Colour Profile Problems Part 2
Hello all
Hopefully Drew will allow this thread to develop.
The 7D2 colour cast problem is blindingly obvious to me. I have the same problem with Cap1 and 7D.
In order to see it, just process and compare on the same screen. It is differences we are looking at, not absolutes.
Cap1 is not alone in this cast problem. I suspect many raw converters have been tweaked in the last year or so to make outputs look 'good'. But not realistic, I suggest.
I am fed up with fiddling around with colours in the yellow-orange-red-magnolia hue range (i.e. autumn leaf colours). I have now gone back to the camera manufacturers' own software for basic raw conversion. DPP and IDC do a good job to my eyes and on my screen. Then I process the basic tif outputs in 'proper' software, including Cap1.
In the past my main criterion for a good raw converter was noise control. Now, with modern cameras and refined software algorithms, noise is less of a problem and I am focused on colour tones. The least offensive ones (IMO) are now DxO-10 and ACDSee-8. Perhaps by next year it will be Cap1 v9?
Always ready to learn!
Peter
Hopefully Drew will allow this thread to develop.
The 7D2 colour cast problem is blindingly obvious to me. I have the same problem with Cap1 and 7D.
In order to see it, just process and compare on the same screen. It is differences we are looking at, not absolutes.
Cap1 is not alone in this cast problem. I suspect many raw converters have been tweaked in the last year or so to make outputs look 'good'. But not realistic, I suggest.
I am fed up with fiddling around with colours in the yellow-orange-red-magnolia hue range (i.e. autumn leaf colours). I have now gone back to the camera manufacturers' own software for basic raw conversion. DPP and IDC do a good job to my eyes and on my screen. Then I process the basic tif outputs in 'proper' software, including Cap1.
In the past my main criterion for a good raw converter was noise control. Now, with modern cameras and refined software algorithms, noise is less of a problem and I am focused on colour tones. The least offensive ones (IMO) are now DxO-10 and ACDSee-8. Perhaps by next year it will be Cap1 v9?
Always ready to learn!
Peter
0
-
Peter,
No problem. I must admit I did wonder why they had written rather than sending you an e-mail and also posting a comment on this thread !!
Disappointingly their silence says a a lot and whilst CO 8 may have a lot of very good features included with it, not being able to handle RAW conversion properly means those other features are of no use.
I guess we continue to wait.............
John0 -
[quote="NN635459933720599202UL" wrote:
Peter,
No problem. I must admit I did wonder why they had written rather than sending you an e-mail and also posting a comment on this thread !!
Disappointingly their silence says a a lot and whilst CO 8 may have a lot of very good features included with it, not being able to handle RAW conversion properly means those other features are of no use.
I guess we continue to wait.............
John
John,
It's tricky following the random name based posts but If I have this right you are Nikon user of the trial Capture One offer.
Have I got the correct John here?
If so, what does the silence tell you? Perhaps that few people have so far officially reported a problem?
Remember this is a Phase funded User to User forum not an official support channel.
Capture One has always managed the RAW conversion that I have asked of it very well. You simply cannot making the sweeping statement that you did. That there appear to be some discrepancies of opinion about default settings for output values for files from some cameras is not disputed. Certainly an "improved" default would be welcome where appropriate but that is somethings that has happened in the past and no doubt will happen again in the future. But defaults are defaults and whilst we would all like to have things done "our way" as a default that does not mean that alternative approaches are unavailable or fail totally - which seems to be what your statement implies.
That's very poor form on a public forum from a non-customer. (If I have the identity right).
A bit like saying Nikon can't make usable cameras because some D750 bodies are showing symptoms of internal reflections - or something like that. I very much doubt that anyone with an ounce of sense would believe that for a moment but there seem to be a lot of people on the Internet with no sense disseminating nonsense. And plenty more who are willing to believe it without question much to their own disadvantage.
Grant0 -
Hi John
I have just seen Grant's post. Not very nice reading for you, I suspect.
You are, of course, a fully paid-up user of Cap1 v8 (since the end of November 2014), following a trial of v7. This week you were drawn into contributing to a debate on colour issues with v8. Your first posts to Phase One.
