Best Film Emulation Plugin (Kodak 2383, Dehancer, Filmbox, and more)

[@cinematools]

KZbin and grain don't go well together, so make sure that you're watching in UHD.

[@stevemuzak8526]

That's why there is no reason to ad fake grain. KZbin compression will kill it.

[@cinematools]

@@stevemuzak8526 that's why it needs to be higher intensity and exported using proper settings.

[@TonyCastrovilli]

@@stevemuzak8526 It's a good idea to export in 6k a 4k video for keep the quality on yt

[@kudzanaimaneswa5800]

@@cinematoolswhat are the settings

[@NekroQueenX7448]

@@stevemuzak8526 There is a reason, maybe the person that made the video wants to add it regardless. And yes, in higher resolution you can see it.....

[@Shah_creates]

Love Filmbox

[@bobtronic73]

Thanks for the comparison. It confirms my findings. I tried out most of these emulations and Filmbox is my favorite. Dehancer really screws colors.

[@cinematools]

Glad you found it useful. Filmbox works right out of the box, and the halation is on a different level than other plugins/methods.

[@simonrabeder1599]

How good is filmbox! I was ooohing and aaahing everytime it came on. Love the video, great choice of scenes and scenarios! Most helpful I‘ve found. I hope video village pay you a commission.

[@cinematools]

Haha. Not expecting anything from Video Village or anyone else. We filmed a lot of tests for internal testing, and it might be useful for people to see the difference. There's a difference between seeing a demo on the website and using it in real-world scenarios. Thanks for watching and feedback.

[@simonrabeder1599]

@@cinematools A joke of course. Thanks for releasing it to the public. Beautifully made. Also tasteful choice in music.

[@CHILL3435]

Even the base Rec709 looks absolutely beautiful compared to the other film emulations.

[@rainzhao2000]

I've shot Kodak 5207 250D scanned on a Blackmagic Cintel scanner. Having only used the free version of Filmbox with the baked in print emulation, I can confirm it looks the closest to the actual film scan under Davinci Resolve's pfe lut, though, filmbox print had more contrast and saturated greens. Filmbox grain and halation are also the most beautiful and realistic. I wish I could say the same for Filmconvert, a product I purchased with halation. Filmconvert just doesn't accurately simulate Kodak 5207 color, grain, or halation. I should caveat by saying my digital tests were done on an A7III. I'm currently working on my own 5207 LUT, and I hope to make a comparison video in the future.

[@cinematools]

Were you using Filmbox as negative only combined with Resolve's LUT?

[@rainzhao2000]

@cinematools9621 I used filmbox full print emulation since negative only is not available in the free version. Filmbox slog3 is actually profiled for Sony Venice, but I believe their emulation is a derivative of the Arri LogC profile, so I used cinematch to convert my A7III slog3 to Arri LogC before filmbox, and I found the colors more appealing that way.

[@dukebozikowski3801]

@@cinematools That's how you are supposed to do it

[@kiksogue]

fantastic video

[@cinematools]

Thanks!

[@AustinGarcia-Color]

Filmbox all the way.

[@gmcubed]

I was kind of hoping for a more conclusive, erm, conclusion. If price is no object, what method do you tend to prefer the most? I'm sure its one of those right tool for the right job kind of things, but You have to have a favorite, no?

[@cinematools]

Of course - it's Filmbox. The spatial effects are top-notch. Halation adds a soft blur to the highlights which sells the look. We couldn't achieve the same result with other plugins or manual adjustments. They also added grain tonal control in the recent update.

[@ekphotography]

Videos is old but maybe you might answer, been watching a lot of color management tutorials and many say let Davinci handle it but when I do it adds a 709 conversion automatically and when I want to use Filmbox it looks terrible. So should I not do any color management , leave my Sony cine slog3 and apply Filmbox and or any luts and then do a cst out with a rec709A ? I am On Mac by the way and apparently rec709 A is the way to go. Thanks for any suggestions. But when using davinci color management, all my power grades or Filmbox look like garbage unless I start with straight Slog3cine and no conversion LUT.

[@cinematools]

Yes, you're doing double conversion if you use color management in Resolve. You need to bypass it and use Log material directly in Filmbox.

