Nikon Picture Controls
Nikon Picture Controls don't match. In the end of this post is an example with the camera's JPG and the NEF in C1. The Picture control chosen in camera was "Standard". The profile in C1 is "Nikon D850 Nikon - Standard". I see differences in tones, contrast, highlights. Most obvious to me are the different blue tone in the jacket and skin tones in the face. The camera is a Nikon D850, I had made Picture Control adjustments in camera: Clarity +1, Sharpness +3. These changes can't count for the differences. There seems to be more clarity and contrast applied to the NEF in C1. This is opposed to what should be expected as the C1 should show the image without adjustments to the original Picture Control.
This is from the release note:
"The profiles available in Nikon Picture Controls are now replicated within Capture One for selected camera models. These profiles are available from the ICC Profile menu within Base Characteristics. They provide the same tone curve and color corrections known from the built-in Nikon JPG files as a starting point for your raw file."
In my experience these profiles are not replicas. They are more "inspired by", if even that. I would appreciate if a Phase One representative could clarify exactly what to expect from the profiles.
I also have a few constructive suggestions:
1. Make the profiles match the picture controls 100%
2. Profiles should be applied automatically and correspond to the choice made in camera.
More wishes:
1. As Nikon and C1 now has a partnership - how about developing a full featured extra RAW conversion module for Nikon NEF, that include Picture Control with adjustments (Sharpening, Clarity, Contrast etc.) and also active D-lighting?
2. All settings above should be automatically applied when importing
3. Lens corrections in camera and in C1 are still different. I prefer Nikon's. It would be great to have those included in C1.
Let me end this post by saying that I am really happy Nikon and C1 have a partnership. I hope it will get even better to make the workflow easier for Nikon photographers.
-
Simon:
I don't mean to be argumentative, but that looks like a pretty good match color wise. Drop the brightness a tad on the raw file and I think they'd match really well.
Having said that, if you really like the way Nikon makes pictures look you could either shoot jpgs or use Nikon's raw converter and get just what you want.
Capture One has resources that they can spend however they think will provide the most return. I hope they spend them in some other way than matching Nikon.
And having said all that, the C1 profiles for the Z7 don't do squat. I had one look and I really can't see any difference in any of them other than the monochrome. And you know what I'm going to do about that? I'm not going to use them.
-1 -
Simon, is the color space of the in-camera jpg the same as the proof profile in C1? sRGB, AdobeRGB...
I agree with Tom it is not a bad match.
Is there a partnership between Nikon and C1, or just a reduced price for the Nikon only version?
Nikon just recently released a profit warning. C1 is probably doing well, but given that we now have the option for a reduced Nikon version plus Nikon profiles I am happy and don't expect a better Nikon match either, at least for the time being. I think too that C1 has other homework and new features to do, which benefit all but not only us few Nikon users.
just my 2cents.
regards
0 -
Capture One used their resources to make profiles that doesn't match. The reason for that is unclear, it could be Nikon not providing all information about their NEFs or it could be a technical limitation of C1. Whatever it is I think it should have been done properly or not at all. Especially when claiming "The profiles available in Nikon Picture Controls are now replicated within Capture One for selected camera models".
Great for you Tom if your happy with things how they are. But you don't have to spread your "It's no big deal"-philosophy on others for whom it might matter, complicate the workflow etc.0 -
Simon, you are right, they are not a match, even to my untrained eyes. Period. So this is a false claim from CO team or they did a bad job.
Just a question, there is ICC profiles and there is Curves. Could you choose another curve to see if it is a match?
also submit this as a request and let them answer it.
0 -
photo by FA:
-Curve was Auto by default, and it is also the choice that has the best match.
-I can also add that I manually adjusted Light falloff to 38 in the Lens Correction tool. By default corners were too dark.0 -
A replica is not the original, per definition. Period. I can't see a false claim...
Did you consider sample to sample variations of sensors? This might or might not be an influencing factor, maybe other technical or demosaicing differences play into it (C1 is probably not going to change their demosaic algorithm to fit every manufactures s variant, even if they knew). A "bad" job is definitely exaggerated in my view.
Anyway, differing opinions are great, it enriches life, and a formal request is always a good idea.
regards
0 -
Simon: I'll check with you before I post anything else. Thanks.
0 -
Hello Community,
I am a bit confused by all of this.
I am not sure that C1 and Nikon have now a working agreement, I suspect that C1 tended to "mimic" (replicate) the (appearance of the) Nikon curves in a lab, so that they could "look like" in-body curves.