I welcome you to the Phase fold. It can be daunting to start with but I can vouch that you will learn much that is not available (or not easily accessible) elsewhere. The forum is managed by Phase but of course it is funded by your money and mine. I suspect it is a bargain from Phase's point of view because it gives early warning of possible problems. There is always the option to submit a support case (look for "My Pages" on the Phase site), which should receive a professional response.
Some forum contributors dwell on nuanced issues. Others jump straight in! You get to recognise their writing styles. In my experience Grant's rather personal post was somewhat out of character. His contributions are well worth reading, although I confess that sometimes I lose track! I think he has some kind of link with Phase staff. So perhaps he can be more defensive of Phase than others.
Phase seem to be in denial of the 7D2 colour problem in v8. The phrase "there appear to be some discrepancies of opinion about default settings for output values for files from some cameras" is somewhat euphemistic, I feel, given that a few 7D2 users are turning elsewhere for raw conversion. I now use Cap1 7.1.3 to process 5D2 files. We all have our own experiences. And they are all equally valid!
Good luck to you.
Peter.0 -
[quote="Peter" wrote:
In my experience Grant's rather personal post was somewhat out of character. His contributions are well worth reading, although I confess that sometimes I lose track! I think he has some kind of link with Phase staff. So perhaps he can be more defensive of Phase than others.
Peter,
Not sure one can be personal to a relatively generic "number" but I thought I was being no more personal or, some might think, out of order than than the post I was commenting on and a rather sweeping statement it contained about RAW file processing.
And no, as I have said before, I have absolutely no direct or even indirect contact with anyone at Phase One other than through this forum or the Support Case system. I'm just a consumer like most people here.
Grant0 -
Peter,
Done nothing? That's pretty interesting to read, given my posts and requests in this thread. Please do not expect a day-to-day solution on this.
We are discussing all this internally. There is yet to be a conclusion, as we are still evaluating our test-data along with the images sent to us by users.
So to all in this thread, please help to keep this topic professional. We all benefit from that.0 -
Thanks for the update Christian.
It is good to hear that Phase One are still assessing this issue; I look forward to hearing the conclusions.
There are so many good features to Capture One, it would be a shame to have to stop using it because of this problem.
Regards,
Richard0 -
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
Peter,
Done nothing? That's pretty interesting to read, given my posts and requests in this thread.
To be fair Christian, your (welcome, of course) contributions to the thread thus far haven't really been in the spirit of keeping your customers up to date with developments.
One post criticised the supposed lack of examples/support cases...
...Which is somewhat confusing at face value.
Some of us would say that there have been a significant number of examples posted (here and in other threads, going back for some considerable time) demonstrating this problem; and as several of us have made clear, there's legitimate doubt about the value of camera-by-camera support cases for what clearly appears to be a systemic, rather than a case-by-case, issue.
One post explained what "finished" means in support case terms - an unsatisfactory response, it would appear.
And one post mentioned limited resources as justification for a lack of input. A cynic might observe that the lack of recources hasn't prevented Phase One's contributions to the thread, but - strangely - has prevented those contributions from containing any information directly relevant to the concerns being expressed.
Your latest post is really all we needed to read - arguably several pages ago...0 -
Keith,
I don't see your post as contributing to the thread-context. Keep this professional and on-topic.0 -
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
Keith,
I don't see your post as contributing to the thread-context. Keep this professional and on-topic.
Christian,
I think it's unfair to allow yourself a defense in this thread, but no response to it. Either completely ignore the criticisms regarding staff involvement, or expect a retort when you defend your point.
On topic (slightly). I think there should be an active bug/development sub-site that allows us to see the progress of a bug report. Whether it's acknowledged and filed, disregarded, in progress, etc.0 -
[quote="photoGrant" wrote:
On topic (slightly). I think there should be an active bug/development sub-site that allows us to see the progress of a bug report. Whether it's acknowledged and filed, disregarded, in progress, etc.
Excellent suggestion. I'm really surprised that Phase One doesn't do this already.
Richard0 -
[quote="photoGrant" wrote:
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
Keith,
I don't see your post as contributing to the thread-context. Keep this professional and on-topic.
Christian,
I think it's unfair to allow yourself a defense in this thread, but no response to it. Either completely ignore the criticisms regarding staff involvement, or expect a retort when you defend your point.
