Hello,
I shoot some raw video with my Canon 60D at 1280 x 544 pixel.
I convert the MLV files with MlRawViewer Version 1.4.3 to get some DNG Files.
I open the dng files in AE CS6 .. and also tried DaVinci Resolve 11.
I noticed some difference when i open the DNG Files in DaVinci.
Have a look:
AE CS6 Version (good):
(http://monostep.org/temp/raw_01_ae.jpg)
DaVinci Resolve Version (bad):
(http://monostep.org/temp/raw_02_resolve.jpg)
Resolve VS AE comparison (scale: 150%):
(http://monostep.org/temp/raw_03_vs.jpg)
AE looks so much better. The "camera ISO noise" is much smaller than in the "Resolve" Version.
I tried different settings in Resolve (set everything up to high resoution) but
cannot fix that problem.
Its not only the noise... when you donwload both imges and switch between the two images
you will notice that the davince version is darker than the AE Version.. but i use the same color temperature,
gama, etc. (i did not change the gama at all). But the main problem is the noise.
another example:
(http://monostep.org/temp/bad.jpg)
In other words I also am glad that I wasn't the only one suspecting that DNG's do slightly come out darker in DR as oppose to AE -- Thanks for pointing this out @Flocksock and hopefully others will chime in as well.
*EDIT*
I also prefer the workflow in AE but as of lately I've been forcing myself to try and get used to DR12 because their rendering is so much faster and I'm also keen on learning the color grade fiasco that comes along with DR12 after spending years on ACR within AE which I also notice that noise comes slightly better than DR12 but then again sometimes I just am in awe of how much improvements have been made by Blackmagic in DR12.
I installed Davinci Resolve 12 .. and got the same issues:
LEFT = Adobe AE CS6.0
RIGHT = DaVinci Resolve 11 (12 looks the same)
(http://monostep.org/temp/bad2.jpg)
Seetings:
- PC, Windows 7
- Canon 60D
- MLV size: 1280 x 544 pixel.
- Converted the MLV files with MlRawViewer Version 1.4.3 to DNG Files
The Image in "DaVince Resolve 11" is 5% darker. But the bigger problem is the noise.
In AE the "camera noise" (i used ISO 800 or 640) is much smaller. So the image is very clear.
In Davinci Resolve the "camera noise" is bigger.. and more colorfull. like some "blocky RGB Dots" ..
and so the whole image lost a lot of details. .. and the image looks more like "h264 Video" and less than "raw".
Please download these two files and switch between those two in your image viewer:
http://monostep.org/temp/raw_01_ae.jpg (http://monostep.org/temp/raw_01_ae.jpg)
http://monostep.org/temp/raw_02_resolve.jpg (http://monostep.org/temp/raw_02_resolve.jpg)
You will see a huge different. I really want to use "Davinci" but i can`t.
I'm a filmmaker, no tech guy.
I ask myself what is the problem.
Is the Davinci RAW Converter so bad?
Are the dng files bad? is there another way to convert those MLV Files into "better dng" files.
Maybe i just missed a button in DaVinci Resolve. Am I the only one with that issue?
So many people are using DaVinci Resolve... maybe they never questioning the "noise"...
and shoot with 100 or 200 iso. but sometimes you want to shoot with 400, 800 iso
and i think its a huge different. (i allready said that) Hope to find a fix for that.
Did you make sure to turn all the noise reduction in acr off before comparing? ACR adds color noise reduction by default
In AE the "noise reduction slider" is at 25% .. i think. standard settings (raw import options)
In DaVince Resolve .. the noise reduction slider is at 10. (standard settings)
I tried different settings... but Resolve allways looks like this.
if i got some time i will make some more
tests with different ISO, 200, 400, 800.
Wait do you have the paid version of DR 12? The free version doesn't have NR. Also, ACR has better debayering for sure but at the cost of speed. That workflow is painfuly slow compared to DR. And I can confirm if you turn off all noise reduction especially color noise in ACR, it makes a big difference but it still seems to be a little cleaner then DR with no NR. Also Adobe has many many years in RAW image processing. But using that workflow is much slower then resolve.
@Flocksock Did you give MLVProducer (http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=15271.msg148538#msg148538) a try? It's very ACR like even has "noise reductions"
mlvp.alpha.build1944 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/mr6c9g8u6hji83t/mlvp.alpha.build1944.zip?dl=0) mlvp.alpha.build2127 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/qckp7txsychpslc/mlvp.alpha.build2127.zip?dl=0) . I haven't tried build #2127 yet but 1944 build works fine
Well I only run on OS X and MLVProducer is a fine tool and works well under Wine on Mac's.
Don't forget how useful MLP & MLVFS are as well. [emoji6]
However, I shot this on 5D3 w 35L 1.4 (ISO 2000) & 16-35L 2.8 (ISO 3200) for my brothers bday on NYE and yes I was a bit drunk as well so excuse my racking.
Noise came out quite well DR12 in combined with Cinelog-C and few nodes of my own tweaks to make it pop (despite of how much I boosted up the shadows as well as honing down the highlights) even tho the sweet spot for 5D3 MLV RAW is practically @ ISO 800 but hey there are no rules in photography, right?
https://vimeo.com/150866001
Thanks for motivating me to get back into my old grooves within AE's workflow and will compare the noise to DR then since I am actually curious to see the results between those two softwares! [emoji106]
It all comes down to the time you want to spend developing the image vs the quality you want to achieve. Resolve and ACR are different technologies with different debayering algorithms and each app has positives and negatives. ACR can rebuild 'some' non-existent highlight detail in clipped channels (effectively increasing available DR) while Resolve has a psuedo highlight recovery function which is basically a contrast boost at the top of the signal. ACR and most Adobe apps are ICC color managed while Resolve and most color grading apps use hard coded math.
In terms of noise, you can get very good results in Resolve using the Neat Video OFX plugin but Resolve will never 100% match ACR and vice versa - there is always a trade off somewhere. Then there is the difference in linearity between the apps. ACR default is display gamma (approx 1.15) vs approx 1.0 gamma in Resolve (YRGB) but both are still subtly different to Nuke, Fusion, Baselight, Scratch etc which are true linear and even then, the controls of each app behave differently and can/do render the same raw image differently.
and is this why OpenColorIO within AE is by far one of the most powerful plugin if not better than most fx out there, right?
I was a bit tired yesterday. i did not use any "noise reduction".
I use "standard" (default) sharpenig ... in AE which is 25% or something
and 10 in Resolve (sharpening) .. but no noise reduction.
i also tried MLVProducer... but got some problems with brightnes, color temperature, etc.
but its much cleaner than the DaVinci Resolve. More similar to "AE".
I know the Denoiser from Neat Video... and also use Denoiser in Nuke.
With RED Material... etc. And it works best when the "noise" is small and clear.
And when i shoot with 400 ISO... i don't care about the noise in the dark shadows... as
long its the "clear noise" i get in AE.
I don't want to reduce the noise. When i open dng files in Resolve i want the same noise-look i get in AE.
Thats all. Later that day, or the next days i will shoot some test footage with 800 or 1600 iso...
I want to get behind those things. ... how the"RAW Video Converter" works (interpretes Noise) in Resolve vs. AE.
Random image off the internet, showing AE default settings. Note the 25 under Color Noise Reduction (last slider):
(http://www.sally-jane.co.uk/tutorials/bridge-acr-images/acr-sharpen.jpg)
Are you saying you explicitly set this to zero in the AE example?
I take some old footage and did some more tests.
AE CS6 vs Resolve 12
(http://monostep.org/temp/resolve_vs_ae.jpg)
My Settings in AE CS6:
(http://monostep.org/temp/ae_settings.jpg)
So i also did some noise reduction in AE... (i think those are the default settings)
EDIT: I will upload the "MLV" Files.. of the "night scene" so other people in this
forum can download an create own DNG Files. (uploading now... onto my server)
here are some DNG Files ... 1280x544 pixel - Iso1600 - Canon 60D:
NIGHT SCENE / FOG (Nebel)
http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000000.dng (http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000000.dng)
http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000001.dng (http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000001.dng)
http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000002.dng (http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000002.dng)
http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000003.dng (http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000003.dng)
http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000004.dng (http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000004.dng)
http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000005.dng (http://monostep.org/temp/__Nebel_A_000005.dng)
So, ACR has default 25% color noise reduction, while free version of DR has no either.
