If you're looking to get the log look from your raw footage, simply open up your DNG's in Adobe After effects(may work with other software that accepts LUTS)
make a new layer
add lut buddy to the new layer
open this LUT
enjoy!
http://www.megafileupload.com/en/file/431990/PHOTOGS-LOG-LUT-cube.html
if anyone needs this uploaded to a different site, let me know. I just did a simple google search to find this one
Hey... thanks a LUT ! ;)
Quote from: AriLG on July 04, 2013, 07:54:15 AM
Hey... thanks a LUT ! ;)
lol Hope you enjoy it!
I downloaded some profile for ACR that looked ooooook, but this lut is like perfect
A thank you would be appropriate ppl. 27 downloads? Anyone like the lut?
The best way to make log - is create own profile in ACR. Or work in davinchi with bm film profile
Applying "flat" LUT to dng will not keep all the details.What the point to shot raw in this case? It`s the same as shoot with h.264 cinestyle profile IMHO
I have tried the Video2Log lut (can't remember the exact source right now?) and was unsure about it but I will try this one and see how I get on :-\ ;)
Thanks anyway :)
Quote from: tihon on July 04, 2013, 12:14:18 PM
The best way to make log - is create own profile in ACR. Or work in davinchi with bm film profile
Applying "flat" LUT to dng will not keep all the details.What the point to shot raw in this case? It`s the same as shoot with h.264 cinestyle profile IMHO
How is it the same? cinestyle would be adding a 'flat' lut to a heavily compressed image.
This would be making a lut for an uncompressed image. Wouldn't the information still be there in it's entirety?
If not, there would still be a LOT more information that recording in a baked lut to a heavily compressed h264 recorded video.
Thanks aaphotog! Been searching for something like this and I will give it a try.
Though i'm wondering weather this step would make more sense to do at the raw - demosaic stage using the curves in ACR?
anyone tried this and have a good ACR preset to share?
seems like you would retain more of the latitude of the original raw doing it straight out of ACR..? The BMC log profile in resolve does a nice job of this when applied to interpretation of the raw cDNGs but i'm not a huge fan of the resolve route for grading/transcoding as it makes a bit of a meal of the debayer resulting in nasty chroma edge artefacts.
Still looking for the best way to ingest and precess this beautifull raw footage in a way that suits my workflow but is seems like there is always a trade off in speed / ease / quality..
If your goal is to color grade, why would you need your footage to be in LOG when you've got it in RAW?
There is more information in raw than there is in log... to me this seems like it would be just an extra step when you can just color grade your original raw files in resolve when you've completed your edit. :-/
Quote from: AnotherDave on July 04, 2013, 01:08:01 PM
If your goal is to color grade, why would you need your footage to be in LOG when you've got it in RAW?
There is more information in raw than there is in log... to me this seems like it would be just an extra step when you can just color grade your original raw files in resolve when you've completed your edit. :-/
different strokes for different folks! If someone doesn't like it, they can simply not use it.
The reason that I like the log, is because it's a better base to START the grading from imo, than what looks to be an already graded image. but then again, thats my opinion. Others will differ.
Looks great, thanks a bunch!
Quote from: AnotherDave on July 04, 2013, 01:08:01 PM
If your goal is to color grade, why would you need your footage to be in LOG when you've got it in RAW?
There is more information in raw than there is in log... to me this seems like it would be just an extra step when you can just color grade your original raw files in resolve when you've completed your edit. :-/
Like i said, Resolves debayer dosn't seem to do as nice a job as ACR. unless i'm missing some magic setting somewhere??.. I Wouldn't be surprised as Resolves interface is an alien nightmare to me..
Is it just me or is does any one else find it to be hugely unintuitve and awkward? it seems really obviously mac centric lacking in simple things like a standard windows minimize button or the ability to choose which of my monitors i want to run it on.. Yeah, as hard as i've tried i really don't like it much..
Anyway, Ideally i would go straight to cineform raw through goPro studio and then create and apply luts as active meta independent of the edit, seems the most flexible workflow requiring least render/re-encoding should i want to tweak any of my looks along the way.
Why would i want to be limited to completing an edit before grading anyway?
