I have to confirm that I, too, am experiencing this issue. Words cannot express how frustrating it is to be given a feature that iMac users like myself have been waiting for for years - only to have the feature not actually work. Is there any kind of troubleshooting that can be done here? I can confirm that I am running Adobe Premiere V13.0 on an iMac Retina P3 display with the “Display Color Management” box checked. Exports and screen grabs are much different than the footage within Premiere Pro.
Also confirming that I am experiencing this issue. On an iMac Pro with the latest Premiere. Display color management is ON however exports to quicktime/vimeo do not come close to matching the gamma/saturation seen in premiere. The display has been calibrated with a Spyder5 Pro, and short of getting a second screen I'm not sure what to do here.
nicolaib68160856 Can you please describe what step you have taken to come to the conclusion that it is not working correctly for you? Please be as specific and detailed as possible so that we can see where you are going wrong. What DCM does is it reads the ICC profile of your display and converts the Rec709 color space in Premiere to display correctly on your display. It only affects what you see on the display and has absolutely no effect on exported colors. It definitely works on a P3 display and solves the oversaturation problem that used to exist with those displays.
1 person found this helpful
I also just noticed this on my most recent export. I've never had this issue in the past, as far as I've noticed.
Anyways, here's a screenshot of what I've noticed with a clip I edited in premiere, exported, and it looks off in many programs. I'm on a late 2016 MacBook Pro. I saw a recent post from Admin stating what to turn on in Premiere, the new color management checkbox, and mercury playback, which is on set to Metal.
The color looks same or identical as Premiere: VLC, Firefox (youtube)
Played back in these apps, color looks off compared to Premiere: Finder, QuickTime, Safari (youtube), Google Chrome (youtube)
What's the point of that? if it converts the rec709 display we see in Premiere to the display, but it's still completely different to the export then how has this addition helped anyone
You don't understand what the reality of video files and computers apps and players is.
I've a long post in the thread on color management near the end that explains the system from computer, OS, video card, monitor, to apps and the files that create or read/play.
Your example shows exactly what happens when using apps that pay attention to the file header tags ... and using apps that don't.
All the ones that don't show properly in your example are noted for NOT paying attention to the tags for color space in the files they display.
PrPro has no control over those apps, period. Neither does any other app.
Now ... if as I mentioned in that other thread, IF you carefully go through your OS, video card, and monitor settings, you can essentially create a system where even non-color aware apps look sorta close. You still can't make them identical because the apps are not designed to conform to any standard.
Here's the full explanation of how video media is 'worked' through a system ... and what you as the user have to check out and set.
Getting Color Displayed Correctly
Most computer users doing video work are still operating from some incorrect assumptions. As the user, you have to unlearn some of the ways you think this imaging system works, in order to get setup so it works properly for you.
The "system" is a mashup of parts. A basic computing system has first the computer hardware ... then the operating system (OS) and the way that is designed to work with a monitor to display images on screen ... then the video card, typically ... and a monitor.
Each is a separate entity with its own 'concerns'. The computer hardware just exists to compute & pass along the data of that computation, totally has no concern with that data. Doesn't see video data any differently than say a text or spreadsheet.
The OS has more interest in the display, but primarily these days that interest is to 'enhance the viewing experience' as the primary goal. Accuracy of display to any standard is not even a concern, the OS is designed to enhance your experience. Because the vast majority of users are known to have lousy quality screens with no management ... they want to help you get past being the dummy they expect you to be.
So there is normally little concern in the OS, as it installs, with showing any media to any sort of real pro-end standards.
Next, that video card ... most cards assume gaming if you're displaying video ... and have all sorts of 'enhancements' to that experience. So, you have a really dark scene in the game, the card automatically brightens the lighter parts so you can see better who's lurking in those shadows.
For Nvidia cards, you need to go into the Nvidia controls and turn that sort of crap off. You also need to set the card's settings so the card controls the monitor via the ICC profiles you calibrated into use for your OS. Proper video display settings for Rec709/sRGB video work.
Now ... that monitor. Like GPU cards, the monitors all assume video is gaming ... or watching some movie. Again, as shipped, monitors are normally set so that they totally disregard color flags and profiles of the media itself and instead "enhance the viewing experience" ... with juiced color settings, that gaming dark-scene thing mentioned above, all sorts of things like that.
You need to go into your monitor settings and turn all that crap off there also. Turn the monitor into a "dumb" piece of hardware that just shows what it's told to show.
NOW ... you can calibrate that monitor with a puck/software system, set the OS to use that resulting ICC profile for that monitor, and have a decent chance of working away. If you haven't done this, well ... there's no way you have any control of what is seen in anything anywhere. And your OS, your card, and your monitor, are all working against seeing any proper or standards met.
Now, we get to showing proper stuff on that screen.
