NEW METHOD for BETTER HALATION
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 ก.พ. 2024
- My new preferred method of adding halation in my projects. I was able to beta test this tool and after LOADS of testing, I can confidently recommend this to both beginners and professionals:
Download Film Convert + Halation here:
www.filmconvert.com
Use Code JVKE to save 10%
✩ My Color Grading Course:
go.jvke.us/checkoutst
Great vid, good explanation can't wait for the next one.
Thanks a lot! More to come.
Thanks
Thank u my friend
Hey Jake, how has the M1 Max been holding up for you in terms of performance? I have been thinking about getting it myself eventually for video editing and heavy grading. I just wondered: did the M1 Max ever fully slowed down with your heavy grading or did the machine just take it no issue?
How does this compare with halation in filmbox?
I actually haven’t tried filmbox yet but I’ll be testing it out very soon and I’ll let you know!
whats the difference between this and dehancer?
There’s a lot of differences. And I have spoken with a ton of colorists. Honestly, the most common preference, is both. Buy both and use both. You’ll find certain things you like about each of them. I use all three.
FilmConvert.
Look Designer.
Dehancer.
I use all 3 honestly , but for halation I use FC. Over anything
I love you
Please upload in 4K😄
We know you own a powerful PC that can export in HDR for TH-cam too😅
For the 4k, that’s my bad. lol it totally slipped my mind when I exported. HDR is a different story. ZERO need or sense to try to transform my sdr screen recording to HDR. also I’m on Mac.
Why does the door above your hat keeps changing shape? Look at the first 25 seconds of your video.
😂I have no idea. Could be a weird compression artifact.
it's funny how you mention that beginner mistakes are "having halation all over the place, on railing, brim of hat etc", yet at the end, you have the exact same example lol.
also, for film convert not having scene-referred workflow in 2024 is just pure cringe (no aces, no Davinci Wide Gamut). and on top of that, you can't just use your license to use the halation, they make you buy the halation add-on for another 60$, which is a just a joke. if you didn't have Nitrate licence before and want just the halation - you still have to buy the whole thing for 180$. film convert has already lost the market yet they just keep loosing it.
people, don't spend money on this stuff. if you are in search of the best halation emulation, best mtf curve implementation, best grain (ok this one might be subjective from project to project) - nothing beats Filmbox yet. Dehancer is good cheaper alternative, tho the halation is worse. film convert has the worst film stock emulations, the worst grain, and the worst halation. i have all three products.
I’ll use filmbox as well. I use several plugins on most of my projects. The tool I use just depends on what the job calls for. And you have to understand the strengths and weaknesses of each tool.
As far as Film Convert not having a scene referred workflow, you’re not 100% correct on that. A lot of times I’ll output to Arri log C which is a very commonly used scene referred color space for grading purposes. But I will concede, updates should include DWG and ACES. That’s one of the joys of working with companies like this, they listen to feedback like this and try to improve in the next update. No tool is perfect.
Lastly, about halation being everywhere in my clip… double check. It’s only in the areas it makes sense to be in, depending on the format and stock: sharp regions of contrast in exposure, and edge highlights.
All these plugins that do halation are bad, to be honest. They all use edge detect algorithms and that is not the way film responds to light and exposure. The problem iis that people are more interested in the "result" than the actual physical simulation. There are better ways to do it, that are less processing expensive and have better results.
One misconception is that halation doesn't affect the whole image. And that is wrong. But the way it affect is not always visible in the form of halo. One significant effect is reduced contrast in the red layer, and that is the cause of the "smooth skin" that film is said to render. This kind of plugin won't do that because it is focused in showing the most obvious aspect as the highlight halation.
Yea. Fair point. The outcome, is what most are looking for. Even at the expense of the accuracy of the effect they’re trying to recreate.
@@jvke.p Yeah, but the point is that you can have the outcome, with better accuracy and demanding less processing power
@@vitorlhermite care to share more on those processes?
@@jvke.p Sure! You can use a node set to Linear, with "lighten" composite mode. Apply the same amout of blur to the red and green channel. Decrease gain in the green channel with the linear gamma to control the amount of halation that affects the green channel. This will change the hue of the halation.
This is way less computing expensive than any of these plugins. You can control the amount of halation using the node keying or decreasing the gain of the red channel.
This is still not 100% percent accurate because it is still a gaussian blur, and the halation is not gaussian, but "good enough" for most cases.
If you want to be more accurate, you can make the same thing again, in paralel, with varying amounts of blur and strength to the effect to creat a more exponential blur. I usually do 3 or 4 passes. This will be more physically accurate as it affects the whole image and reduce contrast in the red channel all around, and be less processing expensive as it doesn't use any edge detect algorithm. You may need to spend a little time to understand the amount of blur applied, the strength and how to do the exponential fall off more pleasing and correct, but once you do it, it will be easy to replicate when you need.
I wasn't in my main account before :3
Well spoken
Thanks a lot! That’s something I’m always trying to improve on