Visioncolor Impulz Luts

[Ed_David]

So now it's been about 2 years since I started messing with Resolve and time after time, I find that Visioncolor Impulz luts are the best tools to get any footage - from DSLR to Alexa to look like film and in my eyes to look the best.

Their webpage has an incredible manifesto about why using a LUT is good - is cool - is acceptable - and I couldn't agree more:

http://www.vision-color.com/impulz/

The other luts I tried aren't - and I've tried them all - well the big ones and the new one but I don't want to mention their names because I don't want to say anything negative but the popular one has too much magneta in the highlights and has weird film pattern that looks artificial and the other one that just came out just has like 10 luts - not customized per each camera's view of what is acceptable for a film stock.

[AaronChicago]

I've been using these for a while as well, and love them.

[utsira]

me too. 

[Zak Forsman]

yeah, big fan of these. I use them in combination with the film grain in the Film Convert plugin.

[AaronChicago]

Which version do you guys use the most? Elite Color 200 for me.

[utsira]

I use the Tetrachrome a lot. The Ektar probably the least (comes out looking very green in my experience). The "Color Implosion" LUT makes the old LUT Utility plugin crash on FCPX (contacted support, still not fixed). But it work with the new Color Finale plugin. So I only just got to see what that one looks like. This is with using the standard Rec709 LUTs on H264 files (from the Panny G6, Sony A6000 etc). Makes me wish I had some 10-bit or 12-bit colour footage to grade.... it might be time to start looking for a BMPCC on eBay again...

[Neumann Films]

LPP Tetrachrome when I use them but I don't find myself using them much.  Just not...fitting to my style I guess.

I like creating my own LUTs for 75% of the look, then I will maybe use Impulz for the Film Print Emulation version of a stock and set it to 50% opacity.

 

I find myself using FilmConvert a lot more lately.  Way more control.

[Ed_David]

LPP Tetrachrome when I use them but I don't find myself using them much.  Just not...fitting to my style I guess.

I like creating my own LUTs for 75% of the look, then I will maybe use Impulz for the Film Print Emulation version of a stock and set it to 50% opacity.

 

I find myself using FilmConvert a lot more lately.  Way more control.

​I like that technique 

personally I think Filmconvert though has this weird magneta highlight thing going on with all its emulations - and that it doesn't really nail the film grain that well - it doesn't seem to feel as authentic how it handles skin tones or highlights - how it gets the blues in the sky - I feel like impulz gets there closer right away.

I used to be the biggest filmconvert fan - but I am seeing certain limitations with it all.

And on custom luts - I have had little luck - I feel like it's a matter of pride to say you create one's own - and but I just hit walls with my own stuff - but it's me - I'm not trained as a colorist at all - I'm just learning as I go along.

[Neumann Films]

With FilmConvert I think it all depends on the camera/profile.  I shoot with a RED but I use Canon 5D Mark III - Prolost because it's the only profile that actually looks good to me. I also don't think FIlmConvert looks good when it's the only tool used.  I add multiple LUTs first and then FilmConvert so it's not doing much of the lifting...just the finishing touches.

Also, regarding your own LUTs, I think it's just trial and error.  What do you use to create them?

[AaronChicago]

Exactly. I feel like Impulz is more of a starting point than a full look. I'll usually throw Impulz on an adjustment layer, on top. Then use Colorista to tweak each shot underneath.

[Ed_David]

definitely - i start with impulz then second layer start modifying over all then third -10000th layer start playing with the frames - brighten this, darken this - etc etc - very excited for resolve 12 to come out soon as well.  Blackmagic is doing so amazing.

[Oliver Daniel]

I use Impulz too. It's lovely. Also Osiris. Some of my highlights go weird on Osiris though. 

Has anybody ever tried Crumplepop Finisher? I'm telling you that plugin (when used correctly) is absolute magic. The difference in sharpness and clarity is staggering.  It's not a drag and drop thing, you have to tweak it to look right. If you get it, my tip is to be careful of the brightness control and tone down the detail control.  

[BenEricson]

So now it's been about 2 years since I started messing with Resolve and time after time, I find that Visioncolor Impulz luts are the best tools to get any footage - from DSLR to Alexa to look like film and in my eyes to look the best.

Their webpage has an incredible manifesto about why using a LUT is good - is cool - is acceptable - and I couldn't agree more:

http://www.vision-color.com/impulz/

The other luts I tried aren't - and I've tried them all - well the big ones and the new one but I don't want to mention their names because I don't want to say anything negative but the popular one has too much magneta in the highlights and has weird film pattern that looks artificial and the other one that just came out just has like 10 luts - not customized per each camera's view of what is acceptable for a film stock.

​It seems like these work well in the right setting, but people should really try to create their own looks as well. Half of the bmpcc pocket footage stuff looks terrible because of the LUTs applied. 

