Gamma issues !

Hi there Adobe folks
This is just a follow up post to see if any movement has been made on the gamma issue front.
Basically importing footage into AE and then exporting results in unpredictable shifts in brightness, appearing either darker or lighten than they appear in the composition window or even when played in the Quicktime player - as well as suffering a colour cast change.
So at the moment I am on a iMac i7 with CS4 AE and OS X 10.6.4 - and AE is almost unusual for me as I may spend hours carefully colour correcting a pieces of footage only to have my output look completely different, I have used AE professionally for over 10 years now and have never had these issues, when I used to render my final piece (usually as uncompressed or as Animation set at 100% Q) the resultant file is identical to what you see in the composition window - everytime, without failure.
Now trying to get the output look anything like the composition window seems next to impossible, I am not the only one suffering this problem, I was working in London last week at a fairly well known studio and their compositors have all but given up on AE for this very problem, we even - at one stage - ended up working in Photoshop (!!) to get around this problem.
So, any news on possible solutions out there yet ?
Cheers for any input.

Musings on a disaster . . .
Worked my way through all the literature - some of it comes reasonably close to addressing the gamma / colour shift problems (after a lot of reading and testing and failing and frustration), nothing seems to correct it absolutely  . . . . which ultimately renders After Effects unusable as a professional tool (up to CS4 at least - I have not upgraded to AE5 as the upgrade appears to be prohibitively expensive).
I understand that the real villain in all this is Apple/Quicktime, but it shocks me that Adobe (with AE) have not taken a much more robust approach to resolving this problem.
Most of the tools I used to depend on and trust on for my day to day work are very simply useless now, what point is there in sitting with a client for 6 hours grading a piece of footage only to find yourself unable to deliver what the day's work achieved, why bother using Colour Finesse when leaving the 'full interface' mode to view your work in the composition window you see a differing version - and so on.
What is more frustrating is that this problem simply did not exist a version or two ago, I happily spent well over a decade (professionally) being able to concentrate on making things appear as I wanted them to and then being able to deliver just that - this has seemingly gone.
Literally put, After Effects is broken.
I really appreciate all the help I have got from this forum in trying to resolve this, but nothing has come close enough that it could be considered a solution, it's simply no good telling a client: "It's a bit washed out and the colour is a little bit more red than we wanted, but it's pretty close".
So . . . . solutions (more correctly compromised work arounds) - I hope these might be of some help to others stranded on Adobe/Apple island.
Basically I suspect my requirements at output are much the same as others who do this for a job, firstly a master output for delivery/broadcast/tape - and a compressed output for client proofing.
For the compressed non-master - I used the latest x264 codec - simply download it (Google is your friend) - install it and ignore all those other codecs that you have used over the years - this actually works pretty well, your AE render looks identical to your AE composition (100% identical) when played back in QT7 - and only a little washed out when played back in QT10 (much less washed out than other codecs).
For the master output - forget the days of being able to render to 'uncompressed' and know all is well - those days are seemingly gone. But you can still come fairly close to rendering something to a lossless format that looks reasonably close to your composition if you stick to 'Animation' or 'ProRes' - the reason I am not more specific here is that your success would seem to depend on the particular project - sometimes ProRes get's 90% of the way, other times it looks overly saturated and Animation get's you closer - so experiment, but these two high-quaility codecs can often get fairly close.
(*ProRes is not, of course, 'lossless' - but in the circumstances if it renders closer to the look of your composition than Animation it is not a terrible compromise).
On a final note: I used to work at a post/facilities house in London (UK) who have used AE since at least 1998 (when I first worked for them) - I was freelancing there last week and they seem resigned to After Effect's death as a professional tool and are now looking at other compositing environments.
Additionally I managed a small coup recently in being able to steal a small piece of work (a single scene from an upcoming Christmas TV ad for UK TV**) from another major - perhaps the biggest, most respected - London post house - they floundered in being able to convincingly replace an actors face with a (much happier) replacement (using Inferno) - the Director handed me the scene - I got it to work really well, he much preferred my result, I was pretty happy with taking on a major facilities house and beating them - but the process of delivery was simply embarrassing, they used my (After Effect's) erratic output to - I suspect - win back some face at not being able to do the scene as well - after much battling with After Effects the decision was to use my render as a guide only for the Inferno operator - such was the inability of several professionals to output an identical file.
After 15 years in this game that was f*&king disappointing and not a little bit embarrassing as I am sure you might imagine.