Why do you upload your files?
I uploaded it because i realy want to use "Resolve" instead of AE.
And maybe i'm just to dumb to click the right buttons in Resolve.
The difference between Resolve and AE is very big... and i don't think AE
got a better "noise reduction" Tool. (And i don't even use it (just the defaults))
I also got similar (good) results (like AE) in "MLVProducer".
So i don't know whats the problem with Davinci Resolve.
Of Course... ISO 1600 is to high. But even when i use 800 or 400...
the noise in Resolve" looks terrible (as you can see).
Turn off everything in ACR i.e. all NR, sharpening, lens adjustments, CA fixes etc and turn off sharpening in Resolve then compare the images.
If you want cleaner images in Resolve you have 2 choices, either Resolve Studio with built-in NR ($999 or $499 if you're on OSX) or Neat Video OFX ($249) because ideally you want to do a NR pass while the images are still raw for better results.
Just an idea - have you tried running the resolve images/video through ACR as a plugin? (I've not tried it but it might let you use ACR NR this way). Neat Video is more flexible and produces better images than than Resolve, ACR or Nuke NR IMO so it's worth the purchase.
Than i got this (Sharpening / denoise set to ZERO):
(http://monostep.org/temp/alloff.jpg)
the exposure is set to 0.5 (in AE and Resolve) but that is
the only thing i changed. If i set the exposure to 0.0 .. the image
in Resolve is stil darker than in AE. But its not only that its darker...
the "noise interpretation" is very different. And its also a problem when
usning Iso400 or 200.
Just looked at the meta in one of your images and you used MLRawViewer? - if so it's a compressed DNG file and that will probably have some affect on noise, especially when debayering in Resolve. Have you still got the MLV files?
Yes i used the "MLRawViewer 1.4.3" to convert the MLV Files to DNG.
And Yes. I still got the MLV Files.
Any better/other tools to convert the MLV?!
EDIT: This is what the MLV file looks like in "mlvproducer".
(still better than DNG files in Davinci) and very similar to AE
(http://monostep.org/temp/mlvproducer.jpg)
(its a screenshot... so its a little bit scaled down. like 90%)
hmmmmmm.
Your images are underexposed. This is why so much noise.
@mothaibaphoto: I know that.
I want to SEE the difference in the"noise". So i took extra "bad underexposed footage"
to have a detailed look at the noise.
But. If you take a look at this image (scroll down) its not underexposed:
http://monostep.org/temp/resolve_vs_ae.jpg (http://monostep.org/temp/resolve_vs_ae.jpg)
And i still got "ugly noise" in Resolve. Take a look at the green bowl... and the
missing details in the brush. its a huge different.
They make ugly noise to encourage the sales of studio version :) This is what all the free versions about as everybody knows. This is conspiracy :) Regarding the image:
DR version has more shadows pulled out, and different WB (more warm) - this possibly explains the bowl issue, and sharpening can make that brish much better. I'm on DR since beta 2 of 12 version and made a lot of pixel peeping comparing what can I produce there with ACR. Yes, they are different and this is good. And finally I liked DR most. But noise is not issue for me.
Resolve more shadow pulled out? (hmmm. i don't see it)
And its 100% the same Color Temperature (as shoot). Did not move that slider.
As you can see in this image:
(http://monostep.org/temp/goodbad.jpg)
The green bowl is "warmer / (different)" in the Resolve version.
Same with the foggy night image. The "big Colored Noise Dots" in Resolve
makes everything feels a litte bit warmer ;)
At the moment i upload the "foggy night.mlv" to google drive. It must be possible
to create a similar look with Resolve. At least a look that looks like the AE version
without any sharpening/noise reduction. Or a look i get with "mlvproducer".
At the moment i tried "raw2dcng" ..and converted some "16bit maximum dng" files.
Looks good in AE.. but Resolve crashes when i tried to open it. :(
WB is never the same in DR and ACR, even if you enter the same numbers in temp and tint.
It seems doesn't matter for ACR, what tool you use for produce DNG - as long, as camera tag is present. But for DR it matters: DNG from MLVProducer, for example, has more vibrant colors than from raw2dcng and mlv_dump.