[@ekphotography]

@@cinematools Thanks, Yes I figure that was the case. Thanks

[@Adamrobifilmy]

Honestly in most of these examples the rec709 looks the best lol

[@cinematools]

Sometimes a simple 709 is more than enough.

[@Shah_creates]

Maybe 5 years ago. Today, these Rec709 looks very video-y.

[@JS_Leger]

it's subjective but for my part I find it too video ish too

[@Dawid.Filipczak]

Excellent comparison. Side by side, not too long and not too short 👌👍 I've chosen Filmconvert just for convenience, but I'm sure any of these options could be used to recreate very similar look with some tweaks.

[@cinematools]

Thank you.

[@oxhorn-br6sf]

Could you please tell me how the second film color in addition to 709 color is achieved, I think the second film color looks very comfortable

[@cinematools]

Sorry, not sure if I understand the question. Do you mean Cinema Tools LUT?

[@oxhorn-br6sf]

@@cinematools Yes, this is the lut. It looks very natural. Where can I buy this lut

[@jejakmaknawi]

Ok, I think I'm very happy with the base rec709 look and don't feel the need to tweak it more..I must be weird.

[@Itsmrbot]

hey bro is there any Kodak 2383 LUT for premiere pro. especially for req709 clips.

[@cinematools]

Resolve and Cinema Tools LUTs work everywhere but you need to use it with LOG footage.

[@szabolaszlo]

As for me cinema tools and filmbox looked the best. Do you have it for Lumix S1/S5 for sale? I can see it is only available for the S5II. Thanks for the video.

[@cinematools]

Thank you. It seems like the color science changed a bit in S5 II compared to S1 and S5. We're planning on adding more cameras in the future but it's a time-consuming process, so I don't have the exact timeline.

[@chromiqa]

what did you need color checker for dehancer?

[@justsomeframes]

what are ur project timeline/output settings fot this test

[@cinematools]

UHD/Rec 709

[@verebellus]

the biggest takeaway here for me is that Nitrate is substantially cheaper than the other options (apart from the cinematools but its not quite the same) unless youre happy with resolves built in tools, which are fairly flexible in my opinion

[@qtben17]

U shouldve added phantom luts in the comparison. Anyhow, filmbox and cinematools look great in my eyes

[@cinematools]

Do they make film emulation luts? There are too many of them to include everything. At least a couple new ones were released while we were making the video.

[@CHILL3435]

For the night shot, Dehancer looked better than Filmbox as it looked the Most balanced out of them all. For the first shot, Filmbox took the cake. The one with the red dressed girl, the Kodak film emulation seemed to fit the mood than Filmbox.

[@victorseastrom3455]

What would have been interesting is if they had shot actual film along side for comparison. I would love to see an IB 2 and 3 strip Technicolor emulation in these packages.

[@lulumink0]

it would be very expensive...

[@tohrofficial1528]

Wow , how did you exposed so perfectly with this Sony a7s3 . I have the camera but unable to get the same result as you . Please could you make a tutorial on the way you expose with the SonyA7S3 Slog3 ? Thanks in advance. Your footages are amazingly nice to look . ❤

[@cinematools]

Thank you. Sometimes we use an external monitor with false color but even without it, the general rule is to protect the highlights and keep the skin tones well exposed. You can use Zebras for this. Also, it's always better to overexpose than under as long as the highlights don't clip. If you're using Davinci Resolve for editing and grading, dial exposure before the LUT. Use Offset or HDR exposure wheel instead of Lift, Gamma, and Gain - it's more organic and will look better. It's similar to adjusting exposure in the camera except you have more control over the image. We might create an exposure and white balance guide in the future.

[@tohrofficial1528]

@@cinematools Thank you so much , I really appreciate your priceless advices . Will try to apply them 🙏🏿 . Looking forward for the guide. Bless

[@cinematools]

@@tohrofficial1528 you're welcome! I suggest you to check Blaine Westropp yt channel, he has great tutorials about exposure. He uses Arri cameras but the same principles apply to A7S3.

[@tohrofficial1528]

@@cinematools Sure , I will check his channel too , Thank you so much

[@area51pictures]

Love that you did this. However, when you aren't using different versions of the same stock (for example, use 50D Vision3 or 250D for all of them) it makes it pretty hard to effectively tell differences which are specific to the film emulation software and which aren't just because you're using different stocks. Just food for thought the next time you do this! Thanks

[@cinematools]

Thanks for watching. 250D only available in Filmbox and Dehancer. However, 250D profile is a lot more contrasty in Dehancer with a push of cyan in the highlights, so we decided to use 200T because it's more consistent.

