a LUT generated from X-H1 data to replicate Astia film simulation in Darktable. I’m not sure how well it works with other Fuji cameras but at least X-H1 users might like it
It is my understanding that after applying the input colour profile + white balance of some sort (and noise reduction, lens correction, sharpening etc, and using exposure to even out ISO differences), photos from similarly capable cameras should look rather similar (subject to sensor dynamic range, of course). What I mean is that as long as the input profile is accurate and the sensors are similarly capable, the ‘flat-processed’ output of a Nikon should be almost identical to a similarly spec’d Canon or Fuji, and, in that sense, LUTs are universal. Is that not so?
My second question is the expected input of the LUT. What I mean is that, unlike filmic, the LUT won’t be able to cover arbitrary values: it’s created to map a certain input range to an output. If we apply non-linear operations (be it tone EQ or a filmic mapping), we won’t be processing the (linear) input in the ‘same way’ as a real Fuji camera / a brand of film etc. would. How do you usually use them? Use (non-linear, non-global) tone EQ to tame the dynamic range?
This does not mean I don’t like or use LUTs: I have unscientific fun with them. In fact, @Jean-Paul_GAUCHE’s profiles are among my favourites, and I’ll definitely try @sacredbirdman’s new profile, too. I usually use a ‘flat’ (logarithmic) filmic ‘curve’ for tone mapping (well, it’s a straight line when plotted, but the scale is not linear, and ‘straight curve’ sounds silly), and apply the LUT on top of that.