Unfortunately the realtime debayer of cineform raw seems to suffer simillar edge artefacts as Resolve so the best option for me as far as i can see is
(ACR - cineform444 - grade in finess and export lut - apply lut in cineform studio or first light)
So as i'm stepping out of raw space after ACR it makes sense to me that i would want to have a log image to grade in..?
like allot of people here i'm still trying to figgure this stuff out so i'm keen to hear other sugestions!
I can understand the desire to have log footage for projects with a quick turnaround... but raw is a lot better for grading. If I was recording directly to ProRes... then sure, log is a great base.
Nice work on the LUT though. I'll see if it works in Resolve.
Quote from: CoresNZ on July 04, 2013, 02:29:57 PM
Like i said, Resolves debayer dosn't seem to do as nice a job as ACR. unless i'm missing some magic setting somewhere??.. I Wouldn't be surprised as Resolves interface is an alien nightmare to me..
Is it just me or is does any one else find it to be hugely unintuitve and awkward? it seems really obviously mac centric lacking in simple things like a standard windows minimize button or the ability to choose which of my monitors i want to run it on.. Yeah, as hard as i've tried i really don't like it much..
Anyway, Ideally i would go straight to cineform raw through goPro studio and then create and apply luts as active meta independent of the edit, seems the most flexible workflow requiring least render/re-encoding should i want to tweak any of my looks along the way.
Why would i want to be limited to completing an edit before grading anyway?
Unfortunately the realtime debayer of cineform raw seems to suffer simillar edge artefacts as Resolve so the best option for me as far as i can see is
(ACR - cineform444 - grade in finess and export lut - apply lut in cineform studio or first light)
So as i'm stepping out of raw space after ACR it makes sense to me that i would want to have a log image to grade in..?
like allot of people here i'm still trying to figgure this stuff out so i'm keen to hear other sugestions!
It looked like an 'alien nightmare' to me a first too... but when I started messing with it, I learned how much easier it is to work with than AE for grading. *I should note that I have been using After Effects professionally since 1998, and consider myself an expert.
Resolve looks a lot better. ACR does a lot of funky stuff it isn't telling you about. My footage out of AE looked slightly pixelated and super saturated. Oh yea, and Resolve processes it about 40x faster too...
The LUT does work in Resolve, and it is very milky! :-)
Not sure how it is for grading in other applications, but it does function in Resolve and I always appreciate another LUT.
Why do you want to convert to log anyway? It is my understanding that shooting in log allows you to pack more dynamic range into the same bit depth, but if the original footage is not shot in log there will be no benefit in converting it to log in post and the RAW files already contain the maximum dynamic range possible from the sensor.
I can see the reason to do so; totally depends on your workflow.
You can easily have mixed media in the situation. For instance, I will shoot ML Raw for some shots and 60D's 720p 60p for slow motion work. Now if I'm shooting in Vision LOG or Cinestyle LOG for the Video work and mixing w/ the Raw frames, the images will obviously look DRASTICALLY different.
However, if you can covert the Raw files to a LOG profile, it's much easier to work with in post-edit color alongside the LOG-recorded Video clips (unless you're round tripping from the get go, which I don't like to do usually). Your final export would have the Raw and Video files all in a near-even LOG space, ready for a LUT and grade thereafter.
I have a question. For those of you out there who are using LUTs(not this LUT, but the cinematic looking LUTs), what blending mode are you setting the cinema luts layer as in After Effects?
Quote from: tihon on July 04, 2013, 12:14:18 PM
The best way to make log - is create own profile in ACR. Or work in davinchi with bm film profile
Applying "flat" LUT to dng will not keep all the details.What the point to shot raw in this case? It`s the same as shoot with h.264 cinestyle profile IMHO
Seconded!
Why convert to log after debayer? If you do convert to log, it should be in the ACR phase, not after. That way you actually do get all dynamic range from the raw file. If you convert to log after, it's just like taking the h.264 (with extra bits and color) and trying to make that log. You'll lower the whites and raise the shadows, but all you'll get is gray clipped highlights and noise in the shadows, not any extra detail.
Hi,
I tried to convert my RAW files to log in ACR already before the whole RAW video craze but haven't really been successful, hopefully someone that understands that log business a bit better will figure it out...
If I understand correctly log is derived from linear sensor data, right?
