Aller au contenu principal

Linear Response film curve

Commentaires

25 commentaires

  • Harry25
    I, for one, only use it with badly lit portraits.
    I find that it's much quicker to get where I want.
    0
  • SFA
    These days I pretty much use it for everything. Invariably with Autolevels (separate colours) as a starting point.

    Flat images usually respond well to levels adjustment with the Linear Curve. In my experience. Then take things from there.


    Grant
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    Thanks guys, interesting to learn about how you use this. More then I anticipated.
    0
  • Robert Farhi
    Hi Paul,

    I use the linear response curve together with a tailored ICC camera profile. This gives me higher dynamic capacities in the adjustments, and I can recover shadows or highlights more efficiently.
    Using a tailored ICC camera profile together with a linear response curve gives you dull images when opening the RAW files, and I need to compensate with contrast, brightness and Luma curve (these 3 adjustments don't interfere with saturation) to get images the way I like them (i.e. natural colors, I don't like saturated pictures very much). I have saved a style that I use when importing my files (or I save the corresponding settings as defaults for my camera body).
    Of course, I might correct contrast, brightness and Luma adjustments as needed, depending upon my image and the desired result.
    Cheers,
    Robert
    0
  • ---
    [quote="tenmangu81" wrote:
    Hi Paul,

    I use the linear response curve together with a tailored ICC camera profile. This gives me higher dynamic capacities in the adjustments, and I can recover shadows or highlights more efficiently.
    Using a tailored ICC camera profile together with a linear response curve gives you dull images when opening the RAW files, and I need to compensate with contrast, brightness and Luma curve (these 3 adjustments don't interfere with saturation) to get images the way I like them (i.e. natural colors, I don't like saturated pictures very much). I have saved a style that I use when importing my files (or I save the corresponding settings as defaults for my camera body).
    Of course, I might correct contrast, brightness and Luma adjustments as needed, depending upon my image and the desired result.
    Cheers,
    Robert



    +1

    without a custom profile it is better to stay away from linear because profiles are build for standard tone curve only. but if this is not an option I adjust exposure for the midtowns first and apply a rgb curve to get the contrast needed. auto level as a staring point is a bad idea because is the same as moving the endpoints in the curve tool so you just steepen the curve add contrast and this nullifies the idea of getting smoother transitions with linear.
    0
  • Robert Farhi
    [quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:

    +1
    without a custom profile it is better to stay away from linear because profiles are build for standard tone curve only.


    Good to get a confirmation of that, but I don't know where to find it "officially" 😄
    Thanks,
    Robert
    0
  • cdc
    [quote="tenmangu81" wrote:
    Hi Paul,

    I use the linear response curve together with a tailored ICC camera profile.


    [quote="Horseoncowboy" wrote:


    without a custom profile it is better to stay away from linear because profiles are build for standard tone curve only.


    Would you guys mind sharing a bit about the process of building your custom ICC profiles. Would this be a general profile you've made for your camera(s) or specific profiles for each shoot using a color checker. And what software are you using to create the ICC profiles?
    0
  • ---
    [quote="tenmangu81" wrote:
    [quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:

    +1
    without a custom profile it is better to stay away from linear because profiles are build for standard tone curve only.


    Good to get a confirmation of that, but I don't know where to find it "officially" 😄
    Thanks,
    Robert



    don't ask to much this makes the "image quality professor" angry 😉
    0
  • ---
    [quote="cdc" wrote:
    [quote="tenmangu81" wrote:
    Hi Paul,

    I use the linear response curve together with a tailored ICC camera profile.


    [quote="Horseoncowboy" wrote:


    without a custom profile it is better to stay away from linear because profiles are build for standard tone curve only.


    Would you guys mind sharing a bit about the process of building your custom ICC profiles. Would this be a general profile you've made for your camera(s) or specific profiles for each shoot using a color checker. And what software are you using to create the ICC profiles?