[@heymiranda512]

Filmbox looks superior when handling brown skin and seems to be my favorite overall. I'm a little shocked at how poorly the others looked after application on her skin specifically. Ironic its film emmulation and classic film also had no consideration for brown skin. 😅 I appreciate this demonstration so much. Thank you!

[@TonyCastrovilli]

it work in Capture One?

[@heymiranda512]

​@TonyCastrovilli If you're asking if it works with Capture One, I'm not sure because I haven't used any emulators with it nor do i have Capture One. I would assume the programming and coding are different. Plus photos work in srgb color space and not rec 709. So it's possible that emulators could work a little better in a photo application vs video, I'm just not familiar/don't use them in my own photography.

[@cinematools]

To be fair, the scene was a little challenging because of the light bounce but yes, filmbox is very consistent.

[@cinematools]

@@TonyCastrovilli Filmbox is available only for Davinci Resolve at this moment.

[@snejkafilm7400]

man reading comments and shocked that nobody noticed issues? Are people really losing cinematography skill? Except rec709 and davinci rest screwed up skin badly. Just look at 3:02 she turned from human into a zombie lifeless white skin. That's why proper colorist cost fortune for big budget films, because they have to select skin, track and keep natural.

[@cinematools]

You're missing the point of the video.

[@montazownianr1]

Where did you get Marisa, I haven't seen her for long time in Adorama.

[@ForestCinema]

I’m considering FilmBox, I already have FC Nitrate and Dehancer. I’ve noticed that Dehancer’s daylight-balanced Vision3 seem woefully unbalanced. I shoot real 16mm film, so I know what it should look like. The tungsten Vision3 seem better if a tad warm. FilmBox almost always looks convincing when I see it used.

[@cinematools]

We noticed the same thing with Dehancer. The FX3 profile is better than the A7S III one. Filmbox is amazing, it requires the least work to get good-looking and convincing results. They also run sales of their products multiple times a year.

[@ForestCinema]

@@cinematools I wish Dehancer would revisit some of their profiles. It seems like their model is more focused on having a large number of film stocks, which is unfortunate, because one or two really good ones would be better. I do think that their pipeline works well, the grain, halation and bloom all do a good job, but the profiling lets it down somewhat.

[@k22-w6v]

WHERE CAN I GET THE kodak 2383 D65 pfe lut ?

[@cinematools]

It comes with the free version of Davinci Resolve.

[@devinontherun]

what lense did u use for the into? and what filter?

[@cinematools]

The city shot? Tamron 70-180 wit. B+W 6 Stop ND.

[@lofifilm25]

filmbox is just next level. I think resolve is prob your best bet if you don't wanna drop a k

[@AntonRyzhov-g3n]

base 709 is the best. And second one is good I think

[@HasyirIbrahim]

DA VINCI JUST DROPPED ITS OWN DEHANCER PLUG-IN IN VERSION 19.0

[@cinematools]

Not really. It doesn't have film stocks, and the quality of grain and halation is worse.

[@HasyirIbrahim]

@@cinematools agreed. filmbox and cinema tools has the best colors imo

[@ХЕЙТЕРЫ-ы2б]

Thanks for the comparison. Nothing from the list is giving a feel of the film. Sometimes Dehancer is littlle bit closer than others. But still it feels like processed digital, not film.

[@AlpacaDiaries]

Dehancer has that very weird bleached look, like you messed up with the curves tool. I started noticing whenever I used it and thought I was going crazy. Turns out I was right. Also the grain just sucks

[@chromiqa]

is the dehancer the worst of alll???

[@cinematools]

Dehancer is very flexible allowing you to dial the look with many parameters. It may require more work than other plugins depending on the footage.

[@DavidKfilmmaker]

It didn’t shine in here.

[@YouTubekanal2020]

Nice 👍🏻

[@marios.8005]

The Kodak 2383 profile in Dehancer is not good. Much better Velvia 50 and the Provia 100F

[@DennisSchmitz]

Cinema Tools and Filmbox look neck and neck to me. The others are quite awful in comparison for lots of different reasons.