Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I know this has been discussed before but I've been researching this topic for the past two hours and still can't find a solution.
I have .mov source files from a Canon 7D. Exporting them from PP CS5.5 (Mac OS X - Lion, 10.7.4) in h.264 or by 'matching sequence settings' results in a gamma shift/desaturated colours. Playing the resulting h.264 file in QuickTime Player, VLC, Elmedia all result in the same colour shift so this is not an issue with QT simply interpreting the gamma incorrectly.
Uploading to Vimeo and Youtube results in the same gamma shift. The monitor I'm using is not calibrated but when puling up a VLC window of the exported file next to the Program Monitor (on the same monitor) shows that there is a definite difference. Below is a screenshot.
Is there any way to produce an exported file for Vimeo use that reproduces the gamma as I see it in the Program Monitor?
Any help would be massively appreciated.
Thanks.
The fix may be within your Nvidia Control Panel settings. I was having this issue when exporting from Premiere CS6 and uploading to Vimeo (the video once posted to Vimeo was washed out and/or hazy).
From this link: http://danbeahm.blogspot.com/2011/01/fix-windows-media-center-andor-vlc.html
...
The fix I found was to use the NVIDIA control panel to control your video playback instead of the video player’s settings.
- Open your NVIDIA Control Panel (type NVIDIA in your start menu search field and selec
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
First, a bit of nomenclature ... that isn't a RAW file, not close. RAW is a very specific file type, that is actually still a data file from the sensor that needs to be at least partially debayered and where you must still set the ISO, gamma, etc. of the file in the computer prior to processing.
Yours is a fully "cooked" normal original camera media file. All debayering, all conversion to video file has already been done in the camera. And yes, this matters as to which it is because the steps in Premiere are very different between RAW and normal video.
Next ... no camera made has a perfectly calibrated screen, not even the $70,000-plus Arri, RED, and Sony rigs. And computer operating systems (such as Mac's ColorSync utility) and video players tend to do things to "enhance the viewers perspective" as does YouTube. Vimeo less so.
Including monitors ... so, what is your monitor, and have you calibrated it with a puck/software setup like say the Xrite i1 Display? As if you haven't, you don't know that the monitor is even close to proper setup and also handling of video data.
Premiere will tend to give the more accurate view of the pixels as far as internally applying correct video standards to the file on its internal monitors. Not always, of course ... it needs to be set correctly.
You didn't say how the file looks within Premiere. Another crucial bit, is how the exported file looks re-imported into Premiere. That can be rather informative also.
Understand ... what that exported file looks like on your system is only what it looks like on your system ... and unless you have a tightly calibrated setup, no one else will see what you're seeing. Well, even if you do, they won't, as about every screen out there is different.
So ... what's the camera? What's the format/codec of the files it produces? What calibration have you done on the monitor if any? Does the exported file look the same when brought back into Premiere as the original does on the timeline?
Those questions can help us sort things out.
Neil
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
"Understand ... what that exported file looks like on your system is only what it looks like on your system ... and unless you have a tightly calibrated setup, no one else will see what you're seeing. Well, even if you do, they won't, as about every screen out there is different."
So why then do I see this difference on my Huawei Matebook 13 i5 with Intel processor?
Viewing file copied straight from SD card (Sandisk Extreme, GoPro 8) on VLC: https://ibb.co/cbR8Y2P
Viewing the PP exported video (now with washed out colours) on VLC: https://ibb.co/f9JLZ1g
My PP export settings: https://ibb.co/MBYJ1zb
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
GoPro ... ok, that's at least one question answered. What's the format/codec ... probably a long-GOP H.264 ... an mp4, probably?
What calibration if any on the monitor? What's your GPU, also ... and have you done anything with GPU settings? What ICC profile are you using?
Does the exported file when brought back into Premiere look the same as the sequence in Premiere?
I didn't ask those in fun, but because they were needed. Add in, what color space is the file? Rec.709, HLG, what?
My comment about no one seeing the file wasn't that no one else would see the difference between the ones you're seeing, it's that no one else will see any file exactly the same way you see it. That said, the more you help answer the questions, the better we can suss out what is going on.
