Author Topic: Free Ektar 100 LUT for Magic Lantern footage (Read 71196 times)

DeafEyeJedi · « **Reply #75 on:** October 03, 2017, 08:13:21 AM »

Quote from: hyalinejim on October 02, 2017, 11:29:19 PM

Sit tight, guys... ...This is all still a work in progress. When I'm happy I'll come back and give you guys Ektar 100... ULTIMATE!!!!

Buckled up and ready for the ULTIMATE ride back to the future. Please take your time on this one, sir!

Quote from: hyalinejim on October 02, 2017, 11:59:53 PM

It's not particularly straightforward! Each film stock has different characteristics in how it renders certain hues - Portra 400 may have warm greens and tan skintones, whereas Fuji 400H will have cool, minty greens and pinkish skin, for example. In addition, contrast and saturation increase as exposure increases with film, and there are various colour casts in the shadows and highlights at different exposure levels.

We are used to exposing plus or minus one with our digital cameras, and seeing a noticeable increase or decrease in brightness. But when negative film is scanned by a lab, the scanner usually automatically compensates for these exposure differences. You end up with bracketing tests where the brightness doesn't seem to change much, but the colour and contrast does:

Definitely spot on. This is probably why it's extremely useful to shoot in ETTR or slightly more depending on subject in scene.

Quote from: hyalinejim on October 02, 2017, 11:29:19 PM

My methodology is first to match the general contrast and colour shift using curves, and then to fine tune exact hue and saturation reproduction for various colours using a LUT. I've dabbled with trying to introduce the film emulation as a DCP profile, but the results aren't very good. I'm getting more consistent and accurate results by debayering (to Cinelog in the case of Canon DSLR RAW but I also get great results with GH5 VLog 10bit) and then adding curves and a LUT.

I can also confirm this consistently not only with Cinelog DCP for Canon DSLR RAW and Vlog 10-bit for GH5 as well as with Cine-D (borrowed this camera few times from a coworker whom refused to split half $ on getting the Vlog update w me) and indeed it is quite a little workhorse while able to match them together nicely with your amazing piece of work that you continue to share with us @hyalinejim!

hyalinejim · « **Reply #76 on:** October 20, 2017, 01:11:45 AM »

Very exciting times ahead for me and for fans of this lut: today I got back scans of the first roll of Ektar that I've shot. I took a series of chart shots at different exposures with which to do the matching, and I also had shot some A/B comparisons with Ektar 100 loaded into my OM1 (nice little camera!) and regular old CR2s on our friend the 5D. I spent a few hours this evening working on matching them. Some shots match better than others, that's for sure, as there are a lot of variables at play when shooting film. But this is one situation where the lut makes the two cameras quite close. The base for this lut was the new DCP profile that Danne and I worked on: ML-Log

https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=20710

OK, here's the 5D shot with ML-Log profile applied in Adobe Camera RAW:

Now, here's the Ektar 100 shot. Nice, isn't it?

And finally... here's ML-Log with the Ektar matching lut applied, with some exposure and white balance tweaks. Also nice!

And one more for good luck! The film scan is in the middle:

I'm gonna work on this some more over the next week or so and when I'm fully happy with the results I'll release it.

Danne · « **Reply #77 on:** October 20, 2017, 01:28:12 AM »

Love this work. And the resemblance is very good.
By the way. I love th OM system. Owned most of the cameras back when shooting film. OM4ti with spot metering was the hardest to let go. I kept a few of the lenses. 40mm f2, 21mm f3.5, 24mm f2. They all have their own personality. Use my 40mm on the 100D all the time.

bpv5P · « **Reply #78 on:** October 20, 2017, 08:14:35 PM »

Yeah, nice job @hyalinejim. It's really close now to the original Ektar. I didn't like the fist version (although I was using on Rawtherapee), but these last ones seems really good, thanks.
I own a OM1 too, it's a good camera.

hyalinejim · « **Reply #79 on:** October 21, 2017, 05:03:12 PM »

...[fanfare of trumpets]

I'm ready for you guys and girls to check out this set of Ektar 100 Luts:

DOWNLOAD EKTAR 100 ULTIMATE SET:
https://bitbucket.org/hyalinejim/ml-log/downloads/MLLog1.3%20to%20Ekt100.zip

These are built for ML-Log v1.3, which is a work in progress.

