logo Sign In

Color matching and prediction: color correction tool v1.3 released! — Page 42

Author
Time

It’s a shame this won’t work on M1 Macs. Used to use it a lot before the M1. Now it just freezes up whenever you try to import a test image.

Author
Time

I’m not sure if something like this has already been mentioned, but I’ve been having issues color matching images to 4K HDR sources. The colors are not an exact match and end up looking pale. I had the color spaces set to 250, smoothing parameter to 0.01, and the fast processing mode turned off

Test Image

Reference Image

https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/30432

Analog Releases of Films That Contain Deleted, Extended, & Alternate Footage That’ve Never Been Released on DVD/BluRay

Author
Time

Tantive3+1 said:

I’m not sure if something like this has already been mentioned, but I’ve been having issues color matching images to 4K HDR sources. The colors are not an exact match and end up looking pale. I had the color spaces set to 250, smoothing parameter to 0.01, and the fast processing mode turned off

Test Image

Reference Image

https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/30432

You cannot just match HDR sources. For one you need the images to be 16 bit. Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

So no one can configure it for an M1 version? Just ignore the post and pretend Mac users don’t want/need this software? I wish it was available to all in a paid version where it didn’t crash or just not even open.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Bates_Motel said:

So no one can configure it for an M1 version? Just ignore the post and pretend Mac users don’t want/need this software? I wish it was available to all in a paid version where it didn’t crash or just not even open.

Just try to appreciate that some of us develop these tools in their spare time for free, and don’t have the time or the resources to cater to every individual user’s needs.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DrDre said:

Bates_Motel said:

So no one can configure it for an M1 version? Just ignore the post and pretend Mac users don’t want/need this software? I wish it was available to all in a paid version where it didn’t crash or just not even open.

Perhaps you should try and develop a version for M1. Otherwise just try to appreciate that some of us develop these tools in their spare time for free, and don’t have the time to cater to every individual user’s needs.

Has nothing to do with “individual needs.” Why would I “appreciate” something I can’t use anymore? Apple is M1 now, and most video editors with on Mac. People have been posting Mac links and they DO NOT work. So yeah, sucks that you and others admonish half the people out there just because you offer something for "free’ that doesn’t work then scold them for it. Sad. man. As an editor who used the tool, its a shame you have that attitude and don’t care that many can’t use it anymore instead of “fixing” it for free or, as I said, CHARGING for it, because I know a lot of people who would pay that can’t use at anymore. Food for thought, dude. It’s an amazing tool and the people I know who can’t use it anymore are struggling to find something else. But I figured since that one dude keeps posting a Mac link like it works that all was good, when it actually isn’t. When a lot of people who do editing with on Mac, then it has nothing to do with “individual needs”… its a lot of people’s needs. And they would pay for the efforts.

All I said was its a shame it doesn’t work for a lot of people anymore, and you ignored tat, until I posted again, then you chose to attack me. So, cool, dude. Be proud of your software that doesn’t work.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Bates_Motel said:

DrDre said:

Bates_Motel said:

So no one can configure it for an M1 version? Just ignore the post and pretend Mac users don’t want/need this software? I wish it was available to all in a paid version where it didn’t crash or just not even open.

Perhaps you should try and develop a version for M1. Otherwise just try to appreciate that some of us develop these tools in their spare time for free, and don’t have the time to cater to every individual user’s needs.

Has nothing to do with “individual needs.” Why would I “appreciate” something I can’t use anymore? Apple is M1 now, and most video editors with on Mac. People have been posting Mac links and they DO NOT work. So yeah, sucks that you and others admonish half the people out there just because you offer something for "free’ that doesn’t work then scold them for it. Sad. man. As an editor who used the tool, its a shame you have that attitude and don’t care that many can’t use it anymore instead of “fixing” it for free or, as I said, CHARGING for it, because I know a lot of people who would pay that can’t use at anymore. Food for thought, dude. It’s an amazing tool and the people I know who can’t use it anymore are struggling to find something else. But I figured since that one dude keeps posting a Mac link like it works that all was good, when it actually isn’t. When a lot of people who do editing with on Mac, then it has nothing to do with “individual needs”… its a lot of people’s needs. And they would pay for the efforts.

