Hello,
I am having this problem with PNGs from Nuke that I need to deliver in a
Photoshop psd-file. This specifically concerns the shadow pass of my comp
but generally there is a discrepancy on everything that is not solidly
opaque.
My workflow is as follows:
- I write my 8-bit PNG out of Nuke
Are yr pngs in 24 bit? That might help.
On 29 Apr, 2014, at 6:45 PM, Florian Einfalt
florian.einf...@saddingtonbaynes.com wrote:
Hello,
I am having this problem with PNGs from Nuke that I need to deliver in a
Photoshop psd-file. This specifically concerns the shadow pass of my comp but
I tried both using 8bit per pixel and 16bit per pixel. No difference
unfortunately.
Flo
On 29 April 2014 11:51, Martin Constable jackyoungbl...@me.com wrote:
Are yr pngs in 24 bit? That might help.
On 29 Apr, 2014, at 6:45 PM, Florian Einfalt
florian.einf...@saddingtonbaynes.com wrote:
An obvios suggestion maybe, but have you thought about moving your workflow to
tiffs? Or exrs?
PNGs do not store info as floating point. They use integers instead. This might
be at the root of yr problem.
On 29 Apr, 2014, at 6:56 PM, Florian Einfalt
florian.einf...@saddingtonbaynes.com
I have tried to use:
png 8 and 16 bit
exr 16bit float
tiff 8 and 16bit
Same behavior with all of them.
On 29 April 2014 12:20, Martin Constable jackyoungbl...@me.com wrote:
An obvios suggestion maybe, but have you thought about moving your
workflow to tiffs? Or exrs?
PNGs do not store info
and here :]
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Simon Blackledge
simon.blackle...@spacedigital.co.uk wrote:
And here…. :)
s
On 28 Apr 2014, at 18:04, Doug Wilkinson d...@buck.tv wrote:
we are interested in hearing about support for the firepro cards on the pc
as well...
On Mon, Apr
Nuke needs to unpremultiply the alpha before applying the sRGB lut and the
premultiply it again. Did you check the premultiplied box in the read
node properties next to the lut selection?
-deke
On Tuesday, April 29, 2014, Florian Einfalt
Hi Deke,
thanks for that, did it just now and it doesn't change anything
unfortunately.
When does the sRGB LUT get applied actually?
Thanks.
Flo
On 29 April 2014 14:28, Deke Kincaid d...@thefoundry.co.uk wrote:
Nuke needs to unpremultiply the alpha before applying the sRGB lut and
the
Maybe you have a straight alpha instead of a premultiplied one. So try
just adding a premult node.
-deke
On Tuesday, April 29, 2014, Florian Einfalt
florian.einf...@saddingtonbaynes.com wrote:
Hi Deke,
thanks for that, did it just now and it doesn't change anything
unfortunately.
When
Photoshop is applying gamma to alpha. Nuke I believe does not. Try
selecting just alpha in PS. Apply levels and set gamma to 2.2
On Apr 29, 2014 9:34 AM, Florian Einfalt
florian.einf...@saddingtonbaynes.com wrote:
Hi Deke,
thanks for that, did it just now and it doesn't change anything
Sorry Deke, that doesn't work either. I have a feeling it is happening on
the PS side of things.
When I bring the PNG back into Nuke it looks exactly like the original.
Anyone familiar with Photoshop's alpha treatment?
On 29 April 2014 14:42, Deke Kincaid d...@thefoundry.co.uk wrote:
Maybe
The reason .4545 isnt the same is because sRGB doesnt have a gamma of 2.2.
Its a power curve and it more like 2.4ish if you are trying to reverse it
with a simple gamma. So you either accept the difference, use gamma 2.2
instead of sRGB or use 32bit tiff or exr.You shouldnt be applying or
One more thing. Under layers at the bottom is a fly away I forget the name
but in site it will say remove black matte. That is premult basically
On Apr 29, 2014 9:57 AM, Randy Little randyslit...@gmail.com wrote:
The reason .4545 isnt the same is because sRGB doesnt have a gamma of 2.2.
Its a
Thanks Randy.
Still no joy even after using the inverted ~2.4 gamma, and without applying
or converting in PS.
Also, Remove Black Matte doesn't do anything for me.
Seems like I need to figure out a workaround to approximate it.
On 29 April 2014 15:00, Randy Little randyslit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi there!
As we're more used to Alexa footage here, I just wanted to ask about RED, as I
have some footage here that let's me wonder about the capabilities of the RED
camera:
I have some shots with fire, sun, lamps, etc. in my images. Shot with EPIC-X.
When importing them into Nuke and
Thanks, that gets me close at least.
