16
$\begingroup$

I've just read that Filmic is not completely implemented: https://developer.blender.org/D2659.

Notes:

  • The results appear to be identical to the original Filmic config, but I left out some parts like the renaming of color spaces, BT.1886, grayscale and new roles. Some of those things might be worth adding as well if they are backwards compatible.

...

Q: Are there significant differences between Filmic shipped with Blender and its repository? Before going down the rabbit hole: What does that mean to us and what version is preferred?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
3
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ There are a few differences. The way base contrast works in 2.79 is different. Read: developer.blender.org/T52311 Also different is that filmic blender does away with the "film emulation" looks (read: blender.stackexchange.com/questions/66957/…) $\endgroup$
    – user1853
    Commented Apr 28, 2018 at 20:42
  • $\begingroup$ To have an in depth understanding on the differences compare the config.ocio files for the version bundled with blender and that of the github. $\endgroup$
    – user1853
    Commented Apr 29, 2018 at 17:42
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Comparing both config.ocio files is difficult without having an in depth understanding @cegaton. I created a .diff just for the record, and at a first glance it's a totally different file. $\endgroup$
    – p2or
    Commented May 5, 2018 at 14:33

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
14
+100
$\begingroup$

Quoting @troy_s, (the creator of the filmic blender's color transform LUTs and config.ocio files)

Is there any difference between this repository and the filmic blender in 2.79?

Indeed.

The default "Filmic" view, which carries on Blender's confused description of what a display is, is actually the Filmic Log Encoding Base coupled with the Base Contrast.

There currently is no means to generate a purely Filmic Log encoded image. You can see this by comparing the "None" creative look against "Base Contrast" and note that the two are identical.

This will pose issues for anyone seeking to use alternative display referred tool chains. For example, the Agent team used the Filmic Log encoded imagery at 16 bit for grading within Resolve.

The version on github works the way the author designed it to work: so that is possible to save images in log without any looks applied. Using log encoded images would allow users to save images in formats like 16 bit Tiff, to be used for further post-production (compositing, color grading, etc), and without having to distort the data or otherwise compromise the dynamic range of the images generated in blender.

Another difference is that you will find a sRGB EOTF transform. (again quoting the github page:

This is an accurate version of the sRGB transfer function.

As I understand it the developers chose to keep some of the previous pieces of code to prevent error messages when opening older files, that expect the default color transform to be named sRGB

Other differences:

The github version includes a BT.1886 EOTF. It not does not include any of the "film emluation" looks. (for additional information read: Combine Filmic Blender and "Standard" Film Emulation), some other color transforms (greyscale and false colour) were moved from looks to views.

enter image description here

enter image description here enter image description here

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .