Free tool · nothing is uploaded
Two LUTs, one file
Bake a chain into a single lookup. Cheaper at playback, more precise than stacking nodes — and unlike a node tree, it is something you can hand to someone.
01 · Applied first
Drop a .cube
- .cube
Read on your own device — nothing is uploaded.
drop, click, or paste
02 · Applied second
Drop a .cube
- .cube
Read on your own device — nothing is uploaded.
drop, click, or paste
Why baking beats chaining
A 3D LUT does not hold an answer for every colour — there are 16.7 million in 8-bit alone. It holds answers on a lattice and interpolates between them. Put two LUTs on two nodes and that interpolation happens twice: the second LUT is handed a colour the first one already approximated, and approximates again from there.
Composing them samples the first LUT at every grid point of the output and asks the second what that colour becomes. One interpolation, written into a file. The practical difference is small on gentle looks and visible on aggressive ones — hard hue keys and steep contrast are where a doubled interpolation shows as banding.
Order is not commutative
This is the mistake worth naming, because the file gives no hint when it happens. A LUT that lifts shadows followed by one that shifts hue produces a different image than the same two reversed — the hue shift in the second case is working on unlifted shadows. Both results are valid LUTs, neither errors, and only one is what you meant.
The convention worth keeping: technical first, creative second. A log-to-Rec.709 transform or a camera conversion belongs in slot one; the look you are grading belongs in slot two, reading an image that is already in the space it expects.
Next steps
- Dial the combined look back — stacking two full-strength LUTs often lands heavier than either alone.
- Inspect what you made — plot the stacked LUT’s tone response and hue shifts before shipping it.
- Resize the result — if the target is a hardware LUT box that caps at 17³.
- Make a LUT from a Lightroom preset — if one half of the stack you want does not exist as a .cube yet.
Frequently asked questions
Why bake two LUTs together instead of stacking them in the editor?
Three reasons. Each node in a chain is a second interpolation, so the later LUT samples a grid that is itself interpolated — baking once samples the first at full precision. A single lookup is cheaper at playback than two. And a stack of nodes is a project setting, whereas a baked LUT is a file you can send to a colourist, a client or another application entirely.
Does the order matter?
Yes, and it is the thing people get wrong. Applying a contrast curve and then a hue shift is not the same as the hue shift followed by the contrast — the second LUT sees whatever the first produced. The tool labels the two slots and lets you swap them, so you can look at both and pick.
What grid size does the result use?
The finer of the two inputs. Using the coarser one would throw away detail the other already carries, and resampling upward would only invent points between the ones you have. Stack a 17³ with a 65³ and you get 65³.
Is anything lost stacking two LUTs?
Some precision, unavoidably — the first LUT is sampled on the output grid rather than carried forward exactly, so values between its grid points are interpolated once. That is still strictly better than the chained version, where the same interpolation happens and then a second one on top of it. If both LUTs are gentle the difference is far below anything visible.
Can I stack more than two?
Do it in passes — stack two, download the result, then drop it back in with the third. The compounding precision cost is the reason there is no unlimited slot list: after three or four passes on aggressive looks it is worth checking the result rather than assuming.
Is my LUT uploaded?
No. Both files are read with the browser's File API and composed on your own device. Nothing is transmitted and there is no account.
Is this LUT stacker free?
Yes — no account, no watermark, no export cap. It runs in your browser, so there is no server behind it to pay for.
A LUT tells you nothing about how it was built.
That is the trade you accept when you bake one: thirty-five thousand answers and no record of the question. The Studio works the other way round — give it a photograph and its recipe and it shows the edit as a sequence of decisions, each one rendered on its own.