Yes, sometimes DR crashes, AE - never :(
Perhaps try using MLVFS or MLP to get the best out of DNG's in order to minimize the noise results as much as possible since it won't be "compressed" similar to how MLRV does.
fog.MLV (around 700 MB - the foggy night scene)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B40YiSxH8aq8Ujh2QkZsd2U2WmM/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B40YiSxH8aq8Ujh2QkZsd2U2WmM/view?usp=sharing)
If any other person can get better results in Davinci Resolve than i do... that would be great.
But not with any noise reduction plugins. just the "raw sliders".
Maybe my dng files suck. i' dont know.
But if AE and mlvproducer looks so much better than Resolve... it must be possible to get
similar results in Resolve, too.
And the "fog.MLV" File is just a test. I don't care about it (its underexposed and Iso1600 just to see the noise).
But i care about other, well shoot scenes,
ISO 200, ISO 400 files... and there i also got really ugly noise in Resolve and i realy want to fix that.
The next days i will definitly try "MLVFS" and "MLP".
There is a way in DR to make a layer node and split it into a luma node and a color node and if you apply a little blur to the color node it gets rid of some color noise. Not sure how i feel about the results though.
https://vimeo.com/68459408
Also you can try the neatvideo noise reduction plug in as suggested above.
Or you could render a flat tiff sequence from ACR and then grade it in Resolve. There are a ton of flat log camera profiles for ACR. But you still loose a lot of hours that way.
The only other thing you could do is tell the guys at BMD to try to improve there DNG decoding even more or make a special SDK for ML RAW DNGs but that's a big battle to fight not sure if its worth it.
Thanks. But i know noise reduction tools like neat and other. I don't need / want to use them.
As i said before. THIS is "testfootage". I don't need to fix noise in it. I just recognize HUGE difference
between AE and Resolve. On files which are shoots at "ISO 200" .. and i don't want to use noise reduction
on this file. Its not about "noise reduction" or "get rid of noise. I LOVE the noise in the AE Version.
I love analog noise, and digital noise.
BUT.. the AE Noise looks so much better than the noise in Resolve. And i don't know why.
Is it the DNG FIles? or some metadata? 12bit, 16 bit problem?
Is the Adobe Raw Converter 10 Times better than Resolve? (i don't think so)
Different debayering algorithms.
Have you tried subtracting a dark frame? It might help with at least some of the noise.
You can find instructions here:
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=9861.msg94883#msg94883
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=14414.0
^^^ + 1 about the debayering algorithms and the split node method I mentioned above doesn't get rid of the noise it evens out the color noise a little bit. But I think it's been said enough here that adobe has better algorithms for Debayering at the cost of speed. I have been using resolve for a while and this has always been the case. But on some of the edits i have done where i over shot , I would never have made it thorough the coloring stage with ACR for time sake. You could use resolve for scrubing through you footage and deleting then process the raws an color grade them through AE using ARC for your final grade. Other then the method I mentioned above I don't know of anything else you could tick in Resolve to help this. Sometimes certain LUTs in Resolve bring out more noise too so be careful of that. But at this point unless resolve and adobe work together that's all you can do. Have you tried adobe speedgrade? A lot of people like that.
thanks for your answer. AE is so damn slow to show DNG files in realtime... and so damn slow in rendering. (But i can render all night.. thats not the big problem. but realtime editing, color grading in Resolve is 100x times better than AE.)
Never heard of Adobe Speedgrade... i will check it out. I really wonder if i'm the only one who noticed the big difference between AE and Davinci. Even when you shoot with a 5D mark 2 or 3.. and ISO100 / 200 / 400 .. you allways got some noise in the shadows and in AE it looks so much better. well. anyway. Thanks for all the help.
Oh we all notice the difference in the noise between both programs but its a matter of speed vs debayer algorithms. Most of the time I choose slightly uglier noise vs 10 hours of rendering. I would love to combined them both. But i am no programer. I wasn't the biggest fan of speedgrades layout but a lot of people like it.
Try MLVProducer too. It lets you choose debayering options! These guys on this forum are BRILLIANT! The programs, scrips , modules, are all just amazing and I have no clue how they do it.
