• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
0

Why do LUTS looks diffrent after export

Participant ,
Oct 26, 2018 Oct 26, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

It's so very Adobe how you fine tune the look of a LUT only to have the exported video look nothing like what you made...

this isn't the problem where there is no LUT at all after download... I've seen that one too,

this time it looks like they are there... just not at the opacity I put them at... more faint and resulting in washed out looking footage considering I lowered the contrast for the LUT...

What's the deal with this... so does no one use LUTs in real life? or do they just use them with software that can use them correctly?

Views

294

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Oct 26, 2018 Oct 26, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

The whole mashup that is computer hardware/OS/apps/video-card/monitor connections is a royal pain. Most parts are designed not to show media correctly, but "to enhance the viewing experience" from the assumption that the vast majority of users don't have a color managed system properly set up, so they 'fix' it for us.

Which means working with color-critical things is really a right pain. In another thread on this subject that's going on now, a couple of the color engineers ... Francis Crossman of PrPro team, VladP of the AfterEffects team, jumped in and both in the forum and in private with that user, tested out a bunch of things. That user reported back in that thread the conclusion that PrPro and Ae are actually color managed to work together if both are set right and the OS/monitor are setup right.

Next ... they were able to get things set up so that RGB data in most apps on that user's Mac were fine, but the grey-scale values didn't always jive between apps.

They did in color managed apps but not in non-color managed apps like QuickTime viewer, Safari, and Chrome. There's some other things there that might still take some look internally by the color engineers at PrPro & Ae. We'll see.

I wrote a piece discussing the various parts of this mess um ... "system" ... we computer users are stuck with. As with anyone, when I first started video post I was dumbfounded how odd the color was. I went to learn about this, and the best info is from colorist's who live by their color management. So ... this is a bit of what I've learned. If you're interested, read on.

It does help with the things to be concerned with, and how to go about setting up a system so you can work without getting your eyeballs or your internal temps blown out. It's written to general users, so if part seems a bit lower than your knowledge/experience, understand for a lot of readers it's nearly over their heads at first.

Neil

------------

Getting Color Displayed Correctly

Most computer users doing video work are still operating from some incorrect assumptions. As the user, you have to unlearn some of the ways you think this imaging system works, in order to get setup so it works properly for you.

The "system" is a mashup of parts. A basic computing system has first the computer hardware ... then the operating system (OS) and the way that is designed to work with a monitor to display images on screen ... then the video card, typically ... and a monitor.

Each is a separate entity with its own 'concerns'. The computer hardware just exists to compute & pass along the data of that computation, totally has no concern with that data. Doesn't see video data any differently than say a text or spreadsheet.

The OS has more interest in the display, but primarily these days that interest is to 'enhance the viewing experience' as the primary goal. Accuracy of display to any standard is not even a concern, the OS is designed to enhance your experience. Because the vast majority of users are known to have lousy quality screens with no management ... they want to help you get past being the dummy they expect you to be.

So there is normally little concern in the OS, as it installs, with showing any media to any sort of real pro-end standards.

Next, that video card ... most cards assume gaming if you're displaying video ... and have all sorts of 'enhancements' to that experience. So, you have a really dark scene in the game, the card automatically brightens the lighter parts so you can see better who's lurking in those shadows.

For Nvidia cards, you need to go into the Nvidia controls and turn that sort of crap off. You also need to set the card's settings so the card controls the monitor via the ICC profiles you calibrated into use for your OS. Proper video display settings for Rec709/sRGB video work.

Now ... that monitor. Like GPU cards, the monitors all assume video is gaming ... or watching some movie. Again, as shipped, monitors are normally set so that they totally disregard color flags and profiles of the media itself and instead "enhance the viewing experience" ... with juiced color settings, that gaming dark-scene thing mentioned above, all sorts of things like that.

You need to go into your monitor settings and turn all that crap off there also. Turn the monitor into a "dumb" piece of hardware that just shows what it's told to show.

NOW ... you can calibrate that monitor with a puck/software system, set the OS to use that resulting ICC profile for that monitor, and have a decent chance of working away. If you haven't done this, well ... there's no way you have any control of what is seen in anything anywhere. And your OS, your card, and your monitor, are all working against seeing any proper or standards met.

Now, we get to showing proper stuff on that screen.

Different types of media can have different 'tags' in them for how they ... hope? ... to be 'seen' and displayed by the system displaying them. Not all media is always 'tagged' for the appropriate color space/profile/details of how it should be seen. As in say, a png file of a video bars & tones image that doesn't have in the file header a 'tag' for correct profile/standard. Each app will see that file differently as the app is designed to see untagged things.

PrPro in this case assumes video sRGB, AfterEffects assumes graphics sRGB, and those two standards for sRGB are slightly different. Hence ... a non-tagged png or other file will appear slightly different between PrPro & Ae based on each app's default assumptions for untagged files.

PrPro and Ae both apply tags to their exports. If ... 1) the entire system the export is played back on is set as above, and 2) the app used actually pays attention to the tags, then and only then will that export be seen very close to the way it showed within the app that created it. No matter whether it was created in PrPro, Ae, Resolve, Vegas, whatever.

But even then, only in apps that pay attention to media tags.

Even if the system is set correctly, if the app pays no attention to flags, then ... that image/video will probably be off in some way from within the app that created it. As has been so often stated, QuickTime player pays no attention to tags, and is one of the worst viewers possible to check for 'accuracy'. Same with Chrome and Safari in browsers.

PrPro or any other media creating program can only control color appearance within the program.

Your system has to be set to show properly tagged video media to that pro standard, and you have to use apps that actually pay serious attention to tagged media, to see nearly the exact thing outside the app in another viewer or program.

I hope that helps.

Neil

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines