FIlmmakers: DO NOT BUY THIS - SpyderCheckr

[@lumoborteidoku]

Yours was not the first video KZbin offered up to me when I wanted an educated answer on what to consider before buying one colour checker over the other, but it was the first that I watched... and I haven't regretted it! Thanks for making it so easy to justify why I'll be using the X-Rite Color Checker Video

[@Humcrush]

Glad I could be of help!

[@Danimally]

Spyder is mostly for photography so, and colors for still photos and for video are slightly different. Spyder is for a CMYK environment (mostly). We need to understand our color profiles and color flow haha

[@ProCoderIO]

Wow! Thanks. I was all geared up to get one. Thanks to your tips I’m looking at the X-Rite and trying to decide if is what I need at this stage to grow my channel.

[@fotogfitzfoto412]

Like criticising a hammer because it doesn't cut wood cleanly. Switched off part way through and won't be viewing any more from this channel. From reading the comments I am not alone, and I'm glad I missed the ending.

[@kiyashko86]

Yes, xrite-video is simpler to use. But spider color checker is correct, don't blame it. It contains standard 60 years old chart which was developed for color and printing (not for simple camera match). And it still better for matching colors than "xrite-video" because cover higher color space. Matching only RGB-CMY edges - doesn't match all the colors. If you need something even better then go with DSC Labs.

[@Humcrush]

No, that is bad advice. It's not appropriate for videographers/filmmakers. Period. For us, the vectorscope is the standard. The Spydercheckr adheres to no standard other than itself. And I have the emails from Datacolor to prove that they agree.

[@kiyashko86]

@@Humcrush Okay, no problem, good luck with your learning of color science.

[@Netaction]

Datacolor: These colors are the screen colors RGB and the print colors YMC. Like all other color charts made for photography. Humcrush: Oh they don't match my vector scope? I didn't know this!

[@ellatino55]

Hey can you explain this? I own this product and still trying to understand how it works

[@Danimally]

​@@ellatino55i got you. This product is for photography. There's a spyder Checkr video. This version is not for video, is for photography. I own a spyder checkr video that works fine

[@lightingvideotv]

DSC Labs charts are accurate to the vectorscope and are recognized by SMPTE and camera manufactures for their accuracy. They have a wide range of charts with different options. I have used DSC charts for decades and colour accuracy is evident in the DSC charts.

[@JeffBourke]

Well they can’t both be right.

[@lightingvideotv]

@@JeffBourke Yes as you say that is why I use DSC Charts as do many broadcasters and camera manufacturers

[@AmigoRicoTube]

Video Rec709 target colors and Photo display RGB and printed CMY color targets are different. If you would look at X-Rite or Calibrite Video Passport, there are 2 sides, one with video targets, another with classic Macbeth targets, video would match the vectroscope in Rec709, Macbeth will not. Even though RGBCMY patches look similar to the eye on both.

[@AlexandrePRODHOMME]

They don't match because they are NOT vectorscope targets in the first place. They are Cyan Magenta Yellow for print. The same reason people SHOULD not be using the x-rite macbeth for video...but they all do, so it became a standard. But they should use the one you switched to, the Video one (or the DSC ones)

[@ER-fd9fj]

Sorry, but I don't quite understand why I can't use the classic X-rite chart (Macbeth) for video, the Davinci has it as an option to correct video color. And this chart includes RGB color and also CMYK. So if I want to do video and photography, I should have two different cards?

[@derekmccabe1316]

@@ER-fd9fj YES, there are TWO different cards -- ONE for Photography and ONE for VIDEO. They are not the same charts.

[@GuidoValdata]

I'm sorry, but it's then false advertising: on the BOX it's written: "camera color correction for photo & video". that. so yeah one would hope it works but, well, no. it's literally word for word on the product description. explain me that...!

[@AlexandrePRODHOMME]

@@GuidoValdata you can use it to colour correct video, but you need to know how to use it. In this case, NOT with vectorscope

[@spektrograf]

Exactly, the SpyderCheckr charts were designed to be used with the Spyder color calibration software-not vectorscopes. If used with that workflow, it works perfectly as designed. This is a good video that reminds people that if you're using vectorscope for color management in your workflow, you'll need to use a color chart designed for vectorscope use.

[@QLFProductions]

When it comes to video I use the spyderCheckr's grey card for white balance since it's big enough and has 1/4 so I can do it myself. I use the colors for photography only, with Lightroom. I use the Xrite video for video because Final Cut has the auto feature that only works with the Xrite passport for video which is now made by Calibrite, not Xrite.

[@cevxj]

Resolve has spydercheckr

[@looneyburgmusic]

Why would a color correction chart for PHOTOGRAPHY need to match the "correct" color values for VIDEOGRAPHY? Useless video is useless.

[@Humcrush]

Why include standard vector scope patches, but not match them? DataColor doesn't make it obvious that it will not work for video/cinema workflows.

[@looneyburgmusic]

​@@Humcrush Well, can't speak to why companies do what they do, but from my own experience using a SC24 to color correct photos I've captured with both Nikon and Canon bodies the results seem to be as near spot-on as I could ever ask for, so first thing I would wonder is if there is an issue somewhere on your end, when you tested the color patches, throwing off the ​values you are getting...?

[@Humcrush]

@@looneyburgmusic Nope, again, confirmed by DataColor...the values for those patches do not match the expected standard that every vectorscope ever expects. (But you don't even need the confirmation, you can simply put the SpyderCheckr and a correct chart in the same shot and view the problem.) You don't have that issue if you're utilizing a still photo calibration tool customized for the unique values it does use.

[@looneyburgmusic]

​@@Humcrush Ok, so maybe made for photographers, intended for photographers, but also "close enough" for non-professional video use... There is an important key point that may apply here that I have run into over the decades in the audio-production world again and again - people looking for results with their recordings which are far beyond both their experience level, and equipment capabilities. When it comes to recording music there are the amateur's, the semi-pro's and finally the "real-deal" full-on pros - and it's only the pros who need a $500k+ studio setup with racks and racks of outboard processing gear which allows for making ultra-high quality recordings. Same thing I would venture might apply here - a professional looking to color correct/grade a video is not going to be using a ~$50 reference card, so matching the absolute color values perfectly might not be a priority...

[@soerens3620]

@@Humcrush They do not use "Standard Vector scope Patches" They just use R,G,B and C,M,Y. These patches have a variety of definitions in various colourspaces. There are tons of colourspaces and all of them have their own C-MY-R_G_B specification - usually defined as an L_ab value. Vectorscopes usualy use the NTSC-YUV definition. That is why x-rite uses them also for their video targets. However, there are tons of targets on the market, that of course also have the commonly used CMYRGB patches that are completely unrelated to the NTSC specification, because they are not designed for TV production. But no matter what the patches are - as long as you have their L_ab values, you can always use any target to make a correct colour profile or as videographers call it, a LUT. Not matching the NTSC specification is surely not a bad design decision, if the target was never meant for video production.

[@AndrewDBrown2020]

I have been trying to use SpyderCheckr 24 with Adobe Premiere and had issues with the vector scopes. I'm fairly new to colour correcting and making videos - so I just thought it was me (it might still be), but I'm definitely going to look into this further. Thanks for the video - superb production quality (to my untrained eyes).

[@cevxj]

Because its not designed for use with vector scopes.

[@thecontagiouscajun4795]

Try MBR

[@СвоёМнение-э2т]

Can someone explain step-by step how to check the color checker chart using vectorscope?

[@JeffBourke]

OMG. I just purchased it this morning!!!! FML

[@LeekowalskiWalker]

This didn't age well.

[@miketkong2]

Awesomely useful brotha. And excellent work on the outro!

[@qrdaudio]

I think, if they don't match with vectorscope because it was designed for Photography and they work. why davinci still put in preset color chart because they was design to work with auto mode, not with manual mode, I think davinci would have source color code for spyder checkr and implement that to they auto algorithm of course they don't match with the vector scope if we do manual mode, which is need some proper "video" color chart

[@What_Other_Hobbies]

It's out of production and no longer available on my tursted online retailers. What's a good option now for video and for photo? Thanks.

[@threeeyedtribe]

You probably have your answer by now but look up the Color Checker passport from X-Rite

[@samk2407]

So if you use davinci resolve, there's a feature where you put in the color checker that you have, and then just eyedropper the correct patches and it will do the correct color manipulations for you. It's actually irrelevant that the colors aren't the vector scope colors as long as they can be calibrated correctly. IDK if premeire or finalcut have this feature but if you use davinci you can use the spyderchecker just fine.

[@Humcrush]

While Resolve's "color match" feature does include this chart, it is a very different beast. You have to know the illuminant and other info to get reliable results. Even then, it's hard to predict exactly what it will do.

[@samk2407]

@@Humcrush my impression was that it worked pretty well but it sounds like you're more experienced with it so 🤷‍♂️

[@levenisingewikkeld]

I think the mistake here is that your product is actually made for photography? Maybe?

[@Humcrush]

It is, but tons of videographers use it, and you won't find anything from Datacolor saying that the patches that look like they would match vector scope colors, don't.

[@levenisingewikkeld]

@@Humcrush Sure thing, I agree that it's very confusing to say the least!

[@fanfan9768]

Yes. I feel the correction is acceptable for photography. But it is not designed for video: I imported the corrected image in the final cut pro and the colors do not point to where they should be. Indicate that this is photography only.

[@lutzhohle6644]

It doesn't matter if it was made for photography or video. It's a calibration instrument. A calibration instrument must match its own reference values very very closely. If this is not the case, you also have the same problem with photos ...

[@levenisingewikkeld]

@@lutzhohle6644Video charts useful for video editing programs are based on vectorscopes. Look up vectorscopes on wikipedia, it's by legacy very specific for television technology. Vectorscopes are used for determining if you have proper broadcast color and analyzing color balance. Since photos aren't used for broadcast, a vectorscope has less meaning and you are mostly looking at changes over time. Since photos are still images, they are less useful. Photography has it's basis in print so color calibration tools have a different background. At least that's how I understand it. Using photography colocharts with different video calibration tools = you're gonna have a bad time

[@ps-ri2qk]

Nice, I'm going to suck it up and buy the x-rite. Now which x-rite combo to buy (photo, video, combo w hardware - hmm. more research :) Thanks for the lesson learned - subscribed!

[@NessNayii]

What did you go with in the end?

[@Mcskittelybiscuts]

I feel so bad for the comment section, the amount of confusion this video has caused is pure chaos. The chart is perfectly accurate for printers and the standard they have, A vector scope shows you the colors, However, there are target colors on that vector scope, those target colors are not the colors on the chart, hence why this youtuber makes a claim that the chart is incorrect. Target colors are based on the importance that Video is working with RGB and not YMC hence why they have different standards and different target colors. This youtuber has strong (entertaining) bias and makes no reference to the fact that there is more than one standard for color in the world. You all should be made aware that when people say standard, it almost always means absolutely nothing. Do a deep dive into standards for color and you will find with even the best approaches, none of it matters because each device can look vastly different from the next one, what you see is not what anyone else sees, even model by model will look different. All in all there's no hope in color standards, use the color chart that works for you and allows you to color correct as best you can and hope for the best for the person who will watch your content.

[@Humcrush]

So, tell us, exactly which widely accepted standard DOES the SpyderCheckr adhere to? I'll tell you: none. It is proprietary. The only reason it works "perfectly accurate for printers" is because it is being measured against itself. Same goes for how photographers use it. There is no good reason why DataColor did not make these 6 patches match an objective standard, they just didn't.

[@Mcskittelybiscuts]

@@Humcrush It's an entire problem across all standards that currently exist. In fact it's not much harder to create your own color card from construction paper and use that to color correct. Your hate is directed towards spydercheckr but really it should be more broad than that. There simply isn't a standard at all other than what companies create in house. Whatever you correct your monitor with should be the standard you use, yet most people don't even calibrate their monitor so none of this stuff matters at all. I'm not a fan of spyder, but the problem is beyond that. I would be interested in a standard that you adhere to that covers all aspects, video correction, monitor correction and print correction. I haven't found any, currently my favorite is apple monitors they seem to be the most consistent yet I still hate their oversaturation, but it doesn't help me record, or print. You see the issue is nobody knows how to do all of these things. It's really sad, I think Spyder has made the best attempt, but really lack in the video correction department.

[@cocchinicorp4048]

How's that "adult in the whitehouse" going bruh? 😆 You know.... the thing.

[@LeviWarkentin]

love you personality man, especially your dry ending, subbed just for that haha

[@DatrysiadMedia]

I own the SC24 and always thought that from camera to camera they render colours slightly different hence the need to use this, so in davinci resolve you would sort the white balance, do the colour match, then do hue vs hue to make sure the 6 colours are accurate and line up in the vector scope. I'm not saying that's the gospel lol just what I've picked up from watching other tutorials on YT. And don't trust me lol in colour blind which is why I bought one psml. I do find when I do this though on the G7 that the 8bit doesn't like to be pushed and pulled all that much and I have had mixed results, sometimes I'm super happy an other times I'm scratching my head.

[@leonardodruscovich2131]

Cool, but lost me at the pretty much dumb politician bullshit at the end.

[@tomtolle99]

I dont quite understand the issue. Why does it matter if they allign to a scope. As long as the colors are correct also all colors inbetween will match. So also the scope colors that are inbetween the charts colors.

[@methodinsurance]

What would you objectively match them to?

[@tomtolle99]

​@@methodinsurance as I said it doesnt matter aslong as the colors match the values they are supposed to match. And aslong as you dont try to match those colors manually you should not even notice a difference. I would probably allign them to wavelengh, as they are pysically defined better than any other way of measuring colors. I work in the VFX industry were the Macbeth chart from xrite is Standard, so I would also recomend to buy it, but I dont see a reason to "shame" this colorchart. There is nothing wrong with it.

[@Humcrush]

@@tomtolle99 Respectfully, that makes no sense. A chart patch has to be matched against a known standard. I can't say too much right now as I'm under an NDA, but DataColor has acknowledged the problem and is releasing a new product soon for filmmakers/videographers that addresses the issue. (I am currently an alpha tester.)

[@tomtolle99]

​@@Humcrush maybe vfx workflow are different than grading workflows. A scope is not a real standard. Its just a list of defind color values once important for tv broadcasting. Those values make more or less sense depending on the colorspace you are using. But aslong as values are defined you can create a color correction matrix to match all your different sources together or hit exactly the Colors you want. Maybe it changed by now but a few years ago resolve was very limited in what you could do. Not even sure if you can generate color matrixes in there or if you have to use the colorchecker tool that they provide.

[@photoandfilmcs]

This video is a revelation for me! Thank you so much!

[@Bigal213]

You're not using the right tool for the job. Use a video colour panel for filmmaking...

[@Humcrush]

gee, thanks. 😜

[@PaulKentSkates]

Frick. This makes so much sense! I'm so mad!! I'm too broke to buy a second card though.

[@Humcrush]

You can trust the grey portion for white balance, just don't try to adjust color based on your vectorscope.

[@vivianvaldi7871]

Btw it doesn't work with vector scopes in DaVinci, but only with the automated process witch (some pros say) is not as good as manual color correction using vector scopes. So the reality is what u say, but not for the reason u say it. DCS doesn't say it's not accurate for video vector scopes, bc we should be able to conclude this from their product specs (in fact, we aren't), so in a way unaware people wanting to color correct videos are mislead.

[@JeffBourke]

QUESTION: IF I use the color chart match feature in resolve, will RESOLVE match the color patches to the correct values???

[@Humcrush]

Yes, in so much as that tool works, it will work.

[@Anna-gv7vo]

Is it still the same nowadays? I mean the new ones? TIA

[@DanielRodriguez-dj6zr]

So, I don't think Xrite is available anymore, I found another called Calibrite, I think is the same, do someone know which to choose?

[@ROCAELPOL]

como puedo comprar tu luts lo estoy buscando i no encuentro

[@RollinLeonard]

i think you have the photo SpyderCheckr??? Xrites photo checker isn't good for scopes either.

[@Humcrush]

There is no video option from Datacolor.

[@RollinLeonard]

@@Humcrush your complaint about the colors not fitting scopes seems unfair because it wasn't designed for that. like buying shoes and wearing them on your hands and blaming nike for their uncomfortable mittens.

[@jayclips7985]

Can you do a how to video with the items used to create that clapper and xrite combo...

[@elviswilson3397]

GREAT vid Joe. Thanks.

[@storaro69]

I wonder why Da Vinci resolve keeps that color chart in their COLOR MATCH list? Maybe they've found a way to compensate for it in the color match feature? But I agree that maybe doing the matching manually thru the vector would probably lead you to the wrong colors. But just a question on charts if you can also answer this. Isn't the point of using color charts is to align the colors in the vectorscope? How can you tell that it's in the wrong alignment since each camera differs from one another and maybe some are actually really off-target? How did the x-rite align immediately and which camera made it align correctly? I'm sure other cameras would keep the colors slightly off-target right? thanks

[@methodinsurance]

1. Correct, DaVinci's color match is based on the known values published by DataColor. 2. If the chart is known to match the points on the vectorscope, then the combination is your guide to correct for variance in lighting and errors in the camera's "color science." A good technical/corrective LUT or CST (color space transform) will pull colors into alignment AFTER white balance is corrected.

[@storaro69]

@@methodinsurance so does that mean the data color checkr isn’t off target right? Im trying to figure out how this footage was shot and how magically the x-rite was already aligned instantly. I assume the camera was set on a rec709 lut and he used a well calibrated color temp light that matched his camera’s kelvin temperature. But in most cases, i assume different cameras dont still align the vectors-cope properly ( i mean, great if they do). So how do we conclude and say that a certain color checker is good or bad?

[@Humcrush]

1. No. The DataColor SpyderCheckr is "off" from proper vectorscope values. (DaVinci Resolve's color match works because it knows the values, even if they don't match vectorscope values.) 2. Once an image is white balanced, the proper REC709 CST (or LUT) for a given camera will indeed put color values where they should be, and an accurate chart will line-up on the vectorscope. The x-rite does. The DataColor does not. Not with any camera. (I've tested the P4K, 6K, UMP12K, GH4, GH5, Canon R5, Sony A7RIV, Sony A-1.) 3. Even without any shot from any camera, this can be verified. DataColor publishes their patch values. They do NOT match the standard values on a vectorscope. The SpyderCheckr is intended for photography, and for whatever reaon DataColor decided to not match their patches to this common standard. Their patches only match themselves. That's it.

[@storaro69]

@@Humcrush Thank you for this and explaining it clearly. This review is really helpful.

[@charlesoxley7242]

@@Humcrush thank you for that explanation. Would it be fair to say that if you are planning on using the SpyderCheckr in combination with the color match feature of Resolve, then it would give accurate color values (and worth using)?

[@RBFilmsja]

what was the reference for this test?

[@Humcrush]

What do you mean? The "reference", if I understand your questions, is a vectorscope. Those points are a known, fixed standard.

[@RBFilmsja]

Sure the points on the scope are fixed color data points, however, the footage used to generate the “inaccurate” results. How did you acquire that footage?

[@Humcrush]

@@RBFilmsja Daylight balanced LED, manually white balanced to the grey card. btw, this is not just my conclusion. Datacolor says as much themselves...the Spydercheckr chips *do not* match vectorscope reference points, or any other standard reference points. I think it is a very poor decision on their part as they don't make it easy to realize the product isn't appropriate for video, but it is a consistent weakness of the product, not a defect.

[@RBFilmsja]

Interesting, I do see the use different colors in their specs, yet I wouldn't think they wouldn't have them matching with any color space at all. Yet what I was actually asking was if you used a camera to record footage, or a calibration tool for readout, such as their spyder or a Klein for example.

[@Humcrush]

Ah, yeah after discovering the apparent discrepancy I double checked my chart against their published values with an x-rite.

[@АртёмВоробей-ъ9м]

Firstly, the colors should not match the vectoroscope immediately, they need to be adjusted to them by correction to compensate for the lighting and camera settings. And this is only if the colors selected on the checker initially, according to the manufacturer's idea, show exactly the value of the vectoroscope, and not some others. With such a large discrepancy, as shown in the video, it is worth assuming that the missing colors should not be there. Perhaps they initially show other values that do not fit the selected points of the vectorscope. To work with this checker model, you need programs with its color profile that will bring the correction to the reference values. And I'm not sure, but perhaps the colors that are suitable for a regular vectoroscope are on the back of the second card, which is on the gray side in the video. By the way, there is a skinton scale there.

[@lekkerpruven887]

Never heard of them card being wrong for foto application. It's there a difference between foto and video?? That's very odd.

[@cevxj]

Yes, there is.

[@jaybee946]

I beleive you're mistaken as to what's going on here. The product is for photography and those chips are for R, G, B and C, M, Y - NOT a vectorscope. It's useful to point out that it has some limitations for filmmakers, but this isn't a mistake from Datacolor.

[@Thevikingcam]

Oh man, you are right. GD im pist now lol.. our filmscool teacher didnt know that, he stated that we can use it with videocameras too.

[@MarcelloMOV]

I love it all bro. Production, quality, content, your tone.... thank you

[@GadgetInspector]

This is just the video I was looking for. I was actually debating whether I should get the SpyderCheckr 24. I'll spend the extra cash to get it right. Thanks!

[@Brillig2]

Whether the passport is too small really depends on the subject. It's too big for my macro work using the Canon MP-E lens. With that lens, I can get max. 4 colors at a time in the frame using the passport. Do I shoot video with that lens? Not often. I didn't realize this was a video video, though, until I started watching it.

[@arete_]

I am confused. You said the ColorChecker Passport was too small to set the white balance. But later in the video, you said you switched to the ColorChecker Passport Video 😕😵

[@Humcrush]

Not the tiny little Passport, the full sized card: amzn.to/3zHfi21

[@arete_]

​@@Humcrush At 3:04 you said, "I finally switched to X-Rites Color PASSPORT Video". Isn't "passport" the tiny one? All I am trying to figure out is which one has the correct colors. The passport version (MSCCPPVC) or the larger MSCCVPR 😂

[@Humcrush]

@@arete_ Sorry, yes, I prefer the larger one. They both do the same job, it's just very difficult to have the passport lit with your subject and have it be large enough in frame to be useful. But I know others who really like it because it is so small.

[@franksmith7390]

I use the X-rite passport works great

[@MontanaAirGunner]

I nearly choked on my lunch at the end! :D OMG it was a crucial part of the video and I loved it!

[@CreativeCompassPro]

Useful AND hilarious 👏👏👏

[@martinregana5548]

But I think I'm missing something maybe you can help me. If they don't match is because the video wasn't recorder with the acurate colors and that's why you use this, to correct them. Right?

[@FrankGlencairn]

If the patches on the checker would fall onto the right points of the vectorscope, you wouldn't need a color checker in the first place. Your camera would already show the right colors.

[@Humcrush]

??? By that logic there would no point in any reference chart.

[@ministerievancreativiteit2979]

I would think the same. In my opinion you use the chart to match camera’s/colors in post. So if the colors dont match after applying the correction made by for example davinci it would concern me. Otherwise I dont understand the logic.

[@craigrobinson99]

Your political opinions were a disaster in retrospect. “Adult in the White House”.😵‍💫

[@theodxpe9415]

🙏 for the video but I like Tenet tho…

[@victordelacruz8440]

How are you using your spyder cube?

[@methodinsurance]

Whenever I have a new shot, I get a few seconds of the seen with the cube in the lighting. Then in post, I can see what is the true specular highlight (100% white), 90% white, 50% grey and a true black (the hole.) It's great reference for grading a shot.

[@calumandrewmorrell1223]

Dear videographers, buy kit designed for videography and not that which is designed for photography. If you do buy kit designed for something you're not doing, don't blame the company for your error. I just save you four and a half minutes. You're welcome.

[@KenKthulhu]

So what WAS your work-around for the SpyderCheckr? Do you pull those values in yourself and create your own LUTs?

[@Humcrush]

I kept a synthetic image of a vectorscope reading of the actual values as a still. Then I’d put that up side by side in Resolve and match by eye.

[@abereut]

@@Humcrush Dude, nobody's here for you political views. Even your on the topic your point is questionable.. I feel sorry for you :)

[@pashaveres4629]

@@abereut yah, when the video got to that part the thumbs-up was withdrawn. hadn't yet subbed, so that saved me the trouble.

[@asadsbz]

I did watch all of it so, it was useful 🤔 i think.

[@joecal2360]

Hell yeah brother, informative AND entertaining! Keep up the great work!

[@TheIkeRai]

Entertaining AND useful. And entertaining.

[@bnielsen44]

I like your feminist glasses

[@thiagolima2398]

Pleasant video!

[@girafingo9280]

Do you ever use Aces? I find it cleans up a lot of the colour issues in BM cameras.

[@methodinsurance]

No, I don't typically use ACES. I like the idea, but don't think it's ready for prime time yet, and these days I rarely need to match different camera models. 99% of the time when people have color issues with Blackmagic cameras, they are not properly transforming from BM's color space/gamma to their working space. ACES is one way to do that, but there are many others: RCM, the RAW tab, transform node, corrective LUT, etc. All will result in more accurate color than just tweaking by hand.

[@girafingo9280]

@@methodinsurance I think ACES is nearly there - certainly not perfect - if you can get a grip of the LMT neon suppression it's pretty effective I find. It's interesting because it reacts differently to various cameras - but I've always been impressed but how well it works in tandem with BM BRAW cameras.

[@rsmith02]

I'd go with Leeming LUT over ACES unless you are following the exact settings the IDTs are built for.

[@girafingo9280]

@@rsmith02 nah not for me. I never use LUTS.

[@Burritosarebetterthantacos]

The secret is the glasses.

[@fireice2585]

I don't understand your argument. The color checker may not match the vectorscope right out of the box because of the camera sensor reading the color differently. That's why you need a color checker in the first place. What is your proof that the color checker is not accurate?

[@Humcrush]

Put two color charts in a scene. The SpyderCheckr and a known good video chart. White balance. The known good chart will roughly align to the vectorscope, the small differences being the corrections that need to be made to the cameras "color science". The SpyderCheckr image will not align, and if you correct so that it does, the color will be noticeably wrong. My proof is both that...what is easily observable...AND discussions with Datacolor's product manager herself. They have acknowledged that the patches do not align and told me that they are working on a new product that they would make available to me to test. That was almost a year ago.

[@fireice2585]

@@Humcrush This doesn't prove that the color checker is inaccurate, it only means that the spyderchecker is incompatible working with video calibration. I was wrong in my initial comment after I look more into this. The spyderchecker is supposed not to work with video calibration at all because the five patches on the chart use different hue than the standard on the video vectorscope. If you examine the data sheet of x-rite color checker video, which is believed to be following the standard, and compare it to spyderchecker, their hues are different. For example, the standard hue of the yellow patch is 56 degree, while the spyderchecker is 49. And the green patch 102 to 112. So they are supposed not to aligned.

[@Humcrush]

@@fireice2585 That is exactly correct, and exactly what I say in the video. But the chart is still widely used by videographers because this discrepancy is not widely known or very clearly stated without digging. The sad thing is, though, that there is no good reason for those patches to differ, the Spydercheckr is adhering to no common standard. Again, about a year ago Datacolor promised to address this, but to date still has not. In fact, they just released a mini version with the same weakness.

[@fireice2585]

@@Humcrush It's not really their fault when people are misusing their chart. Nowhere in its product description is stating anything about using it for videos. The spyderchecker is equivalent to the x-rite colorchecker photo, which itself doesn't work with video vectorscope either.

[@Humcrush]

@@fireice2585 Nor do they go out of their way to make it clear that it is NOT for video. So take this video as PSA for the many people who've made this mistake. It's interesting that so many people rush to defend Datacolor, when the company has acknowledged the issue. Again, there is no advantage for those patches to NOT match. It's just an oversight.

[@zeusdawg72]

You are using Datecolor Spyder Checkr for Photos, that is why your color Vector don't match. Why don't you try the CORRECT Datacolor Spyder Checkr for Videos. Also you said that you had your Datacolor of years, they recommend that the color cards should be replaced after 3 years to make sure colors are accurate.

[@kilianlehnert2705]

The Spider Checker in the thumbnail of the video is a different one than reviewed in the video. So is this video about all spyder checkers being inaccurate?

[@Humcrush]

Same chart, it's just that the grey chip panel can be flipped for even more colors.

[@GuidoValdata]

I wish... I WISH I watched this video BEFORE buying the spyder checkr. And as you described spent HOURS banging my head against the wall, trying to understand what was wrong... Then I threw it in a drawer and forgot about it. Then today looking for gen4vsgen5 your video passed by. And I wished I saw this video back then. (shame no one seems to get angry enough to make it more public). oh well. Have a good life! Guido

[@Humcrush]

Sorry man. I feel ya, that was me for far too long. Datacolor told me they were going to deal with this and send me something for testing, but they never have.

[@Carrosive]

Thanks - the Donald Trump rant at the end was a bit cringe though

[@Humcrush]

Sadly, I'll probably be driven to do it again.

[@golderone7189]

thanks bro

[@joelstrom7128]

You use it wrong. It works perfect with davinci resolve. ;-) so you were expecting the colors matsch your scope? ;-)

[@pimnauta3840]

If I see his face during the video I just would ignore him with all the nonsense he tells us, so I bought the spyder checker!

[@itsdannyftw]

Very entertaining, great video

[@jamesgjurovich7893]

Do not pick your nose before pressing play

[@thebigmon]

"An adult in the Whitehouse" LOL, that comment aged like milk.

[@Thevikingcam]

Ooo thats the reason we got 2 teams shooting. We got x rite and the others got spyder. It never matced perfectly and they neede to hand match. 😅 damn spyder owes me at least 15K€ Lol

[@alexandrevaliquette1941]

I love your outro!

[@barzinlotfabadi]

>I know you didn't find this video entertaining Ha speak for yourself, your snark is a breath of fresh air on the 'tube.