Quote from: hjfilmspeed on January 08, 2016, 08:16:35 PM
There is a way in DR to make a layer node and split it into a luma node and a color node and if you apply a little blur to the color node it gets rid of some color noise.
But almost the all noise in that night fog is luma noise :)
Quote from: Flocksock on January 08, 2016, 10:08:41 PM
Even when you shoot with a 5D mark 2 or 3.. and ISO100 / 200 / 400 .. you allways got some noise in the shadows and in AE it looks so much better. well. anyway. Thanks for all the help.
No, I didn't confirm that. I produced a lot footages from MarkIII(ISO100 / 200 / 400, correctly exposed) with DR and there was no one such noisy.
I remember there is something with color settings in Resolve
I believe its called colorspace and it can be set in the raw tab.
Whenever I used 'bmdfilm' I got sort of posterized colors, especially in the blue colors, like denim jeans and stuff.
Bmdfilm colorspace doesn't work too well for ML Raw dng's.
Use rec709 colorspace instead.
@Levas ... Are you referring to the 32-bit float point?
OK... i did some more Tests in "Resolve 12"...
LEFT = Color space = BMD Film (but i have to push the satuation up to 100)
RIGHT = Color space = Rec.709 (but i don't have to push up any sliders for the colors)
(http://monostep.org/temp/better.jpg)
It start to look so MUCH better, than the Resolve 11 Version. I don't got
the Resolve 11 Version anymore. But i know that i use "BMD Film", too.. instead of Rec.709.
I pushed/klicked any button. But nothing changes in "Resolve 11".
So when i use "bmd film"... the noise looks much better.
But the whole image looks grey. I have to push the saturation up to 100%
to get the colors back.
In the "Project Settings" (Resolve 12) i choose "CinemaDNG".
So its getting better with the noise in Resolve 12... but its weird that when i use
BMD Film the Noise is so much better... but the image is "grey" (like black and white)...
i really have to push the saturation to 100.. and it stills looks washed out.
I just want to show you some new results. I will try to use other "MLV to DNG" Converting Tools
(not using the MLV Viewer). and hope Resolve will not crash. And when i get that "foggy night" scene
the way i wanted. (similar Colors / Noise like in AE) ... than i will test some footage with more
color in it.. like the "green bowl" scene.
Edit some more footage (The scene with the chair and the green bowl).
I got the best results with:
Color Space = BMD Film
Gamma = BMD Film 4.6K
The scenes are all "washed out" ... but its fine. I aplied some simple 1D Luts to it.
Testet "Canon Log to Rec709" and "Canon Log to Video". I still have to push the Saturation up to 50.
And add some simple S-Kurves... but now the image i got from Resolve is almost as good as i get in AE.
No "ugy noise" anymore.
I checked the Forum for the best Workflow.. but only found some strange threads how to like
a "Lightroom Workflow" which is interesting.. to do the colorcorrection in Light room.. and
expport the files in High JPGS.. and edit those jpgs sequenze in Premiere. So the rendering is fast, too.
And Lightroom got the same "RAW Converter" like AE / Photoshop... so its very good.
But if someone got some more "MUST READ threads" about worklflow / Resolve / ... best way to convert MLV files
feel free to post it here :)
Seems like a very Helen Keller approach to the problem, but as long as you're happy with the results then that's the most important thing.
If you want to have a better understanding of the process you should probably concentrate of getting to grips with log and the main colour spaces, and what they are specifically meant for.
Lots of useful info on the Cinelog thread.
Amazing thread! Very useful information, thank you all for sharing!
hmmmm. I'm switching back and forth between "Resolve" and "ACR"
"CinemaDNG" is from Adobe... so i think ACR is more powerfull debayering DNG Files.
(also very good in raw sharpening / denoise. a litte bit better than Resolve.)
BUT. AE is extremly slow for editing dng files.
My Idea is to EDIT all the dng files in "Photoshop".
But i cannot open 400 files in Photoshop. But i thought i can use "Bridge"... and EDIT
only one DNG file... than "copy" that raw-adjustment to all 400 other dng files in the same folder.
After that i could open those "modified ACR sharpened DNG" files into Resolve and do the edit.
In Photoshop/bridge its also very easy to add "camera profiles" like "Vision Log"
(http://www.vision-color.com/visionlog/ (http://www.vision-color.com/visionlog/))
to the dng file.. to apply a flat look.