I must say I was hoping more compatibility from this release.That said, I would welcome more evolutions to build a true replacement in C1 for the defunct Nikon Capture NX-2.
Now, to be sure I totally understand the logic:
C1 proposes Nikon Picture Control equivalents, it does not read them from the EXIF, right ?So: which Picture Control would you select in your body to get the best result in C1 ?
Thanks in advance for your enlightened answers
0 -
Usual in-camera settings like Picture control only affects the jpg engine in the camera, the raw file is not affected (maybe active D lighting as an exception?). So it shouldn't matter what you choose in the camera, as C1 uses the raw file plus the C1 inherent base characteristic settings.
regards
0 -
Claude CAUWE:
C1 proposes Nikon Picture Control equivalents, it does not read them from the EXIF, right ?
No, C1 will still automatically apply the "Nikon D850 Generic" profile, regardless of which Picture Control was chosen in camera. NEF is a proprietary file format and only Nikon knows all the secrets. All 3rd party programs Have had to reverse engineer how their RAW converters interpret colors and curves in NEF files. Picture Controls and Active D-Lightning are settings that hasn't been reverse engineered well by any 3rd party, they are only available in Nikon's own software View-NX and NX-D.So: which Picture Control would you select in your body to get the best result in C1 ?
It won't matter as C1 will apply its own Generic profile at import anyway.
My assumption that there is a partnership between C1 and Nikon is based on the earlier Sony and Fujifilm versions. C1 for Sony was the first dedicated version at a reduced price, and it's hard to imagine that would happen without a partnership. The Fujifilm version was the next one and it provides Fujifilm profiles for Fujifilm RAW files:
From the documentation: "Capture One supports a range of Fujifilm Film Simulations like Fujifilm Provia and Fujifilm Velvia when working with Fujifilm RAF raw files. The different Film Simulations are available from the Curve drop-down menu in the Base Characteristics tool in the Color tool tab when working on an applicable Fujifilm RAF raw file. This is available in both Capture One Pro and Capture One Pro (for Fujifilm)."
Here there's not talk about "replication" but "support". Replication is of course an action of copying. A good replica should, however, be indistinguishable from the original. Why they took the approach of replicating is a big question mark. If they have a partnership with Nikon, why didn't they get access to the NEF secrets? Or is it really so that this could be the first dedicated version without co-operation with the camera manufacturer? I would highly appreciate if a C1 representative could give us some more information about these topics.0 -
"No, C1 will still automatically apply the "Nikon D850 Generic" profile, regardless of which Picture Control was chosen in camera."
Agreed, but from the same menu, you can now select the pseudo-Picture Controls.
So it will no longer be "generic" anymore, but one of the NPC's.
Do they overwrite the NPC chosen in the body, or do they combine ?Hence my question: which one should one chose in the body. E.g. if I chose Landscape in the body, will the result be better if I chose "Landscape" in C1 as well ? Or doesn't it matter at all ?
0 -
Here is some basic information about RAW files and how RAW converters handles the files. I will talk about RAW files when I talk about RAW files generally and NEF files when I specifically mean Nikon NEF files, which is Nikon's proprietary name of RAW files generated in Nikon camers.
1. Capture One never alters the original RAW files. All adjustments are saved separately.2. A RAW file is by definition untouched data. It includes all data captured by the sensor and all settings made in camera. A RAW file always have to be converted before viewing it on a screen. Settings such as white balance, curves etc. are applied by the RAW converter. NPC settings are embedded in the NEF file, but they have to be interpreted by a RAW converter. Only Nikon's RAW converters, such as View-NX, Capture NX-D and earlier Capture NX2 have had this ability. 3rd party developers have needed to reverse engineer Nikon curves colors, white balance etc.
3. When you chose a profile in C1 it doesn't affect the RAW data in any way. It only effects how the RAW data is interpreted. These settings are always saved separately, not applied to the RAW file.
4. It would be possible (Ithink) for C1 to identify which NPC was chosen in camera and then apply the replicated one automatically. This is not happenin. C1 still applies the generic profile.
Conclusion: When using C1 is doesn't matter what NPC you chose in camera. The generic profile will be applied by default and you can chose the replicated profile manually.
How I would like this to work ideally:
1. C1 identifies the NPC chosen in camera and applies it on import.
2. NPC should be viewed the same way in C1 as in Nikon's proprietary software. At least basic profiles but ideally also with adjusted profiles.
