Help! Video Village Scatter

I’ve purchased a subscription to Scatter to find out how it compares to using physical filters. The user guide is bare bones. YouTube videos are vague about where Scatter fits in one’s workflow. Meanwhile, I’m wading my way through Ripple Training on Resolve because my experience with Resolve is very limited. This is good, because I want to learn more about Resolve anyway.

I’ll be obliged if someone can tell me the Scatter steps. As best I can determine, Scatter effects should be applied to the log image before doing anything else. I’ve managed to get that far. How do I make an initial assessment of the impact? Move to a Rec. 709 image? Do people go back and forth between log and Rec. 709 until they’re happy, and assess again after colour correction and grading? Or am I way off-base aka scatter-brained?

Yes, I’m asking a really basic question. Look at it this way. People who know the answer will get a chuckle and won’t have to spend a lot of time explaining

Thanks

Are you talking about Third Party OpenFX plug in for simulating lens diffusion? If you are. A word of advice, include the information about it so people who never used it, never heard about it or need it, actually can understand what you are talking about. "scatter" with no qualifiers is meaningless.

https://videovillage.com/scatter/

I haven't used the plug in or have it, so I can't speak from personal expriance, but seems pretty straightforward according to its own manual. As it says:

"The Scatter OFX node operates on ungraded footage from a supported camera in its native log colorspace or an intermediate space, and will output a processed image in that same colorspace.

Scatter is physically-based - we’ve calibrated the falloff and intensity of the diffusion for the quantities of light that the scene-referred image represents.

Grading after the Scatter node is analogous to working with footage shot with diffusion burned-in on set. Grading before the Scatter node is analogous to changing the light on set before scattering it through the diffusion filter.

If accuracy is important, only scene-referred operations should be performed before the Diffusion node. Exposure and color balance operations should be done linearly (gain in scene-linear, offset in ACEScc, or using Resolve’s colorspace-aware HDR Global controls.) Operations like contrast adjustment and tone-mapping before the Scatter node may produce results that are not analogous to real-world physically-based diffusion. But if you like what you see - go for it."

sshot-1414.jpg (122.88 KiB) Viewed 821 times

https://videovillage.com/images/scatter ... 0Guide.pdf

...................................

If you are confused with some of the terminology, resolve manual has info to check out.

In the refernce manual, which you can acess via help menu there is a section: Setup and Workflows | Chapter 9 Data Levels, Color Management, and ACES page 219 from which I quote:

Display Referred vs. Scene Referred Color Management

"The default DaVinci YRGB color science setting, which is what DaVinci Resolve has always used, relies on what is called “Display Referred” color management. This means that Resolve has no information about how the source media used in the Timeline is supposed to look; you can only judge color accuracy via the calibrated broadcast display you’re outputting to. Essentially, you are the color management, in conjunction with a trustworthy broadcast display that’s been calibrated to ensure accuracy.

DaVinci Resolve 12 introduced a color science option called “DaVinci YRGB Color Managed,” or more simply “Resolve Color Management” (RCM). This introduced a so-called “Scene Referred” color management scheme, in which you have the option of matching each type of media you’ve imported into your project with a color profile that informs DaVinci Resolve how to represent each specific color from each clip’s native color space within the common working color space of the timeline in which you’re editing, grading, and finishing.

This is important, because two clips that contain the same RGB value for a given pixel may in actuality be representing different colors at that pixel, depending on the color space that was originally associated with each captured clip. This is the case when you compare raw clips shot with different cameras made by different manufacturers, and it’s especially true if you compare clips recorded using the differing log-encoded color spaces that are unique to each camera.

This Scene Referred component of color management via RCM doesn’t do your grading for you, but it does try to ensure that the color and contrast from each different media format you’ve imported into your project are represented accurately in your timeline. For example, if you use two different manufacturer’s cameras to shoot green trees, recording Blackmagic Film color space on one, and recording to the Sony SGamut3.Cine/SLog3 color space on the other, you can now use RCM to make sure that the green of the trees in one set of clips match the green of the trees in the other, within the shared color space of the Timeline.

It should be mentioned that this sort of thing can also be done manually in a more conventional Display Referred workflow, by assigning LUTs that are specific to each type of media, or using Color Space Transform Resolve FX in order to transform each clip from the source color space to the destination color space that you require. However, RCM’s automation can make this process faster by freeing you from the need to locate and maintain a large number of LUTs to accommodate your various workflows. Also, the matrix math used by RCM (as well as the Color Space Transform operation) extracts high-precision, wide-latitude image data from each supported camera format, preserving high-quality image data from acquisition, through editing, color grading, and output. These are all advantages when compared to lookup tables, which can have plenty of precision, but can clip out-of- bounds image data and introduce issues when differing lookup table interpolation methods cause minor inconsistencies with color space transformations from application to application.