Similar Messages

  • QT Motion Jpeg gamma issue

    I jumped from using CS3 to CS5 so this may have popped up in CS4 and everyone else figured it out already.
    I used to deliver files in QT Motion JPEG codec.  However in CS5 when I output in that format everything looks washed out as though there is a gamma issue when playing back in QuickTime, or other editing software.  If I open that QT file back up in After Effects it looks fine.
    I'm not using color management, just an out-of-the-box installation at the moment.
    I switched to delivering in QT Animation codec which solved the problem but the filesize was overkill for this particular project.
    Any help is appreciated!

    This did fix the problem asuming I want to bring the footage back into after effects.  When I do that everything matches.
    But...
    If I open the original source footage up with QuickTime, or in a 3rd party editing application and compare it to the AE render made with "Match Legacy After Effects QuickTime Gamma Adjustments" and also compare to a render made without that setting turned on I get very different results
    The original source looks good, but both renders look equally incorrect (washed out like a gamma problem)
    Is After Effects adding a pripriatary tag to the output file that only AE is resepecting when it's loaded back in?
    Thanks!

  • More Gamma Issues

    Today, I wanted to focus on the current state of RAM Preview.
    Last week, I went through exhaustive testing of color accuracy through an After Effects workflow, with source material generated out of Final Cut Studio 2 & 3, all 1920x1080 29.97i. I performed tests through After Effects CS3, CS4, and CS5. In all cases, we used both Tektronix 601A and The results were eye-popping.
    After going through your notes about the recent gamma issues, I made your recommended changes to the Interpretation Rules, as well as the MediacoreQTGammaRulesCSx, along with the proper color management settings (Rec 709).
    Setup:
    MacPro 3GHz 8-core (MacPro2,1)
    16GB of RAM
    AJA Kona 3 v.7.5.1 or v.8 drivers
    OS 10.5.8
    QT 7.6.4
    In the case of CS3, gamma accuracy simply can not be had either via RAM Preview nor via rendered files. In CS4, one can clearly see that Adobe did a very good clean up job on gamma accuracy but those fixes are limited to rendered files. RAM Preview using the QuickTime Output Component through an AJA Kona xx card aren’t even close when looking at Gamma. As a result, black levels are several IRE too low. If we use the AJA Adobe Plug-ins for 7.5.1, I can get accurate Gamma BUT I can’t get real-time frame rates if I use a Project bit depth > 8bit.
    So I have a choice, inaccurate Gamma or bit limited RAM Preview. So why is running a project in 8-bit mode bad? Banding and color skew. Most camcorder acquisition formats are 8bit YUV. Doing conversions from 8bit YUV to 8bit RGB are simply bad. You are converting from a scaled color space in which your usable levels are 16-235 (YUV) over to 0-255 (RGB). As a results, you are going to have plenty of errors. By converting to a 16-bit RGB space, those errors are virtually eliminated.
    Now we both know that RAM Preview desperately needs a “do-over” and has for years. But, it is what we have today and our clients desperately need a solution that offers both gamma accuracy and real-time frame rates in 16 & 32bit modes.
    Thank you for listening

    I tried the three solutions noted on the page, but none of them actually "address" what my problem is. I could not find the directory in the registry, nor could I create one. Is there any last-ditch attempt or solution? I was told I could turn the "time" back on my computer, though I don't want to lose my information or run the risk of nothing happening. For now, thanks for your help.
    ADVICE WELCOME!

  • The gamma issue

    I know the 1.8 vs 2.2 gamma issue has been talked to death, but I don't know the answer to this specific question, hence this post.
    Does the 1.8 vs 2.2 gamma issue occur when simply watching DVDs? I've made many DVDs which I can watch on my PC or TV or Mac and it looks good on all three. I also don't have any problems watching professionally made DVDs on my PC, Mac, or TV. But the latest DVD I made, while it looks great on a PC and a TV, it looks horrible on a Mac. And everyone I've talked to has said it is due to the gamma issue.
    The only difference I can think of between this DVD and the other DVDs I've made is this the images in this one are darker. Also, its the first time I've ever crushed the blacks in color correction, which made the images even darker than they were to begin with.
    But I've watched many professional DVDs with very dark images on my Mac and they look fine, so I don't know why my DVD does not.
    Some information that might be useful:
    Footage: DV anamorphic
    Raw footage codec: DV/DVCPRO - NTSC, Integer (Little Endian)
    Color corrected footage codec: DV/DVCPRO - NTSC
    DVD image format: MPEG-2
    Please note that this issue only involves watching the finished product. The footage has already been color corrected on a properly calibrated TV. I just would like to watch my DVD on my Mac!