If so, one would have to get the image to linear first and then apply a log curve, right?
Since PV2012 is as far as one can be from anything close to linear I decided to use PV2010 as a starting point because you can get a linear result out of ACR if you do the following (according to this (http://www.astropix.com/wp/2006/09/16/getting-a-true-linear-file-out-of-photoshops-camera-raw/)):
- choose PV2010 in the "camera calibration" tab
- set white balance
- set Blacks, Brightness and Contrast to zero
- choose a linear curve in "curves" tab
- Enable CA removal (optional but recommended)
- set sharpness to Zero (optional)
->Convert back to PV2012 by clicking on the exclamation mark in the lower right corner.
-> save as Preset (optional but highly recommended to save time ;-)
Et voilà we (should) have (almost) linear data that still has the pretty highlight rolloff from PV2012.
If one could explain what a log curve exactly is, that curve could be applied to PV2010 before its gets converted to PV2012.
Hi! I use my own raw to log ACR profile. Based on BM FILM profile. Now i can use lut`s created for bm film profile in AE. Works greate for canon ML dng and blackmagic cinema dng files.
Or you can convert canon raw dng to log in resolve, just use a bm film profile in "camera settings".
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4880/y7h0.jpg
Quote from: tihon on July 07, 2013, 12:45:21 PM
Hi! I use my own raw to log ACR profile. Based on BM FILM profile. Now i can use lut`s created for bm film profile in AE. Works greate for canon ML dng and blackmagic cinema dng files.
Or you can convert canon raw dng to log in resolve, just use a bm film profile in "camera settings".
http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/4880/y7h0.jpg
Want to share that?
or give a rough idea how you might work towards a log profile in ACR?
tihon MLraw-to-blackmagick_film(log) ACR preset
Don`t forget to shoot raw with ETTR! (not auto ettr, i mean ETTR method)
http://yadi.sk/d/gZzLvG3g6ZTTq - xml preset file for ACR 6.6, 6.7
http://yadi.sk/d/2vbU1S8G6bBdI - xml preset for ACR 7,8
On a Mac, it's located in User:Library:Application Support: Adobe:CameraRaw:Settings. On a PC, look in C:\Documents and Settings\user\Application Data\Adobe\CameraRaw\Settings.
I use this preset for blackmagic and canon raw files. BM files with this ACR preset looks the same as in resolve with bm film profile. Don`t forget to set right wb and exposure in ACR after applying this preset. Works awesome for me.
After "raw-to-log" is done you can apply any lut: I think that Captain Hook`s lut for blackmagick gonna be nice:
about LUT: (http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?3390-My-BMDFilm-LUT)
Lut buddy version of Captain Hook`s LUT (for Adobe Ae and Pr) : http://yadi.sk/d/cvz-uaL06ZVSq )
Thank! hope it will help
I am still very much learning (as many people on here are too) how best to treat RAW. I will certainly take a look at what you have here and appreciate you uploading and sharing your knowledge. So thank you very much.
I am still undecided what is best for my stuff but certainly trial and error is the way for me at the moment :-\.
Thanks again :)
Thanks for posting. You can open this with ACR7/8 aswell, and then keep it in PV2010 or convert it into PV2012 for smoother highlight rolloff (and therefore a tad more dynamic range.
Quote from: tihon on July 07, 2013, 01:19:17 PM
tihon MLraw-to-blackmagick_film(log) ACR 6.6 preset
I create this preset in Camera Raw 6.6, don't know how it works in other versions.
http://yadi.sk/d/gZzLvG3g6ZTTq - xml preset file
How did you derive those specific settings? Did you just match it by eye or is there a certain math behind it?
It definatelly looks log-ish but is it really true log? I am not saying that its worse than true log, I am just curious how to get "real" log out of ACR (if your preset isn't of course).
Maybe you could comment on my post above aswell. Thanks!
Hi! Thanks.
No math behind it. But it`s not like a cinestyle;) All DR is there.
I have quite similar results after grading blackmagick footage with film log (in resolve) and in AE with this ACR preset.
Thanks for the reply tihon.
Is there a reason why you have a medium instead of a linear curve in the preset?