DOWNLOAD ML-Log v1.3:
https://bitbucket.org/hyalinejim/ml-log/downloads/5D3%20ML-Log%20v1.3%20Simple.dcp

Read more about ML-Log:
https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=20710

So you can think of these luts as also being a work in progress. They are designed to be applied in the following workflow:

1. Import DNGs into Adobe After Effects
2. When Adobe Camera Raw opens, choose ML-Log v1.3 for the Camera Profile
3. In After Effects add the Apply Color Lut effect, or export to an intermediate codec for grading elsewhere

What's the deal with these luts?
These luts fairly accurately emulate Ektar 100 film, as scanned by a specific lab and at various exposures. With negative film as exposure increases so does colour and contrast. And there are different colour casts in the shadows, midtones and highlights at different exposure levels. The five luts here emulate these changes in colour and contrast from two stops underexposed to two stops overexposed. I've labelled them A to E and added plus or minus marks to indicate the exposure level. I've also carefully adjusted the tonality and white balance of each lut so that middle grey falls at the same point for each one. Applying the minus two lut won't make your footage look underexposed, nor will the plus two make it look overexposed. However, you'll notice that the minus two has very milky blacks, a generally cool tone and muted colours. The plus two is much more contrasty with overall warmer tones and hyper saturation, especially in the reds. It may be too much for skintones, as is often the case with real Ektar 100 film. The middle exposure lut has the most neutral colour cast.

How to approach the luts in post

There are two things you're going to want to be able to do to work with these:
1. Manipulate white balance somehow (both on the orange-blue axis and red-magenta axis). Lumetri is good for this. You can also try a three way colour corrector in the midtones
2. Manipulate black, midtone and white levels. I like to use curves, but levels or lift-gamma-gain controls are also good

Both of these should be done before the lut. So don't feel that you're stuck with a particular colour cast or contrast level with a given lut. If you like the colour of "D +" (one stop over) but find it too contrasty, just lift the black point and lower the white point before the lut to lower overall contrast. Use the midtones control to adjust overall exposure.

I 'll illustrate the differences between the five of them in more detail later. For now, here are some random CR2s I grabbed from Imaging Resource and applied the luts to. These images were exposed well and the results here are straight out of the box:

MLLog1.3 to Ekt100 A - -

MLLog1.3 to Ekt100 B -

MLLog1.3 to Ekt100 C

MLLog1.3 to Ekt100 D +

MLLog1.3 to Ekt100 D + +

If there's interest, I'm pretty sure I can do up versions for Resolve as well.

bpv5P · « **Reply #80 on:** October 21, 2017, 08:57:42 PM »

Great hyalinejim, I've yet to try these ones with ml-log 1.3.
I think it would be a good idea to keep the opening post updated with the last version, so people that fall here from google in future don't need to read all the thread just to get the luts...

hyalinejim · « **Reply #81 on:** October 21, 2017, 10:10:54 PM »

Yes, I'll do that at some stage when I feel that I've got it nailed. There are a few variables that I still need to figure out, and I need people's feedback here.

I'm going to upload an alternative set of the five luts. In this second set, the exposure does change with each lut. So the underexposed luts will give you a darker image than the overexposed ones. I'm curious as to which of the two sets people prefer, and why. I think I might prefer the second set as I like seeing the difference in exposure:

https://bitbucket.org/hyalinejim/ml-log/downloads/MLLog1.3%20to%20Ekt100%20v1.1.zip

Another question is how to manage the colour casts. In both sets, I've been calibrating the white balance to 90% white for each exposure level. This more or less standardises the colour across all five luts. Then I go back and make "C" (the properly exposed shot) neutral across most of the midtones. When I apply this correction to the other four it re-introduces some of the interesting colour casts, which I think is desirable. The problem is that each film scan (on a Noritsu or Frontier film scanner) can vary a little from shot to shot. It's not like opening a series of shots in ACR where, if they were shot with the same settings, there will be absolute consistency. So in designing these luts I need to figure out when, where and how to compensate for the variances inherent to film scans. The luts made directly from the scans are a little bit inconsistent in the progression of colour and contrast changes that you would expect.