The preservation of wide-latitude image data deserves elaboration. LUTs clip image detail that goes outside of the numeric range they’re designed to handle, so this often requires the colorist to make a pre-LUT adjustment to “pull back” image data in the highlights that you want to retrieve. Using RCM eliminates this two-step process, since the input color space matrix operations used to transform the source preserves all wide-latitude image data, making highlights easily retrievable without any extra steps.

Updated RCM In DaVinci Resolve 17

In version 17, DaVinci Resolve introduced the biggest improvements to Resolve Color Management (RCM) since it was originally introduced, adding numerous features to simplify setup, improve image quality, and make the “feel” of your grading controls more consistent. Specific improvements include improved metadata management for incoming media files that support color metadata, a new wide gamut color space suitable for using as your default Timeline working color space for any program, a new Input Tone Mapping option (Input DRT) that makes it easier to mix media formats for SDR and HDR grading, improved Timeline to Output Tone Mapping (Output DRT) that offers improved shadow and highlight handling, and select color space-aware grading palettes that make controls feel and perform well no matter what you’re grading.

This updated Resolve Color Management has the same name as the previous version. However, older projects using the previous version of RCM will have Color science set to Legacy, to preserve the older color management settings and color transformations effect on your work. For more information on how the previous generation of RCM works, see the September 2020 version of the DaVinci Resolve 16 Manual.

How Is DaVinci Resolve Color Management Different from ACES?

This is a common question, but the answer is pretty simple. Resolve Color Management (RCM) and ACES are both Scene Referred color management schemes designed to solve the same problem. However, if you’re not in a specific ACES-driven cinema workflow, DaVinci Resolve Color Management can be simpler to use, and will give you all of the benefits of color management, while approximating the “feel” that the DaVinci Resolve Color page controls have always had."

....................

I’ll be obliged if someone can tell me the Scatter steps. As best I can determine, Scatter effects should be applied to the log image before doing anything else. I’ve managed to get that far. How do I make an initial assessment of the impact? Move to a Rec. 709 image? Do people go back and forth between log and Rec. 709 until they’re happy, and assess again after colour correction and grading? Or am I way off-base aka scatter-brained?

Perhaps this will give you a clue.... if you are doing it manually, using: DaVinci YRGB and using CST (Color Space Transform tools) Where this plug in goes is shown in the manual for the plug in.

Juan Melara - Insider Knowledge - An easier way to grade log footage

If you are using automatic color management by resolve DaVinci YRGB Color Managed than much of the process is done by resolve. Somewhat simplifying the process. It depends on with what you are comfortable with and how much control you want over the process. The more automatic it is the easier it is but also somewhat less controllable which does not mean you get worse results, it is still a process of the colorist to do what is needed, its just a good way for resolve to assist you.

Setup and Workflows | Chapter 9 Data Levels, Color Management, and ACES page 221

You can find more information on specifics and recommendations there. If you search for "resolve color management" on YouTube you will see various people offering their best advice and tutorials. But its an on going process since there is no one method that fits all situations and all people. What matters is that output is relative to the input and you want to deliver best results in the end. A process to get there can be varied.

Are you talking about Third Party OpenFX plug in for simulating lens diffusion? If you are. A word of advice, include the information about it so people who never used it, never heard about it or need it, actually can understand what you are talking about. "scatter" with no qualifiers is meaningless.

My title says "Video Village Scatter”.

Thanks for the input. As my post says, I’ve read the Video Village material repeated in your post. With luck, someone who uses Scatter will comment.

Are you talking about Third Party OpenFX plug in for simulating lens diffusion? If you are. A word of advice, include the information about it so people who never used it, never heard about it or need it, actually can understand what you are talking about. "scatter" with no qualifiers is meaningless.

My title says "Video Village Scatter”.

Thanks for the input.

Yeah, but its not like you are describing Mona Lisa and everyone knows its a painting. I've not heard of Video Village Scatter. Had to search for it. Adding a short info about what it is, for example that its a plug in for resolve and what it does, would be more considerate. Maybe next time.

My title says "Video Village Scatter”.

I thought that meant someone on set farted and the folks watching the monitors got the hell out of there.

I had no idea it was a plug-in.

I was addressing my post to people who use Scatter, not people who have never heard of it Also, I was kind of assuming that my post might get a response from someone who has a sense of humour.

Any chance of leaving this thread to people who know what Video Village and their products Filmbox and Scatter are? It’s not like they’re a secret.

Excuses, excuses. This is "video village" by the way. Minus the scatter.

Video-villagers-1-763183708.jpg (302.46 KiB) Viewed 761 times

Scatter: Physically accurate diffusion. Totally virtual.