From what I was able to gather "Contrast" works more on the midtones so you you're maybe better off by using the linear curve and raise "Contrast" again a bit?
I opened after efffect. went to import file, opened a set of dng's. I applied tihon's log settings in ACR the selected ok.
I I then applied Kodak lut to the now video as a new layer. there was NO color!
I guess with tihon's acr settings it takes the color out. now when applying a different lut, it has no color?
My log worked just fine, but it's not a log file for acr, but a log LUT
I noticed that my preset works incorrect in ACR upper 6.6. But in 6.6 works good
Quote from: tihon on July 08, 2013, 01:12:08 PM
I noticed that my preset works incorrect in ACR upper 6.6. But in 6.6 works good
I've been testing out some AMAZING luts by red users and what not. The best log footage that I've been able to get, was right in after effects. Click effects -----> utilities ----> citron converter. Then change the setting from log to linear to linear to log.
Looks horrible. Now add a cinematic LUT like a Kodak 2393
Quote from: aaphotog on July 08, 2013, 03:05:57 PM
I've been testing out some AMAZING luts by red users and what not. The best log footage that I've been able to get, was right in after effects. Click effects -----> utilities ----> citron converter. Then change the setting from log to linear to linear to log.
Looks horrible. Now add a cinematic LUT like a Kodak 2393
"rawdng to bmfilm (log)" from me for ACR 7,8 http://yadi.sk/d/2vbU1S8G6bBdI must work
--------
Looks horrible. Now add a cinematic LUT like a Kodak 2393
----------
yep, i try kodak 2393 in resolve for blackmagick footage with film log profile, looks bad. Looks the same as my ACR log + kodak lut in AE:)
Here is an example of my ACR log preset
(http://imageshack.us/a/img837/6587/lvsp.jpg)
Kodak looks pretty good to me
https://vimeo.com/57785040
Quote from: tihon on July 08, 2013, 03:19:56 PM
"rawdng to bmfilm (log)" from me for ACR 7,8
http://yadi.sk/d/2vbU1S8G6bBdI must work
--------
Looks horrible. Now add a cinematic LUT like a Kodak 2393
----------
yep, i try kodak 2393 in resolve for blackmagick footage with film log profile, looks bad. Looks the same as my ACR log + kodak lut in AE:)
Here is an example of my ACR log preset
(http://imageshack.us/a/img837/6587/lvsp.jpg)
your newest XMP for ACR works MUCH better
but it only works well with hooks lut.
Try the kodak 2393 constlclip lut.
But DONT apply your xmp in acr when loading the files. Instead import the regular dngs to adter effects. Add cineon converter on a new layer and apply the setting lineartolog.
then create another layer and apply the kodak lut. Then come back and tell me what you think
if we use a red`s lut, we need a red`s "log". My "Log" is based on blackmagick log, so Hooks LUT works good.
Cineon converter + Kodak lut works awful for me:(
Trying to emulate Kodak with my modified log preset + hook`s lut:
(http://imageshack.us/a/img841/590/7ctg.jpg)
I think it looks great.
My new ACR "kodak log" preset for using with Hook`s LUT (http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6904.msg57720#msg57720):) : http://yadi.sk/d/PWpnACLk6bazc ) (ACR 7,8)
All you have to do is: shot with ETTR, and correct WB (temp and tint) and exposure for each clip
That ACR log file you posted when applied to my footage with hooks lut gives a good kodak look.
Problem is, why do I need different log starting points?
Quote from: tihon on July 08, 2013, 05:09:10 PM
if we use a red`s lut, we need a red`s "log". My "Log" is based on blackmagick log, so Hooks LUT works good.
Cineon converter + Kodak lut works awful for me:(
Trying to emulate Kodak with my modified log preset + hook`s lut:
(http://imageshack.us/a/img841/590/7ctg.jpg)
I think it looks great.
My new ACR "kodak log" preset for using with Hook`s LUT (http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=6904.msg57720#msg57720):) : http://yadi.sk/d/PWpnACLk6bazc ) (ACR 7,8)
All you have to do is: shot with ETTR, and correct WB (temp and tint) and exposure for each clip
Quote from: aaphotog on July 08, 2013, 07:22:34 PM
That ACR log file you posted when applied to my footage with hooks lut gives a good kodak look.
