some bad color
Hi,
We shout a lot of food product we realized some images haven't the good color. Exemple, an orange jam jar seem a fluo red jam, same think with olive jar seem a brown olive's color.
I did a test ; i shoot same product with same camera, lightning, etc, one with capture one an the other with the original Nikon camera pro.
when a opened both raw files throw preview(Mac) both are very similar with good color, instead a reddish version preview in capture one 8.3 and with the same problem on exported tiff file.
does existing solution or we have a miss set-up ???
Thanks
Dan Ra7
We shout a lot of food product we realized some images haven't the good color. Exemple, an orange jam jar seem a fluo red jam, same think with olive jar seem a brown olive's color.
I did a test ; i shoot same product with same camera, lightning, etc, one with capture one an the other with the original Nikon camera pro.
when a opened both raw files throw preview(Mac) both are very similar with good color, instead a reddish version preview in capture one 8.3 and with the same problem on exported tiff file.
does existing solution or we have a miss set-up ???
Thanks
Dan Ra7
0
-
I'm not trying to be an ass when I say this but:
Do a search of the forum. You will find a good bit of material on the subject.
The quick and dirty is this: Phase One (and a few users) like this look and it it seems they have no intention of changing it.
You can use the color tools and other methods to diminish the look or make it more to your liking.
Lightroom tends to be closer to the Nikon look, and sometimes thats what I have to do.
But play around with the color tools, they are extremely powerful.
BTW, I bitch about the red cast constantly.
Jimmy0 -
[quote="Jimmy D Uptain" wrote:
The quick and dirty is this: Phase One (and a few users) like this look and it it seems they have no intention of changing it.
Actually, there is some evidence that the message is slowly getting through.
What's particularly frustrating is that "The Capture One Look" has always biased slightly warm/orange, and in its original, subtly-applied incarnation was great - I was as big a fan of "The Look" as anyone - but then something changed, and this appealing, gentle, characterful warming-up of images turned into the current orange/red/brown thing, which many of us hate with a passion.
Dan, as Jimmy suggests, you're seeing a problem which a lot of us have with Capture One, but it has been a struggle to get our concerns to "stick" with Phase One.
For now at least, you'll need to fix the problem with Capture One's colour editing tools - or, create a new default profile of your own which doesn't call the built-in camera profile, which for most new cameras, provides exactly the kind of over-the-top, horribly warm-biased rendering. Maybe roll in the "Linear Response" Curve, too.
You can also pick a profile from an older camera to apply to your images - that's a pretty effective work-around. I've been using the Canon 1D Mk III profile by default on my 7D, 70D and 7D Mk II files for years: that's how long we've been stuck with this problem.[quote="Jimmy D Uptain" wrote:
BTW, I bitch about the red cast constantly.
And I hope you continue to do so until the message finally lands once and for all!
😊0 -
Hi Keith
I have had enough of the intransigence shown by Phase in getting to grips with their colour problem. I would like to upgrade from a 7D to 7D2 but I refuse to walk into known colour problems with C1 conversions. Which can only get worse?
I have decided to write to Cannon (UK) to ask if they would be prepared to take appropriate action with Phase. Surely it is in everyone's interest that top of the range raw converters do justice to all the work that camera manufacturers put in to get colours "right"?
I am not expecting a miracle but perhaps if enough C1 users did likewise we would make some progress?
Peter Jones.0 -
[quote="NN634703760209602004UL" wrote:
Hi,
We shout a lot of food product we realized some images haven't the good color. Exemple, an orange jam jar seem a fluo red jam, same think with olive jar seem a brown olive's color.
I did a test ; i shoot same product with same camera, lightning, etc, one with capture one an the other with the original Nikon camera pro.
when a opened both raw files throw preview(Mac) both are very similar with good color, instead a reddish version preview in capture one 8.3 and with the same problem on exported tiff file.
does existing solution or we have a miss set-up ???
Thanks
Dan Ra7
I sincerly doubt that CO1 would be the right choice of raw converter when color fidelity is essential. Although CO1 has a "pro" aura, it is for the pro photographers that need to deliver a "pleasing" rendition that is in accordance with todays trend. More and more of the visual material around on the internet or in print has little to do with faithful colors. Perhaps newspaper photography is least affected by this, although I am even beginning to see artsy portraits in newspapers too.
CO1 does not include an out of the box natural renditon, you will have to create presets yourself.
Chris0 -
In software world do not expect all convertors produce same results, as colour conversion math is different, and logic behind this math is proprietary. You can get most accurate colors from Canon DPP as they aware how their camera is working, but I highly doubt that they disclosure full information about color transofrmation they make in DPP to Phase One the most critical part is demosaic algorithm that are different from vendor to vendor and has a great impact on colour accuracy.
WBR0 -
[quote="Peter" wrote:
Hi Keith
I have had enough of the intransigence shown by Phase in getting to grips with their colour problem. I would like to upgrade from a 7D to 7D2 but I refuse to walk into known colour problems with C1 conversions. Which can only get worse?
I have decided to write to Cannon (UK) to ask if they would be prepared to take appropriate action with Phase. Surely it is in everyone's interest that top of the range raw converters do justice to all the work that camera manufacturers put in to get colours "right"?
I am not expecting a miracle but perhaps if enough C1 users did likewise we would make some progress?
Peter Jones.
I like your optimism Peter.
I do hope that Canon don't apply any publishing constraints on their reply so that you will be free to share it with us.
Grant0 -
[quote="Andriy.Okhrimets" wrote:
In software world do not expect all convertors produce same results, as colour conversion math is different, and logic behind this math is proprietary. You can get most accurate colors from Canon DPP as they aware how their camera is working, but I highly doubt that they disclosure full information about color transofrmation they make in DPP to Phase One the most critical part is demosaic algorithm that are different from vendor to vendor and has a great impact on colour accuracy.
WBR
I am not sure that it is a technical limitation. Phase one cán make very good profiles. The profiles for my Pentax and Sony cameras are overall very good and only need little correction. But also there, yes the typical CO1 look is present, and that is partly a look that has evolved in the past few years. The greatest change in overall color reproduction in my memory, was going from version 6 to version 7, I still feel that I liked the color reproduction better in the pre-7 versions, because it was more natural.
All cameras are influenced by the Phase one color evolution, but it seems that Nikon and Canon in particular have taken a negative color fidelity hit.
Chris0 -
[quote="Peter" wrote:
I have decided to write to Cannon (UK) to ask if they would be prepared to take appropriate action with Phase. Surely it is in everyone's interest that top of the range raw converters do justice to all the work that camera manufacturers put in to get colours "right"?
Hello Peter,
I admire your creative approach, and I'd love to think that would have legs.
I suspect however, that Chris has this right: it's not that Phase One can't make profiles we'd consider good because of any technical failing, but that they won't.
I've said all along (and have no reservations about continuing to do so) that this is a systemic issue; I don't believe that it's necessarily because something is "broken" in the profiling process though, but because a decision-maker in Phase One has decided that this is how the profiles should be.
There's a logic to this: the 7D Mk II "v2" profile is better than the generic one; other manufacturer's "v2" profiles are also an improvement; and as this post suggests, Phase One has silently started to create profiles which seem to address the issues we have identified, for other of the latest Canons.
If the problem was purely technical, getting Canon on board would be a brilliant call; but my strong gut feeling is that someone in Phase One simply thinks he knows, better than we do, what's good for us...0 -
[quote="ChrisM" wrote:
The greatest change in overall color reproduction in my memory, was going from version 6 to version 7, I still feel that I liked the color reproduction better in the pre-7 versions, because it was more natural.
Yep, that's exactly my recollection and opinion too, Chris0 -
Hi Keith and Grant and Chris
Thank you for your feedback. For the record, I am not seeking to change Phase's view of what "looks right". I am simply asking for them to also provide an optional preset that produces what we may call the "as is" colour. Surely this is a simple job in this day and age with well-tested colour test cards?
But you think Phase simply refuses to do this? If you are right it is a shocking display of arrogance towards time-served, experienced users of C1.
Thanks for the tip about the 1D Mk3 profile Keith. I will try it out.
Peter Jones.
I will learn to spell Canon correctly one day - I have an area called Cannop Ponds near me. Hence the typo.0 -
I shoot with a Pentax K-3 and I use the "Linear" color profiles. Everything else ends up with goofy cartoon color schemes. I then fine tune the image with the regular tools. 0 -
Linear profile is for those who want to create by ourselves, still at least to my point of view some magic at demosaicing stage happens that is is different across multiple cameras. More over for some reason I do observe D-Lighting heavily impacting even flat curve profiles.
