Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hey there,

 

i am new to this forum and this will be my first post.

 

As a faithful fujirumors reader i decided to register today, because i have something i like to share with you.

 

I found a workaround to use the film simulations we all appreciate in capture one pro. 

 

All the work and all the credits belong to Scottie Wang who made this possible. Thank you, Scottie  :)

 

He made some pretty cool icc profiles that can be used in capture one pro 8 to simulate all the films we know.

 

Due to file size limits in this forum i have to make several zip files with each simulation in sRGB and Adobe RGB.

 

To install (on a mac) put that icc in this folder : ~/Library/ColorSync/Profiles

 

If you made it right, it should be looking like this:

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

You can flyover with the mouse and have an instant preview on your image. I love this very much so i like to share this with everybody who is enthusiastic about fujifilm!

 

I just need to be reviewed because i am new and i will upload all icc profiles here in this post.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@dfallsfilm:

 

This profiles are not from adobe.

 

I like to quote an aswer of scottie wang, who did this awesome Job:

 

 

 

"I always download source RAW from imaging-resource. They always have quality shots and it's totally free.

 

For my profiling process, I use three commercial software listed below.

 

1.PICTOCOLOR INCAMERA : for ICC profiling (32bit photoshop needed)

 

support chart->http://www.pictocolor.com/incamera.htm

 

2.PICTOCOLOR EditLab Pro : for profile fine tune

 

3.Babel Color Patchtool : color matrix Extraction

 

process in brief

 

step1.Use Patchtool to extract your OOC picture , the extracted file need further editing to get the right matrix text format.

 

step2.Open the souce RAW, set ICC to "Adobe RGB 1998", use C1PRO to export 16bit TIFF.

 

*I always export in Adobe RGB. If I wanna do ARGB->SRGB color conversion, I would do it in photoshop.

 

step3.Open file from step 2 in photoshop, run INCAMERA plugin and include file from step 1 to extract the ICC

 

step4.Use EditLab Pro to fine tune ICC ,and it's done

 

There is indeed some freeware for ICC profiling. (COCA, Argyll...)

 

I believe there must be some way using these freeware to get the same results as mine.

 

But I didn't spend lots time on it, maybe you can try them by yourself."

 

 

 

 

I cannot. So i am very grateful someone did.

 

The profiles work very good for me. I compared with ooc images (Same RAW) and noticed just very little differences. Very little.

Link to post
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

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • The backslashes you are referring are just symbols denoting path.  Once you import into these LUTS into Davinci Resolve those backslashes are removed by default and you only see is the true file name which has no backslashes.  Convince yourself of this by opening the LUT folder from the Davinci Resolve Project Settings.  Do you see any backslashes in those LUT names? Of course not.  The only name you see is the one that has the underscores and the periods. These LUTS work as designed without having to change any path names.  However, they need to be set up properly through CSTs and by what is supported in Davinci Resolve.  Hence, the FLog2C LUTS cannot be used because Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut color space and the FLog2C gamut. Alternatively, Davinci Resolve does support Flog2 because the color space for FLog2 is Rec 2020 and there is an FLog2 gamut. If all you are doing is changing the path names then most likely you are not getting the correct results.
    • I found the reddit topic i refere to :  https://www.reddit.com/r/davinciresolve/comments/1pc3f1e/cant_apply_new_fujifilm_gfx_55_lut/ "Update for y'all, It's just like what @ExpBalSat said, it's because of the backslashes in the names break them. I changed the file name and it works now. "   For me it was the solution. Realy annoying if it doesn’t work for you 😕  
    • Here is the solution to using the Eterna 55 file simulation LUTs in Davinci Resolve.   In general, do not use the FLog2C to film simulation LUTs as they are not supported by Davinci Resolve for two reasons: 1) Davinci Resolve does not support Fuji Gamut Color Space and 2) Davinci Resolve does not support FLog2C gamma.  Instead, use Flog2 which is supported by Davinci Resolve.  Here is an example.  Let's say that you want to use Classic Chrome simulation.  Do the following: Complete your color grade and use a CST to get to Rec 709. Add a node.  Use a CST to convert from Rec 709 to FLog2.  Output Color space is Rec 2020 and Outout Gamut is FLog2. Add a node.  Apply the FLog2 to Classic Chrome LUT Create a combination node from node in steps 2 and 3. Apply a Key to the combination node and adjust the Key Output Gain to get the amount of the combination node that you want applied. So that you do not have to do this over and over again, generate a LUT for the combination node.  Remember to turn off all other nodes before generating the LUT. Hope this helps others. Don  
    • Thanks for the insights. I think it's really hard to make a decision without having the two side by side! 
    • I don’t have the 23 f2 but I have read several times that it is considered a little soft at close distance, compared to the 23 f1.4 lenses. These will also focus at shorter distance from the subject, esp. the new one. So that might make a difference. The new 23 f1.4 LM WR  has better resolution, esp. in regard to the 40Mpix sensors, which you don’t have on the X-T2. What practical difference that makes for the value of the pictures one makes is disputable and subjective.  f1.4 will gather more light but with a smaller DOF, which may be desirable in some situations but not so in others, depends. If you like to shoot close ups, you will probably use higher f numbers to get a bigger DOF. Same for landscapes. If you are a bokeh fan, yes the f1.4 lens are better.  The older 23 f1.4 lens that you are considering is a very good and respected lens. The f1.4 vs f2 aperture per se is perhaps not so important. The 23 f2 is very small, light and practical and a great lens for travel and landscapes. So, go figure. I am afraid I just sent you further down the road to insanity !
×
×
  • Create New...