On topic (slightly). I think there should be an active bug/development sub-site that allows us to see the progress of a bug report. Whether it's acknowledged and filed, disregarded, in progress, etc.
I'm not here to defend nor attack. I'm here to listen to, get inspired by, help or guide our customers where I can, as I am trying to do here.
Focus has to be on the color-issue. Currently, only 3 people have sent us raw-files for 7d2, so there is still plenty room for more examples, given the impressive number of posts in this thread. The more examples we have, the more input gets taken into account for a potential new profile.0 -
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
[quote="photoGrant" wrote:
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
Keith,
I don't see your post as contributing to the thread-context. Keep this professional and on-topic.
Christian,
I think it's unfair to allow yourself a defense in this thread, but no response to it. Either completely ignore the criticisms regarding staff involvement, or expect a retort when you defend your point.
On topic (slightly). I think there should be an active bug/development sub-site that allows us to see the progress of a bug report. Whether it's acknowledged and filed, disregarded, in progress, etc.
I'm not here to defend nor attack. I'm here to listen to, get inspired by, help or guide our customers where I can, as I am trying to do here.
Focus has to be on the color-issue. Currently, only 3 people have sent us raw-files for 7d2, so there is still plenty room for more examples, given the impressive number of posts in this thread. The more examples we have, the more input gets taken into account for a potential new profile.
Could you maybe acknowledge the second part of my post that gives a constructive way to proceed in future?0 -
do people who have issues with color rendering based on P1 supplied profiles see the same issues with raw files containing the shots of regular targets like xrite passport, colorchecker sg, qpcard ? or those targets are all fine with P1 profiles and only real life shots have issues ? because if the same issues are with those targets may be we can really switch to such shots instead of birds beaks ? at least even with consumer level target, w/o access to their individual measurements, there are more or less established what measurements (within of course certain dE*, actual do vary) for their patches are... how about we try to switch the discussion to publicly available raw files from imaging resource ? get a raw file, do conversion and illustrate what particular patch gets to with P1 profile and what do you think it shall be... much more productive way to discuss instead trading accusations and arguing about tastes... no ? 0 -
[quote="photoGrant" wrote:
On topic (slightly). I think there should be an active bug/development sub-site that allows us to see the progress of a bug report. Whether it's acknowledged and filed, disregarded, in progress, etc.
From my past experiences of such matters, even before the internet made "communication" so arbitrary, that is one bun-fight that I suspect would be more harmful than helpful. Far more difficult than herding cats.
I say this even though I would absolutely love to see something along those lines ...
Where it just might work could be within the context of a specialist sub-group of recognised experts all having a broadly common interest in making things work as efficiently as possible.
However that would leave a lot of people who would feel entitled to be informed out in the cold. Me for example.
Do any software developers have such a system in place and publicly accessible?
Grant0 -
[quote="SFA" wrote:
[quote="photoGrant" wrote:
Do any software developers have such a system in place and publicly accessible?
Grant
Sure, plenty.
If you want to see how customer support on a forum is done, just take a casual browse
Adobe - http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family
Spotify - https://community.spotify.com/t5/ideas/ ... ost-kudoed
Autodesk - http://3dsmaxfeedback.autodesk.com/foru ... e-requests
Mozilla - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org
The fact of the matter is, the user base (especially ESPECIALLY the more vocal/contributing kind) are majorly important to the health and growth of a company and those that are willing to invest their time and energy in the pursued growth of the product should be met with graciousness and a humbled tone because we're doing this ON TOP of paying for the software.
I've witnessed one too many times a defensive tone with regards to support and it's pushing me and others further and further away from enjoying the engagement and growth of an active community.
Change the way your support works and watch the community grow. I genuinely, genuinely urge you to read through the Agile Bits forum. A very small team of hard working support staff whose sole job it is, is to make the community feel like their voice is heard (even if it's wrong) and problems are solved. We don't get that here and it makes for a very cold and uninviting place to be.
The services that use something like Lithium have it right. Correct answers are met with 'karma'. This allows common questions to stay near the top and an answer that many find helpful to be easily seen. The way we currently operate is that every day or so the same topic gets posted either because the previous one was locked, or people don't want to delve through pages and pages of forum threads trying to find a problem similar to their own.