In pictures, here's the difference between the two sets:

v1.0 (exposure stays more or less constant)

v1.1 (exposure actually changes)

One final thing to point out (and this is something I may need to work on) the underexposed versions of the luts give odd shadow colour and tonality if you pull the blacks down before the lut. The reason for this is that the RGB curves diverge very strongly in the shadows for the underexposed luts. If you want darker shadows with these versions it's better to pull them down after the lut.

On the other hand, all five luts loooove overexposure. So don't be afraid to lift the midtones pre-lut for a very contemporary effect. There should be good highlight roll off too!

bpv5P · « **Reply #82 on:** October 22, 2017, 12:32:55 AM »

How are you doing the scan hyalinejim? I did some research some years ago (while working with analog photography), the best process was:
- Very a photo in a color chart
- Get VueScan
- Adjust WB based on 18% grey:
http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/html/vuesc12.htm#topic6
- Put the VueScan on highest settings (resolution and dpi)
- Scan on normal exposure using DNG:
http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/html/vuesc15.htm#topic9
- For better quality, you can use "multi-scanning" (although I personally would do it manually, using different scan exposures and then blend with HDRMerge):
http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/html/vuesc23.htm#topic17
https://jcelaya.github.io/hdrmerge/
- The use of anti-newton glass and wet mounting can facilitate the scanner focus:
http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/usinginsert35.html
http://www.betterscanning.com/scanning/msfluid.html

That way you get a pretty raw scan. There's also other variables that can change the film color, such as the development process (C-41?), push-pull and if it's expired or not...

hyalinejim · « **Reply #83 on:** October 22, 2017, 01:30:00 AM »

Yes, I considered different scan options but decided to stick with a lab scanner as they impart a look of their own. The chart shots were processed and scanned on a Noritsu by Carmencita Film Lab. They have a good reputation and some of the work on their website is amazing.

If these luts do what they're supposed to, it should be possible to get close(r) to these kinds of looks:

https://www.flickr.com/search?text=Carmencita%20ektar&structured=yes

70MM13 · « **Reply #84 on:** November 26, 2017, 04:16:41 PM »

This looks fantastic!
Please port it to resolve!
Thanks!

beauchampy · « **Reply #85 on:** November 28, 2017, 05:28:34 PM »

Any chance you could do this for the c200?

hyalinejim · « **Reply #86 on:** December 28, 2017, 07:27:04 PM »

Quote from: 70MM13 on November 26, 2017, 04:16:41 PM

This looks fantastic!
Please port it to resolve!
Thanks!

Try this set of LUTs for a similar look in Resolve:

https://bitbucket.org/hyalinejim/ml-log/downloads/ML%20BMD%20to%20Ekt100.zip

I used these settings, so it's expecting this kind of input:

Then you'll need to use curves or lift, gamma, gain to bring the log signal into range:

Quote from: beauchampy on November 28, 2017, 05:28:34 PM

Any chance you could do this for the c200?

In theory, yes. I would just need a C200 first! But there's a fair bit of work involved in making these luts. That's something that I might start doing commercially for cameras other than ML over the coming months.

hjfilmspeed · « **Reply #87 on:** January 24, 2018, 07:07:38 PM »

Wow!!!! I finally got a chance to test these in Resolve. I LOVE THEM! Probably my LUT of choice for my next edit. Thank you so much for your hard work with this!
Edit: even tho I live this LUT especially the colors I found the standard lut to be a smidge punchy as Ektar usually is. So I put the key output gain to 0.700 and set the color management to Davinci YRGB Color managed and used arri Log c for Everything. Over all I am VERY impressed with this LUT Bravo!!!!! Thank you for this!

