MLV App 1.14 - All in one MLV Video Post Processing App [Windows, Mac and Linux]

[Danne]

I don't agree. Follow adobe dng standard alternatively keep as is.
You will get different variations from any other nle.

[cmh]

Sorry I always edit my posts without realizing someone replied, but both separated values,+0,25 and +1 could be export options, one added on top of the other.
Also, you're right, not only different nle has to be checked but there's brands other than canon, thinking about raw2mlv stuff.

[Danne]

But isn't this for specific use with prorrs proxies? Anything above 0.26 will act as overexposure according to the original spec.
If you export prores from resolve they surely match.

[cmh]

I don't really understand your comment. Just to clarify the 1.26 exposure difference concerns all codecs not just proxies.

Anything above 0.26 will act as overexposure according to the original spec.

Adobe's specs? Do you know where I can find some info on that?

[Danne]

I follow your tests. You converted a cr2 to dng and state it says 0.26 after conversion. This is the exposure calibration tag everything else should be derived from. If Mlv app prores comes out brighter that´s what to look into but really not necessary since it´s a small manual fix if to be used as proxy. If on other hand we start manipulate original 0.26 tag we will get wrong raw starting point. Never good.

[masc]

When trying with ACR, I would say the difference is smaller 1EV.


Sure, it isn't an issue or wrong setting in Resolve?

[cmh]

Sorry for the late response.

I follow your tests. You converted a cr2 to dng and state it says 0.26 after conversion.

Right, I understand now.

Sure, it isn't an issue or wrong setting in Resolve?

I posted a quick video but there is no additional settings involved, it's not ACES, pretone curve isn't ticked (but I've tested, it doesn't change the exposure strictly speaking). The same exposure difference is for all dng files regardless of the profile applied given that you use the same cst/lut in resolve.

I don't have any other NLE installed but at one point I will probably upload a (boring long ass) pipeline comparison between MLVApp and Resolve on youtube, with various shot and go through these settings on screen so people can point out any mistakes.

If I find how to fix it I can put up a patch and fork the project real quick. Otherwise, my workflow will involve exiftool, no big deal it's extremly fast and more convenient than applying a receipt or use a dpx on Resolve.

edit:

Code: [Select]

https://youtu.be/YZAFH2MgE_k

[ilia3101]

Mlv app prores comes out brighter

Does anyone else have this kind issue? I'm having this issue for every kind of export (macOS 10.14)

[masc]

Does anyone else have this kind issue? I'm having this issue for every kind of export (macOS 10.14)

FFMPEG and/or AVFoundation?

[Danne]

I don't have this issue. At least never noticed.

[ilia3101]

FFMPEG and/or AVFoundation?

Both, in all formats. Even with PNG frame export.

It seems like my combination of macOS version, Qt version and screen calibration is mixing badly for some reason.

[Danne]

I get the same as masc. Acr interprets preview window a little darker than mac quicktime preview or player. Resolve as usual has its own life but I get a fairly coherent preview. Gamma is a little different but brightness more or less the same.
Well. Everyone is being fairly lazy around this not posting images comparisons or digging deep so really hard to define a real issue yet .

[cmh]

I won't put that on laziness (maybe a lack of interest).
I don't know much about ACR but I do know that Resolve won't get the right exposure value for DNG produced without the proper exif tag.
Isn't ACR/Lightroom loading an embedded profile with lens data and color profile ? Then there's probably a way to strip that and compare to Resolve or UFRaw or RawTherapee.
Are those comparisons made with the same color space/gamut or just left with default reinhard on MLVApp for exemple (I did my video with rec709/rec709 in both MLVApp and Resolve for that reason)?
Are those previews an accurate representation of said DNG in the first place weither it's Resolve, Lightroom, MLVApp ?
At the end of the day if it revolve around more questions than answers, then I'll ask the real question? Is this even worth "fixing"?

[Danne]

Quick and dirty:
resolve prores(mlv app exported)


resolve cinema dng


Camera raw


Mlv app




EDIT:


Resolve prores master imported back into resolve timeline:


Resolve cinema dng



So yes. You got a valid point. Exposure is not matched correctly in brightness. But maybe other stuff too. I mean. Prores export from resolve matches cinema dng input beautifully.

[cmh]

Give me a sec I'll do the same with sRGB/rec709 everywhere (since I think this is how ACR will display it, well I think).

[Danne]

Adobe standard should be closest to rec709:

Mlv app preview


ACR adobe standard





EDIT:

By the way. Raise exposure in acr by 0.26:
ACR:


Mlv app preview





EDIT 2:
Exposure raised with 1 full step:


Mlv app preview




Looks like 0.26 is close, maybe even 0.5 would work. That is matching acr. Resolve seems even darker as you said.

EDIT: Tested some more in resolve, all set to rec709. Seems more like 1.5 stop imcrease to match brightness.

[cmh]

Damn you are efficient and yeah I know, sRGB/rec709 and rec709/rec709 are really close (sRGB is just a bit higher) but I want to be as accurate as possible (I can see reinhard in your mlvapp screenshots tho and you extracted a frame you didn't export to cdng, just saying).

MLVApp


Prores from MLVApp in Resolve


cdng from MLVApp in Resolve


cdng from MLVApp in Lightroom

[cmh]

I'd say Resolve is closer to Lightroom in term of exposure (but with a wrong white balance, it has always rendered cdng like that and it needs like a -15 tint correction compared to prores) than MLVApp or prores.

[Danne]

Yes, Reinhardt is causing pushed brightness to prores file. If I select tangent(whatever that is) Exposure match pretty close with acr:





Well, quick and dirty .

[cmh]

This is definitly NOT what we got on Windows, weither it's in ACR/Lightroom or Resolve... I'm starting to think that it's more of a Mac OS thing now.

[Danne]

hehe, what a mess 

[cmh]

Yeah Togg from the forum and I had a discussion about a dpx (power grades if you are not familiar) and we both had to raise our exposure by +2 with it, so I'm pretty sure he's on Windows and would have the same issue. Maybe some other Windows users are willing to confirm the issue. What about Linux ?

Here's the dng I used if anyone needed it:
https://mega.nz/file/9YYWRa4Z#qhnCofFnyY_AXlbS_5ciHaUflKXuNLyox-RS2EKVkNw

That said, I'll peace out for now.

[Danne]

Tested some more. If I set to tangent and rec709 and then set white balance the same(6500, tint 0) in both apps it actually looks pretty much the same. Profile adobe color in acr.

Mlv app


Acr




Fixing white balance:
Mlv app


Acr




Pretty impressed how alike this is now in both apps. Maybe only the 0.26 tag needs added to the dng now and it´s perfect?

[cmh]

Real quick (sorry for the squeezed ratio).

MLVApp


Rawtherapee (which is most definitely rendered as sRGB)


Darktable


both really close to Resolve... so the BaselineExposure exif tag would be needed for Windows (maybe Linux) but not Mac OS for some reason. Very strange.

edit: added MLVapp

[Danne]

Could you include mlv app in your latest post?
But resolve is also darker on mac so exposure compensation needed. Will try and include resolve as well tomorrow.