If this is verging too far off topic, please allow a separate thread for us to discuss this because clearly it's an important topic and one that should involve those who are active in this community (we're here to help people, too).0 -
Grant,
I'm in complete agreement with your comments and suggestion as whats currently in place doesn't appear to be working very well.
John0 -
I do not in the Support Team, so it is not my place to comment on their systems.
I am here to make sure that people who have issues with the colors on the 7d2 knows what to send us, so our Imagecore team can take a look for themselves. So far only 3 people have done that, so we do need more samples.0 -
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
I do not in the Support Team, so it is not my place to comment on their systems.
I am here to make sure that people who have issues with the colors on the 7d2 knows what to send us, so our Imagecore team can take a look for themselves. So far only 3 people have done that, so we do need more samples.
Sure,
Send us a link to the bug report so we can collectively as users submit feedback and images and get status reports and we'll be more than happy to do our part. We'll even feel a little tingle in our hearts when we open our inboxes in the morning to get a ticket closed e-mail saying the bug has been fixed.
In the mean time, telling users that this is not a staff-to-user support forum then telling us to blast through 8 pages of posts in a thread to find that you've finally agreed it might be a problem, only to be told to go somewhere else and submit another support ticket separately from the current communication channel... To be replied and have the ticket closed with no mention of who even handled the ticket or whether anything will actually get fixed -- is ass-backwards and a sure fire way to annoy your user base and in fact, give them little to no reason to go out of their way as paying customers to give you images as evidence.
Making your users jump through hoops is bull. Isn't 3 sets of evidence plus your own testing, enough?
I submitted a bug-report to Adobe regarding a rulers issue (redraw performance dived with rulers enabled). They had only one other person submit this ticket. Did they ask for more evidence? No, they conducted a few internal tests, agreed it was an issue and filed the bug-ticket as pending a fix. Beautiful.
You should also be aware that since Apple announced the shutting down of Aperture you've been getting a huge influx of new users looking to convert. Meet them with 'business as usual' support and documentation and they aren't going to stick around long.0 -
Hi Christian
Thank you for picking up the baton on behalf of Phase.
I do not have a 7D2 body, but I did submit a support case re 5D2 that Ulf responded to. I am trying to digest the implications of what he has written - basically that Phase prefers the 'pleasing image' approach and this can be tweaked in C1 as necessary. Fair enough, but the 'tweaking' required is a major challenge. He reminded me that v8 has an option to change the default colour engine from v8 to v7. I have tried this but I see no difference?!
I am frankly very puzzled why so few 7D2 users have responded to your request for processed images. May I repeat my suggestion that you could post a couple of ex-7D2 raw images, plus a set C1 recipe, that users can process and return to you in jpeg format.
However, the bottom line for all of us is that you have received only three submissions so far. Perhaps you need to do more to encourage an open two-way dialogue. Does Phase actually accept that there is a real problem?
As an aside I would like to know why the Sony profile is clearly so superior to Canon? In what way is a 'V2' profile superior to a generic one?
Regards, Peter.0 -
OK, here is another example - this time from Chichester.
http://i1381.photobucket.com/albums/ah220/Python54/phase_one/IMJ_1046_DPP_zpscs0o3fia.jpg
http://i1381.photobucket.com/albums/ah220/Python54/phase_one/IMJ_1046_CO_5D2_zpsuavdma72.jpg
http://i1381.photobucket.com/albums/ah220/Python54/phase_one/IMJ_1046_CO_7D2_zpstjqu481c.jpg
The most obvious difference is in the colour handling of the brick wall in the foreground. The CO_7D2 version shows noticeably darker bricks, the DPP version is closer to reality.
If you flick back-and-forth between the 5D2 and 7D2 versions in Photobucket, you notice the familiar orange tint in the 7D2 image e.g. on the cathedral and on the wooden fence on the left of the picture.
Regards,
Richard0 -
Christian,
This forum draws comments from your customers who have paid to use the software. When those customers start telling you there is an issue and a fundamental issue at that with their product, its normally a good idea for that company to start listening to what its customers are saying.
Your response is not helpful and it has merely fanned the flames on this issue.
