![]() What you should correct or add is that it’s a creative look package that’s not a library of power grades of Kodak or Fujifilm film emulations (and I like the Film Lab Collection name!). Well the fact it’s inspired by the 2393 is actually a great queue to what style of look you could expect from your pack so you should keep that in. Or send me your PFE power-grades for Kodak 2393 and Fuji 3593 and I’ll include it in my follow-up post comparing the different methods of doing film emulation, and we’ll see how it stacks up to Juan Melara’s Film negative Matrix, my 2 node method and a regular CST :) It seems to a great product too, great for beginners and fast workflows that want a library of looks. Please call it what it is, a creative lut/PG pack that’s based on a specific Kodak film stock. Because the stuff that you add on top of the PFE like grain and glow (halation maybe?) are already included in DR.Ĭhange your offered package name. ![]() So I have nothing against you or your product and I respect your work, but your marketing reminds me of those so called pro colorists on YouTube doing tutorials filled with misinformation to catch the eye of a naive beginner. I’m sorry to have to advise against your product but not only does it markets itself as something it is not, but you also make the promotion of it on a post about film emulation… on a subreddit mostly read by novices trying to learn. Hey u/jbowdach - While I understand your lack of appreciation toward my response - Your opportunity of a shameless plug for your power-grades had to be met with an equally shameless answer to what I consider is a grossly overpriced creative look pack that markets itself as an emulation of film although it is in reality loosely based on a single, most used Kodak 2393 PFE… I have no doubt you spend time and effort creating your power-grades and they are probably very good looking as well, but it’s not film emulation. Keep converting to LogC before the PFE because it’s the most accurate free option other that make your own color/contrast adjustments Use Juan’s powergrade that will color match perfectly ![]() So save your money on those overpriced 130$ “film emulation” LUT packs bullshit that don’t even offer different PFEs that what Resolve has and either: And as much I hate to say it, it is much better than my own LUT that I made by matching colors visually from REAL 500T stock. So here is why I mentioned Juan Melara in my previous answer: he is an Aussie colorist who sells a 20$ (last time I checked) powergrade that will actually convert LogC to film negative to do exactly what you are trying to do. The Print film emulation LUTs in the Davinci Resolve list were made so that when a colorist wants to color grade digitally film stock that has been scanned, they want to know how the final print will look on a particular film stock because that will affect color rendition, so they would use those PFE and grade along so to “foresee” what the color grade will be in the end after print.īut digital video doesn’t work that way, and footage shot in Braw or LogC or whatever does not correspond to how the contrast/color is presented to the PFE as a scanned film stock, and although LogC and Arri sensors were made to look similar to film and what you get is somewhat close to the expected result, the colors and contrast don’t sit right if you apply the PFE luts onto LogC because the input footage isn’t in the right “format”, it should be a scanned film negative. ![]() No, and you are doing is exactly what I’m saying is not really correct. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |