Create a 3D LUT for Resolve | DisplayCAL & ArgyllCMS
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 เม.ย. 2024
- The only way to accurate grade your film is with a calbrated display.
Post color professionals preach this relentlessly, because it's true. But what if you're an independent filmmaker without the budget for high end displays that support hardware calibration? Do you buy a colorimeter and create an ICC profile? Not ideal.
The best way to grade on a budget is a small display hooked up to something like the Blackmagic Design UltraStudio Monitor 3G (or Decklink card). Hook up a display with 100% Rec.709 support and then use DisplayCAL and ArgyllCMS to create a 3D LUT file that can be used inside Resolve.
This solution is one of the most inexpensive choices for indie filmmakers on a budget.
However, using DisplayCAL is no walk in the park. It's more like walking into a tornado.
This lesson shows you how to use DisplayCAl to calibrate your display and create a 3D LUT file that you can use in Resolve.
If you're an aspiring filmmaker and would like access to all the Write & Direct training, check out: writedirect.co
#howtousedisplaycalfor3DLUT
#howtocreatea3DLUTforResolve
#onlinefilmschool
#ultrastudiomonitor3G
#Blackmagicdesigndecklink - ภาพยนตร์และแอนิเมชัน
Hi Kyler - So glad somebody is out there making these videos for us! I am ready to get into a properly calibrated work environment and based on some suggestions from others somehow ended up here where you corroborated, expanded and even deep dived for me! Amazing. My grading is done on an M1 Ultra Apple Studio in Resolve with the new BM Micro panel. My plan is to get the Blackmagic Design UltraStudio Monitor 3G, a Calibrite Display Pro HL, and an ASUS PA329CV and use DisplayCal to produce a 3D LUT. QUESTIONS - 1) Is the ASUS I mentioned going to work well? It's a 4K display, but I figured it would be nice to be able to use for other purposes later if I upgrade. Will I have to make adjustments for the fact that it's 4K? 2) I tend to keep things updated and I see indication DisplayCal may not work with the latest Mac OS. I would probably then have to use the Calibrite software if it's not compatible. Would I still get decent results?
Thanks for your kind words! There is a forked version of display cal that should work on the latest macOS. I haven’t tested it because I’m still on the older macOS on my M1. I don’t upgrade operating systems unless there’s a specific need. If you’re going to do a 4K display, I would do the BMD decklink card option. I don’t think you wanna send an HD signal out to 4K- not sure how the image will look. It might be fine, but just haven’t tried it. I’m doing a small HD display so the difference between HD and 4K is negligible. Calibrite software will not work. You can’t create a 3D LUT file using calibrite. Your choices are display cal or Calman software. If you’re going to get a nicer display, try to get 2000:1 contrast ratio.
Calman makes the home version for TV calibration (if your TV is supported). By buying an addition (Client 3),you can also calibrate 3 monitors with the standard version.
Unfortunately, the Calman Home doesn't support Resolve, which is kind of screwing us. They give us half solutions or you better pay the $2000-2500 licence for the full version.
Calman is the ticket-if you have $2k laying around. Unfortunately for us indie filmmakers, not so much. I would love to use them.
Thanks a lot. Really helpful. My Eizo was way off. Now back on track. 😊
Right on man. Happy to help. Glad it worked for you.
Nice content! I really hope you will do a video about using BMD hardware as lutbox.
Will do! Thanks man.
Ive been going through the series and i just want say thanks for creating this content. Im sure the ill be recommending and coming back for a refresher. Qiuestion: I know you said you would followup with how report the results from theh calibration. Ive tried my hand it at just curious if you'll be releasing that before and after report and what to look for in the results.
I do want to get to that, but I’ve got a film in post and I’m just really stacked right now. Also finishing the color grading info for the film school. Sorry for the delays!
Great Job!
Thank you! Hope it helps some indie filmmakers.
Hi! Displaycal PY3 that you sort of mentioned in the video works great on Sonoma 14.4.1 .Im running it on a macbook pro m1 with Sonoma 14.4.1 right now. No problems at all!
Oh really? Good to know! When I tried it you had to jump through hoops to get it up and going and it just didn't work well for me. But that was a year or more in the past. I'll check it out again.
@@writedirect 1.Install homebrew 2. Install Displaycal Py3 . Use terminal to start the program after installtion. Go to Macintosh HD/Users /"your username" / displaycal-py3 folder , right click on the folder and choose "new terminal at folder" . A terminal window will open up then write "make launch" (without the marks). Press enter and then Displaycal py3 starts!
Such great information in all of your videos thank you so much. I am just using a 27"iMac with a built in display, clearly not a good option for accurate color grading, however... is there still a benefit in creating a 3D LUT display profile for Resolve? As opposed to just using the ICC profile my Spyder creates?
Thanks man! Technically, yes. That will affect the viewers. Not sure on full screen playback though.
Thank you so much! very informative video. Do you think Displaycal is unreliable now as its development was abandoned in 2019?
DisplayCAL is the interface for ArgyllCMS. which is continually updated. So as long as DisplayCAL runs on your system, it’s fine. it will not run on the latest macOS, but there is a forked version by another person out there that will.
Very good one, especially for people for whom Displaycal might be a little overwhelming... I am using this method since over 3 years. My setting is quite similar, except from: Calibration - here I set tone curve to Rec 709, as well as black level to 0.01 cd/m2; 3d lut: size 65 (33 is simply less accurate, but some tools like viewing calera monitors may accept only 33). Also I always do verification, which can assure me that all went ok - worth to mention that either a lut is loaded into Resolve, or Device Link Profile with the right path is checked, otherwise luts duplicate themselves.
Great info. So on the black level -- Mind expounding on that more? I'd love to know your reasons. Copy that on the LUT. Didn't realize smaller was less accurate. I'm using a LUT box that asks for 33x33x33 hence my logic on the choice.
@@writedirect Black level might depend on your monitor; I use BenQ SW271 as a reference monitor and I found that information on a channel "ArtIsRight" and tested it getting better results in contrast and delta E especially for dark shades of colors. Regarding lut; the less points it has in the cube, the more values are "only" approximation between these points, so 65x65x65 will deffinitely be more accurate, if you can use one.
Any chances you do a video as good as this one also for display verification in DisplayCal?
Or any good resources that help me to figure this process out?
❤
@@meek1ns yes, thank you. I plan to do a video on the verification process along with the other version of DisplayCAL.
@@writedirect Looking really forward to it! This video here is so good, kinda glad that I found it - I struggle with this topic for months now
I have come across an issue Where the scopes are affected by the monitor lut. I have done as shown, only applied lut to monitor and No lut on scopes and color viewer.
When checking my scopes there’s a small slope between 0-70 IRE that gets lifted when checking a gradient. Any solutions?
Also, do you switch back to video levels on monitor settings after calibration!
Thanks for a great tutorial!
Hey man, thanks for your comment. So I do not switch back to video levels. I'm just staying at data. Interesting on the small change on levels -- That sounds like a bug to me. It wouldn't affect my setup because I'm doing that LUT box, so it's completely outside of Resolve. I'm using one of the BMD MicroConverters as a LUT box. Seems to work well, and the measuring I've done shows a small change from Resolve to LUT box with the same 3D LUT.
There should be a setting in resolve under color management settings to turn that off, let me know if you need help finding it.
Any way to do this with video levels instead? when I try changing the pipeline to video levels I get unusable results. I need video levels as .mp4 and h.264 does not support full levels
You def can change to video levels no problem. But Resolve, DisplayCal and your actual display all have to be set to that. From my specific setup full was better.
I've read and seen some others NOT use "apply vcgt". It's confusing. If we're just using an Ultrastudio Monitor 3g and NOT a lutbox, should we apply or not apply vcgt? You had mentioned that with a lower contrast ratio monitor to use a 2.4 relative curve and set black output offset to 100.....if you have a high contrast monitor 2000:1 and want to use 1886, should black output offset still be set to 100? or keep it at 0? Thanks so much!
Hey man, sorry for the delay. As far as I understand, regardless of a LUT box you want apply vcgt checked. If you weren't using the UltraStudio that would be different. If you have a 2000:1 contrast ratio display, try the Rec. 1886 setting vs what I said. But leave black offset at 100%. Now...this is just what I've read. You can rabbit whole on this app like crazy. Worst case you can try both, export quicktimes of your sequence and see which quicktime looks better.