John0 -
Hello everyone
I am uncomfortable with the direction this thread is taking. I am sure Christian and Phase have received our messages loud and clear!
Clearly Phase has not found a quick fix. If they want more images so be it. It is their company. They do it their way.
Christian is an employee, not the CEO. Please don't shoot the messenger!
Peter.0 -
Hi Richard
Yes, it really is so obvious! Enough said. Over to Phase.
Peter.0 -
It would seem only 3 7D2 users have enough concerns to respond despite an active post with a lot of comments.
Phase would like some more examples so that their response encompasses more than 3 points of view in addition to what they provided originally. Presumably the risk is that 3 viewpoints (for all we know they may all be heading in different directions in terms of preferences) will still not be certain to provide enough useful input to allow a consolidated revised profile to be developed.
But then if most users are not complaining and, perhaps, the examples provided do not obviously suggest an adjustment that would satisfy all the reported criticisms, what should they do?
I can't think of any obvious reason for Phase to sandbag on this. The responses from Phase are unusually public for this particular subject - it would be much easier to simply say that there will be a revised profile in a future release. But no, the test team representative is inviting further examples but getting no response.
If I was in the supplier position right now I would be wondering what was really going in here. And I say that despite a feeling that there is a challenge to be addressed. But I don't have a 7D2 or any other body that is clearly and consistently affected by colour anomalies and that leaves me short of a horse in the race.
Grant0 -
I am just curious how many samples do Phase need. Or do they need any in the first place.
There are 24 pathches standard ColorChecker or 35 patches QPcard that can be used scientifically to measure how an icc profile performs. Let alone there is a CG version that have over hundred of patches.
Although passing these ColorChecker tests do not guarantee accuracy for all colors, failing the test would mean that the colors are significantly off no matter how "pleasing" it looks to your eyes.
If Phase manage to produce an icc profle that has delta E within 3, at least the primary and secondary color are reasonably accurate.
I would be quite surpised to know that Phase deliver icc profile without any measurement or objective quality check.0 -
P1 is rich enough to have a custom made target with a lot of patches vs SG and certainly measured with properly calibrated spectrophotometer on top of that... that's not an issue for them if they so desire to use one 0 -
[quote="Urukhai" wrote:
I am just curious how many samples do Phase need. Or do they need any in the first place.
they certainly can make a shot of whatever targets they have (and I bet they have a variety) and compare the output of C1 w/ P1 profile vs any other raw converter out there and then compare the output patch by patch... if somebody claims that for a particular camera yellows are too orange vs the rest of the pack, their test engineers do not really need customer supplied raw files... that's is if they really curious to answer the claims made here0 -
Just taken these test shots.
Firstly with the EOS 40D
40D photo processed with DPP
http://i1381.photobucket.com/albums/ah220/Python54/phase_one/IMG_8854_CO_40D_zpsjpy2sgyp.jpg
40D photo processed with CO + 40 Generic profile
http://i1381.photobucket.com/albums/ah220/Python54/phase_one/IMG_8854_CO_40D_zpsjpy2sgyp.jpg
Next with the 7D2
7D2 photo processed with DPP
http://i1381.photobucket.com/albums/ah220/Python54/phase_one/IMJ_1682_DPP_zpsioco4g3k.jpg
7D2 photo processed with CO + 5D2 profile
http://i1381.photobucket.com/albums/ah220/Python54/phase_one/IMJ_1682_CO_5D2_zps8n8fha73.jpg
7D2 photo processed with CO + 7D2 profile
http://i1381.photobucket.com/albums/ah220/Python54/phase_one/IMJ_1682_CO_7D2_zpslbugimrt.jpg
Notice that the colour representation in the picture is quite close, except for the 7D2 image processes with CO using the 7D2 profile, in particular the fence to the left of the tree.
Regards,
Richard0 -
RichardT, if you haven't done already, please send the raws (and your comparison jpegs) to our Support guys as well.
Thanks!0 -
[quote="Christian Gruner" wrote:
RichardT, if you haven't done already, please send the raws (and your comparison jpegs) to our Support guys as well.
Thanks!
Hi Christian,
I have attempted to upload the raws and jpegs to my original support case (170473).
Regards,
Richard0
Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.
Kommentare
225 Kommentare