I would match the transition, not chase mathematical identity. A low-light mode may use different noise reduction, sharpening and exposure behavior, so the texture can never be exactly the same as a brighter normal clip.

Start with white balance and overall brightness. If those jump, viewers notice immediately. Then compare saturation and black level before worrying about small differences in fine detail.

Place the most different clips next to each other on the timeline while matching. If you grade them in isolation, each one can look “good” but the cut still feels wrong.

Also avoid sharpening the SuperNight clips just to imitate daytime texture. That can make processed edges and noise more obvious.

In VSDC I would normalize exposure and color temperature first, then use scopes plus visual comparison to bring saturation and contrast into the same family.

I would allow the night scene to remain softer if that is what the capture mode naturally produces. Continuity is more important than pretending every lighting condition was recorded with identical processing.

For travel edits I sometimes hide the transition with story structure too: cut from a bright street to a close detail, then enter the darker sequence. The viewer accepts the visual change as part of moving into a new environment.

Color correction should help continuity, but editing can help it as well.

I like that approach. I was overcorrecting the night clips because I wanted them to have the same crispness as the earlier footage.

I will match exposure, white balance and contrast, then let the night mode keep some of its own texture instead of fighting it.