Scatter is designed to emulate the effect of real optical diffusion filters, providing accurate, consistent, and controllable diffusion right in DaVinci Resolve.

See. Not difficult at all.

Could you please stop hijacking this thread. You don’t know anything about Video Village as a maker of effects software or about its rather well-known products. Do you have nothing better to do than post on a company and software that you don’t know anything about? Do you mind getting out of the way for people who do know?

I usually work with Color science in the project preferences set to "DaVinci YRGB", meaning I need to add a Color Space Transform on one of the last nodes in the node chain on the Color page to move the image to Rec.709.

So at the very least:

• Early in the node chain, add Scatter
• Add one or more nodes for grading
• In one of the last nodes, move to Rec.709 with a Color Space Transform (or if you prefer, use Film Look Creator/Filmbox/Dehancer/FilmConvert/a LUT)

Do people go back and forth between log and Rec. 709 until they’re happy, and assess again after colour correction and grading?

No need to go back and forth. You're not supposed to be viewing the image as log. It's just that the input to the node with Scatter in it has to be in log.

Thanks very much Roger. That’s exactly what I needed to know. Have a good weekend.

Roger is right, and those filters are really good (my example below is a bit too strong, usually 1/4 would be enough).
BTW, the same approach applies to the "Nitrate" version of FilmConvert, it also expects a log input, but you can use it in other places of your chain. They have a new filter, called Hazy, which should do similar things like Scatter. I have not compared it yet, but it's cheaper and not a subscription.
And then, I think Kruno went to quite some extent trying to help, looking up the subject and checking the manual. IMHO, it explains what Scatter does, even with that image pipeline. No need to bash him, in a headline it's not clear if you just use capital letters like in a title of for names.

Scatter.jpg (661.53 KiB) Viewed 624 times

The Scatter diffusion manual is available for free as a download here:

https://videovillage.com/images/scatter ... 0Guide.pdf

I have generally used Scatter late in my node tree and after contrast adjustments, but before windows and so on. You have to be careful not to use it after (say) Letterbox blanking, or else it'll tend to blur the black edge. In a few cases, I've had to window the scatter glow to confine it to just the area I want. A little goes a long way.

For me, the user controls are a bit simple and limiting:



I wish they had a Global Blend control at the bottom to "dial back" the effect, but you can still do this if you drop in a Key and use Key Output to reduce it.

There are several competitors to Scatter that have been shown or announced. "Hazy" from FilmConvert is cheap ($99), maybe not quite as good as Scatter, but still effective and a relative bargain.

You have to be careful not to use it after (say) Letterbox blanking, or else it'll tend to blur the black edge. In a few cases, I've had to window the scatter glow to confine it to just the area I want.

Thanks, Marc, an important point. It's a strength and a possible issue in one. If you use Scatter on a picture that extends beyond the frame (think re-framing), you can get some influence from the outside area like on a real camera filter. But with blanking, it'll become a problem. In my example, which had a different framing originally, we can see some blueish glow in the upper right corner from the evening sky. I set it too strong for demonstration purposes, you are so right about subtlety.

Thanks Marc. Also very helpful.

On Film Convert... I considered it and decided that Scatter made more sense for me. Outside of Film Convert’s current sale, Film Convert core costs US$150. Hazy and Halation are extra. If bought as plugins without core, Hazy and Halation cost $130 each, and they’re Film Convert’s own recipes. They do not emulate specific filters. That means that Film Convert’s Hazy and Halation will tell me nothing about physical diffusion filters. I decided to go with Scatter for a year.

That's not exactly correct. Hazy is independent of FilmConvert and just 99 (was cheaper during BF).
It has some defined filters, like Black Pro Mist, and filter strengths in the usual notation as fractions. Unfortunately, it also doesn't have a general blend slider.
As I already noted, I didn't make any comparisons to Scatter yet.

Uli,

Film Convert’s website says in plain English that the $99 price each for Hazy and Halation is a sale price. If they didn’t mean to say that, cool. In any event, as I said, I wanted the emulations.

In this thread, I asked a simple question, complete with some self-deprecating humour, and as hoped have received some clear, straightforward, to the point replies. I’m happy with the decision that I made to subscribe to Scatter, and I’m grateful to Roger and Marc. I’m not here to turn what should be a short thread into a marathon

Have a good Christmas

fc.jpg (152.25 KiB) Viewed 578 times

I admit it's quite confusing, since during BF they had a discount and wrote it would go back to a regular price of 99. Now they have the typical "Up to 30%" marketing bait, without showing where applies which percentage, if any.

Have a good Christmas

You too.

P.S. Meanwhile they clarified things. No sale for Hazy, it's regular. So, to others reading this thread and asking themselves what to buy, take your time to test the watermarked demo, which has no time limit.