Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

3D LUTs for DaVinci Resolve have the domain set incorrectly #7

Closed
balazer opened this issue Sep 21, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

3D LUTs for DaVinci Resolve have the domain set incorrectly #7

balazer opened this issue Sep 21, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@balazer
Copy link

balazer commented Sep 21, 2017

When LUTCalc is set to generate a 3D LUT and when LUT Type is set to DaVinci Resolve 12+ auto (.cube) or DaVinci Resolve (.cube), setting Input Scaling Max to a value other than 1.0 causes LUTCalc to write an incorrect domain keyword in the output LUT file.

The LUTCalc .cube file will contain lines like these:

TITLE "Custom LUT"
LUT_3D_SIZE 65
LUT_1D_INPUT_RANGE 0 1.095
# S-Log3/Passthrough -> ACEScc/Passthrough, CineEI Shift -5.00, Black Level -35.84% IRE, Input 100% -> Output 100% - Created with LUTCalc v3.1.1 by Ben Turley June 2017

The LUT_1D_INPUT_RANGE keyword is not valid in a 3D LUT. DaVinci Resolve will ignore that keyword. (Tested in DaVinci Resolve 12.5) The correct keyword is LUT_3D_INPUT_RANGE.

@nick-shaw
Copy link

LUT_1D_INPUT_RANGE is a valid keyword, but only if the LUT includes a 1D (shaper) LUT. Then another line such as LUT_1D_SIZE 4096 is needed too. Resolve supports .cube files containing 3D LUTs only, 1D LUTs only, or a 1D LUT followed by a 3D LUT. Each can have a domain declared if necessary.

@cameramanben
Copy link
Owner

Oops! Surprised this one has managed to slip by for so long. Thanks for the heads up and I'll get on to the fix,

Ben

@cameramanben
Copy link
Owner

Should now be updated with the fix. Ben

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants