Colors Oversaturated
Hi,
I'm currently evaluating CaptureOne with LightRoom.
I've noticed that with the same raw image, the color of the object is more saturated, more yellow on CaptureOne than it is in LightRoom.
I'm trying to figure out the reason for this as the yellow tint seems to be exaggerated on CaptureOne. I've turned on HDR Highlight at a pretty high setting. I have my Sony's profile set to high contrast. I also have vibrance set to Classic which isn't supposed to add local color saturation. I'm wondering how I can get more neutral and accurate colors with CaptureOne.
I'm currently evaluating CaptureOne with LightRoom.
I've noticed that with the same raw image, the color of the object is more saturated, more yellow on CaptureOne than it is in LightRoom.
I'm trying to figure out the reason for this as the yellow tint seems to be exaggerated on CaptureOne. I've turned on HDR Highlight at a pretty high setting. I have my Sony's profile set to high contrast. I also have vibrance set to Classic which isn't supposed to add local color saturation. I'm wondering how I can get more neutral and accurate colors with CaptureOne.
0
-
If you are shooting raw files, I think you should find that settings on the camera like high contrast, vibrance, and so on, have no effect on the raw file. (You can check by shooting the same thing with two different lots of settings in the camera and then comparing them Capture One before any processing.)
Typically, images look a bit more saturated "out of the box" in Capture One than in Lightroom. Both are in fact applying some adjustments behind the scenes to the images before you see them. In Lightroom, choosing a different profile in the camera calibration panel will change things like how saturated, contrasty, etc the file looks before you get to work on it. In both apps you may want to adjust contrast, saturation, and a whole lot of other things up or down from the base point the app starts you off at. In other words, they provide you with a starting point to start from. In Capture One you can also change what that start point by changing the "curve" in the Base Characteristics tool (on the color tab). Try Linear Response for something completely different, for instance. (Some people like it as a starting point, though I only resort to it for a few images if I am not otherwise getting the result I want.)
Hope that helps.
Ian0 -
In addition to Ian's comments, do your comparisons at 100% zoom not 50% or less. See if there are any changes to the way things compare.
Grant0 -
I have made a import style preset of -20 in saturation, then the images looks normal on my screen, default looks a little too "fantastic" for me... 😊 0 -
[quote="NNN636203597830845919" wrote:
I've noticed that with the same raw image, the color of the object is more saturated, more yellow on CaptureOne than it is in LightRoom.
A problem some of us (especially users of more recent Canon bodies) have been railing against for years.
And - believe it or not - release 10 is better than its predecessors.
It's just "The Capture One look", I'm afraid. J M T explains what you might want to do; or you can make an old camera profile (the old profiles are much less of a problem) your default.0 -
[quote="SFA" wrote:
In addition to Ian's comments, do your comparisons at 100% zoom not 50% or less. See if there are any changes to the way things compare.
Some interesting (or depressing, depending on your turn of mind) reading on the subject here: viewtopic.php?f=61&t=247290 -
The worst implementation of this Phase One approach to increase saturation on smaller scale viewing or image size was (or is, I don't know if it has been resolved) the significant saturation bump on images (jpeg or tiff) with a largest width or height size smaller than 600px, when viewing these images in the CO1 viewer. I should check whether this saturation bump is still there. It seems that Phase One has a conviction that small images, and/or images that are viewed at a downscaled size, should get a satuaration bump. That might be what is behind this.
Chris0 -
[quote="ChrisM" wrote:
The worst implementation of this Phase One approach to increase saturation on smaller scale viewing or image size was (or is, I don't know if it has been resolved) the significant saturation bump on images (jpeg or tiff) with a largest width or height size smaller than 600px, when viewing these images in the CO1 viewer. I should check whether this saturation bump is still there. It seems that Phase One has a conviction that small images, and/or images that are viewed at a downscaled size, should get a satuaration bump. That might be what is behind this.
Chris
I'm not sure that is an intentional saturation bump.
The challenge with smaller images is having to bin pixels and in many cases the mix that combines to make a perceived colour may no be what we thing it is.
For example, grass is green, right? Except that in most images with an expanse of grass the predominant shade is yellow or very close to the yellow end of green (as we see it via the mix of pixels).
If you remove pixels form the display in order to obtain the smaller size the question of how to apportion the deletes across the perceived colour range becomes important. Or so it seems.
But ours eyes being adaptable windows feeding signals to the brain for interpretation may have other influences to - local surrounding colour casts for example.
Certain colour boundaries seem to be especially affected by this reworking. Yellow/Green and Orange/Red are two that come to mind.
Grant0 -
[quote="SFA" wrote:
[quote="ChrisM" wrote:
The worst implementation of this Phase One approach to increase saturation on smaller scale viewing or image size was (or is, I don't know if it has been resolved) the significant saturation bump on images (jpeg or tiff) with a largest width or height size smaller than 600px, when viewing these images in the CO1 viewer. I should check whether this saturation bump is still there. It seems that Phase One has a conviction that small images, and/or images that are viewed at a downscaled size, should get a satuaration bump. That might be what is behind this.
Chris
I'm not sure that is an intentional saturation bump.
The challenge with smaller images is having to bin pixels and in many cases the mix that combines to make a perceived colour may no be what we thing it is.
For example, grass is green, right? Except that in most images with an expanse of grass the predominant shade is yellow or very close to the yellow end of green (as we see it via the mix of pixels).
If you remove pixels form the display in order to obtain the smaller size the question of how to apportion the deletes across the perceived colour range becomes important. Or so it seems.
But ours eyes being adaptable windows feeding signals to the brain for interpretation may have other influences to - local surrounding colour casts for example.
Certain colour boundaries seem to be especially affected by this reworking. Yellow/Green and Orange/Red are two that come to mind.
Grant
Grant,
I was talking about a saturation bump here, not just a slight perception of higher saturation. Last time I checked (v9), it still happened, and happened exactly when the longest side of the image (either height or width) came below 600px, meaning that the same CO1 produced tiff/jpeg of 599px was about twice as saturated as the 601px version.
I will check whether this behavior is still happening.
Chris0 -
Ah, OK.
Not something I've noticed and I certainly have not checked for it.
Grant0
Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.
Kommentare
9 Kommentare