@@writedirect No worries at all for the delay! I went down a rabbit hole a while ago trying to get the Python Version of DisplayCal going and recently updated ArgyllCMS to 3.2 (which was released in April). Last night I was scouring some forums with top level colorists and it seems like a never ending battle. So, if this info can help you at all as well, here's what I've gathered: BT1886 is the standard. Rec 709 doesn't have a pure gamma curve of 2.4 attached to it. There's charts around you can find that show the difference in the curve when measured. I think WHY it gets confusing is that most colorists are using high end OLED and now QD OLED (and those that still use lower end Eizo's) where they have high contrast ratios or where black can be measured at zero. In monitors with high contrast such as the ones previously mentioned, BT1886 will get you a true 2.4 gamma curve measured from a 0 nit black. Low contrast monitors such as lcd, ips, etc with a contrast of 1000:1 or 1500:1 don't have enough contrast to reach a measured black point of 0 so if you try to calibrate with BT1886, your blacks will end up lifted because the curve has to bend. Therefore, in this case, it's better to use a Rec 709 gamma 2.4 Relative calibration as that will measure from the black point of the monitor and the blacks won't get lifted. WHEW. That was a lot to type but hope the info helps! -- For myself, I did end up calibrating with BT1886 with black output offset set to 0 and the results looked pretty spot on and the verification report showed all tolerances passed. Will try an alternate calibration with black output offset set to 100 tonight to see if there's much of a difference.
@@christopherpiccione9335 nice. I really appreciate the thorough type up! It’s crazy how confusing and all over the place all of this stuff can be. I think if you drop two grand on software from Calman, you could probably get more detailed info. But that’s two grand. Were you able to get the new display cow working with Python 3? I tried it a few months ago, maybe even a year ago and ran into issues. But haven’t tried since.
@@writedirect Yeah, I think that's probably why most colorists just shell out the money for professional calibration. Haha. As for DisplayCal Pyth 3...It works flawlessly and is getting pretty consistent updates. I think they're aiming to release 3.9.13 soon. The big issue I had was that the TPG from Resolve wasn't working on Sonoma but they fixed that. I did have an issue with the tar.gz not working properly but I found a workaround. If you'd like, I can shoot you an email with further info for you to explore and try out?
Also, I do believe from what I've read over on the Github discussions as well as the DisplayCal forums that the new devs are currently working on getting 3.9.13 out AND are also working on getting regular installation packages out for Mac & Windows after that sometime in the near future because there's been so many requests to get normal installers out since the Python3 workaround has been a nightmare for some.
I was going to ask you if it's possible to create the 3D LUT file using a different computer with an older version of the Mac OS. Last night I got DisplayCal to work on my 2012 Mac Pro with Monterey OS. Your instructions are great!
Awesome! And obviously that's only with BMD hardware. Let me know how it goes.
@@writedirect Correct! It will be a few days until I can back on it again. I'll let you know.
@@writedirect Update on my progress: I could not get my DeckLink card to work in an expansion box. So I went ahead and got the BMD UltraStudio Monitor 3G. And got the ASUS PA247CV monitor. All works great! I Then went to my other computer to create the LUT using DisplayCal. I got all the way through it until I got to the part where I had to enter the IP address in Resolve. It says it failed. Not sure why or if I'm missing something. So I guess for now I'l have to wait until there is a fix for my M2 Mac Studio running Sonoma. If you have any ideas, let me know? Thanks!
@@russtvmedia if you’re using the IP address and port number specified, they should talk to each other. You have to have resolve running on that other computer obviously. It’s not an IP address communicating over the network. I know that’s what it seems like but it’s just an internal mapping on your computer. Also, if there’s any type of antivirus firewall or that type of thing running on that computer, I would turn that off.
@@writedirect This might be a stupid question. But for the calibration, does the monitor need to be connected to the computer's GPU, or through the BMD UltraStudio Monitor 3G via HDMI?
ok, but when I'm done, and I load my lut file, do I then turn my display and monitor settings back to limited input?
No-Whichever route you choose at the beginning, leave it that way. There’s nothing wrong with video level. If you think you get a better result that way. But Resolve and your display have to match on that setting. And you need them set that way before you create the 3D LUT. For me, data seemed better.
@@writedirect ok thanks, I tried it on full and it was all washed out no matter what I did. I'm on an OLED proart and had to tinker a bit, but I think I have a good calibration lut now with it all set to limited. It is quite a process for sure. Sadly the display I'm using is not as common I guess among the communities.
Its this one, ASUS ProArt Display OLED PA27DCE-K 26.9 I wish there was more info on it, as it was almost 2 grand, but I guess its up to me to take a scientific approach...
@@RememberThisShow how are you connected to computer? Using BMD hardware?
@@writedirect yes the ultra studio monitor 3g
@@RememberThisShow if I used a 4K display for monitoring I’d prob do a decklink so you could send 4K out. Not that this is your prob. Just side comment. Is the manual part of the monitor calibration working ok and getting in good range? With that display you might want to do change to BT 1886 and experiment with black setting, if the display has 2000:1 contrast.