There is no bad or good colour, it is technology limitation, that most of sensors are bayer sensors see more details here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter - and it has technology limitations. And moe roever technology of combining sensor data is different across cameras and vendors, and kept in secret 😊. That`s why mostly any RAW convertor vendor is producing different results0 -
It would really be nice if we could have the colors from DPP combined with Capture One´s ability to draw everything out of the Raw file 😎
But Canon and Phase One talking with each other....i think we have to fight the "autumn leaves look" with manual white balance and the color editor for some time to come...and enjoy the highlights and shadows we couldn't recover in the jack of all trades-master of none.. Adobe camera raw 😊0 -
[quote="6BQ5" wrote:
I shoot with a Pentax K-3 and I use the "Linear" color profiles. Everything else ends up with goofy cartoon color schemes. I then fine tune the image with the regular tools.
I also use the linear curve with the Pentax K-3 and the Sony A7r, and adjust from there. The "standard" curve blocks the shadows, and yes, gives unrealistically bold colors and contrast that ads to the perception that CO1 has difficulty producing realistic colors.
Other raw converters are much less stigmatized by their default curves, because these curves generally respect the captured data more due to a flatter nature.
The CO1 linear curve gives a very good starting point however, even though often some midtone to highlight lifting is needed to prevent the image from looking too flat. I have much less color and contrast problems by starting off with the linear curve, and at least for Pentax and Sony cameras, this produces very good results.
Chris0 -
[quote="j thorsen" wrote:
It would really be nice if we could have the colors from DPP combined with Capture One´s ability to draw everything out of the Raw file 😎
But Canon and Phase One talking with each other....i think we have to fight the "autumn leaves look" with manual white balance and the color editor for some time to come...and enjoy the highlights and shadows we couldn't recover in the jack of all trades-master of none.. Adobe camera raw 😊
Cant say about Canon, but ACR seems to work a little better in highlight recovery for me. (Nikon D800E)
I just set my default curve to linear. Its still not optimal but much better.0 -
[quote="Jimmy D Uptain" wrote:
[quote="j thorsen" wrote:
It would really be nice if we could have the colors from DPP combined with Capture One´s ability to draw everything out of the Raw file 😎
But Canon and Phase One talking with each other....i think we have to fight the "autumn leaves look" with manual white balance and the color editor for some time to come...and enjoy the highlights and shadows we couldn't recover in the jack of all trades-master of none.. Adobe camera raw 😊
Cant say about Canon, but ACR seems to work a little better in highlight recovery for me. (Nikon D800E)
I just set my default curve to linear. Its still not optimal but much better.
I have often wondered whether some applications' highlight recovery is really highlight recovery or something more like smart healing performed by infilling white patches around to fit in with what is around them.
Without looking at the code being used I don't suppose there is any way to know. Perhaps a test with some extreme bracketing values might provide insight.
Grant0 -
ACR/Lightroom's highlight recovery is recovery - it's a very clever image-adaptive algorithm, which in addition to equalising the histogram dependent on the image (which, incidentally, bugs the hell out of some people, because it's really hard to get a pure white out of Lr), also extrapolates detail from information left in any of the three RGB channels which aren't completely blown.
I like Capture One's HR a lot nowadays (its failings back in the day being another topic we had to kick at, long and hard, in order to get the improvements we see today) and in some images it's better than Lr's - I suspect it also has the ability to reconstruct details from information in unblown channels - but for real HR heavy lifting, Lr is still my first choice.0 -
[quote="Andriy.Okhrimets" wrote:
There is no bad or good colour,
There is "bad" colour when complaints like the one that started this thread come up so regularly.
Not "bad" in a colorimetric accuracy sense (which nobody is asking for anyway) but in the sense that colours as rendered by Capture One are routinely perceived as being so heavily skewed towards an artificial, unpleasant, garish warmth completely at odds with what might reasonably be expected out of a professional converter, as to make the conversions all but unusable.
One thing we should be able to expect from a converter that lays claim to high image quality is not to have to - in effect - build our own profiles from scratch in order to make the software usable. The fact that many of us know to use the Linear Curve is beside the point: we shouldn't have to be messing around with "fixes" to address such a (literally) glaring problem.
If only one or two folk had raised this issue over the last two or three years, we could put it down to inexperience, or to unrealistic personal preferences.
