Data Levels: Full or Video?

I notice that when rendering a graded video (ProRes) from Davinci as a ProRes Quicktime file, it appears flatter, with less contrast in a media player like Quicktime Player or VLC, than it does in Davinci’s viewer (I am not using a reference monitor, just a standard Mac laptop).

The solution I found was to set Data Levels: Full (rather than Video or Auto) in the Deliver page’s Advanced Settings. The output video played on VLC or Quicktime Player then matches what I see in Davinci.

Should I therefore set Data Levels: Full if intending the output to go to Youtube? If I intend to deliver for HDTV broadcast, should I always set this to Video?

I am not sure what Video does and how it is treated by a HDTV broadcaster, but has something to do with broadcast safe levels.

Don't do it, specially not for ProRes as there is nothing within file itself to tell other app it's full range (DNxHR has special flag which states limited vs full range).
Never do it for broadcast for sure.
You preview problems are not really related to data levels. It's more complex.
Conclusion is- always export ProRes with limited levels (unless you are doing it for controlled environment and there is some special need for full range).

If it does look wrong, there might be other issues like wrong monitoring settings

FWIW, I raised this issue before as many others have. Why does a Resolve video look different in VLC and Quicktime Player than it does even on a well calibrated grading monitor like an FSI?

The answer that I found after conferring with many of the top dogs is that there is no answer, different players will interpret colors and levels differently, and so will streaming services. Making things even more complicated since about two years ago is the so-called Night Shift mode available on many computers which will change the color temperature of a monitor depending on the time of day (it's only a matter of time before this comes to TV's as well).

Changing the range from Video to Full is the wrong approach. The best thing that you can do is to grade on a high quality calibrated grading monitor so that you can have the peace of mind of knowing that what you're seeing is the closest thing to the actual true image of the footage you're working with. You might need to explain that to your clients as well (which is the most difficult part, especially when they're not available to be present in your grading suite with you).

Read this:

https://jonnyelwyn.co.uk/film-and-video ... o-editors/

It's bit complex (or not) and it's not directly Resolve fault.
On Mac latest Resolve looks the same as QT X but it doesn't mean it's all good.

Answer is- OSes colro engine are either poor or not up to date with current standards. There are also issue with player where in most cases there is no such a thing like color managed preview. In all this wild world OSX is closest to be correct, it just needs to be updated to meet current and commonly used standard.

Repeating 10th time: QT X uses 1.96 gamma for processing Rec.709 flagged files when converting data to monitor profile for final preview. It has no chance to be correct as not a single file is graded with 1.96 gamma, but either 2.2 or 2.4. Simple as this. If you calibrate Mac screen to 2.4 gamma and manually tag file as Rec,709, but add additional gamma tag set to 2.4 it should be at least close to external calibrated preview.

BM done some tweaks in latest Resolve so its preview will match QT X (but only for 2.4 gamma based projects), but for me this is just a "hack", not a real solution. Proper fix needs to come from Apple+BM+ other company (eg browser developers/Nvidia etc) so we can have at leats industry recognisable and properly processed chain for Rec.709 with 2.4 gamma (properly called BT.18186!), HDR10 and HLG (not even asking for more).

The link has some good info but also some fundamentally incorrect statements.

I am aware that different media players produce different looking results. Regardless, there is a substantial improvement if I set Data Levels: Full. This adds contrast. The output looks much closer to what you see in Davinci on all the players I have tested.

Surely if the video looks flat on an ordinary computer monitor if you set Data Levels: Video, it makes sense to set it to Full if it matches what you see in Davinci better as this is the way others browsing the Internet will see it? I am producing the video for Youtube, not for a client who will use it on Broadcast TV.

I have also seen an older tutorial from one of the instructors who made the recent "DaVinci Resolve 15 - The Art of Color Grading" tutorial for BlackMagic's site, in which she also advised you can change this mode to what looks best, at least for Youtube.

Just don't do it.
It just looks better by coincidence, but you are actually not fixing anything. Your hack is only making things worse and out of common specs (outside of pleasing your eyes).

It's like trying to fix broken water pipe by turning off light

I think you're methodology needs correction.

Ideally, should should take variables like media players, GPU driver and the Operating System out of the signal chain.

It's a seemingly single thing, but it's easy to get confused. Your desktop playback is showing you levels incorrectly. Yes, you can make it look good if you make the levels in your file incorrect. But then this same file would look wrong elsewhere like YouTube, broadcast, etc.

The way you can know if you're doing it right is simple. Export a file and bring it back to Resolve. If it matches the timeline you're good. And if you really want to see it correctly on the desktop buy a Telestream Switch player, or even the free version will do.

Taking all your advice, I will leave Data Levels at Auto (Video).

I find that VLC player seems to give a less flat look than Quicktime Player. Even so, a rendered video has less contrast and saturation than is seen in Davinci’s viewer.

Would a better method be to add an “output node” just before rendering to compensate for this and add some contrast and saturation?

On Pc use gamma 2.2 (and only 2.2) and most player should match Resolve properly.
I don't see any problem- most players will do it fine.
You have many good players on PC, so simply forget about QT (it was always wrong).

@Andrew Kolakowski

Regarding gamma 2.2, do you mean I should set the Project Settings-Color Management-Timeline Color Space: Rec.709 Gamma 2.2, or sRGB, rather than default Rec.709 Gamma 2.4 if outputing for the Internet and computer monitors, rather than for HDTV broadcast?

This is a comparison I did a little while ago. It helps to show the differences.

@Andrew Kolakowski

Regarding gamma 2.2, do you mean I should set the Project Settings-Color Management-Timeline Color Space: Rec.709 Gamma 2.2, or sRGB, rather than default Rec.709 Gamma 2.4 if outputing for the Internet and computer monitors, rather than for HDTV broadcast?

Yes. On PC it will give you in most cases same look as in Resolve viewer (on Mac it won't as QT X will use 1.96 gamma for converting video to screen profile).

The other thing to try is to disable "Use Mac Color Profiles For Viewers" and tell us how you think that compares to VLC/Quicktime etc?

You definitely don't want to do it if you have new wide gamut screen.

You definitely don't want to do it if you have new wide gamut screen.

LOL. The antecedent is unclear.
You're suggesting "...definitely don't want to do" *what*, Andrew?

Sent from my P00I using Tapatalk

Hi,
I recently noticed that after uploading the videos to YouTube, the data levels on YouTube's side are wrong.
I attached a screenshot from my computer monitor. And the lower part of the image is simply clipped. But in Davinci there is some information visible.
What makes me more confused is that it looks wrong on my PC, notebook, iPhone SE, but on my wife's iPhone 7 it looks as it should.
What makes me confused as well is that my workflow is exactly the same as cca year ago and these videos looks fine on YouTube. I use data leves on export Auto.
BTW I did some testing - export Auto, Video, Full...and YouTube always crushes the the black.
Please has anyone notices similar behaviour?
Thanks a lot for any suggestions.

You definitely don't want to do it if you have new wide gamut screen.

LOL. The antecedent is unclear.
You're suggesting "...definitely don't want to do" *what*, Andrew?

The other thing to try is to disable "Use Mac Color Profiles For Viewers" and tell us how you think that compares to VLC/Quicktime etc?

This.
It should be enabled.

I also noticed different behaviour no different platforms - on the left is 3D animation for the client uploaded to YouTube, on the right to Facebook. Facebook has the data levels correct (this is how it looks like in Davinci on the same screen).