    I recommend the excellent lumarriver profile designer and as a benefit the software manual explains in deep everything you ever wanted to know about camera profiles too.
    0
  • Robert Farhi
    + 1
    0
  • ---
    I really don´t understand why p1 does not offer at least one more neutral - color accurate & medium contrast - profile for all user and why nobody demands it. this would make the use of linear (which is not really linear btw) obsolet in most cases. people who start building their profiles will also find out that their is not much difference in color rendering with other converters when both use costumes profiles . in fact some can produce superior tonality compaired to c1.
    0
  • Robert Farhi
    I always believed that a tailored ICC camera profile was valid only for the software with which you developed your chart image. Do you mean you could use an ICC profile built using C1 with other softwares (RawTherapee, DarkTable,....) and with at least comparable results ?
    0
  • ---
    [quote="tenmangu81" wrote:
    I always believed that a tailored ICC camera profile was valid only for the software with which you developed your chart image. Do you mean you could use an ICC profile built using C1 with other softwares (RawTherapee, DarkTable,....) and with at least comparable results ?


    you are right icc profiles are not interchangeable like dng profiles but when you build an icc profile for lets say Iridient raw and for c1 color rendering gets really very close. but now you can see better how a different converter handles tonality and local contrast which for me is far more important than color. c1 emphases contrast in mid and brighter tones ( zone 5-9 in Ansel Adams terms ) which supports this high contrasty look but when you dig into the shadows ( zone 2-4 ) c1 shows a low local contrast and you can do nothing to change it.
    0
  • Photocor
    Sorry for my english, i am french and it is french english... 🤭
    I used the Linear Response for 7 years with icc profie done by Phase One (Leica M9- Leica M)
    But due to problem of neutrality with C1 icc profie I associate since 4 years an own icc.
    As I had a little problem with the foot of the curve I now use Lumariver Profile Designer instead of BasiCoor Input to build it.
    It is a "reproduction" icc camera profile done with two charts (CCSG and Grey Munsel done for Metamorfoze) to be sure to have a perfect neutral grey and linear and now it is the case 😄. (My deltaE is less than 0,5 on the grey axis.)
    The Linear Response in C1 makes it possible to immediately judge the potential of the file.
    I use it like Tenmangu81
    For the contrasts I have three basic "luma" curves: one for the portrait, one for the landscape and one for the shots in the street. I adapt them according to the lighting of the shooting and I adjust it also with levels. The color editor is only used for color.

    Regarding the "optimization" of the icc profile done by Phase One, I have great doubts when I sometimes read that their profiles are optimized for the standard film curve, because I read other things ☹️ and because this curve is added beside and not in the color data described in the profile.For me, it is the result of an interpretation but does not the result from a formula or a comparison with measured colors.
    0
  • Robert Farhi
    [quote="Photocor" wrote:

    Regarding the "optimization" of the icc profile done by Phase One, I have great doubts when I sometimes read that their profiles are optimized for the standard film curve, because I read other things ☹️ and because this curve is added beside and not in the color data described in the profile.For me, it is the result of an interpretation but does not the result from a formula or a comparison with measured colors.


    Just to confirm (?):
    Excerpt from the user manual:

    The Film Standard curve has been designed to give a similar look to transparency film, with deep blacks and bright mid-tones and highlights. Film Extra Shadow offers similar tone characteristics, with less contrast in the shadows. Film Contrast has higher contrast than Film Standard, with deeper shadows and brighter highlights. The Linear option has reduced contrast overall and is intended to offer maximum control of tone mapping using the Curves Tool.
    0
  • Paul Steunebrink
    Hi guys, wanted to say I much enjoy your conversation. Makes perfect sense and great input for my continuing endeavours.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:


    without a custom profile it is better to stay away from linear because profiles are build for standard tone curve only. but if this is not an option I adjust exposure for the midtowns first and apply a rgb curve to get the contrast needed. auto level as a staring point is a bad idea because is the same as moving the endpoints in the curve tool so you just steepen the curve add contrast and this nullifies the idea of getting smoother transitions with linear.


    Auto-levels on the independent colour channels is just a quick way of making them more equally represented across the dynamic range. Getting to a better starting point basically.

    Depending on the image I may use it several times if I am adjusting a lot of other values to tease something out of a special challenge. But for a basically "good" image I find it a quick way to get a good result for anything that will ultimately be constrained by the limitations of the presentation media.
    0
  • ---
    [quote="Photocor" wrote:

    Regarding the "optimization" of the icc profile done by Phase One, I have great doubts when I sometimes read that their profiles are optimized for the standard film curve, because I read other things ☹️ and because this curve is added beside and not in the color data described in the profile.For me, it is the result of an interpretation but does not the result from a formula or a comparison with measured colors.



    1. maybe I'm wrong but then it should be possible to get the same appearance contrast color, saturation and hue independent from the selected tone curve. if you are able to archive this let us know.

    2. with p1 hardware p1 does not think one profile fits all is the right way, guess why ?

    3. isn't it interesting that over the years no one from p1 ever came forward and said folks you are wrong and explains how their color pipeline works. it is obvious anyway. adobe is an open book in this regard. phase one started as a company building scanning backs so icc input profiles made perfect sense but today I think this 30 year old technology is not up to what we need. what a lot of user think is so gerat about c1 color rendering is in fact the sum of compromisses . our cameras got very sophisticated with amazing color depth but we still apply a profile build for daylight on very file regardless of color temperature and type of light source. really this is high end imaging in 2018 ?

    4. where is the famous "image quality professor " when we need him ?
    0
  • ---
    [quote="SFA" wrote:

    Auto-levels on the independent colour channels is just a quick way of making them more equally represented across the dynamic range. Getting to a better starting point basically.

    Depending on the image I may use it several times if I am adjusting a lot of other values to tease something out of a special challenge. But for a basically "good" image I find it a quick way to get a good result for anything that will ultimately be constrained by the limitations of the presentation media.


    i have no argument against it when you like the results. maybe you only shoot images where black and whitepoints are already perfect neutral and no color shifts occure but I have more the feeling we see colors and what makes a good image different.
    0
  • Photocor
    [quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:

    1. maybe I'm wrong but then it should be possible to get the same appearance contrast color, saturation and hue independent from the selected tone curve. if you are able to archive this let us know.
    I am not sure to unterstand. For me every thing is possible even if the profile is wrong, times to obtain the result is simply different and random.

    [quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:

    2. with p1 hardware p1 does not think one profile fits all is the right way, guess why ?
    Yes, I share this, you can built a profile by intent (and Lumariver Profile is perfect for this), but for reproduction you have to use only one profile for one light.


    [quote="Horseoncowboy " wrote:

    3. isn't it interesting that over the years no one .............. really this is high end imaging in 2018 ?

    Yes, Adobe is an open book, but their profile delivered with their software are a quality like Phase One profile.... ☹️ . Yes, our camera get a large capacity on color, but printer not 😭 dislay not 🤭 . So even if it is important to use an accurate camera profile, it's equally important to tame the transition from the camera's color space to the destination color space, it is mainly time and money. I never forget what the author or the customer appreciates it is what is obtained and not how it was obtained. 😂
    I think that the best way is one we know and it is the reason why the work done by the "Ambassador" is important because he shows us different ways.
    Regards
    0
  • ---
    I love to use vey different converter for my work and I´m free from fanboyism I also want to see improvements in any of them especially in c1 . but I´m really tired of adobe bashing because it is not based on facts and bad resultes are often only caused by user errors. so here we go https://drive.google.com/file/d/1m4amfn ... cDjBe/view one is adobe one is c1 both are very much useable in my view and I'm unable to tell which one is superior but maybe I´m wrong.
    0
  • Robert Farhi
    Yes, I agree, I worked for about 10 years with Lightroom and I was very pleased with it.
    As far as I am concerned, I get good results with Capture One faster than I did with Lightroom, and for now, I prefer working with Capture One, because of its possibilities (better local layer adjustments, color editor, and, in a more general way, color management, easier work with a second display,...).
    But I agree that very close good results can be obtained with either.
    0
  • ---
    yeah +1


    here the same image https://drive.google.com/open?id=1k1uoZ ... 7wgoQeo8N5 with linear and also the rendering I would prefer from my currently favorite raw converter. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1pAZ2g ... 7aPAzlhMo_ again not worlds apart from c1 but in some aspects better imho.


    ps.: sony a7r - all images have been white balanced with a colorchecker grey card.
    0
  • cdc
    I agree with you both. I use C1 & LR and choose which program to edit with based on the tools not on the final output because I've always had good results with both programs. If I'm shooting tethered obviously C1 is the best choice. My giant catalog is in LR. If I'm editing product or models on a white background I'll do that work in LR ever since they introduced luminosity masks which make it incredibly simple and rather accurate to separate the product from the white/grey background, C1 has yet to introduce luminosity masks and the color editor fails to pick white/grey/black. Masks based on color however I'll use C1. Et Cetera.

    Both programs are powerful, neither are superior.

    [quote="Horseoncowboy" wrote:
    I love to use vey different converter for my work


    I'm curious, which converter are you referring to?
    0
  • ---
    [quote="cdc" wrote:


    [quote="Horseoncowboy" wrote:
    I love to use vey different converter for my work


    I'm curious, which converter are you referring to?


    Iridient raw developer and photoninja both play nicely together as a kind of plugin with capture one .
    0

Vous devez vous connecter pour laisser un commentaire.