Is there a way to dial back the overall effect or do you have to go to the node. Because im needing to do exactly what Jake said and dial all of this down significantly
Hey Jake to answer your issue with 250D vs 200T and why I changes dramatically is because 250D is a Daylight setting and 200T Is tungsten.. so in other words if you film more on the warm side then you pick any stock with the T at the end but if you film more on the daylight temperature side then you pick anything with daylight settings 250D, 50D, etc.. I had that issue when I first started using the plugin and then learned the differences of those film stocks
Thanks! I knew that T and D indicate tungsten vs daylight. I was more talking to the dramatic changes in contrast. I haven’t shot on the stocks so maybe that’s how they actually respond. It’s just weird how less contrasty every other stock is. Even 50D is less contrasty. Other emulations (like film box) don’t have these characteristics.
@@jakebaine yeah that’s very true! I already have a power grade setting with everything dialed in but to your point my first time as well I was like what the hell is this ugly thing damaging my footage
The stocks wouldn't be significantly different if they were shot in the correct environment. Lets assume the T stocks were modelled on tungsten lighting, and the D stocks on daylight. It would make no sense to emulate film stocks that had been shot at the incorrect white balance. The whole point of the Vision 3 range of stocks is that they are interchangeable, and aside from differences in grain size, they should be mostly similar. Any color or contrast differences are purely interpretive, and not scientific.@@jakebaine
@@jakebaineHiya, really enjoyed this video :) Regarding the high contrast of the 250D and less on the 50D, from what I understand, the shooting conditions originally dictated the stock choice, so the 250D was originally used if the shooting conditions / the scene was lit with low contrast (overcast day with very even lighting), whereas the 50D was made for high contrast scenes (think by the seaside on a sunny day). So it makes sense that using 50D in emulation would add less contrast to the image, (since the scene would be high contrast) while selecting 250D would add a lot of contrast (since it’s ment for footage with a low contrast scene with lots of lights, but lit evenly). Dehancer has a post on this in their website, they might have published this after your review. So my guess is: if you have lit a scene like you would for a digital camera, maybe strong keylight and plenty of contrast etc applying the 250D would not be the right choice, since scene is already high contrast. So for film emulation to work properly one has to also «emulate» or recreate the lighting scenarios for when that film would normalt be used, and not just light your scene like you normally would - makes sense?
Great review and I 111% agree. The first time I used Dehancer was like jumping in a cold pool for the first time. But once your body adjusts it's nice. All well-said. Great plugin once you understand it. The price tag made me wince as well.
I just uploaded my Dehancer review, really wish I'd watched this before shooting it haha! Agree with everything you say, sometimes you get used to the dehancer image and then when you turn it off and realise just how strong the effect is and that perhaps you need to dial it back haha
IT'S SO STRONG! I also found that I had to spend A LOT of time compensating for Dehancer crushing the dynamic range and contrast. I thought I was doing something wrong... There's no way you can get nice film-like HDR footage using Dehancer. That, or it takes A LOT of work... any advice on using Dehancer staying and exporting HDR files? I also noticed the general green casting. I really wish Dehancer had a "preset" workflow built-in so we could all share and load each other's presets. Silly question... Where can I get the full manual? 😅😅
This is 6 months old now so maybe you've figured this out or tried it, one thing to try if you aren't familiar with that DaVinci Wide Gamut is you most likely need to convert your camera INTO DWG with Color Space Transform. It didn't look like you had a node that comes before dehancer. Make a node before Dehancer and put CST on it. Then choose your input camera color and gamma and OUTPUT Color and Gamma in DWG. Then in the Dehancer node choose DWG and see what happens.
Great video! I have found Dehancer Pro to be an invaluable tool that I couldn't live without now. While I agree with the overwhelming force of the default settings, I have found it easy enough to dial in a stock/print and save it out to a simple powergrade that I can use as my own default starting point. It's a bit of extra elbow grease but I really, REALLY like to have all of that flexibility to tune a grade based on my own style or preference. Just my $0.02. :)
This is $$$$$$$, solid review. With my super 8 though I will get insane green or purple color cast depending on the light and film stock. I think that green you're talking about is fairly normal. Also I get insanely crunchy shots with he super 8 so like you said, they shoot themselves in the foot by going too far with the accuracy maybe...? Looking forward to diving in to it more once I finish this massive documentary I'm making right now. Looking forward to seeing more reviews though!
Great review! 🙌🏻💯I find myself most of the time pushing back the contrast and the strength as well. But I‘m using Dehancer for a while now and wondering, why nobody talks about the performance of the plugin. I am using it with Premiere on my Mac Studio and adding Dehancer on Raw Footage (I tested it with Canon Raw and Red Raw) easily multiplys the exporting time by 20. Not a chance to get a smooth playback. The only workaround is to export the final Video quickly in Prores and adding Dehancer. But this extra step sucks. So the question is: Does it work better with Davinci or is it slow as well? 🐌 😅
RAW already requires a lot of processing power and adding Dehancer to it will make it even slower. Even Resolve’s built in grain plugin will slow down playback. You should edit in 1080p to smooth playback while using Dehancer and then switch to 4K for final export.
I didn’t shoot those, I was 1st AC, editor and colorist on that project. That was from the DP Evan Burns. He shot on some vintage Mamiya glass with an Aiviascope 1.7x anamorphic adapter.
Dude. The difference between 250D and 200T is the white balance. D is for daylight balance at 5000 and T is tungsten. Read the Kodak manual on the film stock on the Kodak website. Otherwise great video.
I understand that. I was talking about the difference in black level and contrast. The contrast and black level between 250D and 200T is massive. Not talking about color or balance.
Cool one and exactly my thoughts... I find myself having to dial back and fiddle too much.. although I do eventually get something "cool", it takes more time than needed. and WAY cheaper than Video FIlmbox's option which is ridiculously too expensive...
Sorry i have a question, what is the right way to use the WB on the original shot, for example if i want to use the kodak 500t that is originally a 3200 film, does my clip need to be 3200? Or it need to be neutral with the right wb and then the lut will make te look?
During the film days, cameras didn’t have white balance. You just purchased the stock of film that was balanced for the lighting of your film. So because your camera does have white balance, it doesn’t matter which stock you choose. You just choose the one you think looks best. There is no correct or incorrect way.
I’m aware of that. I was more commenting on the dramatic contrast difference between 250D and 200T. I know the colors shift as the stock is balanced for different light temp but the dramatic change in contrast seems unusual.
@@jakebaineAccording to dehancer themselves the T200 is a film for low contrast scenes/lighting with yellowish colored light, while the 250D is a film for *very* low contrast scenes with more of an overcast type light, the difference in contrast between them is probably a result of the difference between low light and *very* low light - it would be *really* interesting to see a followup video on this, replicating some of the proposed scenarios from dehancer (low contrast scenes) to see how your feelings towards the percieved extreme settings/results :) They even advice people who have shot high contrast brightly lit scenes to reduce the contrast in the original shots before applying film profile in one of their articles for the 350D :)
250D and 200 T are meant to be wildly different. You gotta know what those filmstocks do. D and T are different. Dehancer is not Filmbox where you slab it on and expect it to work. I give you that.
From all of the real film stock comparisons I’ve seen, there is not a massive contrast difference between 250D and 200T in real film compared to what dehancer does.
Jake, thanks for your feedback! We really appreciate it 😃
Is there a way to dial back the overall effect or do you have to go to the node. Because im needing to do exactly what Jake said and dial all of this down significantly
@@craigkeyintel Hi! You can try using Output or Total Impact
@@craigkeyintel you can try using the 'Total Impact' button in the plugin.
Literally the most honest and genuine Dehancer review on RUclips.
Hey Jake to answer your issue with 250D vs 200T and why I changes dramatically is because 250D is a Daylight setting and 200T Is tungsten.. so in other words if you film more on the warm side then you pick any stock with the T at the end but if you film more on the daylight temperature side then you pick anything with daylight settings 250D, 50D, etc.. I had that issue when I first started using the plugin and then learned the differences of those film stocks
Thanks! I knew that T and D indicate tungsten vs daylight. I was more talking to the dramatic changes in contrast.
I haven’t shot on the stocks so maybe that’s how they actually respond. It’s just weird how less contrasty every other stock is. Even 50D is less contrasty. Other emulations (like film box) don’t have these characteristics.
