Did you know that 3D Look-Up Tables (LUTs) are widely used in the film and television industry to ensure accurate color representation?
However, the effectiveness of these LUTs can vary greatly depending on the software used to generate them.
In this article, we will delve into the validation of 3D LUTs, specifically focusing on the performance of Calman-generated LUTs.
By examining the issues associated with Calman’s LUTs, comparing them to those generated by LightSpace, and addressing misconceptions about their capabilities, we aim to provide a thorough understanding of the calibration process and the importance of collaboration between calibration software providers and display manufacturers.
Join us as we explore the world of 3D LUT validation and discover how well your 3D LUT truly performs.
Key Takeaways
- Calman-generated 3D LUTs have issues with oversaturation, gaps, and unevenly shaped points.
- LightSpace-generated 3D LUTs are clean, linear, and without strange areas.
- Calman’s 3D LUTs have issues across different color regions, while LightSpace LUTs are not affected.
- Banding and artifacts are evident in Calman’s LUTs, particularly in the blue/cyan, magenta, and cyan areas.
What is 3D LUT?
The concept of 3D LUT is often misunderstood as a miracle solution, but professional calibrators and reviewers achieve better results with manual calibration, as demonstrated by the issues found in Calman-generated 3D LUTs.
3D LUT, or three-dimensional lookup table, is a mathematical transformation that maps input values of three color channels (red, green, and blue) to output values. It is used to correct color inaccuracies and achieve accurate color reproduction on displays.
However, Calman-generated 3D LUTs have been found to have several issues, such as oversaturation problems, unevenly shaped points, and banding artifacts. These issues affect different color regions and can significantly impact the calibration process.
Therefore, it is important to recognize that manual calibration, supported by knowledge, reference source material, and test images, remains essential for achieving high-quality results.
Issues with Calman-generated 3D LUTs
Calman-generated 3D LUTs exhibit various issues across different color regions. These issues include an oversaturation problem in the 10-point saturation test at 50% brightness, a gap between 100% green and lower percentages of green, and a larger distance between the last two points of the 33-point cube compared to the others.
Additionally, oversaturation problems occur with all edges of the Calman-generated cube, and there are unevenly shaped and problematic points in the blue/cyan, magenta, and cyan areas.
In contrast, LightSpace-generated 3D LUTs are clean, linear, and without strange areas or outputs. The comparison between Calman and LightSpace 3D LUTs reveals that Calman’s correction has a different shape and affects multiple levels, while LightSpace tables are not affected in any color region.
These issues highlight the importance of collaboration between Calman and LG to improve the calibration process and find solutions.
Comparison of Calman and LightSpace 3D LUTs
A comparison between Calman and LightSpace 3D LUTs reveals significant differences in their correction shapes and effects on multiple levels.
Calman’s 3D LUTs exhibit issues across different color regions, including oversaturation problems, gaps in green shades, and unevenly shaped points in blue/cyan, magenta, and cyan areas.
On the other hand, LightSpace-generated 3D LUTs are clean, linear, and without any strange areas or outputs.
The differences between Calman and LightSpace are visually demonstrated in an animation, highlighting the distinct shape of the correction in Calman and its impact on multiple levels.
In contrast, LightSpace tables remain unaffected in any color region.
This comparison emphasizes the superior performance and precision of LightSpace 3D LUTs, making them a more reliable choice for calibration purposes.
Banding and artifacts
Banding issue in the blue region and its impact on different levels is evident. Calman’s 3D LUTs display noticeable banding and artifacts in the blue/cyan, magenta, and cyan areas. This issue affects various levels, resulting in an inconsistent and flawed calibration.
On the other hand, LightSpace-generated 3D LUTs demonstrate a clean and artifact-free preview, with no signs of banding. The animations provided clearly illustrate the banding problem in Calman’s 3D LUTs, highlighting the need for improvement in this aspect.
To achieve optimal image quality, it is crucial to address these banding issues, as they can significantly impact the overall viewing experience. The collaboration between Calman and LG can play a vital role in resolving this problem and ensuring a more accurate and satisfactory calibration process.
Misconceptions about 3D LUT
Many individuals hold the misconception that 3D LUT is a miraculous solution and that manual calibration is obsolete. However, professional calibrators and reviewers consistently achieve superior results through manual calibration methods.
It is important to recognize that 3D LUT is not a one-size-fits-all solution and has its limitations. While 3D LUT has been used in the film industry for at least 10 years, it requires knowledge, reference source material, and test images to properly interpret calibration results.
It is crucial to understand that 3D LUT is not a substitute for manual calibration but rather a tool that can enhance the calibration process. By combining the expertise of professional calibrators with the capabilities of 3D LUT, optimal calibration results can be achieved, leading to improved visual accuracy and innovation in the field.
Importance of Calman and LG Collaboration
The collaboration between Calman and LG is of significant importance as it has the potential to address the need for allowing the upload of 3D LUTs for specific formats and to resolve any existing bugs in the calibration process. This collaboration can lead to a quick solution to the issues identified in this post, proving that it is not an LG-specific problem.
The importance of this collaboration can be understood through the following points:
- Allowing the upload of 3D LUTs for specific formats will provide users with more flexibility and control over the calibration process, resulting in more accurate and customized results.
- Resolving any existing bugs in the calibration process will ensure a smoother and more reliable calibration experience for users, eliminating any potential issues or inaccuracies.
- The collaboration between Calman and LG demonstrates a commitment to innovation and continuous improvement, which is crucial in the ever-evolving field of display calibration. It shows a dedication to providing users with the best possible calibration solutions and pushing the boundaries of technology.
How Can I Determine the Quality of My 3D LUT and Ensure Accurate Display Calibration?
When seeking to ensure accurate display calibration, it’s essential to determine the quality of your 3D LUT. By following a 3D LUT display calibration tutorial, you can learn how to properly assess the quality of your LUT and make any necessary adjustments to achieve optimal display accuracy.
Collaboration between Calman and LG holds potential for addressing the need for allowing the upload of 3D LUTs for specific formats and resolving existing bugs in the calibration process.
This collaboration can lead to a quick solution to the issues identified in the previous discussion.
By allowing the upload of 3D LUTs for specific formats, LG can provide users with more flexibility and control over their display calibration.
Additionally, resolving the bugs in the calibration process will ensure a smoother and more accurate calibration experience.
This collaboration is crucial in meeting the demands of an audience that desires innovation in display calibration.
It is an opportunity for both Calman and LG to enhance the user experience and deliver high-quality calibration solutions that meet the needs of professionals and enthusiasts alike.
A comparison of 3D LUTs generated by Calman and LightSpace reveals significant differences in their performance across different color regions. Calman’s 3D LUTs exhibit issues such as oversaturation, gaps between certain green percentages, and larger distances between some points in the cube. These issues occur consistently across all edges of the Calman-generated cube and are not present in LightSpace-generated 3D LUTs. Furthermore, Calman’s blue/cyan, magenta, and cyan areas show unevenly shaped and problematic points, while LightSpace tables remain unaffected in any color region. Additionally, banding and artifacts are evident in Calman’s blue/cyan, magenta, and cyan areas, affecting different levels, while the LightSpace LUT preview shows no such issues. This comparison highlights the superior performance of LightSpace 3D LUTs and the need for collaboration between Calman and LG to address these issues.
| Issues with Calman-generated 3D LUTs | Comparison of Calman and LightSpace 3D LUTs | Banding and artifacts |
|---|---|---|
| – Oversaturation issue in the 10-point saturation test at 50% brightness. | – Calman’s 3D LUTs have issues across different color regions. | – Banding issue is evident in the blue region and affects different levels. |
| – Gap between 100% green and lower percentages of green. | – LightSpace 3D LUTs are clean and without strange areas or outputs. | – Calman’s blue/cyan, magenta, and cyan areas exhibit banding and artifacts. |
| – Last two points of the 33-point cube have a larger distance from the others. | – Animation shows the differences between Calman and LightSpace. | – LightSpace LUT preview shows no banding or artifacts. |
| – Oversaturation problem occurs with all edges of the Calman-generated cube. | – Correction in Calman has a different shape and affects multiple levels. | – Examples of animations demonstrate the banding issue. |
| – All Calman 3D LUTs suffer from the same oversaturation issue. | – LightSpace tables are not affected in any color region. | |
| – Calman’s blue/cyan, magenta, and cyan areas show unevenly shaped and problematic points. |