The captain hook LUTs are free and actually provide a really nice base. 

Just to clear it up, all of these LUTs still look like digital that is trying to look like film. I guess that creates a sub category. 

[jcs]

Before I got more serious into filmmaking, I created a custom tool to allow mapping any color to any other color. It used a 3D LUT, with trilinear or tricubic interpolation. The UI was in 3D, and 3D glasses were worn to edit the 3D cube lattice (editing was in stereo 3D). The UI provided 2D rendered slices through the 3D cube to help visualize the transform being created. The tool wasn't a retail product, but rather a tool used to figure out a solution to a specific problem. It was clear that while a 3D LUT is very powerful, the distortions created in the mapping can lead to 'color collapse', meaning many colors get mapped to the same value (banding, solarization, poor skin tones), and because the final values must be mapped back to a [0,0,0] -> [1,1,1] space, clipping or other techniques must be used, which can further create unwanted artifacts.

3D LUTs work best when the input is exposed in a way the LUT table 'expects' (per the design). Changing exposure before the LUT can radically change the output (or if shot too low/high). I purchased Film Convert and Impulz Ultimate, and while both are useful tools, I don't use them very often. I might use them more if they supported my (by far) favorite film stock: Eastman Kodak 100T 5248/7248.

A 3D LUT cube can be converted to a 2D bitmap (and back to a 3D LUT): I used this method for an iOS app which needed fast real-time 3D LUTs.

Here's a 3D LUT creator that works similarly to the custom tool I created (but with a 2D UI and 2D bitmap display): http://3dlutcreator.com/

When I watch movies on Netflix, when a scene has amazing color, I stop the movie and look it up on shotonwhat.com. I did this when watching Braveheart recently, on this scene:

Shot with iPhone 5S on Sony XBR5 HDTV:

The blue/magenta halo is not visible on the TV- iPhone 5S artifact. Screen shot on MacBook Pro in Safari (Netflix makes screenshots a challenge- most come out black; stopping on a good sharp frame is tricky as well. Here's a close sharp frame). Note the reduced brightness and contrast: HDTV image looks much better in real life!:

Reading the Kodak paper on 5248 film: http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/H-1-5248t.pdf , something interesting is apparent: sharpness varies with RGB (B is sharpest, followed by G, then R). Blurring the G and R color channels may help recreate the 5248 look (not possible with a 3D LUT alone). I stopped Men in Black II on a similar shot, with Will Smith in front and blue sky in back. Something magical about blues, skintones (pinkish) and 5248 film. The Last Samurai, The Fifth Element, Armageddon, Fight Club, American Beauty, Star Trek First Contact, The Shawshank Redemption, Baraka, and many more favorites- all shot on 5248.

[sam]

I purchased Impulz as well. Solid value, but I agree with jcs.
Anyways,here's A trick I learned to quickly view a multitude of luts without clicking or selecting
 
1.open a video clip in Photoshop
2. click Color Lookup (box with 9 squares on the far right under adjustments)
3. click Load 3d Lut in the newly opened properties tab and click the first lut in the list.
4. Hover your mouse over the blue highlighted box with the name of the lut you just clicked
and use your mouse scroll wheel to quickly cycle through your luts to get ideas or what might make a good starting point etc...
 (you may have to add your luts to photoshops directory)

[Ed_David]

Before I got more serious into filmmaking, I created a custom tool to allow mapping any color to any other color. It used a 3D LUT, with trilinear or tricubic interpolation. The UI was in 3D, and 3D glasses were worn to edit the 3D cube lattice (editing was in stereo 3D). The UI provided 2D rendered slices through the 3D cube to help visualize the transform being created. The tool wasn't a retail product, but rather a tool used to figure out a solution to a specific problem. It was clear that while a 3D LUT is very powerful, the distortions created in the mapping can lead to 'color collapse', meaning many colors get mapped to the same value (banding, solarization, poor skin tones), and because the final values must be mapped back to a [0,0,0] -> [1,1,1] space, clipping or other techniques must be used, which can further create unwanted artifacts.

3D LUTs work best when the input is exposed in a way the LUT table 'expects' (per the design). Changing exposure before the LUT can radically change the output (or if shot too low/high). I purchased Film Convert and Impulz Ultimate, and while both are useful tools, I don't use them very often. I might use them more if they supported my (by far) favorite film stock: Eastman Kodak 100T 5248/7248.

A 3D LUT cube can be converted to a 2D bitmap (and back to a 3D LUT): I used this method for an iOS app which needed fast real-time 3D LUTs.

