New LUT & Highlights

[Dionysios.TS]

Hi guys,

I noticed while using LUTs that the "old" highlights compression works a bit better that the filmic one as the last one makes the image too flat IMHO or in some cases doesn't have any effect at all... O.o
I guess is normal due ti the nature of the filmic curve?!?!?

Thanks,

Dionysios -

[Javadevil]

The new filmic highlights requires tweaking the flimic shadow as well to achieve the contrast.

[Dionysios.TS]

Thanks for answering, the filmic shadow once up gives light to the shadows and don't change the contrast. I noticed the same behaviour in the VFB+ plugin as well.

At the end I thing that working with the LUT profiles need to test all the post parameters to get a nice result. This is due to the LUT nature of each profile file. Sometimes contrast must be up while the filmic highlights don't change anything at all. Other times I found filmic give the best result and contrast lower it down a bit.

I guess all this is normal as the LUT profiles change radically the curves of the original image and the post production controls in the VFB, change their results as consequence.

Thanks,

Dionysios -

[Juraj]

You know, I am the one who harked most for filmic, but lately it behaves unpredictably for me. This imho isn't Corona's fault, the VFB+ I think does absolutely the same.

Filmic shadows is absolutely weird. Not sure how this is implemented, but it only provides crisp shadows at some particular conditions (maybe some special exposure ?). Other times, it flattens the image !.

I still have some suspicions if we get the correct deal, if it's not supposed to convert to LogC space first, if it's really independent of exposure. And most of all I think I want the full filmic because the simplified is too much for every single scene.

Right now I am back to HC 2-5 + contrast/midtonesboost LuT.

[Dionysios.TS]

You know, I am the one who harked most for filmic, but lately it behaves unpredictably for me. This imho isn't Corona's fault, the VFB+ I think does absolutely the same.

Filmic shadows is absolutely weird. Not sure how this is implemented, but it only provides crisp shadows at some particular conditions (maybe some special exposure ?). Other times, it flattens the image !.

I still have some suspicions if we get the correct deal, if it's not supposed to convert to LogC space first, if it's really independent of exposure. And most of all I think I want the full filmic because the simplified is too much for every single scene.

Right now I am back to HC 2-5 + contrast/midtonesboost LuT.

Same stuff here too! Filmic reacts in different ways from image to image and the situazion is worst while using LUTs. I do exactly the same workflow as yours at the end!

Thanks for getting back,

Dionysios -