On 29 April 2014 14:46, Randy Little randyslit...@gmail.com wrote:
Photoshop is applying gamma to alpha. Nuke I believe does not. Try
selecting just alpha in PS. Apply levels and set gamma to 2.2
On Apr 29, 2014 9:34 AM, Florian Einfalt
Photoshop is handling the blend modes with gamma correction while Nuke is
doing it in linear, try checking the Video colorspace on your Merge node in
Nuke and see if that matches what you see in Photoshop.
Cheers,
Diogo
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Florian Einfalt
Thanks!
I assumed all this. Just wanted to make sure there is no mistake in doing one
specific way.
My main question is: is it true that RED cameras can only deliver/capture
highlights that are way darker then what the Alexa does? So in my example, a
maximum value of around 4 from the RED
Oh diogo yes. Go into color prefs under edit menu on mac. See what
happens if you set blend rgb to gamma 1.0. But that only affects layers and
color but maybe its related? What colorspace is your photoshop in?
Probably for you it should be srgb. You shouldnt need to convert either
when opening
What happens if you do pdlog in red settings and then use a colorspace node
to do loglin. Read node loglin does weird things. Colorspace node seems
to work better.
On Apr 29, 2014 11:43 AM, Neil Rögnvaldr Scholes n...@uvfilms.co.uk
wrote:
Ha - this is interesting i don't know the answer but
You're suggesting 'RedlogFilm' in the RED settings, right?
Doing this and using a separate colorspace to do the Log2Lin gives similar
values than using the Read colorspace. My maximum value in the image is lower
than 5 compared to the 54 with an Alexa image.
Am 29.04.2014 um 18:17 schrieb
Isnt there a pdlog 685 setting still in red? But it would have change with
redlog and color space if it was going to change at all I suspect. (Maybe)
On Apr 29, 2014 1:07 PM, Schneider, Abraham aschnei...@arri.de wrote:
You're suggesting 'RedlogFilm' in the RED settings, right?
Doing this and
Just remember that with all digital cameras these are arbitrary
logarithmic-like curves applied on top of the linear data captured by the
sensor. Currently I'm working on the Alexa footage: night shot with house on
fire. With AlexaV3logC curve maximum linearized values of fire are around 36
Nuke would be doing the comp in linear light, whereas PS does it sRGB,
so you are probably looking at a gamma discrepancy of around 2.2.
On 4/30/14, 1:51 AM, Florian Einfalt wrote:
Sorry Deke, that doesn't work either. I have a feeling it is happening
on the PS side of things.
When I bring
oops, sorry, Randy had already said the same - ignore me :)
On 4/30/14, 11:21 AM, Frank Rueter|OHUfx wrote:
Nuke would be doing the comp in linear light, whereas PS does it sRGB,
so you are probably looking at a gamma discrepancy of around 2.2.
On 4/30/14, 1:51 AM, Florian Einfalt wrote:
Hm, don't really get your point. Of course I linearized both footages. If I'd
compare linear with log, the values are different. But if I linearize both with
the correct curve and have one footage clipping at values below 5 and the other
at 54, that's a huge quality difference to me.
Of course
Is it possible to create a fake normals map from a 2d plate? Such as a shot of
a mans face?
Darren Coombes
Check out some of my work…
http://vimeo.com/82865049
Mob: +61 418 631 079
Skype: darrencoombes
Twitter: @durwood81
___
Nuke-users mailing
Are you talking about a node that does something like crazy bump or xNormal?
--
Deke Kincaid
Creative Specialist
The Foundry
Skype: dekekincaid
Tel: (310) 399 4555 - Mobile: (310) 883 4313
Web: www.thefoundry.co.uk
Email: d...@thefoundry.co.uk
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Darren Coombes
Was talking to someone about a shot last night and I have a shot where a face
needs to look like its appearing through a layer of goo. There was mention of
using a “fake normals” of the 2d image to help light certain areas of the goo,
but all i can think of is using some sort of luma key to
http://www.crazybump.com/
http://www.xnormal.net/
Crazy bump mac version has a free beta, also there are free tools on
windows (xnormal) and linux (gimp) etc You can extract a normal map
height map from your image in one of those utilities. Sometimes it works
great, sometimes it doesn't
here's another one:
http://www.nukepedia.com/gizmos/filter/height2normal
--
Deke Kincaid
Creative Specialist
The Foundry
Skype: dekekincaid
Tel: (310) 399 4555 - Mobile: (310) 883 4313
Web: www.thefoundry.co.uk
Email: d...@thefoundry.co.uk
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Deke Kincaid
31 matches
Mail list logo