All I said was its a shame it doesn’t work for a lot of people anymore, and you ignored tat, until I posted again, then you chose to attack me. So, cool, dude. Be proud of your software that doesn’t work.

Nothing to do with pride. You come on here like people owe you something. The software was developed for Windows, period. I don’t own a Mac M1 or otherwise. Williarob was kind enough to port it over to Mac, and even went so far to offer support when he could help. I made this tool for myself and then decided to offer it for free, because it might be useful to others. I’m glad to see that it is, or in your case has been. However, I have a job and a ton of other projects. It sucks that there is no alternative for you right now (except maybe use a Windows machine or older Mac version), but coming here complaining, because software, that you got for free isn’t working anymore isn’t going to get you anywhere with me, and I don’t think anyone else here either. This may surprise you, but often freeware that was developed for older systems (in this case 7 years ago) at some point stop working. In such a case you can hope a new version comes out, or alternatively ask the developer nicely, if they can find some time in their busy schedule to fix the issue. The attitude you’re displaying will get you a resounding no. So, the best thing you can hope for now is that someone else with an M1 has the civility to use the word please.

Author
Time

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:
Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

What’s the best way to do that?

I think a tool like Mkvtoolnix can do it, but I’m not sure, since I have not actually done it myself.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:
Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

What’s the best way to do that?

I think a tool like Mkvtoolnix can do it, but I’m not sure, since I have not actually done it myself.

Last question, when you say to add HDR metadata to the source, are you talking about the test image that’s already in HDR or the reference image?

Analog Releases of Films That Contain Deleted, Extended, & Alternate Footage That’ve Never Been Released on DVD/BluRay

Author
Time

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:
Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

What’s the best way to do that?

I think a tool like Mkvtoolnix can do it, but I’m not sure, since I have not actually done it myself.

Last question, when you say to add HDR metadata to the source, are you talking about the test image that’s already in HDR or the reference image?

I’m a bit confused. You want to match an HDR source to an SDR reference?

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:
Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

What’s the best way to do that?

I think a tool like Mkvtoolnix can do it, but I’m not sure, since I have not actually done it myself.

Last question, when you say to add HDR metadata to the source, are you talking about the test image that’s already in HDR or the reference image?

I’m a bit confused. You want to match an HDR source to an SDR reference?

The test image is a 4K HDR source and the reference image is taken from an SD Laserdisc.

Analog Releases of Films That Contain Deleted, Extended, & Alternate Footage That’ve Never Been Released on DVD/BluRay

Author
Time

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:
Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

What’s the best way to do that?

I think a tool like Mkvtoolnix can do it, but I’m not sure, since I have not actually done it myself.

Last question, when you say to add HDR metadata to the source, are you talking about the test image that’s already in HDR or the reference image?

I’m a bit confused. You want to match an HDR source to an SDR reference?

The test image is a 4K HDR source and the reference image is taken from an SD Laserdisc.

Ah oke, and when does it look pale? After rendering with a LUT?

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:
Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

What’s the best way to do that?

I think a tool like Mkvtoolnix can do it, but I’m not sure, since I have not actually done it myself.

Last question, when you say to add HDR metadata to the source, are you talking about the test image that’s already in HDR or the reference image?

I’m a bit confused. You want to match an HDR source to an SDR reference?

The test image is a 4K HDR source and the reference image is taken from an SD Laserdisc.

Ah oke, and when does it look pale? After rendering with a LUT?

After I apply “Build color matching model”.

Analog Releases of Films That Contain Deleted, Extended, & Alternate Footage That’ve Never Been Released on DVD/BluRay

Author
Time

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:
Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

What’s the best way to do that?

I think a tool like Mkvtoolnix can do it, but I’m not sure, since I have not actually done it myself.

Last question, when you say to add HDR metadata to the source, are you talking about the test image that’s already in HDR or the reference image?

I’m a bit confused. You want to match an HDR source to an SDR reference?

The test image is a 4K HDR source and the reference image is taken from an SD Laserdisc.

Ah oke, and when does it look pale? After rendering with a LUT?

After I apply “Build color matching model”.

I’m a little confused, because for the example you posted the regrade does not look pale.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:
Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

What’s the best way to do that?

I think a tool like Mkvtoolnix can do it, but I’m not sure, since I have not actually done it myself.

Last question, when you say to add HDR metadata to the source, are you talking about the test image that’s already in HDR or the reference image?

I’m a bit confused. You want to match an HDR source to an SDR reference?

The test image is a 4K HDR source and the reference image is taken from an SD Laserdisc.

Ah oke, and when does it look pale? After rendering with a LUT?

After I apply “Build color matching model”.

I’m a little confused, because for the example you posted, the regrade does not look pale.

For this shot, the colors came out that way (notice around the lamp by the door)
https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/27055

For the example I posted, even if the regrade doesn’t look pale, the colors aren’t accurate. Notice around the woman’s face.

Analog Releases of Films That Contain Deleted, Extended, & Alternate Footage That’ve Never Been Released on DVD/BluRay

Author
Time

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:

Tantive3+1 said:

DrDre said:
Secondly, you need to add HDR meta data to your source.

What’s the best way to do that?

I think a tool like Mkvtoolnix can do it, but I’m not sure, since I have not actually done it myself.

Last question, when you say to add HDR metadata to the source, are you talking about the test image that’s already in HDR or the reference image?

I’m a bit confused. You want to match an HDR source to an SDR reference?

The test image is a 4K HDR source and the reference image is taken from an SD Laserdisc.

Ah oke, and when does it look pale? After rendering with a LUT?

After I apply “Build color matching model”.

I’m a little confused, because for the example you posted, the regrade does not look pale.

For this shot, the colors came out that way (notice around the lamp by the door)
https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/27055

For the example I posted, even if the regrade doesn’t look pale, the colors aren’t accurate. Notice around the woman’s face.

If you mean the intensity of the lamp you might try reducing the smoothing parameter to 0.001. With regards to the woman I don’t really see the inaccuracy. It looks fairly accurate to me. There are some yellowish color splotches around here nose, but these also appear in the 4K UHD source if you bring the contrast and saturation to normal levels.

Author
Time

Would someone please kindly send me a download link to the MAC version of Dr. Dre’s coloring tool? It seems the previously posted links are expired. Thank you in advance!

Author
Time

felpotomous said:

Would someone please kindly send me a download link to the MAC version of Dr. Dre’s coloring tool? It seems the previously posted links are expired. Thank you in advance!

I second that request. Really appreciate any assistance!!

Author
Time

Williarob said:

Here you go everybody:

Dr Dre’s color Matching tool v1.2 (latest version) for 64 bit Windows*:

https://ln.sync.com/dl/e51125f10/njry8grb-juw5i7vz-ttrapwci-cb4cxh9j (385 MB)

Dr Dre’s color Matching tool v1.2 (latest version) for 64 bit OSX:

https://ln.sync.com/dl/89689baa0/6c22akdh-3ct3f4wr-mwmscjkw-5q7xg6hb (10 MB)**

* If you have a 64 bit version of Windows AND you have more than 4 GB of RAM AND you need to color match two giant images (4k or 8k with 16-bit color, or 2 giant 8K size montages of images, then it would be worth uninstalling the 32-bit version and downloading and installing the 64-bit version. I don’t think you will find it is any faster under “normal use” situations.

** Why is the mac version so much smaller? Simple really: in 2014, Matlab enhanced it’s package builder with some new features, one of which is an option to download the runtime package from the internet during install. The windows version was compiled with the 2012 compiler, which doesn’t have this option (or the option to change the icon and splash screen).

Enjoy!

If you have any issues with the new versions, let us know.

Here are the links with a big thanks to Williarob!

