I've used the other LUTs, but they don't look better than Color Profile: None.  You have to add a Correction, which crops it in by like 10°.  The colors look a bit too saturated no matter what you do like older drone cameras.  You'd think when you run a LUT, it should at least look the same as None or better, but it's not.  People constantly add LUTs to their videos, but it's not that great or at least in a normal every day suburban setting.  Perhaps when you are shooting in the middle of nowhere around beautiful landscapes.  Maybe when you are shooting bright snow in the winter, it's better.

People who are novices run LUTs to their videos and think it's cool, but it's not.  If it was better than None, then it is, but it's not.  Just because you can 10-bit doesn't mean it's better when you compromise for all the other things that make footage great.

Interesting line of thought.  I have wondered the same thing at times when I shoot in 8bit and really like the results. Those great at coloring using something like Resolve probably can get the most out of D-log that others counting on just a LUT may fail to achieve.

Interesting info!

I agree!
I just posted on this moments ago:

https://forum.dji.com/forum.php? ... p;page=1#pid1993511

In my tests, I was able to make some of the shots look better, but then you'd have issues with hazing around the edges,  I agree the default h264 seems to be the best all round mode.

DAFlys Posted at 11-4 01:05
In my tests, I was able to make some of the shots look better, but then you'd have issues with hazing around the edges,  I agree the default h264 seems to be the best all round mode.

But if you start cranking the dials in h.265.. shouldn't it be like RAW vs JPEG?  They say it's 50% more information is stored so that means you have a greater amount of flexibility?

AntDX316 Posted at 11-4 01:27
But if you start cranking the dials in h.265.. shouldn't it be like RAW vs JPEG?  They say it's 50% more information is stored so that means you have a greater amount of flexibility?

It should be,  it just seems most of the time its not so easy to get the quality.  I suspect its one of these things that suited to a very particular scenario.

DAFlys Posted at 11-4 01:30
It should be,  it just seems most of the time its not so easy to get the quality.  I suspect its one of these things that suited to a very particular scenario.

I never really got into messing before the latest tech.  With the M2P and A7 III, you can fully crank some of the dials and the image looks better.  I find it interesting that all? cameras never have the image pop out of the box.  Adobe is extremely essential.

AntDX316 Posted at 11-4 01:33
I never really got into messing before the latest tech.  With the M2P and A7 III, you can fully crank some of the dials and the image looks better.  I find it interesting that all? cameras never have the image pop out of the box.  Adobe is extremely essential.

Always been a big fan of Photoshop, especially when they added the spot healing tool.

DAFlys Posted at 11-4 01:42
Always been a big fan of Photoshop, especially when they added the spot healing tool.

I along with many others have swerved from everything Adobe. There are plenty of alternatives such as Darktable for editing photos and the superb DaVinci Resolve for video editing without being slaved to a monthly subscription. I happen to like D-log M over h.264 with the correct settings.

Hover-Fly Posted at 11-4 04:03
I along with many others have swerved from everything Adobe. There are plenty of alternatives such as Darktable for editing photos and the superb DaVinci Resolve for video editing without being slaved to a monthly subscription. I happen to like D-log M over h.264 with the correct settings.

Can you post an example of your dlog footage vs h264,  so far most are struggling to get the best from dlogm.

Thank you for this informative thread.  I haven't done any heavy color correcting yet.  I may start soon.

c

No doubt DlogM properly post processed (using Davinci Resolve Studio) produces FAR BETTER results than "default 8 bit". The issue we are having here is two-fold: It takes practice, good tools and time to properly post log footage. Second: Unless you have a high quality display to watch the stuff as for example an LG OLED, of course you will not necessarily see much of a difference except maybe in the highlights and shadow definitions.

Resolve Studio integrates Dolby Vision (at least the important parts without license). With DV one can now properly edit HDR video footage and output it with H265 in QuickTime wrapper. It will contain all the attributes for triggering HDR displays. I also noticed that recent updates (not sure which one) has improved the HLG noise problem a little. Resolve Studio has fantastic NR capabilities. Combined with HDR post and NR the HLG footage looks incredibly good. Again, it takes good tools, time and effort - but it is well worth it.

roamer105 Posted at 11-4 10:43
No doubt DlogM properly post processed (using Davinci Resolve Studio) produces FAR BETTER results than "default 8 bit". The issue we are having here is two-fold: It takes practice, good tools and time to properly post log footage. Second: Unless you have a high quality display to watch the stuff as for example an LG OLED, of course you will not necessarily see much of a difference except maybe in the highlights and shadow definitions.

Resolve Studio integrates Dolby Vision (at least the important parts without license). With DV one can now properly edit HDR video footage and output it with H265 in QuickTime wrapper. It will contain all the attributes for triggering HDR displays. I also noticed that recent updates (not sure which one) has improved the HLG noise problem a little. Resolve Studio has fantastic NR capabilities. Combined with HDR post and NR the HLG footage looks incredibly good. Again, it takes good tools, time and effort - but it is well worth it.

I forgot to mention that I have been re-processing some of my favorite DlogM original footage in HDR mode using Dolby Vision.... Amazing results. Here, the 10-bit really shines.

I would be happy to share the Resolve work-flow and setup to do this for anyone interested.

roamer105 Posted at 11-4 10:43
No doubt DlogM properly post processed (using Davinci Resolve Studio) produces FAR BETTER results than "default 8 bit". The issue we are having here is two-fold: It takes practice, good tools and time to properly post log footage. Second: Unless you have a high quality display to watch the stuff as for example an LG OLED, of course you will not necessarily see much of a difference except maybe in the highlights and shadow definitions.

Resolve Studio integrates Dolby Vision (at least the important parts without license). With DV one can now properly edit HDR video footage and output it with H265 in QuickTime wrapper. It will contain all the attributes for triggering HDR displays. I also noticed that recent updates (not sure which one) has improved the HLG noise problem a little. Resolve Studio has fantastic NR capabilities. Combined with HDR post and NR the HLG footage looks incredibly good. Again, it takes good tools, time and effort - but it is well worth it.

Show the video you have as a demo.

AntDX316 Posted at 11-4 12:11
Show the video you have as a demo.

I can show you a video on YouTube - but it is "YouTubed...." and not any better than whatever else is there. I do have a channel "Roamer105" where I published some of my videos. While they had been processed in 10-bit H265, once put on YouTube --- it is downgraded to 8-bit and dramatically compressed.

roamer105 Posted at 11-4 12:45
I can show you a video on YouTube - but it is "YouTubed...." and not any better than whatever else is there. I do have a channel "Roamer105" where I published some of my videos. While they had been processed in 10-bit H265, once put on YouTube --- it is downgraded to 8-bit and dramatically compressed.

Why not post one to Google Drive for downloading in it's original form.

roamer105 Posted at 11-4 12:45
I can show you a video on YouTube - but it is "YouTubed...." and not any better than whatever else is there. I do have a channel "Roamer105" where I published some of my videos. While they had been processed in 10-bit H265, once put on YouTube --- it is downgraded to 8-bit and dramatically compressed.

Use Vimeo or private message me the direct download for me to host it.  Your best one for the example.

DAFlys Posted at 11-4 04:11
Can you post an example of your dlog footage vs h264,  so far most are struggling to get the best from dlogm.

Sure , these are  straight from the tin, using D-log M and the LUT provided by DJI. I have other results but they are not ready for human consumption just yet, as unlike these shots I'm getting the barrel correction right.  





There are a few clips on that channel to look at.  Hope it helps. I believe someone on Youtube did a side by side  h.264 vs, D-log M.

cheers and regards

Hover-Fly Posted at 11-5 00:54
Sure , these are  straight from the tin, using D-log M and the LUT provided by DJI. I have other results but they are not ready for human consumption just yet, as unlike these shots I'm getting the barrel correction right.  

If the correction of None is wrong such as, not modified at all, it could look worse than D-Log M of course.  It doesn't mean to never touch None because it's None.  When you base everything upon 1 comparison and have no other understanding, you can be left with incorrect knowledge forever.

The colors aren't great w/ those videos.  D-Log M always has the colors looking saturated and fewer amounts of the variations after post.  Unless you are slightly color blind where the differences would look the same, you can significantly tell the difference as others already have.

AntDX316 Posted at 11-5 01:02
If the correction of None is wrong such as, not modified at all, it could look worse than D-Log M of course.  It doesn't mean to never touch None because it's None.  When you base everything upon 1 comparison and have no other understanding, you can be left with incorrect knowledge forever.

The colors aren't great w/ those videos.  D-Log M always has the colors looking saturated and fewer amounts of the variations after post.  Unless you are slightly color blind where the differences would look the same, you can significantly tell the difference as others already have.

I didn't do any by hand/eye correction with these videos, I just dropped the then new D-log M LUT over the top of the footage - these were a test for me.  I wouldn't use it again as is, I know enough about   colour grading not to use that LUT as is. LUTS are never a be all end all solution, coreect camera settings and exposure come first, then corrections, and only thn a LUT.  

cheers and regards

Hover-Fly Posted at 11-5 12:04
I didn't do any by hand/eye correction with these videos, I just dropped the then new D-log M LUT over the top of the footage - these were a test for me.  I wouldn't use it again as is, I know enough about   colour grading not to use that LUT as is. LUTS are never a be all end all solution, coreect camera settings and exposure come first, then corrections, and only thn a LUT.  

cheers and regards

If your exposure settings are wrong off the M2P, D-Log M would be better.  M2P usually has the 0.0 EV set wrong as it seems to be 0.7+ higher than it should be.