Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register 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 :)

SpeedLooks for Speedgrade, Resolve, Scracth, Lustre, FilmLight

jimhare said:
I would have thought it would be the Speedlook LUT like this:

lut.png
Click to expand...

yup. Doing that now. Thanks Again!
 
Adrian Jebef said:
This actually makes a lot of sense and is really the only way a single "look" / LUT could possibly give somewhat consistant results between different camera original files. Basically, the input "Log" LUT is designed (per camera) to transform each camera's highs/mids/lows into a consistant gamma range scale that can then be re-transformed with the output "creative" LUT (like stock emulations) into a consistent final "look". IE: let's just say that EPIC records mid-grey (18%) at 42 IRE, ALEXA records it at 38 IRE, 5D records 50, Sony F65 at 35. With the input "Log" transform SpeedLooks puts mid-grey for every camera at 40 on the scale. So when an output "creative" LUT is used it only has to be written once because it is already optimized for mid-grey at 40.

Make any sense?

Matt, it would be great to see a sequence of mixed camera footage with the same SpeedLook applied. I think it would be really interesting to see where SpeedLooks pushes highlights and shadows across different camera source footage.

(when you have the time)

:emote_popcorn:
Click to expand...
No, it's not "look" / LUT could possibly give somewhat consistant results between different camera". What they are trying to do is use the idea of ACES, which is already supported by Resolve and every other manufacturer. They are re-inventing the wheel, that already exists.
 
Matt Ryan said:
nope, thats only because I shot and exposed for 500ISO, then dropped it to 320 in Resolve to start color. But both have same exact settings, just one has the logC input LUT... It wouldn't looked so crushed if I left the ISO at 500ISO as shot. I posted the grab of my settings above.
Click to expand...

Hmm... ok. Your settings look good. But nothing should be hitting full black in a RLF image no matter what your original or post set ISO is.

I just checked on some pitch black ISO 1600 footage reduced to ISO 50 and the blacks are still quite elevated. Your blacks are actually fully clipped black. Interesting...
 
Matt Ryan said:
No SpeedLooks Clean 3500 Fuji LUT.

I'll run the standard Alexa Lut and post those JPEGS right now and zip the tiffs. Give me a sec.
Click to expand...

I'd prefer ARRI LUT, as the idea is to emulate ALEXA. So, I want to see for myself, just how well it works... or doesn't:-)
 
Juan Melara said:
Hmm... ok. Your settings look good. But nothing should be hitting full black in a RLF image no matter what your original or post set ISO is.

I just checked on some pitch black ISO 1600 footage reduced to ISO 50 and the blacks are still quite elevated. Your blacks are actually fully clipped black. Interesting...
Click to expand...

my bad, there is an edge vignette on. Forgot about that. But it's only on the outer edges in a circle.

Damn, just realized I grabbed the wrong stills! I grabbed my final grades. Let me start over haha. They only had the LUTS, the vignette, and a levels adjustment. Anyways untouched RAW images posted below.
 
Here's my lame attempt:

1. Red Log Film only
1RLF.jpg


2. Red Log Film Plus EPIC Input LUT from Speedlooks to make Log-C

2RLF_INPUT_LUT.jpg


3. RLF, Input LUT and SpeedLooks output:

3speedlooks.jpg


4. RLF, Epic input LUT and Alexa output LUTn (required minor tweak as it was a bit flat) :

4alexa.jpg


5. No LUTS at all, just RC3, RG3 and my own quicky grade:

6own.jpg
 
Are you sure it's simulated grain Matt? I thought it was adding noise that had the appearance of grain. As you say, more noticable when the image is pushed.

Matt Ryan said:
No it's built in. You wont see grain unless you really push the footage.
Click to expand...
 
jimhare said:
Are you sure it's simulated grain Matt? I thought it was adding noise that had the appearance of grain. As you say, more noticable when the image is pushed.
Click to expand...

quite possibly. I asked Jeff August the creator and he just said it was built into the LUT. He was the one who recommended setting base ISO to 320 for most all shots unless really underexposed.
 
jake blackstone said:
No, it's not "look" / LUT could possibly give somewhat consistant results between different camera". What they are trying to do is use the idea of ACES, which is already supported by Resolve and every other manufacturer. They are re-inventing the wheel, that already exists.
Click to expand...