    its the first time I've ever crushed the blacks in color correction, which made the images even darker than they were to begin with.
    whats the reason for doing that, why are you not setting the black level at black point?
    properly calibrated TV
    not really the best piece of equipment to be trusted for colour correcting, even going to the expence of getting the TV calibrated (presumably by an engineer) the TV cant be compared to a professional programme monitor, the only real way to colour correct.

  • FCP 6 & SL Gamma issues

    I seem to have a problem with gamma in FCP6 on snow leopard. Rushes in QT are fine, but appear very dark in FCP. I have read on Creative Cow forums that the fix is to upgrade to FCP 7 (!!) but I was rather hoping I could avoid this extra expense just now.
    Any other suggestions? I don;t understand why FCP6 would not display colours correctly.
    Is there a user setting I need to adjust in FCP? I can see a difference between setting the play back gamma to "accurate" and "approximate". Does this mean that QT is not displaying gamma correctly? Would be nice to get both to match.
    Thanks

    ajophoto wrote:
    Any other suggestions? I don;t understand why FCP6 would not display colours correctly.
    The COW thread you linked to explains that FCP adjusts the gamma to approximate what it would look like on a broadcast monitor which causes problems with Snow Leopard as it changes the default gamma profile of the OS. I cannot confirm whether or not this is fixed in FCP 7.
    I seem to have a problem with gamma in FCP6 on snow leopard. Rushes in QT are fine, but appear very dark in FCP. I have read on Creative Cow forums that the fix is to upgrade to FCP 7 (!!) but I was rather hoping I could avoid this extra expense just now.
    Why does it matter if you are offlining? Even if you had FCP 7 and it fixed the gamma issue, I would still not recommend relying on it for accurate image reproduction.
    Is there a user setting I need to adjust in FCP? I can see a difference between setting the play back gamma to "accurate" and "approximate". Does this mean that QT is not displaying gamma correctly? Would be nice to get both to match.
    There is no setting in FCP, only "Final Cut Studio color compatibility" in QuickTime 7. But there is still some discrepancy between the two, even on Leopard. I never rely on this.

  • H264 Gamma Issues on PC

    As a relative newbie on a very steep learning curve, I have just come across the Gamma issues when creating H264 videos on the Mac and then having them viewed on PC.
    I've spent all day reading the thousands of comments on various websites regarding this issue and think I now have a basic understanding of the cause. However I am still quite confused as to the solution.
    In Ken Stone's brilliant tutorial 'Compressor H.264 movies from FCP for the web' he states that H264 handles Gamma correction by burying 'Colour Sync' profiles into the QT movies so that at playback, the H264 QT movie will check the platform of the viewer and adjust Gamma correctly. So I thought all of the stuff I was reading must have been prior to Ken's comments.
    After compressor had made an amazing job of my video, I sent it over to the PC ready for a first test and yes, it looked bad and clearly the Gamma was wrong.
    I then found a workaround that literally hundreds of people had used: where by the finished QT file was adjusted as follows:-
    "After rendering into a QuickTime/h.264 file, open it up in QuickTime and select “Show Movie Properties.” Highlight the video track then click on the “Visual Settings” tab. Towards the bottom left you should see “Transparency” with a drop-down box next to it. Select “Blend” from the menu then move the “Transparency Level” slider to 100%. Choose “Straight Alpha” from the same drop-down and close the properties window and finally “Save.”" More details of that here - http://www.videocopilot.net/blog/2008/06/fix-quicktime-gamma-shift/
    I have now made different versions of the video, with and without the changes outlined above. When they are viewed either 'standalone' on my PCs and laptops or downloaded from my website, compared to how they looked on the Mac, just look completely dull and flat.
    I’m trying to work my way through this problem but in the meantime if anybody can help, I would be eternally grateful..?
    Thanks

    As a relative newbie on a very steep learning curve, I have just come across the Gamma issues when creating H264 videos on the Mac and then having them viewed on PC.
    I've spent all day reading the thousands of comments on various websites regarding this issue and think I now have a basic understanding of the cause. However I am still quite confused as to the solution.
    In Ken Stone's brilliant tutorial 'Compressor H.264 movies from FCP for the web' he states that H264 handles Gamma correction by burying 'Colour Sync' profiles into the QT movies so that at playback, the H264 QT movie will check the platform of the viewer and adjust Gamma correctly. So I thought all of the stuff I was reading must have been prior to Ken's comments.
    After compressor had made an amazing job of my video, I sent it over to the PC ready for a first test and yes, it looked bad and clearly the Gamma was wrong.
    I then found a workaround that literally hundreds of people had used: where by the finished QT file was adjusted as follows:-
    "After rendering into a QuickTime/h.264 file, open it up in QuickTime and select “Show Movie Properties.” Highlight the video track then click on the “Visual Settings” tab. Towards the bottom left you should see “Transparency” with a drop-down box next to it. Select “Blend” from the menu then move the “Transparency Level” slider to 100%. Choose “Straight Alpha” from the same drop-down and close the properties window and finally “Save.”" More details of that here - http://www.videocopilot.net/blog/2008/06/fix-quicktime-gamma-shift/
    I have now made different versions of the video, with and without the changes outlined above. When they are viewed either 'standalone' on my PCs and laptops or downloaded from my website, compared to how they looked on the Mac, just look completely dull and flat.
    I’m trying to work my way through this problem but in the meantime if anybody can help, I would be eternally grateful..?
    Thanks

  • Interface/Gamma issue - Display profiling

    If you profile/calibrate your display (with professional software) to Gamma L* - darkish, grey boxes appear in some application-windows. Never happend in Tiger so I figure it's a Leopard issue.*
    If you use Gamma 1.8, the Apple default, Photoshops windows (in my case) look perfekt. With Gamma 2.2 they're barely noticable (pretty much only if you know the boxes are there).
    All the other settings you can choose while profiling - like temperature, luminance, chromatic adaption, profile-type etc. don't influence windows in this way - but as soon as you change the gamma those boxes appear.
    I would very much like to know how you guys deal with it - do you profile your display to 1.8/2.2 (like a CRT) OR do you use L* and live with the boxes OR have you profiled your display properly/with L* but you don't have this nuisance? (!?)
    Any help/info would be greatly appreciated.

    *So here's what I think happens (+ my idea to solve the grey-boxes issue):*
    Some applications use the monitor-profile to draw their interface. Like Photoshop and Graphic Converter. (The only 2 I've installed, I'm sure some video-editing-applications, even players are concerned that's maybe the reason some people think it's 'random'). I think these apps do so to immediately can reflect a change in the profile, without restart.
    Now Mac OS X Leopard seems to not allow these applications to do so in certain parts of the interface. (Must be new, that's why there were no issues with Tiger) The window itself is drawn by the OS. That's the reason only elements like the text and buttons are affected.
    And the problem is that the OS uses its 'Generic RGB Profile.icc' which contains Gamma 1.8. So if you calibrate your display with Gamma L* (which you really should do and most profiling-software does by default) those grey boxes appear in said applications.
    The solution is easy. Replace the system-rgb-profile with one that supports L* - like the eciRGB profiles.
    To do so you have to rename the .icc file in finder but also edit the information inside (which can be done with the ColorSync Utility). Then copy it to the System/Library/ColorSync/Profiles folder.
    *After that the grey boxes dissapear and everything is back to normal.* There's some difference in the tabular data like the CMM and a chroma-entry, so you might want to re-write your display-profile just to make sure everything's alright.
    I haven't seen anything yet but could imagine that the rendering of webpages in safari might be affected. Or rather some webbrowsers' without colour management. (Just a theory, hopefully not...)
    *Problem 1:*
    Some Adobe apps can see that the current system-profile is identical to your working-space-rgb and reset your rgb-choice to the Generic RGB profile after a restart. (Without changing the 'Colormanagement SYNC'd icon/setting.) This probably could cause trouble if you export or open files.
    Solution:
    Use a different profile for your system than your Adobe-RGB setting. I used the 'L-Star RGB v2' for the system and the 'eciRGB v2' for Adobe. They're technically identical but for some reason Photoshop and esp. Illustrator now respect my choices and don't reset anything. Works fine for me.
    *Problem 2:*
    Besides the aforementioned chroma-entry in the Apple default profile (which loss shouldn't cause any issues) there's also the localisation information. Because the profile is named differently in different languages of OS X. I haven't found anything causing trouble (probably because if the profile isn't found it resets back to the english version by default).
    Solution:
    This would be easy if someone knows about a .icc file editor. If we could add those localised names from the Apple profile no application would ever know. I've only found hexadecimal editors but won't put something like that on my machine, especially since everything works fine.
    *I hope Apple comes up with a real solution soon, this seems like too much of a hack - considering the delicate nature of colour management.*
    *If you read this and know what I'm talking about and disagree or know any reasons why one would not want to do this - please speak up! I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like to know.*
    This is pretty much mirrored on the Adobe forums btw.