Here's a 3D LUT creator that works similarly to the custom tool I created (but with a 2D UI and 2D bitmap display): http://3dlutcreator.com/

When I watch movies on Netflix, when a scene has amazing color, I stop the movie and look it up on shotonwhat.com. I did this when watching Braveheart recently, on this scene:

Shot with iPhone 5S on Sony XBR5 HDTV:

The blue/magenta halo is not visible on the TV- iPhone 5S artifact. Screen shot on MacBook Pro in Safari (Netflix makes screenshots a challenge- most come out black; stopping on a good sharp frame is tricky as well. Here's a close sharp frame). Note the reduced brightness and contrast: HDTV image looks much better in real life!:

Reading the Kodak paper on 5248 film: http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/H-1-5248t.pdf , something interesting is apparent: sharpness varies with RGB (B is sharpest, followed by G, then R). Blurring the G and R color channels may help recreate the 5248 look (not possible with a 3D LUT alone). I stopped Men in Black II on a similar shot, with Will Smith in front and blue sky in back. Something magical about blues, skintones (pinkish) and 5248 film. The Last Samurai, The Fifth Element, Armageddon, Fight Club, American Beauty, Star Trek First Contact, The Shawshank Redemption, Baraka, and many more favorites- all shot on 5248.

​this is fascinating - thank you for sharing this!!!  Wow I am now super curious about this film stock!!

[AaronChicago]

So is there no LUT out there for 5248?

[Inazuma]

How successful a LUT is really depends on the camera.  For example the VisionColor stuff is terrible on Panasonic cameras (if used on their own) but really nice on Nikons. And I've found the opposite true for FilmConvert. 

Also I have to say that they are a little overused. It's fine for narrative stuff but does every travel video need them really? 

[mtheory]

All this choice lets us use literally hundreds of LUTS/stocks/looks on a single movie. Panasonic Varicam35 even creates/uses a custom LUT per each shot. 

[Geoff CB]

Before I got more serious into filmmaking, I created a custom tool to allow mapping any color to any other color. It used a 3D LUT, with trilinear or tricubic interpolation. The UI was in 3D, and 3D glasses were worn to edit the 3D cube lattice (editing was in stereo 3D). The UI provided 2D rendered slices through the 3D cube to help visualize the transform being created. The tool wasn't a retail product, but rather a tool used to figure out a solution to a specific problem. It was clear that while a 3D LUT is very powerful, the distortions created in the mapping can lead to 'color collapse', meaning many colors get mapped to the same value (banding, solarization, poor skin tones), and because the final values must be mapped back to a [0,0,0] -> [1,1,1] space, clipping or other techniques must be used, which can further create unwanted artifacts.

3D LUTs work best when the input is exposed in a way the LUT table 'expects' (per the design). Changing exposure before the LUT can radically change the output (or if shot too low/high). I purchased Film Convert and Impulz Ultimate, and while both are useful tools, I don't use them very often. I might use them more if they supported my (by far) favorite film stock: Eastman Kodak 100T 5248/7248.

A 3D LUT cube can be converted to a 2D bitmap (and back to a 3D LUT): I used this method for an iOS app which needed fast real-time 3D LUTs.

Here's a 3D LUT creator that works similarly to the custom tool I created (but with a 2D UI and 2D bitmap display): http://3dlutcreator.com/

When I watch movies on Netflix, when a scene has amazing color, I stop the movie and look it up on shotonwhat.com. I did this when watching Braveheart recently, on this scene:

Shot with iPhone 5S on Sony XBR5 HDTV:

The blue/magenta halo is not visible on the TV- iPhone 5S artifact. Screen shot on MacBook Pro in Safari (Netflix makes screenshots a challenge- most come out black; stopping on a good sharp frame is tricky as well. Here's a close sharp frame). Note the reduced brightness and contrast: HDTV image looks much better in real life!:

Reading the Kodak paper on 5248 film: http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/H-1-5248t.pdf , something interesting is apparent: sharpness varies with RGB (B is sharpest, followed by G, then R). Blurring the G and R color channels may help recreate the 5248 look (not possible with a 3D LUT alone). I stopped Men in Black II on a similar shot, with Will Smith in front and blue sky in back. Something magical about blues, skintones (pinkish) and 5248 film. The Last Samurai, The Fifth Element, Armageddon, Fight Club, American Beauty, Star Trek First Contact, The Shawshank Redemption, Baraka, and many more favorites- all shot on 5248.

​Awesome information here. Thanks for that. Great note about blurring/sharpening the individual color channels, will try that out!

As for the LUT usage. I'm fine with them being used as a base, but I dislike them being used as a "instant grade" that I can spot on peoples work. It's not creative to just use them as is and take away the personal touch. I like to use some of the Kodak presets in speedgrade, but the colours shift to far towards green in the shadows and dark blues are to saturated. So I adjust to taste, then grade further on top of that when I have that base.

Basically, great starting point, but not a substitute for a personal grade.