DNG Colour
I understand that Capture One Pro ver 9 supports opening and then using DNG files, but it does not support the colour checker passport profiles. Unfortunate. My work flow depends on accurate colour, and although Capture One IC is good the colour is too fashionable...not really all that accurate.
My repro work is dependent upon making In Camera profile and then importing it for use in C1. This works well and I do get very good colour. This is obtained in a very controlled work environment...but only for 2D flat art work.
My product photography work cannot make use of those same IN Camera profiles and this is where the Colour checker Passport profiles [or a Phase One Version?] could come into play.
My repro work is dependent upon making In Camera profile and then importing it for use in C1. This works well and I do get very good colour. This is obtained in a very controlled work environment...but only for 2D flat art work.
My product photography work cannot make use of those same IN Camera profiles and this is where the Colour checker Passport profiles [or a Phase One Version?] could come into play.
1
-
[quote="Grant Kernan" wrote:
I understand that Capture One Pro ver 9 supports opening and then using DNG files, but it does not support the colour checker passport profiles.
you can create icc/icm profiles for C1 using X-Rite passport target... a plenty of software does that, for example argyll or rawdigger + argyll or dcamprof + argyll , etc, etc...[quote="Grant Kernan" wrote:
My work flow depends on accurate colour
how accurately you can reproduce a different (not a different x-rite passport, but totally different type), measured, target in your converter with your "colour checker passport profile" ? what is the max/avg dE2K for the set of patches ? I am just curious as your claim reproduction work and I'd assume you don't go by your eyes, but by some instrument measurements (with spectrophotometer) to compare how your conversion with profile fares against that ?[quote="Grant Kernan" wrote:
My repro work is dependent upon making In Camera profile and then importing it for use in C1. This works well and I do get very good colour. This is obtained in a very controlled work environment...but only for 2D flat art work.
My product photography work cannot make use of those same IN Camera profiles and this is where the Colour checker Passport profiles [or a Phase One Version?] could come into play.
which specific software are you using to create icc/icm profiles for C1 for your repro work that can't handle x-rite passport target (if you so inclined to use that) ?0 -
[quote="deejjjaaaa" wrote:
[quote="Grant Kernan" wrote:
you can create icc/icm profiles for C1 using X-Rite passport target... a plenty of software does that, for example argyll or rawdigger + argyll or dcamprof + argyll , etc, etc...
No solution that i know of for mac that does this as easy and straight forward as spydercheckr or X-rite does.0 -
Pictocolors "In Camera" software does a great job using Xrite's colorchecker Digital SG chart [formerly Greytag Macbeth]
It however is very exposure dependent and lends itself to flat fine art repro.
I am looking for a solution which works for uncontrolled lighting as in shooting 3D work with graduated backgrounds and intended over/under exposed areas.0 -
[quote="Paul Lindqvist" wrote:
[quote="deejjjaaaa" wrote:
[quote="Grant Kernan" wrote:
you can create icc/icm profiles for C1 using X-Rite passport target... a plenty of software does that, for example argyll or rawdigger + argyll or dcamprof + argyll , etc, etc...
No solution that i know of for mac that does this as easy and straight forward as spydercheckr or X-rite does.
1) spydercheckr OEM software does not create DCP profiles, it creates recipes/presets.
2) with x-rite you do not control anything - the mere fact that X-Rite dropped generation of icc/icm profiles (that was an option in prerelease/beta version) speaks volumes what price "easy and straight forward" means.
3) and for the easy and straight forward - OOC JPG is easy and straightforward, but you nevertheless use raw converter... the same goes with profiles... better results require investment (time & effort) in mastering the tools.0 -
[quote="Grant Kernan" wrote:
Pictocolors "In Camera" software does a great job using Xrite's colorchecker Digital SG chart [formerly Greytag Macbeth]
I see... so how is the precision ? better than this in C1 ? top/left from reference target actually measured with i1Pro2 / bottom right conversion with profile (built with DCamProf = http://www.ludd.ltu.se/~torger/dcamprof.html ) ?
http://s9.postimg.org/6vnkxrqb3/match.jpg[quote="Grant Kernan" wrote:
It however is very exposure dependent and lends itself to flat fine art repro.
I am looking for a solution which works for uncontrolled lighting as in shooting 3D work with graduated backgrounds and intended over/under exposed areas.
uncontrolled lighting means what - bad spectrum like sodium vapor street lights or just exposure but you bring your own decent (or even good) spectrum light with you (led panels, halogen, etc) ?0 -
[quote="deejjjaaaa" wrote:
1) spydercheckr OEM software does not create DCP profiles, it creates recipes/presets.
2) with x-rite you do not control anything - the mere fact that X-Rite dropped generation of icc/icm profiles (that was an option in prerelease/beta version) speaks volumes what price "easy and straight forward" means.
3) and for the easy and straight forward - OOC JPG is easy and straightforward, but you nevertheless use raw converter... the same goes with profiles... better results require investment (time & effort) in mastering the tools.
1. True, but the result i pretty much the same as he X-rite
2. Still professionals all over the world use it daily to get better results, my self included.
3. To a certain point yes, but using software with UI from the early 80's hosted on website with flashing neon titles does not make it any easier. I'm a photographer, not a mad scientist YMMV. 😉
Bottomline there is no equivalent to X-rite or Spyderchkrs solution that is available for LR. Whom who that doesn't who i don't know and it doesn't really matter.0 -
Okay,
I complicated things as I am talking two different scenarios.
#1 is the repro work which is very accurate. The "In Camera" software
samples the processed tiff file which includes my digital color checker SG chart and then builds a very good profile...as long as I keep lighting and exposure consistent.
I am happy with the results.
#2 I do not use mixed lighting. Either I use strobes or North light copy lights. Thank you for Raw digger suggestion. I will experiment with that.0 -
[quote="Grant Kernan" wrote:
#2 I do not use mixed lighting. Either I use strobes or North light copy lights. Thank you for Raw digger suggestion. I will experiment with that.
rawdigger is just a part of workflow - it helps to prepare the data - but then you need to use actual profiling tools - like argyll (there is a GUI front-end for it = makeinputicc, http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51765762 , that automates the mundane tasks of writing command line parameters)... or you can use more complex tool like DCamProf (with argyll tools and possibly rawdigger to prepare the input data for it).
PS: can you illustrate why profiles prepared with your current tools under the same light that you will then use on location are failing for actual shots/raws done later ? spectrum of illumination will stay the same - are you so much concerned that WB can't correct possible color casts ?0 -
[quote="Paul Lindqvist" wrote:
1. True, but the result i pretty much the same as he X-rite
may be... but using preset on top of profile that you do not like is like whitebalancing OOC JPG[quote="Paul Lindqvist" wrote:
2. Still professionals all over the world use it daily to get better results, my self included.
better vs what exactly ? most of people simply using that to get something alternative vs profiles supplied by Adobe... just because Adobe imposes a certain color rendering in their profiles.[quote="Paul Lindqvist" wrote:
I'm a photographer, not a mad scientist YMMV. 😉
/quote]
time to invoke a proverbial Ansel with his zone system, etc...[quote="Paul Lindqvist" wrote:
Bottomline there is no equivalent to X-rite or Spyderchkrs solution that is available for LR.
yes, but better tools are available... but you are welcome to create profiles with software that does not allow you to enter actual spectral measurments of the actual target, actual spectral measurements of the actual illumination, etc just because it has a drag and drop GUI and renders differently from Adobe Standard... 🙄0 -
[quote="deejjjaaaa" wrote:
[quote="Grant Kernan" wrote:
#2 I do not use mixed lighting. Either I use strobes or North light copy lights. Thank you for Raw digger suggestion. I will experiment with that.
rawdigger is just a part of workflow - it helps to prepare the data - but then you need to use actual profiling tools - like argyll (there is a GUI front-end for it = makeinputicc, http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/51765762 , that automates the mundane tasks of writing command line parameters)... or you can use more complex tool like DCamProf (with argyll tools and possibly rawdigger to prepare the input data for it).
Does Raw digger (the profiler edition) take into account the CO1 hardcoded treatment of raw data, that is done before applying the icc profile? I read a thread on LuLa where a Phase one technician working on the CO1 color pipeline acually chimed in, and stated that for sensible profiling, the target hád to be processed in CO1 to give a reliable measuring input. He speciffically insisted, that preparing a measuring target from raw in Rawdigger could not give good results.
btw. someone shóuld really one day put all this commandline technology into a useable software package for use with common color targets. I would have no problem paying for it.
Chris0 -
[quote="ChrisM" wrote:
Does Raw digger (the profiler edition) take into account the CO1 hardcoded treatment of raw data, that is done before applying the icc profile?
rawdigger does not create profiles - you can take that into account when you actually create profiles with the data prepared by rawdigger... you can extract "transfer function" for your camera and pref'd curver from .tiff generated by C1 and use it[quote="ChrisM" wrote:
I read a thread on LuLa where a Phase one technician working on the CO1 color pipeline acually chimed in, and stated that for sensible profiling, the target hád to be processed in CO1 to give a reliable measuring input.
I was there in that very topic in LuLa...[quote="ChrisM" wrote:
He speciffically insisted, that preparing a measuring target from raw in Rawdigger could not give good results.
define good - you can for example prepare a simple matrix + gamma profile with rawdigger and argyll, even w/o accounting that "transfer function" is slightly different from ~g1.8 and that profile will be very much usable in C1 (yes, it is not LUT profile, so you don't have that range of color corrections that 3D or 2.5D lut allows... and to use C1 color editor I wrote a simple Matlab script that converts matrix + TRC profile with cieXYZ PCS into LUT profile with cieXYZ PCS and color editor works now)... I also replace TRC with C1 "transfer function" in between... for me such profile works (I do not like what P1 does to fine tune rendering of skin tones, etc...) well...[quote="ChrisM" wrote:
btw. someone shóuld really one day put all this commandline technology into a useable software package for use with common color targets. I would have no problem paying for it.
may be - I never used Matlab or Octave in my life, but then I simply get access to the computer with it installed and started... yes, I spent a lot of time in Matlab help, but then I can do things myself as I want them...
also - GUI tools exist, for example the old ProfileMaker 5 still works and can create profiles for C1 quite well from .tiffs generated by C1... it allows to use custom target measurements, custom target illumination measurments, you can do certain finetuning of your profile there, etc0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
11 comments