But it isn't just one or two. And clearly, many of those who continue to rail against this colour problem are obviously very well-informed on matters of colour management: this isn't a couple of new users who need to learn about White Balance...
This isn't Open Source "roll your sleeves up and get your hands dirty" software. So when http://www.phaseone.com says:Each of the more than 300 cameras supported in Capture One Pro 8 goes through a rigorous testing and profiling process. This ensures the best out-of-the-box results in terms of color reproduction
That's what we expect. And we are very clearly not getting it - not even close.0 -
Keith Reeder
That's what we expect. And we are very clearly not getting it - not even close. - why you then using it.
Guys if actually want to help please add at least sample image demonstrating issue, or it looks like 2 pages discussion about nothing.0 -
[quote="Andriy.Okhrimets" wrote:
Keith Reeder
That's what we expect. And we are very clearly not getting it - not even close. - why you then using it.
Guys if actually want to help please add at least sample image demonstrating issue, or it looks like 2 pages discussion about nothing.
Maybe you have something there.
I have already posted this pic in another thread but I don't mind doing it again.
Nikon D800E
Profoto Lighting
Profoto White Softlight "Beauty Dish" Reflector
I'm looking at these photos on calibrated NEC PA271W
This is Nikon Capture NX2 no adjustments. (This is an accurate representation of what the people looked like)
http://paintboxphotography.com/img/s12/v171/p1333623897-5.jpg
This is Capture One Pro no adjustments.
http://paintboxphotography.com/img/s2/v73/p1333623900-5.jpg0 -
[quote="Andriy.Okhrimets" wrote:
Guys if actually want to help please add at least sample image demonstrating issue, or it looks like 2 pages discussion about nothing.
I'm not sure who you think you are, Andriy, but we're not trying to persuade you there's a problem.
We've been demonstrating the issue - with dozens and dozens of images making the point, over something like twenty different threads - for a couple of years now.
Not to mention the number of support cases that have been raised.0 -
[quote="Jimmy D Uptain" wrote:
Maybe you have something there.
No, he doesn't, Jimmy - he's been on this forum for five minutes, hasn't a clue what has gone before, and has put no effort into finding out before starting to tell us what we need to do.
Andriy, if you really want to help (as opposed to just wanting to crash around make an impression), it'd be best if you take the time fully to understand what we're talking about, before contributing to any thread; because this and the DNG thread clearly demonstrate that there's considerable room (and need) for you to improve your knowledge of the subject matter.0 -
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
[quote="Jimmy D Uptain" wrote:
Maybe you have something there.
No, he doesn't, Jimmy - he's been on this forum for five minutes, hasn't a clue what has gone before, and has put no effort into finding out before starting to tell us what we need to do.
Andriy, if you really want to help (as opposed to just wanting to crash around make an impression), it'd be best if you take the time fully to understand what we're talking about, before contributing to any thread; because this and the DNG thread clearly demonstrate that there's considerable room (and need) for you to improve your knowledge of the subject matter.
Actually what I was trying to do was get a ton of images on one thread. Enough proof in one place is way harder to ignore.
Also harder to hide.
The last time I posted the picture, I was asked to take several photos in different lighting blah blah blah.
The way I see it, I paid them to do this on the entry fee.
So I get your ire, but it won't take but a minute for each of the people to post examples as I have in this one thread.
It would tickle me to see 20+ samples of "C1 look gone awry".0 -
Hi
I was once told that if you want something done, do it on a file going downstream not one trying to go upstream.
So, if we are serious about getting Phase to do the sensible thing for its customers perhaps we have to go over their head? According to my research, Phase is owned by an investment company called Silverfleet. Postal address:
Silverfleet Capital, 5 Fleet Place, London EC4M 7RD.
Would our time and energy be better spent writing direct to the owners rather than creating support cases that are simply not being taken seriously? The key point for me is that C1 is no longer able to provide a simple default colour output that mimics "as is". So with all due respect what is the purpose of Phase/C1? In my view they need reminding that there is plenty of competition out there.
Peter Jones.
Sorry about this Phase, but I am close to giving up on you. And I am sick and tired of reading so many "off colour" posts from fully paid-up customers who are clearly very experienced in this field.0 -
[quote="Peter" wrote:
Hi
I was once told that if you want something done, do it on a file going downstream not one trying to go upstream.