Actually, yes, it is. The "idea of ACES" is an old one. In fact, it's the same basic idea of the log-to-lin transform you use daily. ACES just happens to propose a MUCH bigger "box" capable of holding every camera out there (and those yet to come). Personally, I think ACES is a fantastic step in the right direction. If it works it will solve MANY problems. Unfortunately, like most new things, it's got its share of bugs. SpeedLooks is not concerning itself with pure technical precision the way ACES does. It is simply striving to create consistently good looking pictures for its user base.

And yes, we are ALL constantly "re-inventing the wheel". After all, we want a better wheel not just a good enough one.
 
jake blackstone said:
I'd prefer ARRI LUT, as the idea is to emulate ALEXA. So, I want to see for myself, just how well it works... or doesn't:-)
Click to expand...

I've never spoken directly to the creator of SpeedLooks but I highly doubt that the "idea" of the camera-specific Log input transform is to make all other camera footage "look like" ALEXA footage. After all Log C is not ALEXA specific. It is simply a defined Log gamma space based on the Kodak Cineon curve. Speedlooks is using Log C as a reference container in which any supported camera formats can be properly and constantly placed prior to grading or applying one of their "looks".

Actually, the input transform LUTs seem as valuable as the creative "looks".
 
You can see in my example above what happens when you combine the SpeedLooks LOG-C input conversion for EPIC, with the ALEXA-REC709 LUT from Resolve. The results are interesting but I don't think as good as the SpeedLooks output LUT.

Adrian Jebef said:
I've never spoken directly to the creator of SpeedLooks but I highly doubt that the "idea" of the camera-specific Log input transform is to make all other camera footage "look like" ALEXA footage. After all Log C is not ALEXA specific. It is simply a defined Log gamma space based on the Kodak Cineon curve. Speedlooks is using Log C as a reference container in which any supported camera formats can be properly and constantly placed prior to grading or applying one of their "looks".

Actually, the input transform LUTs seem as valuable as the creative "looks".
Click to expand...
 
jimhare said:
You can see in my example above what happens when you combine the SpeedLooks LOG-C input conversion for EPIC, with the ALEXA-REC709 LUT from Resolve. The results are interesting but I don't think as good as the SpeedLooks output LUT.
Click to expand...

Yup, applying the ALEXA rec709 output transform LUT to EPIC footage is a bit weird. The ALEXA rec709 output transform is written specifically to convert ALEXA Log C images into a basic rec709 space. The results should be decent but not really that interesting as the rec709 LUT is more of a technical transform than a "creative look" LUT.
 
Here is the Resolve project file (http://wtrns.fr/7_sdaXoajjqP0g), where I had used Matt's TIFF files for a test. There I matched RLF image to the ARRI look. After that I had matched manually both images to the 3500 FUJI LUT.I believe Matt's image has a vignette. Mine doesn't. Both operations didn't take long or anything complicated. SppeedLooks adjusts a bit of offsets to give a brighter image and slightly moves the image toward cooler tint to create the "Alexa look". That's it. I highly doubt, that that's the Alexa color science magic... See it for yourself.
Please note, that I wasn't able to match the 3500 FUJI LUT precisely, as I didn't have that image as a LOG, therefore I had to kinda guess, but it would be very easy to match that look precisely, if I had it in Log.
The Resolve stills and ARRI LUT is included in the project. Matt's images you'll have to download yourself. Have fun...
 
jake blackstone said:
Here is the Resolve project file (http://wtrns.fr/7_sdaXoajjqP0g), where I had used Matt's TIFF files for a test. There I matched ARLF image to the ARRI look. After that I had matched manually both images to the 3500 FUJI LUT.I believe Matt's image has a vignette. Mine doesn't. Both operations didn't take long or anything complicated. SppeedLooks adjusts a bit of offsets to give a brighter image and slightly moves the image toward cooler tint to create a Alexa look. That's it. See it for yourself.
Please note, that I wasn't able to match the 3500 FUJI LUT precisely, as I didn't have that image as a LOG, therefore I had to kinda guess, but it would be very easy to match that look precisely, if I had it in Log.
Click to expand...

I reposted some clean Tiffs and jpegs above. The original images were the wrong ones by mistake. Sorry. Heres the correct ones: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?87940-SpeedLooks-for-Speedgrade-Resolve-Scracth-Lustre-FilmLight&p=1128891&viewfull=1#post1128891
 
jake blackstone said:
Yes, for the test I had used the corrected ones. I just don't have the Log image of 3500 Fuji to match it to. But the RLF to ALexa match is correct.
Click to expand...

I'll post one in the morning

What are your impressions on the LogC input LUT? Better starting point than RLF?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top