Jump to content

Math based film emulation. Alexa to 5219 color science


Will J. Lokken

Recommended Posts

Hi there,

Over the last few years I've developed a system to match cameras with color science, specifically matching digital footage to film.
I recently finished a quite heavy project attempting to emulate 5219 with the Alexa, and I'd like to share it with you and hear what you think.

I wrote a few words about my findings and thoughts from the process for those interested in the topic, as well as put some side-by-side images comparing film and Alexa after the color science has been applied. Here's a link to the post: ARRI Log C | Kodak 5219

I'm also interested in hearing your opinions on, and knowledge of, the use of similar color science within the industry in general.

Are some of you using similar techniques already? I read that they used Steve Yedlin's display prep on Last Jedi to match digital shots, but haven't been able to find much info elsewhere on the application of such tools. 

Would you find creating film-like looks for digital capture a desirable trait or prefer clean Log C as a starting point for grading?

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems from your examples that you are matching Alexa to a film negative scan, and you've done quite well.

That said, it appears to me that the film scan does not look like an analogue film print. To me, it looks "better" than an analogue film print.

And so my question:  If going for a "film look", would it be more "unique" to emulate a film print rather than a negative scan?

 

Yesterday I was beginning a color grade for a film and was playing with different techniques and came up with something that is rather "filmish", but not at all an emulation.  We have so much control over the image now that we didn't have in the analogue days.  Is there really any reason to "recreate" film?  I think it's a very interesting experiment that you've done that will yield a great bit of insight into color grading, so that the effort has not been wasted.  I'm just wondering about how important a "canned" film emulation really is...

 

Thanks for the article Will.  These are just my gut reactions ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a process called RFG. We record the digital files to 35mm camera filmstock (500T or 200T), the rescan the film back to digital DPX log files for final grading. We try to match the main primary colours but let the secondaries float.

A recent example of our work can be seen on Amazon Prime: Guava Island.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Thanks Bruce. I do agree with you, film print is a very interesting target as well for color science and 2383 is my next project when I get around to it ! 

I understand your thoughts about the importance of such tools. I guess it's all a matter of taste in the end. I personally like the different way colours are inter-positioned relative to each other in film which is completely different to how they are in Alexa, and how highlights bloom for example -- all the details in the way film renders an image which can't be mimicked with tools available in programs such as Resolve. I see much potential in my own work for using color science as a tool, not just for one stock but for any complex look creation

Dirk, the RFG process sounds interesting. Do you have any technical info or examples of the results of the process you can share?

Pete, my color science is not currently existing in a shareable format -- it would be a bit of a project to teach how to use the tools I've created in the current state, but hopefully one day I will have a way to make it accessible

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will,

We have done dozens of commercials as well as sections of feature films and entire films. On one particular commercial for Vaseline, we used 500T, 200T and 50D to show different timespans, from mid 1800s to Vietnam to present day. It can be seen on vimeo:

 

Another one, completely on 500T to simulate a 1960s film is on Amazon Prime: Guava Island.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Hey, I know this is an old post, but it seemed intriguing. However, the link is dead. I think your domain expired.

I'm curious, generally what process did you go through to emulate the film stock? Did you shoot the same scene with a digital camera and 5219 stock and compare them, or is it something completely different? What kind of math was used?

Thanks.

Edited by Brian E. Rutan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/22/2019 at 1:06 AM, Dirk DeJonghe said:

The link to my (temp) website is fixed. We use split screen with the original digital image and recorded negative. See my previous post.

 

Thanks for the reply, Dirk. I probably should have clarified that in my previous post I was addressing the creator of this thread, Will J. Lokken.

While I'm at it, what made you go with the process of recording digitally acquired footage to film and back? I must say I really like the results you got, it totally looks like a real negative. But, I'm curious, what didn't work about simply acquiring 35mm directly? Also, why record to a negative instead of DI print stock or intermediate stock?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was an intial request by a well-known DoP who wanted a 'home movie' look for a Superbowl commercial a few years ago, as if the consumers themselves had filmed the images. This prompted some testing and we arrived at the combination of 500T camerastock plus S16mm sized area.

The objective of Intermediate films is to be as transparent as possible, to make an Interpositive and Duplicate negative that matches as closely as possible the original negative in contrast and color rendition. This is not what we want in this case, we want to add some texture and character. The camera stocks have some character (greens, flesh-tones, sky etc) that is added during the process.

The intermediate stocks have very little grain, again, not what we want. Grain is 'texture' now, no longer a 'defect', just like some painters use a broad brush with visible brushstrokes against a digital picture (completely texture-free).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Brian,

My website is no longer active. It was a post with pictures and an accompanying text on some of the technical notes and conclusions I made. I've put the pictures up on flickr instead for those interested so you can see the two formats compared with this color science.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/185251785@N02/albums/72157711562201957

Regarding the process - yes I shot film and alexa "side by side" (technically one at a time to get a more similar framing and to use the same lens) in a variety of lighting scenarios (much more than you see in these few images here, but these are some of them) I also shot color charts and more boring stuff to measure color and contrast curve response.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hi Will!

I am very interested in your work and have to say the results on Flickr looks very very good. I am currently in the process of doing something similar, and was wondering if you wanted to share some more information on how you went about processing the image after capture? Did you use any automatic color chart color matching, or a more manual approach, perhaps using software like Nuke ?

Would love to chat more about this!

Best,

Oskar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Hello folks.

We've been researching this matter since 2014.
Finally we released a film simulation tool – Dehancer OFX plugin for DaVinci.

There is a full set of modern Kodak Vision 3 negative movie films + Eastman Double-X 5222.
We have more than 50 photographic and movie film profiles in total. Аll of them are sampled from real film stock and printed in our own darkroom to capture true film color and contrast.

Dehancer is not just LUTs, because our film characterisation is a very sophisticated process + many unique stuff that just couldn’t fit in a single lut. We’ve even sampled –2 +2 push/pull film exposure variations.

There are also additional tools for complete film look and feel inside the plugin – Film grain, Bloom and Halation.

Here are some examples of Kodak Vision 3 and Fuji Etherna profiles:

 

 

 

 

 


And even Adox Color Implosion we have too:

 

It would be a great pleasure for us if you try it:

https://www.dehancer.com

* Please don’t forget to hit Update button in the plugin – it downloads all film and camera profiles.

It’s free to try, and promo license requests are accepted via e-mail (see website contact info).
It is also possible to get a license for free – if you have any interesting ungraded footage you could provide us with.

Edited by Dmitry Novak
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some stills from real movies graded with Dehancer (Kodak Vision 3 film profiles mostly):

01.thumb.jpg.d661af1b03cc75dc248e709f3cb3b146.jpg

SOFYA

Director: Nikita Chvanov
Dop: Max Zazulin
Color: Victor Malygin

 

02.thumb.jpg.4e664fdc394eb3efbcc2486384d2951e.jpg

"Object 12"
short fiction film

Dir. Valeria Boldyreva
DoP Alexey Tokun
Colorist NIkolay Smirnov

03.thumb.jpg.727a48a38046b8def9c0f2ce89d96cef.jpg

"Katyusha"
short fiction film

Dir. Daria Zabava
DoP Vladislav Smirnov
Colorist Vladislav Smirnov

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...
On 5/29/2019 at 12:30 PM, Dirk DeJonghe said:

We have a process called RFG. We record the digital files to 35mm camera filmstock (500T or 200T), the rescan the film back to digital DPX log files for final grading. We try to match the main primary colours but let the secondaries float.

A recent example of our work can be seen on Amazon Prime: Guava Island.

Looks great!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...