Custome Picture Files for my C100

[Kevin O'Connor]

Two different questions:

- Are there pre-made custome picture (CP) files available on the web that I can down load and install in my C100? Are there CP files that look like the options available from VSCO for post production to use in camera?

- To use the Canon Log Gamma correctly I need to use a LUT in post production. I kida understand this, I use CS5.5 and have some experience with the basic functions but; how are LUT's applied in post? If this is a question for a different string I'll take this there.
Is a LUT a pre-configured video effect?
Do I need to down load a specific LUT for CS5.5 to work with Canon Log Gamma?

Thanks

[Matt Davis]

You don't need a particular LUT or a specific bit of software.

More often than not, all I need is the default colour board in FCPX (the equivalent of the 2-way colour corrector in FCP and the 'Fast' (sic) one in Premiere.

There's Nattress Curves, Magic Bullet, Iridus Tonalizer, FilmConvert, a whole raft of S-curve modifiers. There may be a specific Rec709 LUT, but who would use Rec709 for creative reasons? LOL

Most of the time you'll be lifting the mids, tugging down the blacks and making things broadcast legal (no whites over 100%), adding a little sharpening, and applying this to all your clips in a given scene before you go to secondary grading.

[Kevin O'Connor]

Thanks for the info,

Sorry I'm not getting the lingo, What is the "Fast" (SIC) one in Premier? Are you referring to one of the standard color correction effects you can apply to clips in the sequence?

Are down loaded LUTs', like from Magic Bullet and LUT Buddy, intended to be used "as is", with no tweaking/adjustment?

When you say "S-curve modifiers" are you referring to the S shape graphs that comes up in "Levels Adjustment Layer or Curves Adjustment Layer" in Photo Shop? There are similar S-curves effects in Premier that modify the color / contrast / brightness of the clips. If this is correct then are the video effects in Premier (that handle color correction) considered adjustable LUTs'? Maybe I've been using them all along and didn't know what they're called.

Thanks for the help.

[Matt Davis]

Sorry - yes, whatever the standard colour corrector is in Premiere! LOL Trying and mostly succeeding to abandon Premiere...

The 'LUT's you are thinking of are more 'Looks'. Everything is and should be considered tweakable as you're doing things by taste rather than mathematical formula. Ditto the S Curves.

a LUT - Look Up Table - is a quick and handy way of unbending, say, a debayered raw image or Log-C image, which have at least 10 if not 12 bits per RGB channel. The Canon's C-log has a mere 8 bits per channel, so we're not talking about heroic shifts in image, simply 'going the last mile' on the exposure.

I've noted a little confusion at some of my workshops - C-Log is not 'raw' - one still has to worry about white balance and you do need to check your waveform monitor to spot issues with exposure, but if you've seen Log-C or raw Epic footage, you'll know that the images can look very disconcerting rather than 'a little dark'. LUTs are applied to Epic video output so you have a fighting chance to appreciate what you have got before the Colorist gets to work on it.

[Kevin O'Connor]

Okay, I'm starting to understand, thanks. I have a few more questions then:

- I discovered that Canon has three LUTs you can down load from their web site. One is for converting C-Log to the REC-709, which you indicated is not a great idea. Whats the issue here?

- The second LUT is to convert C-Log to Cineon Gamma. Is this not just converting C-Log gamma into the same gamma that the Cinema Lock options creates in camera?

- In the C100 is Canon Log Gamma the same as the Cinema Lock option? Do they produce the same results?

Thanks

[Matt Davis]

Regarding Rec709, it's part of the standards set for HD video and how it's displayed. Trouble is, Rec709 is rather limiting in these modern times - 5-6 stop range and a fairly plain gamma that doesn't have much truck with our current desire for compressed highlights. Rec709 is a sort of 'worst case scenario' or 'base setting' from which we've since built on over time. To me, it's very contrasty and video-ey.