Different types of media can have different 'tags' in them for how they ... hope? ... to be 'seen' and displayed by the system displaying them. Not all media is always 'tagged' for the appropriate color space/profile/details of how it should be seen. As in say, a png file of a video bars & tones image that doesn't have in the file header a 'tag' for correct profile/standard. Each app will see that file differently as the app is designed to see untagged things.
PrPro in this case assumes video sRGB, AfterEffects assumes graphics sRGB, and those two standards for sRGB are slightly different. Hence ... a non-tagged png or other file will appear slightly different between PrPro & Ae based on each app's default assumptions for untagged files.
Prpro and Ae both apply tags to their exports. If ... 1) the entire system the export is played back on is set as above, and 2) the app used actually pays attention to the tags, then and only then will that export be seen very close to the way it showed within the app that created it. No matter whether it was created in PrPro, Ae, Resolve, Vegas, whatever.
But even then, only in apps that pay attention to media tags.
Even if the system is set correctly, if the app pays no attention to flags, then ... that image/video will probably be off in some way from within the app that created it. As has been so often stated, QuickTime player pays no attention to tags, is one of the worst viewers possible to check for 'accuracy'. Same with Chrome and Safari in browsers.
PrPro or any other media creating program can only control color appearance within the program.
Your system has to be set to show properly tagged video media to that pro standard, and you have to use apps that actually pay serious attention to tagged media, to see nearly the exact thing outside the app in another viewer or program.
I hope that helps.
Neil, this makes sense (or I think it does), but is there no way to create an export or display setting in Pr that lets you see your footage the way the apps see "untagged" files? If so many creators and viewers are using Chrome, Safari, Youtube, etc. why not have a color management option in Pr that caters more closely to those apps? Without conforming to a standard, they seem to interpret display the footage in a similar way.
since rec. 709 gamma 2.4 and BT1886 use a different shadow curve, here is test #2
This will convert between bt1886(a theory that premiere uses this over rec709 2.4) and sRGB 2.2/rec 709 2.2
I added both. one to darken and one to lighten.
if this fails, one can only assume that its color management passthough of the OS's color profile is not accurate; as true color profile support should, in effect, negate having to worry about what ICC you are currently calibrated at and then you just only have to worry about the difference between premiere's and FCPX's display reference.
Among others, I've asked for the user to have the color-management option to turn off the second-stage (and "proper professional") Bt1886 display transform processing. That way, even when users are known to be using the wrong setup, you can output to that setup. It would be an option many would like.
Another thing to realize ... properly done pro media will have the full Rec709 modern version with the Bt1886 display transform applied. So ... for any pro produced say b-cast media viewed on any device, creating content that looks like all other pro-produced content means that it will look the same as other pro media on that device.
Whether it looks like it does on your screen really is kinda irrelevant. Ain't nobody nowhere not no-how gonna see exactly what you see when making it. Not even for b-cast stuff with all gear to standards. That will at least be close ... but even then, you can never absolutely match two monitors.
the way i see it, adobe forced us into this with having the correct color only exist in a program monitor. There is no bt1886 export option. AME doesn't know what P3 is. Since a lot of stuff is still made for the web, perhaps grading normally, and then exporting a transform lut in pure faith that it will be ok in the browser is the best we can do at this junction until they actually add a button called "Web compatible gamma"
AE already has this feature, its called color profile converter. It burns in the change, and doesn't need metadata support, unlike conventional color management. and blame chrome too, because google has engineers that don't care either. at least firefox somewhat can force various icc's by file path.
Yea ... but you know, ain't this stuff a right mess?
We need that option to disregard the 1886 simply because (even though it is The Standard for video) one major OS and many apps don't recognize nor apply it.
But some do ... so ... if you do produce stuff without the display transform, it won't look as good on systems that apply that to most media "naturally". If you do produce stuff with the display transform, it will look similar to other pro media on some systems but not as cool as if you hadn't on some others that don't apply the display transform.
If the idiots would just agree to apply the stupid standard period we users wouldn't have such stupid messes to try to guess our way out of.
Either way you go, your material will look different between systems/devices, depending on the variable of who applies the full transform and who doesn't. You can't make it look 'right' to your eyes on everything. Mac users seem to think "the world" sees things like they do on their beloved Macs. Even though they're a very small part of total systems out there. So I think claiming that "all my viewers/users" use a Mac ... may not be as universally true as many think. Apparently they aim for a rather niche market.
To me, the quickest thing to 'fix' this would be Apple deciding to actually join the 21st Century and apply the modern, updated form of Rec709. They have by far the smallest "platform" out there. But I'm not holding my breath.
So Adobe offering Mac users an out would be probably a heck of a lot more achievable.
Image gamma can not be one within the premiere and another in Quicktime.
Definitely ADOBE and APPLE need to talk and solve this problem that really messes up. Why do not you guys use the same image reading pattern?
This lack of compatibility has caused a lot of confusion and does not make the least sense, it comes to be lack of respect. It is with great sadness that I say these words and I am 100% sure that most MAC users think the same.
I work at 25 years with editing and color treatment and reaffirm that this incompatibility is ridiculous.
No matter whose fault it is, you need to resolve this, even if it is creating an option when exporting video.
This is an issue that involves a lot of different parties.
PrPro applies both the original camera transform function of Rec709 and the addendum of a number of years back for the proper display transform function.
This is considered the standard for Rec 709 in full b-cast mode.
Apple has apparently never upgraded their OS and stuff to incorporate that addendum to the original Rec709.
But it isn't just an Apple/Adobe difference. Some browsers such as Chrome and Safari don't recognize the full ... if any ... standards either. Firefox does.
So people viewing media on the web see differences based on which browsers they use.
Even video players ... VLC and Potplayer are very good about complying with media tags. QuickTime player is not the only other player out there that doesn't. So depending on the player used, viewers see different things.
Then you have monitors and video cards (GPU). Most are set out of the box to "enhance the viewing experience" assuming the user is a gamer or just watches movies. On a poorly setup system.
If you don't go into their settings and disable all that crap, you get shifting darks depending on how dark overall a scene is among others things. Color and contrast jacked around to make it "purty".
All of which make it wrong.
If you haven't gone through your OS display settings, then through the GPU control settings, then the monitor's settings, THEN calibrated with puck/software system to Rec709 video standards, well ... you cannot have confidence in what you see.
Let alone what anyone else sees.
It's complicated and rather a mess.
I understand your opinion, but Quicktime is the main video player from APPLE, even this serious problem does not exist between FINAL CUT and Quicktime. ADOBE needs to solve this problem quickly. This situation can not be regarded as acceptable.
Don't worry about understanding my opinions. I like everyone having different ones ... it means they're thinking independently. My opinion from the above, is it would be good if PrPro gave the user the option to turn off the Bt1886 display transform so some users would be happier.
I do suggest we all worry about understanding the technical details.
I don't know how familiar you are with colorists, and the tremendous effort they spend to get accurate representation of the image on their 'confidence' screen. I've never met a colorist who considered a computer off-the-rack and any 'normal' computer monitor a system even capable of being calibrated to the needed standards. There's a reason for this. (No guarantee anything out of that system will come close to passing the mechanical QC test for b-cast acceptance ... period.)
You note QuickTime is the main video player from Apple. Some things flow directly from this.
First, the Apple OS is not setup to respect both transform aspects of modern Rec709 out of the box. Second, the monitors used on most newer Macs use one of several versions of the P3 wide-gamut color space. Which is way different than the video-sRGB standard for b-cast work. Realistically, to get a P3 monitor showing video sRGB correctly takes one heck of a lot of calibration and a transform LUT. But wait ... there's more: each different size Mac P3 monitor will need a different calibration transform to be accurate.
Now, we get to QuickTime player ... which is a notoriously color-stuupid app. It doesn't properly apply the flags/tags of any media coming into that player. If that is the standard you want say Adobe's PrPro to apply, well ... it will be wrong on the vast majority of systems and users out there.
Next, to the relationship with FCPx ... which is built in-house to run on an OS that doesn't respect the full Rec709 "modern" version but is juiced to run great with FCPx ... and naturally, with other apps like QuickTime that don't apply full transforms. Yea, that and QuickTime are both designed with the same shortcoming, naturally ... they play together well.
It seems to come as a shock to many Apple users, but that company's rigs are what, a bit less than 10% of the total computer/device user base? And yet many Apple users assume that what would work best on their rigs (without bothering to go through any tech consideration or calibration/setup) should be the main operational consideration for any other app out there.
That's not particularly a rational consideration ... to plan to build around a minute portion of the user-base and make everyone else work around a poorly designed setup that is based on wrong assumptions at the start.
As I noted in an earlier post, I do advocate giving users the switch to turn off the Bt1886 display transform part of the Rec 709 professional standard. I normally tend to hold with giving wider choices ... something of course, Apple itself never does.
To me, anyone assuming that only Apple users will ever view their media is well ... not wanting a wide adoption of their content. But that's my opinion and they're welcome to theirs.
Technically, turning off the display transform renders media rather less-than-pro quality. As it clearly chooses to violate the full pro standard that's the only one we've got.
So feel free to request the off-switch for Bt1886 display transform. I'll vote right along with you for that to be added. And of course, I know any media produced on such a setup machine will look poorly on my setup ... and many others out there properly calibrated for the full Rec709 standard.
But please ... understand the technical side of what you ask for. Not opinions, the math/physics of the issue.
Sorry that the new feature is not satisfactory in solving your grading issues with this monitor. My suggestion is that you create a new bug and file it here: Premiere Pro: Hot (3162 ideas) – Adobe video & audio apps
No, Adobe really screwed the pooch this time! I'm losing valuable time and their tech support seems totally indifferent to the problem.
No Video no audio, just massive errors!
1 person found this helpful
No Video no audio, just massive errors!
That sounds very different and unrelated to the subject of this thread. How about filing a new thread stating your specific troubles? That way we can try to troubleshoot with you.