Turn your RAW footage into LOG

[aaphotog]

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

[AriLG]

Hey... thanks a LUT ! 

[aaphotog]

Hey... thanks a LUT ! 

lol Hope you enjoy it!
I downloaded some profile for ACR that looked ooooook, but this lut is like perfect

[aaphotog]

A thank you would be appropriate ppl. 27 downloads? Anyone like the lut?

[tihon]

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

[mageye]

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

[aaphotog]

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.

[CoresNZ]

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..

[AnotherDave]

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.  :-/

[aaphotog]

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.

[muddmanrich]

Looks great, thanks a bunch!

[CoresNZ]

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!

[AnotherDave]

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.

[AnotherDave]

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...

[AnotherDave]

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.

[bnvm]

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. 

[KahL]

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.

[aaphotog]

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?

[iaremrsir]

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.

[Joachim Buambeki]

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):

- 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.

[tihon]

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

[mageye]

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]

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

[mageye]

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 

[Joachim Buambeki]

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.

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!