Problem is, why do I need different log starting points?
i think because to simulate Kodak we need Kodak LUT for canon LOG, not for Arri or Red. And of course we need to have this log, but we don`t:)
We don`t have a true canon raw log, so don`t have LUTS,
As you can see, i made my first ACR log preset using blackmagick film profile, and it works with all LUT`s exactly the same as bm raw, and provide the same results. I tried to use KODAK lut with bm footafe (film log) - looks bad. The same as in AE with ACR log + Kodak lut
I think those Kodak LUTs is for RED log, so we need to emulate RED log in ACR to get the same result with LUT
Quote from: tihon on July 08, 2013, 07:56:46 PM
i think because to simulate Kodak we need Kodak LUT for canon LOG, not for Arri or Red. And of course we need to have this log, but we don`t:)
We don`t have a true canon raw log, so don`t have LUTS,
As you can see, i made my first ACR log preset using blackmagick film profile, and it works with all LUT`s exactly the same as bm raw, and provide the same results. I tried to use KODAK lut with bm footafe (film log) - looks bad. The same as in AE with ACR log + Kodak lut
I think those Kodak LUTs is for RED log, so we need to emulate RED log in ACR to get the same result with LUT
so the last acr you made was a kodak acr log?
so in essence, I should be able to use the kodak LUT that I posted a video to and it should look ok?
or was the latest acr log xmp that you posted just a way of making Hooks lut look like the lut from a kodak log and its really no good for kodak luts(meants for red files)?
Quote from: aaphotog on July 08, 2013, 08:06:32 PM
so the last acr you made was a kodak acr log?
so in essence, I should be able to use the kodak LUT that I posted a video to and it should look ok?
or was the latest acr log xmp that you posted just a way of making Hooks lut look like the lut from a kodak log and its really no good for kodak luts(meants for red files)?
Last "kodak log version" doesn't emulate red log:( this preset is only for use with Hooks lut to make a picture like a redlog+kodak lut. All you need is correcting wb and exposure
Hey guys, thanks for the input so far. I am still looking for a way to get "real" log footage out ACR - it can't be that hard.
If I understand it correctly log is just a gamma curve, so with the the other developments settings set to linear (see my other post in this thread) one should have log footage with the appropriate curve in ACR, right?
With my timelapse footage I am getting terrible results with those presets posted, If I use the linear preset and the Cineon "linear to log" converter it's much better though not as good as I would like to have it.
Cheers!
Quote from: tihon on July 07, 2013, 01:19:17 PM
tihon MLraw-to-blackmagick_film(log) ACR 6.6 preset
Don`t forget to shoot raw with ETTR!
http://yadi.sk/d/gZzLvG3g6ZTTq - xml preset file for ACR 6.6, 6.7
http://yadi.sk/d/2vbU1S8G6bBdI - xml preset for ACR 7,8
On a Mac, it's located in User:Library:Application Support: Adobe:CameraRaw:Settings. On a PC, look in C:\Documents and Settings\user\Application Data\Adobe\CameraRaw\Settings.
I use this preset for blackmagic and canon raw files. BM files with this ACR preset looks the same as in resolve with bm film profile. Don`t forget to set right wb and exposure in ACR after applying this preset. Works awesome for me.
After "raw-to-log" is done you can apply any lut: I think that Captain Hook`s lut for blackmagick gonna be nice:
about LUT: (http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?3390-My-BMDFilm-LUT)
Lut buddy version of Captain Hook`s LUT (for Adobe Ae and Pr) : http://yadi.sk/d/cvz-uaL06ZVSq )
Thank! hope it will help
tihon, thanks so much for sharing your ACR preset and Hook's LUT (converted for LUT Buddy).
But when I try to use that combination in AE, I get a very strange outcome (dark with strange colors). Any idea what could be wrong? Thanks again,
John
(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2811/9313931221_985095a41b_o.png)
Quote from: johnha on July 18, 2013, 08:49:01 PM
tihon, thanks so much for sharing your ACR preset and Hook's LUT (converted for LUT Buddy).