  • Leopard - CS3 - Interface/Gamma issue

    Hello there, switched to 10.5(.4) on a MacPro today and now check this out, it's only in Photoshop. Illy and Indesign and Bridge are fine. No other applications are affected.
    If you profile/calibrate your display (with professional software) to Gamma L* - darkish, grey boxes appear in the Photoshop dialogue windows.
    http://img297.imageshack.us/my.php?image=leopardphotoshop11zg0.png
    If you use Gamma 1.8, the Apple default, Photoshop looks perfekt. With Gamma 2.2 they're barely noticable (pretty much only if you know they're there).
    All the other settings you can choose like temperature, luminance, chromatic adaption, profile-type etc. don't influence Photoshop-windows in this way - but as soon as you change the gamma those boxes appear.
    I would very much like to know how you guys deal with it - do you profile your display to 1.8/2.2 OR do you use L* and live with the boxes OR have you profiled your display properly but you don't have this nuisance? (!?)
    Any help/info would be greatly appreciated.

    b So here's what I think happens (+ my idea to solve the grey-boxes issue):
    Some applications use the monitor-profile to draw their interface. Like Photoshop and Graphic Converter. (The only 2 I've installed, I'm sure some video-editing-applications, even players are concerned that's maybe the reason some people think it's 'random'). I think these apps do so to immediately can reflect a change in the profile, without restart.
    Now Mac OS X Leopard seems to not allow these applications to do so in certain parts of the interface. (Must be a new feature!) The window itself is drawn by the OS. That's the reason only elements like the text and buttons are affected.
    And the problem is that the OS uses its 'Generic RGB Profile.icc' which contains Gamma 1.8. So if you calibrate your display with Gamma L* (which you really should do and most profiling-software does by default) those grey boxes appear in said applications.
    The solution is easy. Replace the system-rgb-profile with one that supports L* - like the eciRGB profiles.
    To do so you have to rename the .icc file in finder but also edit the information inside (which can be done with the ColorSync Utility). Then copy it to the System/Library/ColorSync/Profiles folder.
    After that the grey boxes dissapear and everything is back to normal. There's some difference in the tabular data like the CMM and a chroma-entry, so you might want to re-write your display-profile just to make sure everything's alright.
    I haven't seen anything yet but could imagine that the rendering of webpages in safari might be affected. Or rather some webbrowsers' without colour management. (I'm just guessing.)
    b Problem 1:
    Some Adobe apps can see that the current system-profile is identical to your working-space-rgb and reset your rgb-choice to the Generic RGB profile after a restart. (Without changing the 'Colormanagement SYNC'd icon/setting.) This probably could cause trouble if you export or open files.
    b Solution:
    Use a different profile for your system than your Adobe-RGB setting. I used the 'L-Star RGB v2' for the system and the 'eciRGB v2' for Adobe. They're technically identical but for some reason Photoshop and esp. Illustrator now respect my choices and don't reset anything. Works fine for me. (!)
    b Problem 2:
    Besides the aforementioned chroma-entry in the Apple default profile (which loss shouldn't cause any issues) there's also the localisation information. Because the profile is named differently in different languages of OS X. I haven't found anything causing trouble (probably because if the profile isn't found it resets back to the english version by default).
    b Solution:
    This would be easy if someone knows about a .icc file editor. If we could add those localised names from the Apple profile no application would ever know. I've only found hexadecimal editors but won't put something like that on my machine, especially since everything works fine.
    I hope Apple comes up with a real solution soon, this seems like too much of a hack - considered the delicate nature of colour management.
    If you read this and know what I'm talking about and disagree or know any reasons why one would not want to do this - please speak up! I'm sure I'm not the only one who would like to know.