Unfortunately, color 'management' is pretty screwed up in reality. What a pro colorist does is setup a system the tightest to the Rec.709 standard as possible. And grades to that. Then no matter what screen that media is shown on, it will look ... relatively on that screen ... like all other pro-produced media on that screen.
It will not look anything like what the colorist saw. But ... again, it will look like other pro-produced media on that screen. So to those used to that screen, it will look "normal".
Neil
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
"GoPro ... ok, that's at least one question answered. What's the format/codec ... probably a long-GOP H.264 ... an mp4, probably?"
Yes
"What calibration if any on the monitor? What's your GPU, also ... and have you done anything with GPU settings? What ICC profile are you using?"
"Does the exported file when brought back into Premiere look the same as the sequence in Premiere?"
Haven't tried that so I can't tell.
"I didn't ask those in fun, but because they were needed. Add in, what color space is the file? Rec.709, HLG, what?"
I do not know whats Rec.709 or HLG means or what they do.
I mentioned I have Intel GPU. I have not done anything with my GPU settings because I do not know what they mean or what they do or how to get to them (I'm an absolute noob in these things, I'm just a simple basic cut, add simple stuff edit kind of guy, not a pro editor with fancy color grading which I also don't understand fully or know how to do). I do not know what ICC is.
My main question which you didn't answer is why my files from the SD card look great on my monitor, but edited and exported video looks washed out when viewing both on VLC or any other player I tried (all the same). You can clearly see the difference in my screenshots of the colours, the original SD card file and exported ones and that's exactly what I see on my monitor. Why don't I see the same colours and quality (SD card file quality) in exported videos?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I can't answer that for specifics until I know more of what's going on in your setup. As there are a TON of things that could be going on.
There's a lot more to getting good consistent color in video work than many people understand when starting out. Way too much gear, from cameras through players through monitors through TV's has stuff set up to "enhance the viewing experience".
Which is a marketing term for juicing the image or sound in a way that makes a 'better' first impression with the mass market. It isn't accurate, but it's "impressive!" at first glance.
Premiere is designed to attempt to be as accurate as possible. When Premiere and other non-pro things 'disagree', the better bet is that Premiere is more accurate. The other apps/players/whatever may be doing stuff to the image to "help". Typically such things as popping contrast and saturation up a bit.
Or ... they may just not be doing the correct thing for video.
As to Rec.709 versus HLG, that's something you do need to learn to differentiate. Rec.709 is the "SDR" or standard dynamic range, "normal" video media. HLG is one of the more common HDR ... high dynamic range/wide-color gamut formats.
HDR media played back in SDR/Rec.709 settings will be dull.
Neil
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
That's probably the GoPro colour option thing in the camera itself and I love the looks of it, I want the exported video to look EXACTLY like my SD card file video.
"HDR media played back in SDR/Rec.709 settings will be dull."
So why when I play the "raw" SD card file it's not dull, but PP pro edited export is dull?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
No clue, as I don't know what that original file IS or how they may "tag" the media. Premiere is exporting standard Rec.709, so ... I do wonder if that file is an HLG or something, but again, you haven't given any data about it, you seem to expect me to be omniscient or something. Which I ain't by a longshot.
Giving a short clip of original camera file here for others to view/test ... (and again, it's not raw at all, just a camera-original file), would of course also be helpful.
And of course, it's very easy to make a Lumetri preset that would say increase contrast & sat a bit to more closely match what you want, and simply drag/drop than on a whole bin of clips in the Project panel. A couple seconds, all files 'fixed' to your liking.
Neil
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I'm given you all the data I could. I answered your questions and posted links to screenshots of my PP to an image uploading site..
But I got the problem sorted now anyway.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I do have a similar problem, but it is only when exporting through AME. If I export directly from Premiere, it is fine, but not by the Media encoder. Do you have a clue what could be the cause?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Again, more info is needed. What's your footage ... camera, frame-rate (f-r) & frame-size (f-s), codec, and sequence settings in PrPro ... and then screen grabs of the export boxes for both PrPro & AME would be best.
Next, is this evaluated by looking at within PrPro, or through some other video player ... and if so, which?
