Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

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

jake blackstone said:
I'm curious why then Arri supplies both legal and full range LUTs for color grading systems, like Resolve.
Click to expand...

Arri's LUT generator is very comprehensive, probably overly so. It gives you all the options, even if some of them have no meaning. Many people have found this confusing!
 
Nick you know alot about this subject and you were a TA at Reducation UK - why is that there is no official LUT's from RED?

And Jake is very right when he says RED is quite unpopular many places because of little stuff like this- it seems so simple to provide.
 
ssssssssssh here's a little secret for you:

The Alexa Log to Rec Transform works on RedLogFilm...

and...

GASP...

it looks excellent...

GASP...

Like "the same" as an Alexa if exposed correctly.
 
BTW: The RedColor/RedGamma Viewing spaces ARE LUTS...

because the camera shoots RAW there is always a transform from the RAW to a viewing image...

So, look at it this way

A LUT is merely a transform from one representation to another. You can hand-color something, or you can view it through a series of transforms and add other transforms...
 
Dan Kanes said:
ssssssssssh here's a little secret for you:

The Alexa Log to Rec Transform works on RedLogFilm...

and...

GASP...

it looks excellent...

GASP...

Like "the same" as an Alexa if exposed correctly.
Click to expand...
Yes, it does look good with Alexa LUT, but not perfect, as Nick already pointed out. One of the things, that gets affected the most, IMHO are the skin tones. I find, that with Alexa LUT I have to work a little extra hard to get the skin tones right.
So, I would love for Red to release a series of LUTs, so we wouldn't even need to discuss it.
 
Here's a link to a .cube LUT I created: http://juanmelara.com.au/downloads/redlogfilm2video.zip

It gets pretty close in converting REDlogFilm to match REDgamma3.

I've been using it for a while with great success. Check the comparison image below...

redlogfilm_lut.jpg
 
joe hedge said:
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
Click to expand...

Hah! I was just going to do a whole write up on this, but apparently ben already posted about it. I DPed that project, and the DIT on set was Tom. It was brilliant, Tom was delogging redlogfilm to 709 and this gave me the ability to make lighting decisions based on an interpreted curve, essentially showing me the noise floor and clipping edge of the highlights from the LOG. I essence showing me everything the camera had in a director/client friendly curve. From there, Tom set the looks from the adjusted log signal in Live grade and saved the CDL. This gave us a nondestructive grade from RAW, but in a sense, staggered the look into two pieces, so adjustments can be made in layers. Giving us more subtlety.

Tom? Care to chime in?
 
jake blackstone said:
It looks pretty good Juan. Thanks for posting it.
Do you have anything with a skin tone in the picture?
On the other hand, never mind, I can see it for myself, right?:-)
Click to expand...

I've had another look at this LUT, trying it on skin tones and it doesn't look quite right in the highlights. It looks like theres a slight bit of posterisation. I'm tweaking it again I'll put up a new version soon...

But what do people value most, a LUT that 99% matches REDgamma3 with no further tweaks but doesn't nail the highlights 100%. Or a LUT that doesn't match RG3 but creates a more pleasing image all round?
 
Hi Bjorn, I am interested in checking your LUTs offered above out. Any chance these LUTs can be converted for use in Resolve? This forma does not seem to work unless I am doing something wrong...
Thanks
Tom
 
tomspark said:
Hi Bjorn, I am interested in checking your LUTs offered above out. Any chance these LUTs can be converted for use in Resolve? This forma does not seem to work unless I am doing something wrong...
Thanks
Tom
Click to expand...

Odd, it's 3D luts is that possible to import in resolve? I have not tested, works like a charm in Flame.
 
I find it absolutely fascinating, that we even need to have this conversation. How much time had passed from the introduction of RFL? A couple of years? And yet, no official response from Red on a proper LUT. WTF!!!??? They introduced RLF, stated, that it's perfectly adheres to Cineon standard and for the rest you're on your own. Come up with your own LUT for all iterations of RLF/RLF2/RLF3 legal and full for ADSK, Resolve, Nucoda, FilmLight, Nuke, AE and on and on and on. So, people in post chain start using third party solutions, so nothing matches between users and no one at Red cares. How difficult would be for Red to release an official LUT for main software platforms, so everyone operates on the same plane? LUT generator would be great too.
 
jake blackstone said:
I find it absolutely fascinating, that we even need to have this conversation. How much time had passed from the introduction of RFL? A couple of years? And yet, no official response from Red on a proper LUT. WTF!!!??? They introduced RLF, stated, that it's perfectly adheres to Cineon standard and for the rest you're on your own. Come up with your own LUT for all iterations of RLF/RLF2/RLF3 legal and full for ADSK, Resolve, Nucoda, FilmLight, Nuke, AE and on and on and on. So, people in post chain start using third party solutions, so nothing matches between users and no one at Red cares. How difficult would be for Red to release an official LUT for main software platforms, so everyone operates on the same plane? LUT generator would be great too.
Click to expand...


+1 yes please!
 
jake blackstone said:
I find it absolutely fascinating, that we even need to have this conversation. How much time had passed from the introduction of RFL? A couple of years? And yet, no official response from Red on a proper LUT. WTF!!!??? They introduced RLF, stated, that it's perfectly adheres to Cineon standard and for the rest you're on your own. Come up with your own LUT for all iterations of RLF/RLF2/RLF3 legal and full for ADSK, Resolve, Nucoda, FilmLight, Nuke, AE and on and on and on. So, people in post chain start using third party solutions, so nothing matches between users and no one at Red cares. How difficult would be for Red to release an official LUT for main software platforms, so everyone operates on the same plane? LUT generator would be great too.
Click to expand...

You are spot on. The worst thing the not matching part - when you move between vendors.... "its like quicktime from PC houses to Mac houses... do I need to say more?"
 
Björn Benckert said:
Odd, it's 3D luts is that possible to import in resolve? I have not tested, works like a charm in Flame.
Click to expand...

This format (.3dl) works with HDLink, not Resolve. Resolve reads ".cube" and ".dat" only.
 
I agree. Red need to provide an accessible means to be able to work consistently with colour for people who want to take advantage of RedLogFilm. Red Log Film has been repeatedly touted as the best way of getting the most out of the .r3d, yet in Resolve, a very common finishing package for people who shoot on Red, the only accessible way of getting a reasonable conversion is using Alexa log conversion LUT's. I don't like going this way, it feels wrong and does not look completely right. Please Red, help simplify getting optimum colour out of you great camera!

Anyone know how to convert a .3dl LUT into .cube or .dat so I can check out Bjorn's LUT's in resolve. I don't have flame or an HDlink. I have looked around and cannot find a way to do this. Maybe it needs to be pulled up in flame and perhaps exported as a .cube or .dat. Unfortunetely I don't have the system to test.
Anyone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top