  • Gamma issue... beating a dead horse

    so so confused, about this gamma shift from After Effects to Final Cut. I rendered the same clip out 4 different times and each time it has different gamma. Here are my render settings:
    1. v210 Codec
    2. Quicktime Animation
    3. Apple FCP Uncompressed 8bit
    4. ProRez 422 HQ
    The first 3 I thought were uncompressed or "slightly" compressed. The v210 codec looked like crap. The best was Animation & FCP Uncompressed... but again they look different. This is complete madness. And it did not matter if I selected use Legacy. Out of all our gear only Final Cut is gamma crazy... Can someone explain to me why such a difference in these clips. I know I'm beating a dead horse here. Thanks for any helpful tips or pointers

    Mine is fluctuating. Mine worked without having the Match Legacy Gamma Adjustment on and then off then on. I did something which seemed to overwrite a setting and reset something. Not sure.
    Try this.
    In project settings, Turn on the Blend Colors Using 1.0 Gamma.
    Render something in the render que. My video suddenly got darker and the results were darker than normal.
    I went back, checked it off, re-rendered it, and it worked out perfectly.

  • Two tone gamma issue

    Not sure if this is the correct forum, but here it goes.
    Lately I've been having this issue where the frame, or top of certain app windows will have this weird two tone thing. For example - http://cld.ly/83ppa , http://cld.ly/33ppb , and http://cld.ly/3bppc.
    I tried reinstalling OS X to no avail. This is really frustrating, and quite annoying.
    Any help or suggestions are greatly appreciated.
    Message was edited by: Brady Valentino

    You'll have to look closely.
    On the first picture (Safari) - Right underneath the search bar the window turns into a lighter grey.
    On the second picture (Notify) - The Gmail tab doesn't match the window underneath it.
    On the third picture (iChat) - The middle section doesn't match the top or the bottom.

  • Gamma issue

    What if i'd choose from system settings - displays - color and then click on 'ColorMatch RGB' instead of using 'cinema'. what follows is that my screen falls more dark.
    so would that not exactly match a pc's gamma then. and working with this color profile and thus modifying the exposure of the images i gonna use on my website to look just fine on my cinema set into 'ColorMatch RGB' mode?
    of course the colors (of images and other graphic work) would then look too bright for all mac out there in the internet.
    does this makes sense?

    See if this discussion helps at all:
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=6871301&#6871301

  • Gamma issue? Go Pro mp4-files in QT Windows

    I've had a similar problem with QuickTime and h.264 in MacOS: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2360748
    Now QT in Windows seems to have the same problem. My original mp4-file in QT MacOs looks like this:
    http://www.helikopterfoto.se/qtmacos.png
    while the exact same file opened in QT Windows (and all other programs dependent on QT support) looks like this:
    http://www.helikopterfoto.se/qtws.png
    What's wrong?

    Edit:
    Opened the mp4 original file in VLC on another computer, got the same problem. Converted it to AVI in MP4CAM2AVI (no transcoding, just changing the container), and now it looks much better when played in Windows. Still a little contrat and colour loss.

  • Many questions. 1080/60p AVCHD. Gamma issues?

    Question #1.  Does it support 1080/60p AVCHD files?
    Question #2.  Are the colors all off on editing and export like imovie and quicktime? 
    Question #3.  Is it better than Premiere Pro CS5.5?

    See this: http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/specs/
    mish

  • Upscaled dv for anamorphic and want to know about adjusting gamma etc.