3. To make the user experience even better, Nikon Lens Corrections and Active D-Lightning should also be available in C1.
In practice this would mean that you get a starting point identical to using Capture NX-D as RAW converter, but you would also be able to use C1's all wonderful tools and apply them on the RAW file.
If a user now wants NPC colors and curves, the only option is to use Capture NX-D. You can't continue work on the RAW file in any other editor and maintain Nikon colors.0 -
Agree with your wishlist.
1 -
Claude,
Regarding your question
"Hence my question: which one should one chose in the body. E.g. if I chose Landscape in the body, will the result be better if I chose "Landscape" in C1 as well ? Or doesn't it matter at all ?"
It does not matter.
The body creates a NEF file, with raw sensor data, the raw data is not affected by Picture Control settings.
It is up to a raw converter to interpret the sensor data and create a pixel file with RGB values. C1 is a raw converter, View NX is another, and the camera body (firmware) has a raw converter too.
The camera uses its raw converter to create in-camera jpgs, as well as the small preview which you see in camera or on your computer e.g. in explorer or finder.
The picture controls should affect this preview only. Like a box with cookies, the preview is like a nice picture of the cookies printed on the box, the raw cookies inside the box don't care about the picture on the box they are sold in.
When a raw converter creates an RGB pixel image, it interprets the raw sensor data, which does not have color information for its photosites. The raw converter knows which color matrix (color mosaic) lies over the sensor in camera, e.g. Bayer or Fuji x-trans, so it can create an RGB pixel image. This process step is called de-mosaic-ing. This process also deals with noise, and it also looks at neighboring pixels (or sensor photosites). There are more than one demosaicing algorithms in the world, and I know only one software which allows you to choose: RawTherapee.
C1, LR, Nikon incamera or ViewNX, DXO, Canon, they all have a demosaicing algorithm but don't disclose which or how exactly this is implemented. Noise reduction, sharpening, contrast, all these algorithms is somewhat different from converter to converter and makes us prefer one over the other, and sometimes on a per image basis.
Secret sauce of the different companies I guess.
This demosaicing has a visual impact also on colors to my believe, so if C1 does not use the exact implementation (code) of Nikon, there will be differences.
Now the picture control settings / color profiles come into play, but they only convert or transform color values, on an image which is already slightly different due to the different demosaicing implementation.
It is an interesting idea to have a converter which takes the exact implementation of each camera vendor, but this would require the vendors sharing or providing executables or libraries, so that not the C1 code would be executed but the vendor code. This is extremely unlikely. But even if, I have some doubts that the C1 tools would work as intended then. I further believe it would be costly.
In essence, I believe C1 has created color profiles so that C1 developed raw images, as good as possible and within reasonable effort, match the perception of images developed with a Nikon converter.
In other words, you'll get images which look like being developed in C1 (as opposed to LR look, for example) but with colors very close to Nikon.
If that is not what you want, in-camera jpgs or a Nikon converter software is an alternative.
But there is nothing wrong in requesting one's wish with a feature request.
Disclaimer: The above is based on my non-professional understanding of how raw converters work.
This official statement might be of interest to you:
https://support.captureone.com/hc/en-us/articles/360007388658
regards
1 -
Thank you for a very detailed and comprehensive explanation, BeO. Even if I had a reasonable understanding of the RAW/NEF "development" mechanisms, it always helps to have it said with other words (nice analogy with the cookies box, by the way :-) ).
All is not always that easy, because, for instance, I realized that increasing the "de-noising" in the body actually creates MORE noise in non-nikon development software. Possibly due to some Nikon-owned coding.
A Nikon software is, as you said, an alternative. But since Nikon Capture NX2 was killed, their current NX-D version is far from efficient in terms of speed and management of batches. Pity, but it's for free. You get what you pay for...
0 -
Thanks Claude. I may have made a mistake because I guess the next time I buy cookies I probably will think about Nikon profiles... :-)
Yes I believe there are a few settings which affect the raw data, Active D Lighting I think.
Interesting, what is the menu code for de-noising, I need to remember to leave it at default. Is this the long exposure or normal NR?
I switched from Nikon to mirrorless a few years ago, now I am on the verge going back "home". Need to look into current Nikon software then, too.
0 -
It was for normal NR. I now leave it "off", and my files, even in RAW/NEF contain less noise. Go figure :-)
Long exposure is another game: if the camera take an exposure of 8 seconds or more (number to be confirmed, just out of memory), the cam will take the picture, then close the shutter, and take exactly the same picture "without subject" ( as the shutter is closed).
It will identify the bright pixels caused by the heating of the sensor during long exposure, produce a "negative" image, and blend the two to erase these "warm" pixels from the file.
Very efficient, but takes a hell of a time, because on top of taking the second pict with the same exposure time, the camera also has to process them.
0 -
Thanks Claude.
0 -
I really love natural Nikon skin tones and for years would love to see it in Capture One.
Sometimes I even use genuine Nikon NX-D software since it replicates the in-camera look, but in general the NX-D is almost useless.
So I was very excited when I read the news about genuine Nikon colors in CO1.
In reality, it's not even close. The photos look extremely different in almost every aspect: brightness, contrast, saturation, colors, especially shadows.
I tried to compare simple straight no-adjusted images, and even Standard look different.
Hope to see it changed one day. Examples are attached. Neutral JPG from camera is on the right and "Capture One NIkon D850 Neutral Profile" is on the left.
1 -
Thank you Roman for testing and sharing this. Your findings are similar to mine. To me the difference is most obvious in the blue shirt. Nikon's is much less saturated. But as you stated - there are differences in almost every aspect.
I made a custom profile that is much closer to Nikon's Standard Picture Control in 20 minutes, which makes me think that C1 didn't put much effort to these profiles.
I really hope we could see true Nikon colors in C1 some day.0 -
I would add to a wishlist an ability to import custom picture controls to C1. Nikon's native software lets you do this. And you can use them with Capture NX-D after importing to Picture Control Utility.
0 -
Hi guys. Since this discussion there have been new development. Nikon has come out with Studio NX, again a free software and much better faster than NX D. Those wanting identical Nikon Colors can use it as RAW converter and then use the resulting JPEGS in PS or even C1 for further editing.
0 -
Since 1.5 years I'm a Nikon guy again (Z 7) and I now must say that the C1 Nikon profiles aren't very good, and I mean bigger deviations than the ones shown in above pictures.
NX Studio is indeed a lot better than NX-D.
I'm particularly interested in the Nikon Flat profile as it renders very natural colors, unlike the C1 profiles (C1 Nikon and C1 Z 7 Generic), and I think the C1 Nikon ProStandard is even more orangy than the "old" Generic or Generic v2, they even out real word color nuances.
I guess C1 proclaimed goal of the ProStandard profiles is achieved, smoother color & tone variations for product and portrait photography, but that is not the genre I'm interested in. I want color variation in my images where color variation is in the real scene.
I am still not a fan of the NX Studio editing tools though, and also not of the noise reduction, C1 clearly has the better NR, better tools and better workflow, imo.
So I tried to tweak the C1 Nikon Z 7 Flat profile (with Linear Response curve) to better match the NX Studio profile with the C1 red curve (and a bit green and blue curve), and though I achieved a very good result for one image (but not in 20 minutes), applying this as a style to other images didn't work out well.
So my question is about your experiences about trying to replicate the Nikon colors with C1, are you successful, could you create a style, what tools and adjustments did you make, which profiles did you replicate.
0 -
Well, since the arrival of Nikon NX-Studio, and the fact that C22 won't run on Mojave, I must say that the most of my "normal" work is done on NX-Studio.
Precisely to keep Nikon's original colors.
And it is only when I need additional touching-up (e.g. for big scale posters or Chromalux works) that I resort to C21. For all normal "good" items, I find enough resources in NX-Studio to deliver more than decent results.
0 -
If color rendering is a priority you have to use Nikon's own proprietary software to achieve the best results. It is the same with Fujifilm. So, you have to trade something off, for instance, noise reduction capabilities.
By the way, that is the same with film photography. There are a lot of presets to simulate film colors and look but you can not beat film itself.
Try exporting with TIFF 16bit from NX Studio and then use C1. Perhaps, you can balance some shortcomings.
0 -
Try exporting with TIFF 16bit from NX Studio and then use C1. Perhaps, you can balance some shortcomings.
Yes, It is what I do when special care is needed. For mots illustration pictures, Studio NX totally does the job, often with not much more than adjusting the D-Lighting …
One needs to be careful, though, that C1 doesn’t apply a profile of itself on the TIFF when importing - that would ruin the Studio-NX step.
0 -
Interesting. Do you manage all images with C1 (e.g. in a catalog), even those you develop only with NX Studio?
So you did not try to improve the Nikon profiles of C1 using a style to get a better match, or did you try and have not been successful?
0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
27 comments