The Cineon thing sounds, and please excuse me sounding a little mealy mouthed and cynical about this, a bit like Marketing. If you're into Cineon, then you'll probably know what needs to be done, but Canon's marketing have recognised that people are asking for LUTs and 'here you go'. LUTs in a 10-16 bit environment are extremely valuable, but with original material using just 8 bits per channel, you're asking for something that will help redistribute your tonality from the C-Log 'slightly odd' back to 'ooh, doesn't that look beautiful'. You're not having to imagine what Arri's Log-C or Red Raw's going to look like when lifted out of its shot state.

I'd say that the most useful LUT is actually in the camera - the V.Assist mode. Note how the menu selections - usually orange - are pretty yellow in V.Assist mode. That's the camera applying a LUT to the LCD Panel as a quick and dirty fix on trying to judge your lighting in C-Log mode. If you were to accidentally expose faces by eye in C-Log, you'd miss out on all the highlight compression, and when you switch V.Assist off, it's hard to think that those skin tones are going to work - but they do once you use the quick lift of the mids in post.

The Cinema Lock option is a quick way of engaging the C-Log mode and all its extra bits without accidentally leaving some other setting on, or getting a dodgy version of it.

[Kevin O'Connor]

Wow, this LUT stuff is more involved then just picking a filter effect. But thanks to your help, I'm building a better understanding. Let me re-cap on what I think a LUT is:

- Choosing the C-Log or Cinema Lock option in the C100 produces an image free of (In Camera) modifications like contrast, saturation, tonal quality (like a clear slate). This allows the post edit process to create a LOOK without undoing any pre-set Custom Picture Settings/styles like the EOS std. or Wide DR.

- If the above is true then any LUT is a tool applied in post production for color correction that you need to tweak and adjust to achieve any desired LOOK. This LUT could be the Color Correction Effect selection already included in Adobe Premier Pro. (Is this last sentence accurate?)

- Some LUTs work better then others, this is why products like Magic Bullet / LUT Buddy are available.

- The alternative to an adjustable LUT is a plug-in, a pre-configured LOOK, like the Magic Bullet Quick Looks. This allows you to select a specific LOOK like Old Fugi Film Stock to apply without any tweaking or adjusting.

- One way or the other I still should shoot in C-Log or Cinema Lock if I want to apply a something like the Magic Bullet Quick Looks for the best results in Post-Prod.

How close is my understand of LUTs now?

Thanks, KO

[Matt Davis]

Originally Posted by Kevin O'Connor

How close is my understand of LUTs now?

Almost there - just need to rub off a few rough bits. :)

Originally Posted by Kevin O'Connor

- Choosing the C-Log or Cinema Lock option in the C100 produces an image free of (In Camera) modifications like contrast, saturation, tonal quality (like a clear slate). This allows the post edit process to create a LOOK without undoing any pre-set Custom Picture Settings/styles like the EOS std. or Wide DR.

Not quite, but close: C-Log, which can be easily and safely switched on using the Cinema Lock function, produces an image where the widest range of tones (from white to black) can be squeezed into the limited room of an 8 bit picture, and it does so by devoting more space to the whites, which push the mid-tones towards the dark end. This slightly unnatural method provides the optimum quality all round but needs work in post. Other Custom Picture settings, including Wide Dynamic Range and EOS Std, use a traditional shape of gamma curve needing less or no work in post. You can actually switch everything off and you'll have what Canon engineers consider to be the most typical 'pleasant' video look that's close to the Rec709 gamma.

Originally Posted by Kevin O'Connor

If the above is true then any LUT is a tool applied in post production for color correction that you need to tweak and adjust to achieve any desired LOOK. This LUT could be the Color Correction Effect selection already included in Adobe Premier Pro. (Is this last sentence accurate?)

Again, *close*. A LUT is a tool applied in both production and post production to quickly and temporarily colour correct your rushes and provide a 'one light print' (for us boring old farts who understand that term) of your rushes, so you're not squinting and screwing your eyes up whilst editing. Or (any clients around?) providing the client something to look at that won't make them think the DoP is rubbish (because all the shots are dark, low contrast and look a bit soft. It's not a grade, just a rough and ready job, where there's a table saying "if this little pixel is IRE32 then make it IRE55, if this little pixel is IRE33 then make it IRE57, if this little pixel is IRE33, then make it IRE60" - tables are read VERY quickly by computers, so it's not a real grade but can happen in real time.