    I took my dv ntsc 4:3 (3:2 really shot on dvcam on the dvx100a) timeline and nested it in an anamorphic sequence to render out a quicktime with the 1:85 matte on it and to apply an rgb limiter as when it upscales some of my broadcast safe get hot again in the high end. This output is going to a theatrical presentation. Unfortunately now they are only going to show it with dvcam and want this anamorphic output so it matches another filmmaker's settings and the projectionist doesn't have to get confused (?) so anyway...
    Back to my question...when I upscale this to 133.33 to fill the screen in the anamorphic of course things get washed out...I readjusted gamma to 1.05 which is subtle but brings the blacks back...I do have a bunch of monitors but I distrust that on my little 14" broadcast sony crt what is going to project won't be washed out so I'm relying somewhat on a sony flat screen panel with settings to match my smaller crt but by eye...
    In any case anyone out there doing this a lot do you find there are general settings you use that would adjust and resaturate color and gamma levels etc. and any other levels I need worry about so the picture won't look so washed out when it's projected? Does readjusting gamma to 1.05 sound right to you or should it be more as a general thing?
    I have a color balance set up for highs and mid range but don't know that I need to use them on this file which I output as an uncompressed it seems to not have lost much in the color itself it's mainly the gamma issue...I also want to get this right because it's a pain working with the uncompressed nested sequence and rendering it is extremely time consuming.
    ...when I output a quicktime earlier using dv ntsc compressor settings "as is" I found I would lose saturation and the picture would get dark if I applied the gamma and instead color corrected just with color balance settings and the rgb limiter.
    thank you

    What kind of problem are you having? I've used Netbackup for doing Oracle backups quite a bit without a problem. If you can shutdown the instances, just have a script do it before the backup starts. Usually, I do a cold backup on the weekends and then backup of the archive logs during the week to save tape space. Just stick in a little script to do a log switch before the backup starts to make sure you get the current changes. If you're running 24x7, you'll need to look at buying the RMAN module from veritas or roll your own hot backup script.

  • H264(Youtube/Vimeo Preset) export looks flat and desaturated- H264 Gamma?

    All my h264 output both quickitme and mp4 looks flat and desaturated after export compared to to the program window.This happends with both cs5.5 and cs6.
    I know there is some h264 bug with Quicktime but  its flat on Youtube also( in Safari) I thought this gamma issue has been sorted out?
    How can I output my files to youtube so it looks the same as my Program monitor on youtube? I know all screens are different and you need a color calibrated montior( I have that) but why the shift?
    It just does not seem that anyone has an answer. x264 does not work... anything else? QUickitme x does not have the ability to do the "opacity fix"
    How will i get that my output on my client screen will not be so flat. ( I know it wont be exactly the same (as TVs in a showroom) but the difference between the video inside premier and outside is VAST!
    I dont want to "fix" it by addinga contrast and saturation layer and them on a Windows machine maybe its then overly contrasty?
    I'm on 17" MAcbook PRo Using anexternal calibrated NEC Monitor.
    Did I miss a major answer on the web somewhere?

    So what do you guys do? Just add an extra layer of process ( I have added a fast color correction Adjustment layer and clipping the black at 10 and the highlights at 245 and putting the saturation at 120. Its a thumbsuck though...
    How on earth do  people who colour grade on Davinc or Lustre etc output there stuff to Vimeo.(Yes I know it goes to film or TV , but what about thier showreel?) It also uses H264? Is there ANY codec I can use to upload to Youtube that will look like my program monitor?
    It is facinating how these companies provide all these wonderful tools and in the final polished output you cannot get it too look llike it looked inside the product! Baffling!
    If I had a Windows machine would I have this problem?

Maybe you are looking for

  • May be untrue but...

    I heard it might be possible to create a solaris 10 zone in which you could run solaris 8 software. more usefully that you could take an image of an existing solaris 8 instance and transfer it to a zone on a solaris 10 machine. anyone know any detail

  • VAT number in SB invoice

    Hello experts, I would like to know why the VAT number in self billing invoice is different to the VAT number in customer masterdata? Thanks, Ferdaws

  • Photoshop Elements 5,  camera raw documentation

    Hello, Is there a specific location to find documentation updates from one version of Camera Raw to another? I purchased a manual for PSE5 and the Camera Raw displays are for a version that is older then what I have(Camera Raw 3.7) installed. It is h

  • Can't Upgrade to itunes 7.0.2

    When i go to the download screen and push download it just goes to the "thank you for downloading itunes" screen. I can't seem to get the save file screen up. Turned off pop up blocker, and all my window updates are good, same with the internet.

  • Have tried four times to get the free trial of captivate 7 to download onto my windows 7 64 bit

    have tried four times to get the free trial of captivate 7 to download onto my windows 7 64 bit desktop and the download manager displays a message it is not compatable with my ie11