@@jakebaine yeah that’s very true! I already have a power grade setting with everything dialed in but to your point my first time as well I was like what the hell is this ugly thing damaging my footage
The stocks wouldn't be significantly different if they were shot in the correct environment. Lets assume the T stocks were modelled on tungsten lighting, and the D stocks on daylight. It would make no sense to emulate film stocks that had been shot at the incorrect white balance.
The whole point of the Vision 3 range of stocks is that they are interchangeable, and aside from differences in grain size, they should be mostly similar.
Any color or contrast differences are purely interpretive, and not scientific.@@jakebaine
@@jakebaineHiya, really enjoyed this video :) Regarding the high contrast of the 250D and less on the 50D, from what I understand, the shooting conditions originally dictated the stock choice, so the 250D was originally used if the shooting conditions / the scene was lit with low contrast (overcast day with very even lighting), whereas the 50D was made for high contrast scenes (think by the seaside on a sunny day).
So it makes sense that using 50D in emulation would add less contrast to the image, (since the scene would be high contrast) while selecting 250D would add a lot of contrast (since it’s ment for footage with a low contrast scene with lots of lights, but lit evenly).
Dehancer has a post on this in their website, they might have published this after your review.
So my guess is: if you have lit a scene like you would for a digital camera, maybe strong keylight and plenty of contrast etc applying the 250D would not be the right choice, since scene is already high contrast.
So for film emulation to work properly one has to also «emulate» or recreate the lighting scenarios for when that film would normalt be used, and not just light your scene like you normally would - makes sense?
Great review and I 111% agree. The first time I used Dehancer was like jumping in a cold pool for the first time. But once your body adjusts it's nice. All well-said.
Great plugin once you understand it. The price tag made me wince as well.
love the mood of the video
Man. Love the honesty!
The “ I’m retarded ? “ really caught me off guard 😂😂😂😂😂
Thanks for the review , I will buy it asap
02:00 how do you get the scope so big?
The shot with the green tint that you didn't like looked the most filmic to me. Looked like a still from a blockbuster.
I Highly recommend to use a first node with color space transform to take out the log space you are using and then set the Dehancer at rec709
Nice review, Jake.
I just uploaded my Dehancer review, really wish I'd watched this before shooting it haha! Agree with everything you say, sometimes you get used to the dehancer image and then when you turn it off and realise just how strong the effect is and that perhaps you need to dial it back haha
Bravo, amazing review!
Thanks!
IT'S SO STRONG! I also found that I had to spend A LOT of time compensating for Dehancer crushing the dynamic range and contrast. I thought I was doing something wrong...
There's no way you can get nice film-like HDR footage using Dehancer. That, or it takes A LOT of work... any advice on using Dehancer staying and exporting HDR files?
I also noticed the general green casting.
I really wish Dehancer had a "preset" workflow built-in so we could all share and load each other's presets.
Silly question... Where can I get the full manual? 😅😅
This is 6 months old now so maybe you've figured this out or tried it, one thing to try if you aren't familiar with that DaVinci Wide Gamut is you most likely need to convert your camera INTO DWG with Color Space Transform. It didn't look like you had a node that comes before dehancer.
Make a node before Dehancer and put CST on it. Then choose your input camera color and gamma and OUTPUT Color and Gamma in DWG. Then in the Dehancer node choose DWG and see what happens.
Yup, I'm aware! I do this in my pre-group nodes so thats why you didn't see it.
Great video! I have found Dehancer Pro to be an invaluable tool that I couldn't live without now. While I agree with the overwhelming force of the default settings, I have found it easy enough to dial in a stock/print and save it out to a simple powergrade that I can use as my own default starting point. It's a bit of extra elbow grease but I really, REALLY like to have all of that flexibility to tune a grade based on my own style or preference. Just my $0.02. :)
Do you have any experience with Filmbox?
I do! I enjoy filmbox. I like the strength options. I had a portion about filmbox in my review but ended up cutting it for time.
Do you find it better than Dehancer?
This is $$$$$$$, solid review.
With my super 8 though I will get insane green or purple color cast depending on the light and film stock. I think that green you're talking about is fairly normal. Also I get insanely crunchy shots with he super 8 so like you said, they shoot themselves in the foot by going too far with the accuracy maybe...? Looking forward to diving in to it more once I finish this massive documentary I'm making right now.
Looking forward to seeing more reviews though!
This is good to know!!
Thank you!
