Meeting Summaries 

ACES Output Transforms VWG 

← Use sidebar to navigate to a particular meeting.
Use Cmd+F or Ctrl+F to search this page.

Meeting #54, May 18th, 1pm PT


Alex Fry
Nick Shaw
Scott Dyer

Rémi Achard
Lars Borg
Daniel Brylka
Alex Forsythe
Michael Parsons
Joshua Pines

Meeting Notes

  • Alex Fry: Kevin is away this week. Nick has some changes to the survey form. I have a cutdown set of images proposed for the test group. And we need to come up with a list of names for our pilot phase. The candidates repo with the transforms for Resolve, Baselight and OCIO is currently still in my GitHub, but we'll move it to an AMPAS one soon. The ACES_ODT_SampleFrames repo contains 1080 AP0 EXRs of 77 selected frames, as well as AVIF versions and the GitHub Pages with comparisons. We picked what we thought was a range of varied representative images, and some of the gamut mapping problem images. Anything anybody thinks we've missed?
  • Nick Shaw: I've made changes based on last weeks discussion. A notice about collecting but not publishing emails. The questions on your setup are required questions. I got different info on viewing conditions – ST 2080-3:2017 say 5 nit surround, BT.2035 says 10 nits. We need to pick one.
  • Joshua Pines: 10 nits for SDR, and we use that for everything.
  • Nick Shaw: We probably want one for both so they can compare without changing lighting. Maybe let them use what they are used to, and tell us what that is. I've tried to make the form less repetitive, turning multiple questions into one question with a "multiple choice matrix" of answers where I could. The zone saturation section I did two versions, one with repetitive separate questions, and one "cleaner" version with just three questions (shadows, mids, highlights) and a matrix of answers. Which do people prefer?
  • Scott Dyer: The separate version I felt I would be comparing them to themselves, and the simpler version comparing them to each other and ranking them.
  • Lars Borg: I think that's good. It let's you set a reference and rate the others relative to that.
  • Nick Shaw: The last section has a new question about their preferred HDR and SDR candidate, and one about any other questions we should have asked. That one's particularly useful for this pilot group.
  • Lars Borg: Are there any questions we could remove to prevent "survey fatigue"?
  • Nick Shaw: It would be nice if we could do conditional questions, so if somebody says they don't have an HDR monitor it doesn't show the HDR questions. But Google forms can't do that.
  • Lars Borg: If you moved some questions to the end, people might feel more productive towards the end.
  • Joshua Pines: Should we add an N/A option for HDR questions, for those who have SDR only?
  • Alex Fry: We could do separate forms, one with no HDR questions, and give people two links.
  • Nick Shaw: I added some descriptions to the hue and HDR "matching" sections describing what we mean by "hue consistency" and "matching".
  • Joshua Pines: Do they need SDR and HDR monitors side by side? Or is the SDR soft proofed in HDR?
  • Alex Fry: We have both Rec.709 and Rec.709 in BT.2100 PQ to make it easy to compare. We have a list of colorists from Netflix. We only want 5 or 6 for the pilot.
  • Joshua Pines: Are you just looking for colorists?
  • Alex Fry: Mostly, and people one of us has a good relationship with. We'll send out an email with direct links, so they don't have to go to GitHub.
  • Nick Shaw: That's what we did for gamut mapping.
  • Scott Dyer: Anything we can usefully do while we wait for responses?
  • Nick Shaw: By the time this goes out, we probably won't get anything back by next Wednesday. Do we skip next week and reconvene the week after with feedback?
  • Scott Dyer: Maybe. We'll let people know on ACES Central.
  • Alex Fry: We can post the email we send out on ACES Central, for those interested but not here now.

Meeting #53, May 11th, 1pm PT


Alex Fry
Kevin Wheatley
Nick Shaw
Scott Dyer