Originally Posted by Kevin O'Connor

- Some LUTs work better then others, this is why products like Magic Bullet / LUT Buddy are available.

Well, you're choosing your LUT to perform a task - do you want to unfold/unbend/un-'raw' your image enough to light it, edit it, show it to a client or to check it for technical stuff? Once you start grading, you really should bin the LUT - it's like a little preview, and you don't want to grade from a preview! LUT Buddy and Magic Bullet are doing two different jobs, and I could go totally Medieval about flat profiles on DSLR (and C100) footage and all its evils, but that had better be a different post.

Originally Posted by Kevin O'Connor

The alternative to an adjustable LUT is a plug-in, a pre-configured LOOK, like the Magic Bullet Quick Looks. This allows you to select a specific LOOK like Old Fugi Film Stock to apply without any tweaking or adjusting.

(insert whiny 'I-dunno' sound) LUTs aren't adjustable. They're just the quick and dirty 'this is sort of what it might look like when you're done'. Yes, there are plug ins that give you a preconfigured look, yes they can ask you if you shot with a profile, then 'correct' for it, but they are simply doing the basic work for you so you're left to tweak. And I'm not sure if FilmConvert (mentioning no plugin in particular) is a LUT tool per se. Certainly not Magic Bullet.

Originally Posted by Kevin O'Connor

- One way or the other I still should shoot in C-Log or Cinema Lock if I want to apply a something like the Magic Bullet Quick Looks for the best results in Post-Prod.

Aha. Now, this is the point at which I need to re-iterate this: C-Log is for difficult lighting situations, and if you shoot in fairly bland lighting situations, you may be better served with WDR or another CP. It's important to know that C-Log is for difficult lighting (interviews against a window, B-roll of urban scenes in sunlight after rain, wildly contrasty interiors and so on).

C-Log is not *raw* - raw is something else entirely where white balance, gamma, et al are decided after the event. C-log isn't even really comparable with Arri's Log-C because the Arri works at a minimum of 10 bits (where there are 4096 steps between black IRE0 and white IRE100, rather than our paltry 220 steps (16-235 - so yes, you get a few more using the superwhites range up to 109IRE).

When you only have 220 steps and you choose to squish your picture into the middle 33 IRE (33IRE to 66IRE - check your Technicolor rushes, DSLR folks!), and then want to pull them out to a full range, you're bound to see huge macroblocked noise in your blacks and find your highlights pull the midtones way above where they should be. At 8 bit, our rushes are simply too delicate for that sort of bending.

So, if you can't control your highlight to shadow ratio, have highlights or hot spots in your image, and some gaping holes in the shadows too, use C-Log, fill your boots. If you're doing a corporate talking head in an office or using chromakey, DON'T (unless you know why LOL). Use WDR or something else - and if you're doing chromakey, ensure your Detail/Sharpening is at -10.

Here's a very interesting post that mentions LUTs in passing, but has some valuable info for C100 users in the comments:

Arri Alexa vs. Canon C500 Camera Tests | Hurlbut Visuals

[Kevin O'Connor]

This is great, I can't find this type of training or knowledge at my locoal community college.

Your last quote responce makes the most sense to me. I was under the inpression that I should use C-Log or Cine Lock all the time. Although most everything I shoot for the inde films I work on are not lighted very even so I may use Cine Lock most of the time.

- What would be the problem or difficulties if I did not apply a LUT to my footage shot in Cine Lock or C-Log?

- The only Cine-Lock footage I've worked with so far in Premier CS5.5 I turned to black & white. I thought the image looked good but am I getting the true expected results from my edditor if I do not use a LUT?

