Wednesday, January 13, 2021
11:00am - 12:00pm Pacific Time (UTC-7:00pm)
Please join us for the next meeting of this virtual working group (VWG). Future meeting dates for this month include:
Dropbox Paper link for this group:
We will be using the same GoToMeeting url and phone numbers as in previous groups.
You may join via computer/smartphone (preferred) which will allow you to see any presentations or documents that are shared or you can join using a telephone which will be an audio only experience.
Please note that meetings are recorded and transcribed and open to the public. By participating you are agreeing to the ACESCentral Virtual Working Group Participation Guidelines
You can also dial in using your phone.
Dial the closest number to your location and then follow the prompts to enter the access code. United States: +1 (669) 224-3319 Access Code: 241-798-885
To go back to the posterization topic that I quickly jumped on and so that we agree on what we are talking about, here is the Wikipedia definition:
Posterization or posterisation of an image entails the conversion of a continuous gradation of tone to several regions of fewer tones, with abrupt changes from one tone to another. This was originally done with photographic processes to create posters. It can now be done photographically or with digital image processing and may be deliberate or an unintended artifact of color quantization.
With that in mind, I took @ChrisBrejon’s lightsaber image which I think was not processed correctly:
No they aren’t. It is just a really poor naming convention. They are AP0 exr files. Sorry about that.
If we have a look at the name of the file : cg_ACEScg_lightSabers_001_aces.exr, I’ll explain what I tried to attempt (obviously an epic failure on my end)
cg -> prefix to indicate that this image has been generated using computer graphics
ACEScg -> primaries used for the lights
lightSabers -> the “topic”
aces -> the colorspace alias (it could have been “lin_ap0”)
Since AP0 is the format for exchanging files, I tried to follow this rule. Obivously the fact that “ACEScg” is present in the name of the file is a terrible idea. New file are on their way with a better naming convention.
Having said that, I do not think that interpreting this exr as AP0 (instead of AP1) would change your results, right ?
Just wanted to say that I agree about the need of precise terminology to name properly the errors the VWG OT needs to fix. I’ll try to be more accurate in my next posts, both in terminology and ctl processing.
For the record, we did manage to generate some ctl reference render for the light sabers with the help of @jedsmith
I think it is very interesting to observe the differences between OCIO and CTL on the blue neons.
On a side note, here is a couple of thoughts I had during this meeting :
define exactly what posterization, banding, gamut clip, hue skews and mach bands are, with clear examples illustrating them (no ambiguity !)
try to list where these issues may come from
only provide examples using CTL or the ACES nuke nodes from Jed Smith (and not using OCIO V1)
One “advantage” we have with full CG renders is that we are not IDTs dependent in a way and I thought it would be worth mentioning. The ACEScg primaries used in this render will show perfectly the issues we’re trying to fix I think (I just need to name them properly).