- This topic has 20 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Ho Florian,
Really amazing software! I’m a bit overwhelmed to be honest but I’ve spent the last couple days reading and playing with the different settings. I’ve got a Panasonic Pro Plasma and my question is, is there a way to leave the gamma curve alone and just “clean up” the grey scale? After my calibration the actual color of the grey scale is little changed and I can still see some places where it’s off slightly. I will post my report.
Thank you again
jb
Hi,
color doesn’t exist independently of relative luminance (which is really what we’re talking about when talking about “gamma” or more accurately tone response). The 3D LUT looks fine in that regard, although there is a very slight fluctuation in the luminance response which may be related to plasma ABL (white level drift compensation and using a small measurement area size can be used to counteract this). I’m not sure it is a real issue though, because content transformed through the LUT looks very smooth.
Hi Florian,
I appreciate the response…I attached my verification file and think I’m fairly dialed in but would love to get your thoughts.
Thank you
Curious, once the LUT is in the LUT box and running to the monitor then there shouldn’t be an issue hooking a different system up to. I mean the LUT would look the same on a mac or a windows machine? Also, I’m finding I need to load the icc from the storage folder to re-test the LUT, so I’m guessing if I wanted to verify on the windows machine I would need to bring that icc over and load it to test?
Curious, once the LUT is in the LUT box and running to the monitor then there shouldn’t be an issue hooking a different system up to.
Correct. Are you using a LUT box though? My impression was you have set the LUT in Resolve?
Also, I’m finding I need to load the icc from the storage folder to re-test the LUT
If you’re not using a LUT box, then yes, because Resolve doesn’t support verifying through the LUT if it’s set in Resolve.
Hi Florian
My plan was to create the LUT in resolve and then transfer it you a LUT box so it doesn’t interfere with my external scopes. That should work right?
Hi Florian,
Having a hard time here for some reason. I donated 50 USD hoping you can get me set right…I’ve attached my setup. I’m just looking for a 2.4 gamma and a cleaned up greyscale on my panasonic pro plasma. I’ll run it again and post the results.
thank you
Jeff
See Attahced:
Everything looks fine (I think) except that wonky gamma curve…How do I get it to 2.4?
So far today I’ve tried:
tone curve = 1886 2.4
tone curve = custom 2.4
smaller patches (probably under 5%, others were at approx 20%) 1886 2.4
All look very similar and all have the wonky gamma levels.
I am on a windows 10 64 bit machine
There’s nothing wonky about the tone curve, as far as I can see, it’s spot on target. Note that you probably don’t want “pure” 2.4, because that will crush your near blacks. If you then try to counter-act that during grading, the graded result may look too bright near black on a calibrated TV.
Hi Florian,
If you look at the gamma evels it never comes close to 2.4 seems to be the issue. It would be great for a 2.2 or 2.1, but is there a way to get it closer to 2.4.
Thank you
If you look at the gamma evels it never comes close to 2.4 seems to be the issue.
But it shouldn’t. The nominal gamma for each individual level in the overview is the target. And the delta L* 2000 in the overview tells you about the visual error in terms of luminance (practically nonexistent in this case).
You can of course aim for a “pure” gamma 2.4, but you probably shouldn’t for the reasons I outlined (near black crush).
