Date
1 - 3 of 3
proper FileTransform usage
Paul Miller <pa...@...>
On 3/8/2016 7:01 PM, Mark Boorer wrote:
Hi Paul,Actually, what we found was creating an actual OCIO config out of the LUT file transform produced the proper results. Not entirely sure what the actual difference is under the cover. |
|
Mark Boorer <mark...@...>
Hi Paul, When you say your FileTransform results differ from Nuke's, is this from using a Vectorfield node, or an OCIO FileTransform node, or perhaps an OCIO Display node entirely? Also what format of LUT are you using?(I'd also recommend using INTERP_TETRAHEDRAL where possible) Cheers, Mark On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Paul Miller <pa...@...> wrote: I need advice on the correct way to use a LUT file transform in an OCIO processor. My results when using a FileTransform look different than in Nuke, with whites appearing more subdued using the test LUT I have. Am I doing this right? |
|
Paul Miller <pa...@...>
I need advice on the correct way to use a LUT file transform in an OCIO processor. My results when using a FileTransform look different than in Nuke, with whites appearing more subdued using the test LUT I have. Am I doing this right?
My normal OCIO processor looks like this: DisplayTransformRcPtr transform = DisplayTransform::Create(); transform->setInputColorSpaceName(colorSpaceName); transform->setDisplay(displayName); transform->setView(lookName); transform->setLinearCC(gainTransform); transform->setChannelView(swizzle); transform->setDisplayCC(exposureTransform); processor = config->getProcessor(transform); However, I also allow bringing in an external LUT file, and I use it like this in lieu of the DisplayTransform: FileTransformRcPtr fileTransform = FileTransform::Create(); fileTransform->setSrc(path); fileTransform->setInterpolation(OCIO::INTERP_LINEAR); GroupTransformRcPtr group = GroupTransform::Create(); group->push_back(gainTransform); group->push_back(fileTransform); group->push_back(exposureTransform); processor = config->getProcessor(group); I'm using the same display shader for both. |
|