- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I’ve recently been calibrating some displays for a client with a Flint running 2011 software.
But there seems to be a major problem with the way LUTS are handled.
The LUTs seem to work perfectly if added as a node in effects, but when added as an output LUT to manage the broadcast monitor the LUT is not being applied correctly. There are noticeable differences in the image – red in blacks, different contrast…
The LUT itself has been proved to be correct – and indeed works correctly as an effects node. It’s just when used as an output LUT it is being applied incorrectly.
Any ideas, as I’m really surprised Autodesk can have got this so wrong!
From a couple of private replies I have received I realias I have not provided enough information…
The difference we are seing is small – and I can understand some people not seeing it if the
LUT being used is making major changes, (a print emulation LUT for example).The LUT wer are using is only for small alterations to correct subtle Rec709 errors in the
display.We have tried all variations of settings, and yet the error remains. We have a small
contrast variation, and red in the shadows.If you use ‘normal’ (real footage) images the variation is hard to see (but is there), but with
some test frames you can see it easily.I have asked the client to see if a bypass LUT (a LUT with no variation from input) causes the same problem, as we can then profile with that LUT active and negate the problem…
Which ever way you look at it there really does seem to be a variation on the way LUTs are used as effects nodes, which I guess are CPU based, and for live output application, which I suspect is GPU based?
If anyone has access to a 2011 Flint I can send you the LUT and test frames so you
can see the problem.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.