So, if we are serious about getting Phase to do the sensible thing for its customers perhaps we have to go over their head? According to my research, Phase is owned by an investment company called Silverfleet. Postal address:
Silverfleet Capital, 5 Fleet Place, London EC4M 7RD.
Would our time and energy be better spent writing direct to the owners rather than creating support cases that are simply not being taken seriously? The key point for me is that C1 is no longer able to provide a simple default colour output that mimics "as is". So with all due respect what is the purpose of Phase/C1? In my view they need reminding that there is plenty of competition out there.
Peter Jones.
Sorry about this Phase, but I am close to giving up on you. And I am sick and tired of reading so many "off colour" posts from fully paid-up customers who are clearly very experienced in this field.
Peter,
I suspect that if you said you were were happy pay a lot more for the software and pay 20% per annum on top for a guaranteed service (not untypical in the commercial software world) they would listen to you and wonder if that new business model could be rolled out to everyone.
Or, to put it another way, maybe they could "bundle" the costs, including a service element, into a subscription model and make the products subscription only - the same as the rest of the software industry is attempting to do. (I presume the main model for this is the Mobile Phone industry where people seem happy to pay for services they will never be able to use sensibly.)
There will, no doubt, come a time when so many vendors decide to lock in to a subscription only policy, allegedly to provide the funding model to make everything so much better for all, that the cash flow demands far exceed the benefit to be gained as far as individual users are concerned. The corporates will be less worried. Business to business is a different game where such methods are already well understood and "negotiations" come into play once the numbers become an issue. But you surely know that already.
Ah well, there's always the fall back of going and bothering the Open Source developers I suppose.
In any event I think your comments are well outside the scope of a user to user forum funded and operated by the very company you are trying to attack and cajole into your way of seeing things. I would not be at all surprised to see this thread locked and perhaps deleted. Nor would I be concerned if that were to happen.
Just my personal opinion of course.
Grant0 -
Subscription only....🤓 ... after having a closer look and..emm....the colors is actually perfect 🤭 0 -
[quote="j thorsen" wrote:
Subscription only....🤓 ... after having a closer look and..emm....the colors is actually perfect 🤭
Subscription only AND software as a service - the other part of the "deal".
With luck the third aspect of the concept - "all your data will be nice and safe on our servers, honestly. So therefore we don't support a local storage option." - will not apply to digital images until the world has absurdly fast communications speeds and absolutely full proof service availability.
Even then there are likely to be continuing marketing issues based on "progress" that will require regular updating of hardware.
Such things may well not be a business objective to companies like Phase but for other players in the wider industry, especially those that might be considered to be in a position of dominance, it is beginning to look like a clear objective and where they are allowed to lead the game other may be forced to follow.
All just my opinion of course.
Grant0 -
[quote="SFA" wrote:
...
In any event I think your comments are well outside the scope of a user to user forum funded and operated by the very company you are trying to attack and cajole into your way of seeing things. I would not be at all surprised to see this thread locked and perhaps deleted. Nor would I be concerned if that were to happen.
...
Grant
Public Guide Lines and Rules.
...
13 Do not post questions or comments relating to the appropriateness of another member's post. Phase One A/S is moderating this forum and this is up to Phase One A/S to judge this, Moderators while handle this not users.
...0 -
[quote="mli20" wrote:
[quote="SFA" wrote:
...
In any event I think your comments are well outside the scope of a user to user forum funded and operated by the very company you are trying to attack and cajole into your way of seeing things. I would not be at all surprised to see this thread locked and perhaps deleted. Nor would I be concerned if that were to happen.
...
Grant
Public Guide Lines and Rules.
...
13 Do not post questions or comments relating to the appropriateness of another member's post. Phase One A/S is moderating this forum and this is up to Phase One A/S to judge this, Moderators while handle this not users.
...
Hmm.
Well, if we quoting rules of the forum I offer these:
...
8 Make sure that your post fits the topic description of the forum.
...
...
10 Do not post a message merely to blow off steam or otherwise get something off your chest. This is a support, user to user help and resource area, if you have something to take up with a dealer then take it up with a dealer, if you have something to take up with Phase One then please take it up with Phase One.
...
Grant0 -
I think rules have been quoted.
Some have received warnings.
We will close this thread as it is not constructive.
If you want to take up something with Phase One, then go to http://support.phaseone.com -> contact support.0
Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.
Kommentare
30 Kommentare