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Williarob said:

Here you go everybody:

Dr Dre’s color Matching tool v1.2 (latest version) for 64 bit Windows*:

https://ln.sync.com/dl/e51125f10/njry8grb-juw5i7vz-ttrapwci-cb4cxh9j (385 MB)

Dr Dre’s color Matching tool v1.2 (latest version) for 64 bit OSX:

https://ln.sync.com/dl/89689baa0/6c22akdh-3ct3f4wr-mwmscjkw-5q7xg6hb (10 MB)**

* If you have a 64 bit version of Windows AND you have more than 4 GB of RAM AND you need to color match two giant images (4k or 8k with 16-bit color, or 2 giant 8K size montages of images, then it would be worth uninstalling the 32-bit version and downloading and installing the 64-bit version. I don’t think you will find it is any faster under “normal use” situations.

** Why is the mac version so much smaller? Simple really: in 2014, Matlab enhanced it’s package builder with some new features, one of which is an option to download the runtime package from the internet during install. The windows version was compiled with the 2012 compiler, which doesn’t have this option (or the option to change the icon and splash screen).

Enjoy!

If you have any issues with the new versions, let us know.

Here are the links with a big thanks to Williarob!

Thank you for the prompt reply! However, I did try this link already and I get a “setup quit unexpectedly” error message. I’ve tried it with two separate Macs, none of which are M1’s. Does anyone know if there’s an operating system limit?

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Williarob said:

Here you go everybody:

Dr Dre’s color Matching tool v1.2 (latest version) for 64 bit Windows*:

https://ln.sync.com/dl/e51125f10/njry8grb-juw5i7vz-ttrapwci-cb4cxh9j (385 MB)

Dr Dre’s color Matching tool v1.2 (latest version) for 64 bit OSX:

https://ln.sync.com/dl/89689baa0/6c22akdh-3ct3f4wr-mwmscjkw-5q7xg6hb (10 MB)**

* If you have a 64 bit version of Windows AND you have more than 4 GB of RAM AND you need to color match two giant images (4k or 8k with 16-bit color, or 2 giant 8K size montages of images, then it would be worth uninstalling the 32-bit version and downloading and installing the 64-bit version. I don’t think you will find it is any faster under “normal use” situations.

** Why is the mac version so much smaller? Simple really: in 2014, Matlab enhanced it’s package builder with some new features, one of which is an option to download the runtime package from the internet during install. The windows version was compiled with the 2012 compiler, which doesn’t have this option (or the option to change the icon and splash screen).

Enjoy!

If you have any issues with the new versions, let us know.

Here are the links with a big thanks to Williarob!

Thank you, sir!

Author
Time

I really should check this out and at least play around with it.

Sometimes I’ve wondered what it’d look like to take a bunch of our fan projects and essentially average out their color correction to see what it’d look like. It sounds like you could just about do that, creating one or more LUTs for each of these and then applying them to your unmodified source material. Just apply them all partially, like if there’s ten references apply each of their LUTs to your source at 10%.

You could take the GOUT, 97SE, Despecialized Edition, 4K77/80/83, and whatever else and put them in the blender. Maybe arrive at something that reflects them all in a mitigated way.

As someone who doesn’t really know how to color correct things in any detailed way, treating it that way sounds fun.

My stance on revising fan edits.

Author
Time

I don’t know what horrible life decisions I’ve been making NOT to have tried this out for myself sooner. I just generated several LUTs for the 19SE BluRay of ESB trained on Adywan’s color corrected 2004 transfer, and the results look really good. Very much looking forward to having time to play with this further.

My stance on revising fan edits.

Author
Time

I’m trying to use this for two different sources for ESB, one from 2004 and another the 19SE. I align the images as best I can before generating the two frames to feed into the tool, but I can’t get it to be exact.

Would it be better to use a higher smoothing parameter? I haven’t seen DrDre recommend anything higher than 0.1, but it can go as high as 1. If the two images are not totally identical (same frame, but the sources aren’t pixel-perfect), is there a drawback to using 1 as the smoothing parameter?

My stance on revising fan edits.