Its a bit like this Workflow in Lightroom:
JPEG workflow for ML RAW video using only Lightroom and Premiere
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6864.0
only with "Adobe Bridge."
PROBLEM: I tried the right mouse button on a dng file an click "open in camera raw". But i got a error message.
I updated bridge, photoshop and camera raw plugin.. but i simple cannot "open in camera raw".
i searched 1 hour to fix that problem... but found no solution.
i searched this forum if someone tried this workflow... but found nothing.
I did not want to start a new thread, yet. :)
If you open a DNG in PS it will be opened with CR. CR is not a standalone program.
Have you ever tried "SmartImport2" in AE which allows you edit ONE DNG (in ACR) per MLV and it'll apply to all DNG's under that particular MLV.
Works really well on my end ... Give it a try while running MLVFS.
Quote from: Flocksock on January 10, 2016, 05:32:07 PM
so i think ACR is more powerfull debayering DNG Files.
(also very good in raw sharpening / denoise. a litte bit better than Resolve.)
ACR has more features, indeed - local adjustments is a killer feature for example.
But, ACR, actually, very bad in sharpening compared to DR. I did this conclusion after comparing a very crisp shots in crop mode with great lenses. DR makes good even better, ACR did mess and oversharpened look.
And ACR denoise is better just compared to nothing. If you compare it to any third party plugin you'll see that ACR much more blur the image.
Thanks for all the feedback. In the next days / weeks i will do more test scenes, and do more research to optimize
the workflow.
Did some more tests. Got some more questions about Davinci Resolve 12.
About interpreting footage.
Sime suning "DaVinci YRGB" (Color Science Settings)
I simple choose "Cinema DNG" in the "Camera Raw Settings"
When I'm at "COLOR" in Resolve... i simple select "Clip" (Decode Using)
and in "Color Space" i have the options between "Rec.709" and "BMD Film" and "BMD Film 4.6k"
BREAKDOWN:
1.
I simple choose "Clip" in the "Decode Using" Setting.. and after that chose the Color Space.
Is this ok? Or should i do some other settings in "Project Settings"?
2.
In "Color Space" I can choose between "Rec.709" and "BMD Film 4.6k".
In Rec.709 everything looks fine.. but the noise sucks (as seen in my screenshots). When I choose "BMD Film 4.6k"
the image looks realy realy flat... like i added a "flat LUT" or shooting in "cinestyle profile".
But when i add some curves, bring back the saturation the picture looks very good. And the Noise looks good, too!
(which is super important)
Instead of Cuves and saturation i can also add a simple "Linear to rec.709" LUT i found in the VFX LUTs Folder....
and it works almost perfect. The Image looks very good... and the noise, too.
Much much better as if i choose "Rec.709" in the "color space" directly.
So.. my current Workflow is:
A: Convert MLV to DNG using:
____"MLVViewer" works fine .. and "MLVMystic_v0.5" allways works fine!
____"raw2cdng" not working (no matter if 12bit or 16 bit .. Resolve is crashing)
B: At Resolve .. in "COLOR" Edit Mode.. simple choose CLIP (Decode Using) + COLOR Space = BMD Film + Gamma = BDM Film 4.6 K ...
C: Apply some "Linear to rec.709" LUT at starting point.
...
The image looks good.
But... am I doing something terrible wrong?
I also read this thread here:
DaVinci Resolve 12 and ML Raw
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=15801.0
And tried it:
1. Switch to "DaVinci YRGB Color Managed"
2. Alexa LogC for Timeline Colorspace
3. Rec.709 Gamma 2.4 for Output Colorspace
looks ok... but the "noise" looks not good.
In the thread it says:
"By selecting Bypass as the Output Colorspace option, you will
see your image in LogC Gamma and Alexa Wide Gamut.
When i do it... my image looks exacty the same... as if i simple chose
my method:
- "DaVinci YRGB" (Color Science Settings)
- In COLOR select: "Clip" .. and then select "BMD + BDM Film 4.6k" (Color Space + gama Options)
So... is the "DaVinci YRGB Color Managed" Method really important?
Or is my method also fine?
https://vimeo.com/67970827
You could use this lut after the BMD