Neil
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Thanks for reply. I guess it is not about footage, it is about hardware. Two other computers with totally equal setting in same project are OK but this one is not. (It is Prores HQ/422 - 1080p/2160p)
Exports checked in Premiere. Looks different. (H264 from AME is brighter then should be, export out of PrPro is OK)
Intel Xeon Hexa Core 3,2GHz, 24 GB RAM, nVidia Quadro 4000.
Thanks!
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I also have the same issue. I have no problem playing it on VLC, but QT is just a pain.
I am running on a new imac 5k with AMD Radeon R9 M395X. I don't think I could change the dynamic range setting like in Nvidia. Any solution to mac users?
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Fixing the Nvidia settings they suggested in the forum fixed mine thank goddd
Sent from my iPhone
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Anyone find a solution for this problem in the 5k iMacs?
Thanks
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Try changing the color profile to sRGB under monitor settings. It is defaulted on the 5k iMac to the P3 which is a much wider gamut and makes the exported file and the preview file in premiere look different. Most likely premiere is overriding it with their own color settings and thus causing it to look different on a media player when exported. If you bring up your quicktime file and compare it to the timeline image in premiere and select different color profiles, you will see wild variations between the two. My recommendation is to set it to sRGB. Then double check it on a TV or ideally a properly calibrated monitor. It also might still be slightly off due to gamma issues in each media player. That's another issue. Google quicktime gamma issues for more information on that. Color management is a nightmare. . .
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I've noticed this problem with exports on my new 5K iMac. My Retina Macbook Pro did not have this issue.
I would love to find a proper fix for it as the files also look washed-out on Youtube/Vimeo (so playing the files in VLC is not really a fix). For now, I have found that using the 'gamma correction' effect and setting to a value of 11 will counteract the shift. I put this on an adjustment layer just before exporting. Not ideal, but better than leaving the washed out exports as is.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
It could be as little as a setting on your new iMac ... being different than one on your Retina. On the PC side, there's a setting in the nVidia control panel as shown here ...
That "How do you make ... " section is crucial. If "With video player" is checked, whatever the heck any video player prefers to do with the stuff it plays to "enhance the viewer's experience" will be done. Including things like say, jumping the gamma (contrast) for more "pop", and interesting variants of what "they" think their users use for incoming material & cameras ... so it could be choosing to set 'full range' levels to 16-235, 16-255, or 0-255. And each player WILL do it differently!
Changing the settings on my own beast to "With NVIDIA settings" and Dynamic (signal levels) set for Full (0-255) means I get fewer of the surprises of the delightful creators of the general-use video players.
Broadcast level output has been 16-255 recently, if I've got it right, and many "pro" things use that. I think in the tape days it was 16-235 to preserve adequate extra headroom. And is going to 0-255 on pro level outputs, and as HDR comes in, what's been referred to as the IRE scale has become Nits, as a measure of signal luminance, with 0-255 Nits replacing the 0-255 IRE scale. But HDR can go anywhere from 400 Nits to 1,000 Nits. Perhaps more. The Lumetri scopes in both PrPro & SpeedGrade can handle well over 1,000 Nits when set to HDR.
And it all gets back to ... if your stuff is going to be viewed on the web by who knows who, on no one knows what "device" from a smartphone to a huge workstation, with/without monitor calibration, and of course ... AFTER YouTube/Vimeo/Whoever Service has jacked around with your upload, you can't control squat.
The only way to keep your sanity and keep working is make sure your own system is fully calibrated with a puck system & software at least ... a lovely full broadcast reference monitor and BM or AJA connector parts is even better though several more thousands of buck of course ... and that the material stays within proper bounds on your scopes and when viewed over say a standard TV from maybe a DVD or something, and viewed over other computer monitors, it looks ok. You'll NEVER be able to make it look perfect on any other uncalibrated device ... period. But as long as your material looks the same as other properly prepared material (meaning BROADCAST quality things viewed on that device) ... it's the best you can do.
Neil
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I have an nvidia card, I experience the issues mentioned here. I understand this is a display problem, but the issue is how to make sure that what I output look at least most users settings. I'm pretty sure that there's a tiny percentage of people that are making those adjustment settings you mentioned. In fact those are probably the default settings that no one care about, the issue remain the same. I look at VLC and Youtube, and the colors are crushed and washed out, and if I view it in Windows player it look pretty much like in Premiere editor. But my target is pretty much youtube.
I also made some tests with other codecs, and some of them appear just like the editor in the before mentioned players that showed the issue, unfortunately I can't use them because either Youtube doesn't support them or they are just too massive.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
It's back to the issue ... you cannot out-guess you're clients, and you have to accept that. Remember, they will see this not in comparison to YOUR "beautiful" version, but only in comparison to all the other stuff they view in their setup.
ALL b-cast quality stuff they see is delivered at the standard b-cast levels to YouTube, and viewed by users with the same issues as you're complaining about. If you deliver b-cast or near b-cast standards material, it will appear to them as the same or very similar to the OTHER good-quality stuff they get.
If you deliver something that is "other" than what they get as the "good" stuff, that's what they'll notice ... if they notice anything. And at that point, yours is "different" than the studio-quality stuff they view.
All broadcasters, even the good old networks, have this issue ... NO ONE controls how all those stupid tv's are setup, nor how the screens of the computers/devices are setup. They ALL deliver to their standards and have to leave folks to their own setups.
So ... do you think you're smarter than the networks, cable companies, and such, at out-guessing all possible computer/device screens?
If so ... there's room in various nice facilities, food provided ... locked key-passed doors ... endless days to think by yourself ... plot your takeover of the world ... watch the clouds go by ...
Neil
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
But it not about client side... I get also the washed out effect on my own players. This is not about the others player settings. I can check the erroneous colors either on my device or at work, and they look like the same washed out issue. Not the differences of the players of what you describe. Besides, settings of nVidia doesn't do nothing, at least to me.
One thing however you said that could make sense is the player might be playing the 16-235 range instead of 0-255, but I have no idea how to arrange the final output to match either of these. I know in Sony Vegas there's a way to correct this by either selecting Studio RGB output filter to fix that, but I never found an equivalent in PP.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Here's an other example to illustrate my point.
Here's a screenshot of an output made in h264. High profile, 5.2, 20mbps. The left picture is what I have in PP, the middle pic is what I see in VLC and right, is Youtube. You can clearly see a colorshift difference, the reds is more magenta and the blacks are darkenned a bit. Two different players, yet they show exactly the same issue.
Here's now the same segment, uploaded in Lagarith codec.
The reds are now exactly where I want, and I did not change anything in my computer at all. And as far as I know, Youtube convert to H.264 once uploaded. So there's definitely something with wrong with the h264 codec in PP imo.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
There's a very subtle difference in the way it appears, and it is closer in the Lagarith one ... so fine, use that. This isn't to say there's something "wrong" with H.264 within PrPro, as it could as easily be the way that the other players interact with H.264 in general ...
And even on your upper set, where there is a visible difference ... if that is all the difference that this appears on from different computers, you would be the luckiest content provider on the planet. Seriously.
If I showed you one of those by itself, you walked out of the room a moment and back in, you would never be able to be certain which one I had on the screen, whether I'd changed it or not. You might have a guess, and half the time, you'd outguess yourself.
Sitting staring at them compared to each other, it's obvious to you. But color, contrast, and hue are all way too relative to human brains. Use the Lagarith if you feel better, and just get to work. And that's coming from a picky sot myself ...
Neil
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
I don't agree with you. At all. The chroma and lighting in general is in the ballpark of where I want with Lagarith and totally off with H.264, and this is not only this particular shot, but almost on every shots, making the whole video look dull and less colorful as intended.
Again, this is not about what the other might perceive. I think everyone here is smart enough to get that. The point is to preserve the output lightning and chroma the nearest as possible to the proofing media aimed for, and this is crucial in color grading to prevent that the skin look purple instead of pink and such, otherwise I'll be wasting time with vectorscopes. I think my examples above are dead clear about that, you might find it slight, but since many complained about it here and elsewhere, I think it worth to take a look to the issue more seriously.