But when I try to use that combination in AE, I get a very strange outcome (dark with strange colors). Any idea what could be wrong? Thanks again,
John
After applying his ACR preset, try changing your white balance(in ACR)
Quote from: aaphotog on July 18, 2013, 09:42:01 PM
After applying his ACR preset, try changing your white balance(in ACR)
I figured out the issue. In After Effects, I had my color space set to ProPhotoRGB Linearized. When I changed that to Rec709 and unchecked the Linearize box, the colors turned out normally.
Tihon and others, I'm curious to know... which color space to you work with in AE?
Quote from: johnha on July 22, 2013, 06:31:16 PM
I figured out the issue. In After Effects, I had my color space set to ProPhotoRGB Linearized. When I changed that to Rec709 and unchecked the Linearize box, the colors turned out normally.
Tihon and others, I'm curious to know... which color space to you work with in AE?
Where do you change it?
Quote from: aaphotog on July 22, 2013, 07:54:18 PM
Where do you change it?
It's under project settings.
Quote from: johnha on July 23, 2013, 05:52:49 AM
It's under project settings.
I checked my color space: it set as "NONE" :)
thanks aaphotog!
So i need to download lut buddy in order to use this lut?
Quote from: davidjm on August 07, 2013, 10:36:21 PM
So i need to download lut buddy in order to use this lut?
you can use resolve.
you can also use after effects by itself as well.
Quote from: vikado on August 07, 2013, 11:14:11 PM
you can use resolve.
you can also use after effects by itself as well.
In resolve you need to use "camera raw" to set profile in "film log". In AE you need to use ACR to "emulate" log (if you need)
Hey folks! I just wanted to share my free
Adobe Camera RAW preset as another potential option for you. An easy to use preset to flatten your footage, maintain color, and all within ACR. No need to add layers or luts.
This plugin will capture avaliable dynamic range while keeping your colors vivid and accurate so you can render into Pro-Res, DNxHD, or Cineform and color-grade in whatever program you wish.
Updated to v2 for Improved Dynamic Range, Color, and White Balance/Tone bug-fixes.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9746153/Site%20Images%20%26%20Files/flatz_raw.jpg)
This is the Color Corrected DNG file using Adobe Camera RAW
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9746153/Site%20Images%20%26%20Files/flatz_log.jpg)
Here is the DNxHD file using the Flatz Preset.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/9746153/Site%20Images%20%26%20Files/flatz_color_graded.jpg)
And here that same DNxHD file color corrected (rather quickly to match the RAW grade)
Download and read more information here: http://www.dlwatson.net/flatz-preset.html
^^^^^ you should open your own thread.
I made some camera profiles which should give you something like log and create no flicker.
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5586.msg66775#msg66775
Quote from: araucaria on August 14, 2013, 05:12:10 AM
I made some camera profiles which should give you something like log and create no flicker.
http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=5586.msg66775#msg66775
You should read the post above yours and do the same
Quote from: aaphotog on August 08, 2013, 11:15:00 AM
^^^^^ you should open your own thread.
You should rename this thread to 'Turn your RAW footage into LOG with aaphotog's LUT', until then, thanks to everyone for sharing their LUTs too!
Quote from: Africashot on August 14, 2013, 10:39:59 AM
You should rename this thread to 'Turn your RAW footage into LOG with aaphotog's LUT', until then, thanks to everyone for sharing their LUTs too!
+1
aaphotog, thanks a lot for making this ACR preset. This is the most promising workflow for me by now - especially since you can quickly "develop" it with the LUT from Hook. This LUT is basically great - it provides a cool look instantly pleasant. I´ll need to check how easy it is to get different results, though, since it´s very aggressive in the blues (they stand out) and - at least with my footage - in the skin tones. They are very orange, and all red tones appear very orangish as well which is definitely off from the real world scenario where the shots were taken.
But so far you ACR presets compress all the highlights I find in my shots, there´s no flickering so far and when exporting this to DnxHD the quality after color correction is SO close to the original that you could call it "visually lossless". And about half of the file size of a compressed DNG (Batchelor compresses the DNGs after conversion if wanted). For a bigger film I´d definitely want to go that route since I don´t want to keep thousand of folders with file sequences, MOV files in "log" are way better.
If Adobe would provide us with a way now to supress the ACR dialogue popping up and throwing your preset at it automatically - this would be "conversion heaven"!
cheers,
Steffen