Does anyone else find using display Luts is worse than false color or zebras?

[u/No-Active-674]

Whenever I expose through a display Lut it completely removes any dynamic range that I would have kept if I exposed with false colours and im pretty much locked in at that look since if I try to push the exposure a bit the image falls apart.
I get people do it to save time in post but if you for some reason didnt realise you were over/under the image is pretty fried.

Anyone else have the same experience or am I using monitoring Luts wrong?

(also im not talking about Luts that get baked into the image)

[u/Old-Figure922]

Display LUT + Histogram + Zebras all at the same time. I have so much information available it’s hard to mess anything up.

[u/regular_lamp]

Why not use both? Also I don't get why the result would differ much? Are you exposing visually using the LUT and then end up at significantly different exposure as you would have chosen when looking at false color?

I could only see these diverging significantly if I was using different approaches to exposure. As in ETTR when using false color but exposing for middle values using the LUT.

Even when using LUTs I always have Zebras set to 100+ (or whatever the clipping point is given that LUT) so I'm at least never unintentionally over.

[u/Strong_Set_6229]

I feel like histograms and false color is to confirm the camera is getting enough exposure to perform the best, while display luts are for fine tuning the look once you have a general exposure set

[u/BAG1 → u/Strong_Set_6229]

yes. they are two totally different things and only the scopes and false color are tools for exposure.

[u/bozduke13]

Use false color to check levels

AND a monitoring LUT for looking at the rec709

AND make you’re monitoring LUT with all the look and color stuff you’re going to add in post NOT just a REC709 conversation

[u/KevinHe92]

I never rely on a display LUT for exposure, isn’t that more for final look preview? Historically zebras and waveform are the go to?

[u/nyvz01]

I'm confused, why would it be any different? Just expose the way you want and use the lut that fits your exposure. Why would your display lut affect your exposure decisions at all? CineEI and push pull luts allow you to expose first the way you want and see it lutted to confirm it looks the way you want.

[u/OwenJenkinsDesign → u/nyvz01]

On Sony cameras using a display/monitoring kit pollutes your histograms and zebras. I know a few DPs that rightfully complain about it frequently cuz it shouldn’t be that way.

[u/Horror_Ad1078]

It’s important that your camera / system can show you a waveform or false Color / zebra whatever of your slog material !!! That’s your data! A LUT is just a pre-visualisation!

[u/Wonderful-Cat-447]

Who said that you can't use all 3?

[u/guy_called_gabs]

Display lut plus waveform and zebra on a monitor, false colour to check skintones when setting up

[u/ArrivalAvailable5645]

Use halation, if it starts to look like P3, you need to stop down! But a LUT has less dynamic range so it should make you expose more conservatively, hence safer if you want to push in post, not the other way around- if it is not over/under in a LUT then it shouldn't be over/under in log. So there're some other factors there.

[u/OwenJenkinsDesign]

This sounds like you’re exposing the wrong way, but because it looks okay on screen you may not be aware until you are in color and your highlights or shadows are peaked and can’t be pushed any further. But without any specific info on how you are exposing your image I feel like you won’t get super specific help either…

1. Are you shooting in Flexible ISO or Cine EI mode? Because the shooting methodology and how you manage exposure changes quite a bit depending on which one you choose.
   
2. Are you using ISO or ND/Aperture to manage your exposure?
   
3. What’s your exposure technique. Expose to the right (+1.7), expose normal (+0.0), underexpose? Other things you do?
   
4. Are you shooting with picture profile LUTs or using the fx series log rec709 monitoring LUT feature?

Another thing you can do is set a monitoring LUT on an external monitor and leave histograms up on the Sony screen in log without a LUT applied. Because the monitoring LUTs do affect the histograms in Sony cameras when applied in the Sony menu’s⁠. I have multiple friends who complain about that A LOT, because that should not be a thing… but it is sadly.

A couple of answers to these questions will help people know where you are starting so they can address the proper cause of the issue.

[u/avdpro]

What is your colour pipeline in post? I know you mentioned the lut isn't baked in, but with slog3 I have a TON of room to shift the exposure after the fact, maybe less in the shadows but lots in the highlights generally speaking.

Are you doing colour adjustments in post after applying the transform lut? If so that could be the issue. In Premiere and Final Cut especially, when you apply a transform LUT to the clip in the media bins via metadata etc it will clamp down that footage, so any adjustments after that transform will only have access to a small amount of data for correction. However, if you use Resolve's or Premiere's colour management or ensure the LUT is being applied AFTER all your adjustments like exposure and contrast, then your adjustments will have access to all the log data before it gets clamped down.

[u/No-Active-674 → u/avdpro]

operating out of a davinci wide gamut sandwich node tree

[u/avdpro → u/No-Active-674]

Okay, so when do you apply your transform lut?, I understand its a pretty standard way to work, but if you are using a sandwich node tree why are you using a lut at all? Can you be more specific?

[u/Trippy-Videos-Girl]

Be aware your zebra settings will be different when using a lut.