Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - iaremrsir

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
Sorry I haven't been on in a while.
I've worked it out.

You just do 1 divided by the number in AsShotNeutral

So iaremrsir had red as 0.47

1 divided by 0.47 = 2.12 (the number he used in raw white balance)

The problem I have is how to use this information in dynamic link.. Ah well I'll just have to set my WB in premiere.
Yes, inverse is 1/x.
SG's DNG debayering doesn't work with Direct Link. I recommend doing an edit then export an EDL.

For exiftool, just download the app
and drag your dng on top of it.

Once you invert those values and put those into the white balance boxes you should have a balanced linear image. Just apply the gamma 2.2.ilut to go from linear to gamma 2.2

I haven't read through every single post yet because I am already so frustrated with this workflow.

This didn't work for me whatsoever.

When attempting to convert, all I got was "Error" on every single clip.

Can you give a little more info than this? Maybe a screenshot of the conversion screen.

Just collect a set of values for each of the main WB settings and make .look files and save to your settings folder. Similar to this:

Here is a screenshot from me working with cdng in Speedgrade and After Effects. I purposely included the blown out window so you can see what it does. The first two images are me attempting to correct them to the proper white balance. The first one is in Speedgrade, I did not spend too much time on them because the result I was talking about, with the blown out highlights changing color, became noticeable. I used a combination of all the sliders and I tried to match the waveform and histogram but, they were not represent it properly in Speedgrade. You can see the red channel is rather sporadic. The second one is in After Effects which took me only one click. The last two where were I pushed the WB way over to the cool side so you can see it. I did not use any other tools in Speedgrade other than the temperature and tint sliders, this also changed the blown out highlights. I know some of you have confirmed this in previous posts in this thread but, here is a visual representation of it. If anyone has any other ideas, I am all ears. But, it seems like Speedgrade may not be one of the best choices for a workflow with cdng or at least at this time until there is more support. I have included the cdng file if you want to play around with it and post your results. Thanks!

Please keep in mind that I am not a professional colorist. So be nice!  ;)

Super easy to balance! Did it in 30 seconds. You ever used exiftool before?

Take inverse values of AsShotNeutral and that's your raw white balance values.

Applied that then the Gamma 2.2.ilut

Nope, to change raw white balance you have to tweak the values in the color space panel

Read this, it will fix that green cast in SG. (Need to load a .look file with values for the colormatrix ) Its because the black level has been change for Cdng in Premiere Pro without any pink cast at 16bit Cdng

I know this already, but the point I was trying to make for him was that SG doesn't actually use its own demosaic and color transforms for footage when in Direct Link with Premiere.

So why it does not do that when you open it using direct link from premiere?

Because Direct Link uses Premiere's debayer settings for all file formats. That's why the SpeedGrade app as a copy of all of the Premiere Pro importer plugins and effects.

Maybe something to do with BayerGreenSplit or lack off in the DNG tag?

No, SG just doesn't read the matrix even if the tags are there. It requires you to input it or the raw white balance values.

Thanks Andy600.  I'm even more intrigued by the new Resolve 11 announcement. 

I'm curious if it's OK to convert files to CineformRAW and then do the Cinelog thing in Resolve?

You'd need to convert from ProTune to linear first, unless they have a ProTune to Cinelog LUT. If you don't mind my asking, why would you convert one log curve to another when their purposes are the same?

According to their site, it is for Mac.. It runs here, without the features, but acts more erratic than any code I have ever seen on OS X.
$999 for something Speedgrade does in blink....

Overpriced - if you ask me !

Wait I think I've confused which tool you're talking about. I'm talking about raw capabilities in GoPro Studio Premium

On Mac I can neither import .RAW .MLV PR4444 --- what good is this app for ??????????????

It's a Windows tool.

Okay, so I've managed to use SpeedGrade to debayer DNGs, but with the ProTune curve. However, I'm having problems with exporting to the CF codec in either AVI or Quicktime. This could be an alternate way to get ProTune compressed files using SpeedGrade's daily workflow.

For sources that have north of 13 stops of dynamic range, should we just use the 13-stop curve?

Thanks for explaining all of this. And thanks for the spreadsheet as well, gives much better understanding of how it works compared to video gamma.

I thought something like that at first, wouldn't you use a curve that divided the stops equally amongst the available codewords: 10bit - 1024 codes, 12-bit - 4096 codes etc.?  So for a 12-stop camera, using 12-bit log storage you would think you need 341-ish codes per stop (4096 / 12 = 341.33.)  The source is in linear space is digitized, so say 14-bit (with noise in the lower bits), which has a highlight stop of 8192 values, which will be stored as 341 values in log space (efficient) -- this is fine -- whereas the bottom usable stop (for a 12-stop camera) is the lowest 3 bits, 8 values of mostly noise expanded out to 341 codewords.   That is not going to work.  It also plays havoc on compression efficiency as the last stop is mostly noise, and noise is uncompress-able.

