![]() ![]() Anyone know?ĭidn't want to get too far into the grading stuff yet, but I just want to make sure I shoot for the best image while traveling soon. Not clear on what the difference is in applying a look to the actual clip, or adding it on an adjustment layer instead. afterward? I'd assume it is better to adjust the basics first before the style, but I'm not certain that it really matters as long as the final look is what you want. Is it better to do all the basic levels, color, exposure stuff first, then apply LUTs, presets, Looks, etc. ![]() Just wondered if one method is preferred over the other.Īlso, I've been starting with a LUT I like, then dialing back the opacity, then adjusting my various exposure, saturation, etc. "Alien Look") then adjusting to taste, and using LUTs? Seems like they both make good starting places to tweak from. do you know what the difference is between using a preset "Look" or color table "preset" (i.e. If I just continue to tweak my Standard profile to where I get very close to where I want to be straight out of the camera, it doesn't leave me much wiggle room at all in the grade. If I use either your profile or the Flaat 11, they'll require much more grading work, but the LUTs and effects, etc. Now I'm torn as to how to handle my shooting on the road. Yours produced an image that gave me the absolute most room to play with the image. Compared yours to the Flaat 10, 11, and a tweaked Standard. Hey, I used your picture style on some quick tests, then played with grading. I will give it a try when some good cameras are around because I mainly look for stills quality, I don't tell stories, I just want to do moving stills. Nope, right now I have stopped filming (although I'm downloading the vision luts to give them a try just for fun), I'm just taking photos. Sticking with LUTS and tweaking my own profile. I've seen really nice stuff from Brandon Li using Osiris, but it's mostly been from cameras like the Sony RX10, 5D3 & BMPCC which I think that LUT is particularly tuned to.Ĭan anyone using Nikon here, recommend some LUTs that you find most appealing? Not going for Film Convert at the moment. I don't think the LUTS that come with LUT Utility are the best for the Nikon, but they're not bad. )Īnyway, what I've figured out is that I get better results with a tweaked Standard file than I do the Flaat 10 one. I'm sure a good colorist wouldn't need the LUTs but it's just so much quicker to get it right if you're a relative noob like me. I can get close starting with the Teal + Orange Look built-in to FCP X, but it's always better using the LUT. Consistently, despite my best efforts, the footage using the LUTs comes out better and closer to natural film stock. Added a little bit of grain and sharpened. Then used the Fuji 3513 to Rec709 at about 50% and miner tweaks to the exposure, etc. however, I just graded the same footage the best I could by eye and several different shots. I didn't think I really needed the LUT Utility or any LUTs to start with. I've been playing with the LUT Utility with test footage I shot using the Flaat 10 profile, and a modified Standard profile. So, now I'm trying to get the in camera settings where I want them to be for grading in FCP X. The trade-offs are worth having a wide range, macro, AF for stills, VR for handheld, etc. Have decided that the 18-200mm VR lens, while not perfect, is close enough to my manual glass to sacrifice some shallow DOF for the benefits of the VR stabilization. Trying to get something close to a decent look before I leave, and with minimal gear. Experimenting with the D5300 before I take it on a little trip to Mexico. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |