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 :)

Weapon 3d lut question

Well, that doesn't seem right :tongue_smilie:
 

Attachments

  • LUTerror.jpg
    LUTerror.jpg
    74.7 KB · Views: 0
Looks like your in rg4 instead of redlogfilm

Not that that would solve rainbow colors :)
 
Jake Wilganowski said:
Looks like your in rg4 instead of redlogfilm

Not that that would solve rainbow colors :)
Click to expand...

I did the LUT based on a DC/RG4 clip and use that as the base in my Weapon when applying the LUT.
 
All converters I've found needs to be bought. I only want to change a 33x33x33 or 16x16x16 LUT to a 17x17x17 LUT. I don't understand why such simple things aren't already inside Resolve.
 
You can also convert the LUT to whatever you want in Photoshop. There's a million ways to do this.
 
Tommaso Alvisi said:
Chris,

if you need conversions just PM me and I'll help ya

Just tell me the format you want and target Gamma and/or Color Space.
Click to expand...

It's a tailored LUT I'm afraid, so there's no standard gamma or colorspace, it's more for approval of a look on set. But thanks for the offer :)

Phil Holland said:
You can also convert the LUT to whatever you want in Photoshop. There's a million ways to do this.
Click to expand...

How do I do that? The LUT I made in resolve is a grade, not a color space or standard gamma, so I would like to convert it as is into a 17x17x17 form. How do I do that in Photoshop? :)

EDIT: I think I found it, you create a new image, load in a LUT onto that, export as 17x17x17 LUT? Seems to work now in camera so I'll guess i do that from now on. Just a pain that a single freakin setting like that couldn't exist when exporting the LUT out of Resolve :tongue_smilie:
 
This might help as an example how to do this. We built a LUT in Photoshop to help with a visual effect we want to monitor on set. If you create a color lookup adjustment layer instead of how we used a selective color layer you can import your LUT there. Then export the same way we do (4:31) but change your your grid points to be 17. Make sure you have a background layer though or it will throw an error.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/207378049/locke-a-film-by-joe-blodgett/posts/1545134

Sorry for the kickstarter page we have embed disable on the video right now.
 
Is there a way to export a lut from photoshop CS6 rather than upgrading to CC? Really want an easy and preferably free way to convert 32x32x32 3Dluts to 17x17x17 for use in MG.

Should totally be an easy function in RCX as well.
 
Jake Wilganowski said:
We REALLY need to be able to see luts upon playback, it's super annoying to have a workaround.

I have made a custom Kodak lut and man is it beautiful! I want to run it all the time! Solves all color complaints and looks incredible. Had to do a fair bit of tweaking to make it shine but it's there now. So Red:
1) allow luts on playback
2) give me the option to burn in the lut to QuickTime if I so choose
3) give me the option to NOT include the lut in the file structure if i so choose
Click to expand...

The three questions Jake has mentioned here are exactly what I'm hoping for and frankly really need. My DIT is forced to have a LUT box for the simple task of playing back with my LUT so my director, client etc. doesn't watch back in LOG. Being able to burn in my chosen LUT to my ProRes or DNX offline proxies is also very important. It ensures that the offline editor is forced to use the look we've signed off on set so everyone who views/reviews edits moving forward accepts the look and also ensures the colourist doesn't just revert to log and do what they want if the DP is not able to attend the grade, which does happen sometimes due to scheduling conflicts and budget reasons.

Once this in place then I think the workflow from a weapon will be the best option at the moment available for production.
 
Andreas Neo said:
The three questions Jake has mentioned here are exactly what I'm hoping for and frankly really need. My DIT is forced to have a LUT box for the simple task of playing back with my LUT so my director, client etc. doesn't watch back in LOG. Being able to burn in my chosen LUT to my ProRes or DNX offline proxies is also very important. It ensures that the offline editor is forced to use the look we've signed off on set so everyone who views/reviews edits moving forward accepts the look and also ensures the colourist doesn't just revert to log and do what they want if the DP is not able to attend the grade, which does happen sometimes due to scheduling conflicts and budget reasons.

Once this in place then I think the workflow from a weapon will be the best option at the moment available for production.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. Can we please get this in a firmware update soon?
 
Andreas Neo said:
The three questions Jake has mentioned here are exactly what I'm hoping for and frankly really need. My DIT is forced to have a LUT box for the simple task of playing back with my LUT so my director, client etc. doesn't watch back in LOG. Being able to burn in my chosen LUT to my ProRes or DNX offline proxies is also very important. It ensures that the offline editor is forced to use the look we've signed off on set so everyone who views/reviews edits moving forward accepts the look and also ensures the colourist doesn't just revert to log and do what they want if the DP is not able to attend the grade, which does happen sometimes due to scheduling conflicts and budget reasons.
Click to expand...
I have never seen a situation where "the colorist just reverts to log" during a session. What we can and will do is drag along the LUTted material as a comparison, then come up with a look that works favorably with what you've been seeing during the edit process. If anything, I generally try to warn my clients away from any kind of a lifted/Log-ish look on the basis that it's unrealistic and too flat. (I get that this might be a look people specifically want for some kinds of projects, particularly with short running times, like commercials.)

I know a ton of productions that just use the off-shelf color science provided by Red -- like the usual DragonColor/DragonGamma combo -- and just use that as a "ballpark" image that gives you the general idea of where to go. If you start spending too much time on set actually trying to work out a grade, you're going to wind up getting enmeshed in all kinds of delays. I can think of many situations where we've spent 2 or 3 hours coming up with a complex look for a 5 minute scene in post, where there's lots of time and you can relax, put your feet up on a table, and grab a sandwich. You'll also know in post you're seeing a calibrated monitor (or projector) you can absolutely trust, under optimum viewing circumstances -- not staring at a rented monitor that's had the crap beaten out of it, while watching it under a black hood, and you have no idea if what you see is real.

On set, it's a whole different story. Just get something that looks reasonable, make sure it's framed correctly, make sure it's exposed properly and in focus, and move on. If you're concerned about it, then my suggestion would be to do a "pre-color" session right after the shoot and have a colorist do a one-day or two-day pass on a dailies roughcut and give it the "more intense" look you're going for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top