I would use Lagarith it if I could, but the size are gigantic. If it a flawed issue of the H.264 codec, then yes, learning to accept it is a must, but then, how to make sure you have the right proofing colors output? PP doesn't have any color management system as far as I know so a calibrating puck is like useless at this point.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
What seems clear to me, but not so clear to you at this point (it seems) ... is that you're very worried about a very tight level of proofing control on say PrPro yet feeding your delivery into a system that will throw it all over heck and gone.
What is absolutely guaranteed ... after you upload that to YouTube, not one person on the planet will ever see every hue precisely as you have them in any NLE you might choose to use. How do I know that precisely? I have two good monitors here, both puck-calibrated, and they will NEVER show the same thing identically. Close, but not identical. Within PrPro, the same video player, whatever.
I'm going to NAB, headed to the airport in a couple hours. I'll be spending a lot of time with colorists that use upwards of $30k gear at their editing suite, including all the out-board BlackMagic and AJA and Kona cards & boxes feeding out-board high-end dedicated scopes and their beautiful Flanders Scientific broad-cast monitors. If I mention this discussion, they'll just shake their heads. Yea, for the work they do, pulling secondaries to make sure that some company's logo and other 'trade-marked' colors are precise in the original is absolutely necessary ... and they do it righteously.
But even among their gear, no two monitors will show precisely exactly what another one shows. Close ... it's something they routinely have to explain to clients, as so often they've got two-three computer monitors for working, the scopes thing, and a large monitor for clients to watch "over their shoulder" while working. Colorists talk routinely about wishing they had a way to make sure the client never EVER saw their working monitors and the client-monitor/screen together while working, as there are so often discussions about it ... and some clients are frightened that this screen is "right" but that one is "wrong".
So they deliver those trade-marked colors as tightly according to precise number values as possible. And the commercial is broadcast ... but no two stations doing the broadcast will put out totally identical signals, there will be averaged variations ... and no two TV's that ever show that to the consumer will agree precisely on those oh-so-precise colors. Because the TV's are all over the flipping creation both for what they are capable of, and how they're set ... or not. BUT ... within that system, there are actual standards. And still it's more variable than seems reasonable.
PrPro is used every day by thousands of broadcast professionals to put out highly technically prepped b-cast work, that is scanned for "standards" on submission to the studio and passes without issue. That's broadcast standards, something that can be set and technically evaluated. So ... PrPro is definitely a pro-level tool. Routinely used for pro-level b-cast deliverables. Accurately, reliably.
There is NO such thing for YouTube submissions. Or for the internet in general. Period. It's not the same "field".
People deliver H.264 files meeting b-cast standards from PrPro every day. And Lagarith, ProRes, and many other codecs as laid out by whoever they're delivering their content to. So claiming there's something "wrong" with PrPro's output isn't perhaps ... totally accurate. Might there be differences between PrPro's output that one can find with different codecs, especially viewed "in the wild" on different video players? Of course ... every player does slightly different things with the codecs it sees by any test I've ever made or seen. Partly because some codecs include specific things in them to "set" gamma and levels, and others don't. And partly because of the way the code for that player works.
So I'm not disparaging your work in trying to puzzle this out, or understand it ... but the reason there haven't been other long-term users jumping in to either assist or suggest something else, is we've been through this. You're trying to do the most righteous output/delivery you can, and I understand that ... it's what I do also.
But you're delivering into a swamp-land of no standards whatever ... seriously, which is what both YouTube and the Web and general-use video players are. And trying to relate what something is like after being dumped into the swamp with what it was like in a pristine state.
You'd have better success in say creating b-cast standard stuff to a tv station, then watching that output on a b-cast standard fully calibrated expensive TV. But even then, you still would see variants at LEAST as great as what you show above. In a totally standards-controlled situation beginning to end.
Which isn't at all what we do when we take something from PrPro and put it into a computer and play it on a general video player. Even on our own computer.
Neil
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Right...
Anyway, after searching for the issue in other discussions, the suggestion was to use an external h.264 compressor. Now it look good on both YUV and RGB range and Youtube show the right colors for me and for the others.