Skin tones Nikon D800/600
I am struggling to get pleasing skin tones with either my Nikon D800 or D600 - particularly with infants or young children. I am using the generic D800 profile - tried all the curves, even experimented with profiles of other cameras. I have fiddled with the colour editor and colour balance. When the picture is white balanced using either a grey card ( and I've tried a white card) or a pre-white balance is set in camera the resulting picture to my eyes has an unpleasant orange cast. Out of desperation I have downloaded a trial of Capture NX2 and the cast is gone. The colour may not be entirely to my preference, but it is at least a good starting point.
I know I'm not the only one complaining about the Nikon profiles provided by Capture One, but has anyone any suggestions on how to deal with this - other than move to capture NX or has anyone had any constructive feedback from a support case with Phase One
I've got to add - I really don't want to have to use NX
Cheers
Lotus
I know I'm not the only one complaining about the Nikon profiles provided by Capture One, but has anyone any suggestions on how to deal with this - other than move to capture NX or has anyone had any constructive feedback from a support case with Phase One
I've got to add - I really don't want to have to use NX
Cheers
Lotus
0
-
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
I'm sure it did, Terence - but "gorgeous" and "colour inaccurate" are not mutually exclusive.
This bias towards orange is the reason for the "Capture One Look" - and for the most part it's great. But if colour accuracy matters - and for me as a bird/wildlife photographer, sometimes it matters a lot - situations like the one under discussion, where I know how the colours are supposed to be and I want them that way, are when I look to a different converter.
There's no problem with the idea of playing with colour to get a particular look (the inexplicable popularity of looks like bleach bypass attest to this), but surely we need to start from reasonably accurate colours, or at least have that option.
I'm with you here Keith. Despite the quality that CO1 has when it comes to raw conversion (and for me CO1 is simply the best raw converter around), their camera profiles can give you a real headache when it comes to color accuracy. I went through a similar struggle with the Pentax K5IIs and a set of Zeiss lenses, in my case skin tones were plagued by a significant red cast, leading to many shots with people looking like they shouldn't. I'm on a hardware calibrated Eizo so this should not be the case. I had some discussion with Phase one, pleading for a "neutral" option in their profiles or color management, just so we have a choice to go along with their preferred look, or choose for color accuracy.
Of course I ended up struggling with the color editor, but with the hue shift option, you end up with half of the colors not looking right when trying to correct for one "off" color. The color editor is a great tool, but only really if you work on a image to image basis, it is not very useful when trying to get to a proper default icc profile. I settled with a saved profile that simply desaturated the evil reddish skin cast 😕 Still the best IQ by far to my eyes, but oh, oh, what a blessing would a color accurate profile option be...0 -
[quote="Christian Gr" wrote:
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
but surely we need to start from reasonably accurate colours, or at least have that option.
You have every possibility to set a new default and then you would not be bothered by CO's defaults.Christian !
It doesn't work !0 -
I use profiles create has to leave a test card and treated(handled) in ProfilMaker, the results(profits) are much superior to the profiles by default and especially more balanced than the profiles of LR. These profiles are integrated(joined) into my working flow as profile by default and works very well.
You should not use of profile in Version 4 but only in version 2 of the icc. I use the publisher(editor) of color with his profiles with no problem at all and publish(edit) even profiles has to leave this menu.
Bonsoir. 😉0 -
[quote="Christian Gr" wrote:
You have every possibility to set a new default and then you would not be bothered by CO's defaults.
No offence Christian, but it simply should not be necessary to need to "work around" as basic and fundamental an issue as inherently inaccurate - or at the very least arbitrarily skewed in favour of someone else's subjective opinion of what constitutes good colour- camera profiles.
By any reasonable view of this issue, I would argue that it should be exactly the other way round: surely the default camera profiles should be as neutral and true-to-colour as possible, and it would then be for the user to develop "special effect" profiles or presets to cater for their particular needs.
As I've suggested, this isn't a major problem from my perspective, not shooting much human skin (and when I shoot sport, I don't really care too much about perfect skin tones - that's not what such images are about) but it simply seems wrong-headed to me that things are the way they are, and - from an entirely objective and unbiased perspective - I think SB and the others who are unhappy about this are making a very valid, very reasonable point.0 -
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
[quote="Christian Gr" wrote:
You have every possibility to set a new default and then you would not be bothered by CO's defaults.
No offence Christian, but it simply should not be necessary to need to "work around" as basic and fundamental an issue as inherently inaccurate - or at the very least arbitrarily skewed in favour of someone else's subjective opinion of what constitutes good colour- camera profiles.
By any reasonable view of this issue, I would argue that it should be exactly the other way round: surely the default camera profiles should be as neutral and true-to-colour as possible, and it would then be for the user to develop "special effect" profiles or presets to cater for their particular needs.
As I've suggested, this isn't a major problem from my perspective, not shooting much human skin (and when I shoot sport, I don't really care too much about perfect skin tones - that's not what such images are about) but it simply seems wrong-headed to me that things are the way they are, and - from an entirely objective and unbiased perspective - I think SB and the others who are unhappy about this are making a very valid, very reasonable point.
Capture One has through years been well-known for providing good out-of-the box skintones. The is a choice. We balance absolute color-correctness with the ability to render skintones in a pleasing manor.0 -
[quote="Drew" wrote:
Lotus,
We need a RAW, as we have no basis for what a JPEG has been through between capture and creation.
No file the D800 can create is too big, just zip it and send it. If you do error out let us know in the case and we'll set you up with the FTP.
Hi Drew - getting 302 everytime I try to upload photo - FTP maybe?
Cheers
Laura0 -
[quote="Drew" wrote:
If you do error out let us know in the case and we'll set you up with the FTP.
😉0 -
Drew, I have an xrite color checker and can fire off a raw from my D800 too if it helps. 0 -
[quote="Christian Gr" wrote:
Capture One has through years been well-known for providing good out-of-the box skintones. The is a choice. We balance absolute color-correctness with the ability to render skintones in a pleasing manor.
Christian, I feel obliged to point out that poor skin tones is what this thread is about.0 -
[quote="Keith Reeder" wrote:
[quote="Christian Gr" wrote:
Capture One has through years been well-known for providing good out-of-the box skintones. The is a choice. We balance absolute color-correctness with the ability to render skintones in a pleasing manor.
Christian, I feel obliged to point out that poor skin tones is what this thread is about.
Please do post an example, and a link to the raw-file.0 -
I just wanted to thank LotuoO for creating a support case and providing us with a very good example of the discrepancy seen. With that file we were able to build a custom ICC profile that, while not perfect, is much better for use in the specific conditions of the image.
We've forwarded the image onto our Developers and we'll try to get a new profile in an upcoming release.
Please keep in mind that the few (3 total) cases that have been created and provided examples of this concern may not be the same as what you are seeing, all of these are quite subjective. I hope it's clear from the response here that we are working to improve the software and have no problem creating custom ICC profiles for specific concerns. I would urge ANYONE that is also concerned about this issue both create a support case AND provide us some RAW file examples with measurable data (color chart) so that we can help to improv the profile.0 -
Thanks guys for your most prompt response to my support case. It is most encouraging to know that you are working on the profile.
Cheers
Lotus0 -
Thanks Drew that is good news. Will the profile (once completed) be incorporated into a release or will we have to create support case to get access to it.
I have raise a case 135440 with supporting raw files for the red shift that bothers me. It could be that the custom profile that was created will help me too.0 -
In collaboration with our Image Quality Professor, I've made a few tweaks to the default D800(e) profile.
Try it before your collegue! -> http://we.tl/QNuToVSog0
Here's guide on how to use the profile in Capture One: http://blog.phaseone.com/move-your-cust ... computers/
Please provide some feedback, if this help on Your specific case.