Why do want to reduce the number codewords used for the highlight, but not give equal weight to the shadows, as the shadows are not all signal.  We want to store the signal without too much overhead of the noise. For wider dynamic range systems there is a lower noise floor, so we need to use fewer bits in the highlights saving more codes for the lower stops. That is why there are different log curves.

Thanks for the explanation! One thing I noticed, is that compared to something like Log-C or Cineon, the formula you gave clips the black at 0 if the blacks are in fact clipped in the raw data. And something like Cineon offsets it. What's the reasoning behind this the offset/raised blackpoint? How exactly would you read this formula if you were to graph it? I'm thinking that input would be x-axis and y-axis, but I don't know how to visualize that in 10-bit or 12-bit values. And also, how'd you come up with the base of the log, like the 113 and 90? I apologize for asking so many questions, I just want to understand this more. I want to do engineering that involves something with cameras and/or sound... Is there a name for that? Anyway, thanks again.

Quick question Dave, how does the base of the logarithm connect to the dynamic range it's optimized for? Also why not log base 2 since every stop is a doubling of light?

Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: February 01, 2014, 09:15:39 PM »
Can you upload such a clip?

The one's with a lot of dead pixels or the FPN clips?

Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: February 01, 2014, 09:39:17 AM »
There are no fixes about FPN yet. For this, I might have to record some optical black data. I want to study it on silent pictures first, because they include full optical black data; so if you have a burst of silent pictures that show this problem, upload them here:

I'll go ahead and shoot some tomorrow and upload them. It'd be awesome to get FPN correction because it's very apparent in the footage.

In regards to the current raw2dng_escho, it worked very well. Nice and speedy. The only exception was with clips that seemed to have cold pixels everywhere, other than that it works as expected.

According to the website, Eyeframe is no longer available :(

The release of Lightworks 11.5(w. ffmpeg) concludes the development and availability of the Lwks dedicated EyeFrame Converter. It has been a very time consuming task to help people out with their Lwks related troubles, but in the end of the day the Lwks customers are better off with dealing directly with the Lwks staff, when they run into problems with the Lwks product.

The in/out problems of Lwks, unsupported codecs and missing proxy and time-code options are some of the reasons for the EFC growing to become the most popular thread in the Lwks forums, so I hope the Lwks staff will be up for the task.

I wish them good luck.

Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: February 01, 2014, 08:54:41 AM »
I might be able to compile on Mac, someone would have to guide me through it though. I've only ever done small projects with just a few source and class files.

Unless you're going to uncompressed linear, 16 and 32 bit files are unnecessary. Logarithmic curves were made for compression, which means they're for 8-12 bit files. Log encoding doesn't increase dynamic range, it remaps how it is stored.

ACR reconstructs highlight information when one or two of the RGB channels clip. This as you may have experienced can cause the pink highlight issue. GingerHDR just lets the highlights clip to white instead of attempting reconstruction.

are cf raw files supposed to allow the raw settings within resolve? for me they've always been disabled when importing cfraw files as either mov or avi into resolve.

my workflow for now is :
record as mlv (5dmkII) - convert to raw (mlvbrowsesharp) - convert to cfraw (raw2gpcf) - import to resolve

but the resolve raw panel is disabled, so i thought perhaps i could use gopro2pro perhaps to do the raw settings i cant use in resolve (temp, debayer, sharp), but any changes in gopro2pro arent reflected in resolve either. so if theres something i am missing to allow me to use cfraw files in resolve, and then use resolves raw panel, please let me know, thanks.

Sorry I completely missed this. Resolve doesn't give control over the raw parameters, it just debayers it and gives you an image. If you shoot a color checker or DSC one shot, you can balance all your footage much faster. You get CF compression w/ Resolve's debayer.

Already tried with linear profile DNGs and Cinelog embedded in a LUT. The results are not as good or as accurate as you get with the ACR workflow. You can get fairly close with a LUT if the embedded DNG metadata is correct but Resolve only uses the first DNG color matrix and it's DNG implementation is quite basic. We had issues with color casts, skin tones and other things that just don't happen with ACR plus ACR still beats Resolve's debayering 99% of the time.

We have a couple of pros putting some examples together and the differences are quite noticeable. If you use a batch script for rendering DNGs with Cinelog through AE it's comparable in speed to rendering intermediates from raw files in Resolve. I will post everything on our website when the content is ready.

Well that's disappointing to hear  :'( But it's good to hear you guys already went the extra mile and tested with another program. I really wish Adobe would find a way to offload the debayering and processing. And not make us confirm settings for every DNG clip we import.

Raw Video / Re: [600D RAW] Dots, dots and more dots.
« on: January 28, 2014, 07:37:15 AM »
I will do a complete test on Friday. How well does it do with FPN? I know there's a fix for 5D3, but does the same fix work for the 600D?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7