[@diegomora7608]

The adult in the house thing didn't age well Xd

[@theautomationchannel6920]

It turns entertaining at the end...

[@gedoxey]

I liked your video but drop the politics. I'm am independent. I'm sick of all politicians. Your subscriptions will raise.

[@euTechs]

Haha so good ending!

[@TrapPhoneLoveMelodiesss]

Bruh, I bought this and literally never used it once. 🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️

[@viscerablack]

can someone explain this. why would the colors on one card not work for both photos and video in terms of color correction? are they not interchangeable ? are the swatches different colors on the 24 vs the Xrite video? Is the 24 just wrong for video cc? but works for photo cc? im so confused lol.

[@H0mework]

CMYK vs RGB

[@felixvideoworkshop]

Great video, thank you for the anti-review!

[@instantchiro85]

so good until the political rant at the end. Hows is that adult working out? Shame the video was great and was going to subscribe until the swearing and unnecessary political rant

[@ДенисКузнецов-ж2я]

Don`t panic : )

[@elmafudd9703]

It was all good until the politics started. Such a shame.

[@brandonpierce]

Appreciated color checkr insights… but I don’t watch these videos for preaching. Went from great helpful to annoying real quick.

[@iamkubrick]

Yeah that was childish and completely unnecessary.

[@DeyanIlievDoctora]

political propaganda at the end, such a shame…

[@greigcoetzee]

I've watched a fair number of your impressive, no-bullshit, entertaining and extremely helpful videos. This is the one that finally got me to hit the subscribe button. As someone who grew up in apartheid South Africa and knows the danger of allowing old, white supremacists like Trump to run a country, I am happy to follow anyone who wears his disapproval of Trump on his sleeve even at the risk of pissing off all the Trumpets who may be watching his videos. That and the fact that you clearly know your shit.

[@johannguasch754]

sub'd. informative.

[@JeffBourke]

Knowing this now, it’s ridiculous how many wrong videos there are teaching people how to do it wrong haha. I am with this guy 100%. DO NOT buy Thai chart.

[@cevxj]

But he’s wrong, he’s comparing a photo-to-print color chart with a video chart.

[@gordons.dempseyii1345]

I AM LAUGHING AT YOUR ADULT'S IN THE DC AREA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@fotogfitzfoto412]

I am laughing at you incorrectly creating a plural by using " 's ".

[@jdolci1702]

Wow, very useful, thanks, but could have done without the unnecessary political statement at the end. No matter what a creator's political views are, I don't want or care to hear it, especially when the subject of the video has absolutely nothing to do with it.

[@rexplorer.official]

Unfortunate the end had to get political. Keep that up and you probably won’t reach your sub goal. Rest of the video was great.

[@Humcrush]

If even one person rethought there vote, I'm cool with that. 😉

[@MojoPapiFPV]

Not to mention it doesn't create ICC profiles. Trash.

[@MarylandDroneMedia]

I sure glad Biden is president.

[@jrcwwl]

What the hell does that have to do with a color checker??? Now, we just all know you like an abject failure who now is the sole owner of the catastrophe in Afghanistan and the out of control situation at our southern border, not to mention who is mentally--------gone.

[@charlespokeradventures]

Yeah, it was a great Video till the end. How are the adults in the white house doing for you right now? I wouldn't mix political views in this type of video, just a way to lose a new subscriber. But best luck to you.

[@zardosspinosa6944]

Sadly a provocative video. As I am interested in photo only, I lost the fact that you were referring to video only. I did take note of a comment below by a professional who said the SpyderCheckr was more accurate for photos. And man lose those glasses, I am in the profession and they make you even less believable.

[@Humcrush]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eaCahmSbbtCZhMU

[@screenstory]

Rude, dude.

[@zardosspinosa6944]

Yea, well, I guess the truth can hurt@@screenstory

[@sscm5278]

Not interested in your political views at the end.... first and last time..

[@budapest233]

If you want two countries instead of one, go ahead with this notion. For all the others out there: The only chance coming together lies in the realization that there are common interests, jobs, hobbies, values and so forth on every side. That is something unifying. Seeing someone being interested in the same things as you are, yet being in other areas of life on a completely different train, WILL let you - at least from time to time - 'color check' your own preconceptions... ;) Very useful in life, if you don´t want to get brainwashed and used by opportunistic demagogues (on any side), in my opinion.