DeafEyeJedi · « **Reply #88 on:** January 24, 2018, 11:15:45 PM »

Quote from: hyalinejim on December 28, 2017, 07:27:04 PM

Try this set of LUTs for a similar look in Resolve:

https://bitbucket.org/hyalinejim/ml-log/downloads/ML%20BMD%20to%20Ekt100.zip

Are these specific LUTS designed to be used within Resolve for those that do NOT own Cinelog DCP, correct?

Quote from: hyalinejim on December 28, 2017, 07:27:04 PM

In theory, yes. I would just need a C200 first! But there's a fair bit of work involved in making these luts. That's something that I might start doing commercially for cameras other than ML over the coming months.

Great news actually and you definitely got my full support!

Lars Steenhoff · « **Reply #89 on:** April 03, 2018, 11:31:46 PM »

https://theblog.adobe.com/april-lightroom-adobe-camera-raw-releases-new-profiles

https://youtu.be/IsZnkW1Q7N8

new profiles menu in adobe

hyalinejim · « **Reply #90 on:** April 04, 2018, 12:01:00 PM »

Very interesting!

70MM13 · « **Reply #91 on:** May 17, 2018, 06:42:44 PM »

I'm not sure if there's a problem with the server, the image host, or my end, but I can't see the embedded images you provided above, so I can't see the expected settings you provided for resolve since it's only an image I can't see!

Can you please relink to another image, or provide a description of the settings?

Thanks!

50mm1200s · « **Reply #92 on:** July 21, 2018, 03:06:15 AM »

Found this neat open source software. Might be useful of everyone working with LUTs:
https://lattice.videovillage.co/

masc · « **Reply #93 on:** July 21, 2018, 10:59:07 AM »

Quote from: 50mm1200s on July 21, 2018, 03:06:15 AM

Found this neat open source software. Might be useful of everyone working with LUTs:
https://lattice.videovillage.co/

Nice. But open source? Download costs 199.99$. Or did I not look right?!

Andy600 · « **Reply #94 on:** July 21, 2018, 01:04:36 PM »

Quote from: 50mm1200s on July 21, 2018, 03:06:15 AM

Found this neat open source software. Might be useful of everyone working with LUTs:
https://lattice.videovillage.co/

Lattice is great but it's not open source and it's Mac only.

You should check out https://cameramanben.github.io/LUTCalc/. The online version is free but the Chrome and OSX versions are only a couple of dollars. You'll need to understand what you're doing to get the best from it but it has a comprehensive feature set and the source code is available if you wanted to go deeper.

Danne · « **Reply #95 on:** July 21, 2018, 01:32:06 PM »

Good tip @andy600. I use tweaked luts in Switch from this calculator. Should be good for Mlv App which also takes 1D luts.

50mm1200s · « **Reply #96 on:** July 21, 2018, 02:59:33 PM »

Heh, my bad. I was looking only on github, so I thought it was open source. Again, my fault.
LUTCalc seems just as neat, though.

ngemu · « **Reply #97 on:** July 15, 2019, 04:59:19 PM »

Is it possible to apply these lut files to a .mov file exported from mlvapp and imported into adobe premiere?

masc · « **Reply #98 on:** July 15, 2019, 05:07:12 PM »

You can apply the LUTs in MLVApp before exporting or in Premiere. Make sure to setup the input profile correctly.

ngemu · « **Reply #99 on:** July 17, 2019, 09:47:24 AM »

Quote from: masc on July 15, 2019, 05:07:12 PM

You can apply the LUTs in MLVApp before exporting or in Premiere. Make sure to setup the input profile correctly.

Can you explain this? I'm having trouble grasping the workflow needed to use this lut in MLVapp.

These are the steps I took
-drag mlv file into mlv app
-color balance white (Selected the white van)
-color balance face option (selected a persons face)
-apply the alexa c-log (with camera matrix on)
-enable ektar lut
-adjust color temperature

What am I doing incorrectly?

News:

Author Topic: Free Ektar 100 LUT for Magic Lantern footage (Read 71196 times)

bpv5P

bpv5P

bpv5P