Appreciate the honesty.
Hey thanks for the video. I’m new to color grading-just beginning to learn. What other tools are worth looking at?
I recommend learning Resolve. Cullen Kelly is a great place to start, he has incredible content.
If you dont mind me asking, what font was used in this video mate? It looks amazing!
MADE Mellow!
Great review! 🙌🏻💯I find myself most of the time pushing back the contrast and the strength as well.
But I‘m using Dehancer for a while now and wondering, why nobody talks about the performance of the plugin. I am using it with Premiere on my Mac Studio and adding Dehancer on Raw Footage (I tested it with Canon Raw and Red Raw) easily multiplys the exporting time by 20. Not a chance to get a smooth playback.
The only workaround is to export the final Video quickly in Prores and adding Dehancer. But this extra step sucks.
So the question is: Does it work better with Davinci or is it slow as well? 🐌 😅
RAW already requires a lot of processing power and adding Dehancer to it will make it even slower.
Even Resolve’s built in grain plugin will slow down playback. You should edit in 1080p to smooth playback while using Dehancer and then switch to 4K for final export.
What lenses did you shoot the running footage on? Anamorphics I assume?
I didn’t shoot those, I was 1st AC, editor and colorist on that project. That was from the DP Evan Burns.
He shot on some vintage Mamiya glass with an Aiviascope 1.7x anamorphic adapter.
is this LUT?
Great review!
Dude. The difference between 250D and 200T is the white balance. D is for daylight balance at 5000 and T is tungsten. Read the Kodak manual on the film stock on the Kodak website. Otherwise great video.
I understand that. I was talking about the difference in black level and contrast. The contrast and black level between 250D and 200T is massive. Not talking about color or balance.
@@jakebaine ahh got it. Cool.
First person to call it like it is.
This guy knows his stuff
Cool one and exactly my thoughts... I find myself having to dial back and fiddle too much.. although I do eventually get something "cool", it takes more time than needed. and WAY cheaper than Video FIlmbox's option which is ridiculously too expensive...
The best review thus far. Another con is thst it's very heavy on your system. Or on mine at least 🙂
Subscribed! Good video
Sorry i have a question, what is the right way to use the WB on the original shot, for example if i want to use the kodak 500t that is originally a 3200 film, does my clip need to be 3200? Or it need to be neutral with the right wb and then the lut will make te look?
During the film days, cameras didn’t have white balance. You just purchased the stock of film that was balanced for the lighting of your film.
So because your camera does have white balance, it doesn’t matter which stock you choose. You just choose the one you think looks best. There is no correct or incorrect way.
Shift+F while color grading
Damn why almost all pros are using Davinci Resolve right now?
damnn i have invested alot in learning Premier
You can still use premier.
T = Tungsten - switch your WB to 3200. D= Daylight - switch your WB to 5500-5600
I’m aware of that. I was more commenting on the dramatic contrast difference between 250D and 200T. I know the colors shift as the stock is balanced for different light temp but the dramatic change in contrast seems unusual.
@@jakebaineAccording to dehancer themselves the T200 is a film for low contrast scenes/lighting with yellowish colored light, while the 250D is a film for *very* low contrast scenes with more of an overcast type light, the difference in contrast between them is probably a result of the difference between low light and *very* low light - it would be *really* interesting to see a followup video on this, replicating some of the proposed scenarios from dehancer (low contrast scenes) to see how your feelings towards the percieved extreme settings/results :)
They even advice people who have shot high contrast brightly lit scenes to reduce the contrast in the original shots before applying film profile in one of their articles for the 350D :)
I got an email from them too!
😂😂😂 100% my views on Dehancer. They should simplify it.
but what did you do to color grade this video?
Liking for the F bombs. Authenticity in a review. 🙂
You can attach that to your shirt.
250D and 200 T are meant to be wildly different. You gotta know what those filmstocks do. D and T are different. Dehancer is not Filmbox where you slab it on and expect it to work. I give you that.
From all of the real film stock comparisons I’ve seen, there is not a massive contrast difference between 250D and 200T in real film compared to what dehancer does.
while it's a good review I don't think it's the most accurate one. You need to have some film experience to say some statements
I would love to work with film one day.
Speaking in wireless mic + sponsored review + color grading of your own video => bye bye.
Thanks for visiting!