Thanks, KO

[Matt Davis]

Thanks Kevin. Glad to be of help. Well, some help. Glad I haven't confused the heck out of you, at least. I am very aware that nobody else has chimed in yet - guys, if you're out there, feel free to chime in. I stand to be corrected!

Please bear in mind - a LUT is just a Quick and Dirty grade according to a preset look - you DON'T have to use a LUT.

So many times in professional video and cinematography, we need to see what we actually have to work with, not an idealised version of it. So, we choose headphones to monitor sound like the Sennheiser HD-25s - they don't make bad sound good, they make bad sound crap. They don't make good sound orgasmic, they make good sound, erm, good.

We don't choose Sony Orgasmatron OLED screens to make our pictures look good, we buy (rent!) excruciatingly expensive OLED monitors (and the rest) to make our pictures tell us what our cameras are seeing.

And, once we have the biggest and roundest sound quality, the most tones captured and the most amazing images buried deep in vast vats of data, then - THEN - we use a LUT to make the briefest of polaroids of what we have.

You really DON'T need to get to hung up on LUTs - trust yourself/your editor to grade nearer to the final cut. By all means use a LUT if you want to, but I don't see the need in C100-land. I can do a far better job, and my 'one light' grades can vary scene to scene, and it's easy to go back and apply a more finessed grade, plus mattes (power windows, whatever) to lift and separate like a visual wonder-bra.

The key thing is that EVERY shot (EVERY BLOODY SHOT) that you shoot (correctly) in C-Log will require a grade of some sort. C-Log should NEVER look good enough for the final edit - if it does, you did it wrong. No worries if that happens, it's just like Jazz. But you missed out on the power of C-Log is all.

I'd say 'forget LUTs' - just move on. Do it all in post. When you're through with that, through with rendering special versions for nervous clients, through with having to grade before editing, then chucking that grade out and starting again at picture lock, then - THEN - let's talk LUTs on your next production. LUTs are not a magic bullet (that's what Magic Bullet is) - LUTs are just a quick and dirty workflow trick.

By the way... (says he, and I am putting on my asbestos underpants right now coz I could be starting a flame war), there are many many tales of Directors shooting commercials and spots with Red Epic, and taking the LUT version (recorded to ordinary ProRes at 1080p) and editing and publishing that because it's 'good enough'. Essentially cutting out all the magic of an Epic by using its LUTted output (wince, sharp intake of breath, howl). This is partly the reason why I'm a bit anti-LUT, but mostly because if you really (really) need a LUT with C100 footage, you shot it wrong. LOL!

[Kevin O'Connor]

Yeah, kind of strange that no one else responded to the very first question in my original post. I'll ask that question again later.

Good to know that a LUT is not absolutely required and I understand that in the 8bit world the change is not that big. Also good to know that footage shot in C-Log should not be the final color grade. Another thing I learned is that applying a LUT is not the last step, there is still a final color grading on top of it.

Okay time to apply what I have learned and then ask my wife how she likes her footage lifted and separated. Should be interesting. ;-)

Thanks, KO.

[Dan McGuckin]

I really enjoy Brian Weed's CINELog profile. which can be found here - C300: Cowpunk's Profiles

I choose that over any other profile for shooting all of my content, which is alot of ambient light indoor and also indoor studio shorts.

Or if you don't want to click

--

cineLOG - Similar to above but with the cine1 gamma profile; more muted colors and flatter curve with a bit more dynamic range.



709LOG
Gamma: Normal 3
Black / Master Pedestal: -2
Knee / Enable: On
Slope: -2
Point: 90
Sharpness: -10
Color Matrix / Select: Canon Log
Gain: +30
Phase: +11
R-G: +3
R-B: +1
G-R: -8 or -6
G-B: -2
B-R: +3
B-G: -1

cineLOG
Same as above, but
Gamma: Cine 1
Black / Master Pedestal: 0
Color Matrix / Gain: 0

[Kevin O'Connor]

Thanks for the link. I'll try the CP files created by Cowpunk.

Thanks,