Now to the trade-off on this profile: It is a bit more saturated overall, which means that when using e.g. the Contrast slider, you will also saturate the image quicker. I will recommend using the filmcurve "Extra shadow" or "Portrait" if this is a concern.0 -
The profile help with skin tones but didn't fix the red shift issue I have. Thanks for letting us try it though. 0 -
[quote="sizzlingbadger" wrote:
The profile help with skin tones but didn't fix the red shift issue I have. Thanks for letting us try it though.
Please post an example.0 -
I imagine that the red coat that's actually orange is an example, Christian - that's the "red shift issue" that SB has been talking about. 0 -
[quote="sizzlingbadger" wrote:
The profile help with skin tones but didn't fix the red shift issue I have. Thanks for letting us try it though.
There's a support case pending from you, awaiting some files and tiff file examples. This profile may not have been a solution for you specifically but we'll have a look at your files and go from there in the support case.0 -
Christian,
I have been away for a few days.
It seems the tweaked profile is no longer available to download so I can't test it.
It it possible to post it again?
Thanks0 -
Anyone from PhaseOne?
Best,
R0 -
[quote="Romain7" wrote:
Christian,
I have been away for a few days.
It seems the tweaked profile is no longer available to download so I can't test it.
It it possible to post it again?
Thanks
It seemed that the provided ICC profile didn't help much, so we are currently considering what to change in the profile and allocating a spot in the task-pipeline for this. As I have said before, we cannot satisfy everyone in one profile, so please have that in mind.0 -
Hi,
Any update one this issue?
Thanks!
R0 -
Nikon's Capture NX2 best results with D800 or D600.
There is also software to use NX2 with Lightroom.0 -
Why is the D800 camera profile so bad in CO7?
Skin tones are VERY unnatural.
While my older Canon 1Ds and Canon 5DII files open quite well at standard settings D800 files look wrong.
If I open my Canon images in Canon's Raw converter, ACR and CO7 all at default setting they look very similar.
If I open d800 files in NX2,ACR and CO7 the NX@ and adobe ACR are quite similar with NX2 looking significantly nicer the
CO7 conversion at default setting looks way off with "brownish" skin tones and patchy skin.
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3781/12296270314_5706856dfc_z.jpg
The actors true skin tone is what you see in the Nikon shot. He's blond and fair skinned.
If I want a fake tan look like the CO7 conversion I can do easily in post.
Straight RAW conversions should be accurate and natural.0 -
C1 seems to add some contrast to D800 files which also results in more saturation (goes hand in hand). Under the color icon (the 3 overlapping circles) go to Curve and change it from Film Standard to Film Extra Shadow. That usually works pretty well. Other than that you would have to start creating your own "natural settings" which once saved can easily be applied to all your new captures. 0 -
I prefer the skin tones in D800, the Canon has over saturated red. I guess you're just used to looking at images shot in canon.
I don't see any problem with it.0 -
I can of course see the difference, but the brown-tinted tone of CO is deliberate choice based on user input. Couple that with the use of the "Extra Shadow" film-curve and you have a very strong combination.
Remember you can always change the default color profile to something else (like your own custom ICC)0 -
[quote="FredBGG" wrote:
Why is the D800 camera profile so bad in CO7?
Fred,
As you have posted to the other relevant thread you are well aware of the ongoing discussion with this ICC profile.
viewtopic.php?f=46&t=15451&start=45&st=0&sk=t&sd=a
Let's please try to keep topics together so discussion can continue with existing threads.
Ultimately it seems to be a "you can't please everyone" issue.0 -
to me the one on the left looks too red, flat and unnatural. the one on the right looks more realistic color and has nice contrast. I prefer the one on the right by far. I have found that adobe raw conversions give a weird reddish feel to skin whereas Capture One is a much better starting point.
looking at it again maybe the right one needs to be bumped up a third in exposure or in curves.but there is much more contrast and definition in that one - look at his right cheek - the adobe one is totally flat and the Capture One version has much more of that 3-D effect.0
Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.
Kommentare
73 Kommentare