves (with all other SDK settings left at defaults) give slightly raised black levels, so you need to sit the black level down if you want true blacks in the image. My LUTs have the equivalent of setting lift to -0.02 in Resolve "baked into the LUT" so that they can be used as output LUTs, with no nodes downstream of them, and still give true black where no light hit the sensor.

If you have my LUTs you can try it. Take a REDgamma3 image (with nothing adjusted from defaults except ISO, FLUT, Kelvin, Tint and DRX) and set Lift to -0.02 in Resolve. Take the same image as REDlogFilm (same caveats) and apply my LUT. They should match.

 

[Nick Shaw]

This is part of the reason I am inviting feedback. If people disagree with the decision I made to do this, I can provide unmodified REDlogFilm to REDgamma LUTS, and leave it up to the colourist to add an additional node downstream of the LUT to sit the blacks down if required. This additional node will be required though, as because of the way the REDgamma curves work, no matter what you do in grading prior to the LUT, the output cannot be true black.

 

[jake blackstone]

No. There will be a difference and it is intentional.

All the REDgamma curves (with all other SDK settings left at defaults) give slightly raised black levels, so you need to sit the black level down if you want true blacks in the image. My LUTs have the equivalent of setting lift to -0.02 in Resolve "baked into the LUT" so that they can be used as output LUTs, with no nodes downstream of them, and still give true black where no light hit the sensor.

Ah, I see, I did understand it the other way around Thanks for the clarification. I think it may be a good idea to add this very explanation to your "read me note".

 

[jake blackstone]

This is part of the reason I am inviting feedback. If people disagree with the decision I made to do this, I can provide unmodified REDlogFilm to REDgamma LUTS, and leave it up to the colourist to add an additional node downstream of the LUT to sit the blacks down if required. This additional node will be required though, as because of the way the REDgamma curves work, no matter what you do in grading prior to the LUT, the output cannot be true black.

Personally, I prefer your solution, as this is one less thing to worry about. But I do have another question. If one need to render out the legal range on Resolve, will we able to do it, while using this LUT or we'll need to use the rlf2rg3_LL_Color instead of rlf2rg3_EE_Color LUT?

 

[Nick Shaw]

Personally, I prefer your solution, as this is one less thing to worry about. But I do have another question. If one need to render out the legal range on Resolve, will we able to do it, while using this LUT or we'll need to use the rlf2rg3_LL_Color instead of rlf2rg3_EE_Color LUT?

No, you should not use an LL LUT in Resolve. Resolve is designed to always work internally in full range, but unclamped float, so that sub-blacks and super-whites are preserved without needing to resort to the "trick" of 64-940 ranging. Full <> legal scaling is best handled IMHO using Resolve's built is "Data level" options in Clip Attributes and Output options.

 

[jake blackstone]

No, you should not use an LL LUT in Resolve. Resolve is designed to always work internally in full range, but unclamped float, so that sub-blacks and super-whites are preserved without needing to resort to the "trick" of 64-940 ranging. Full <> legal scaling is best handled IMHO using Resolve's built is "Data level" options in Clip Attributes and Output options.

Yes, that's my understanding too, that Resolve always operates in full range. Thank you for the info, again.
I just realized, that the legal LUT is for Color and not for Resolve. I'm curious why then Arri supplies both legal and full range LUTs for color grading systems, like Resolve.