メインコンテンツへスキップ

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

Canon 5D Mark 3 - Still wrong profile on C1 9.2.1 ....

James31
Hello all,

I just upgraded to version 9.2 and all RAW-files from my Canon 5D Mark 3 are completely undersaturated and greyish.
After changing the profile from 5D M 3 generic to 5D Mark 2 generic it looked better...

Using an "older/wrong" profile from other Canon cameras brings back normal color!?

tnx

UPDATE
No change after service Upgrade 9.2.1.
0

コメント

26件のコメント

日付 投票
  • SFA
    Why would you expect a change from a service upgrade?

    Have you checked what is different between the Mk 2 and Mk3 profiles?

    Have you created a Support Case to ask for an official comment about the differences you see?

    Bear in mind this forum facility is provided by Phase as a primarily User to User communication channel. If you need managed support go through the Support Case process.

    All of that said, if I open a CR2 file (1D3 in my quick test) and scroll through the available canon profiles both the 5D2 and 5D3 look far more saturated than the default 1D3 result with the 5D3 being slightly MORE saturated than the 5D2.

    Given the 1D3 and 5Dwhatever cameras are very different the appearance change does not surprise me but the point was that the two 5D profiles seem to be giving the opposite effect to what you are seeing.

    Are you sure that there is not other effect in play - you have not, for example, set an alternative value for the default profile or saturation level or something for the 5D3 settings? Or some other value perhaps?


    Grant
    0
  • Willy Knuever
    I had the same experience in CO 9.2.1. It looked like a RGB image displayed on a sRGB monitor. The RAW files were from a Canon 5DIII and on a RGB callibrated monitor.
    After re-starting the program the problem was (for the present) gone.
    Regards,
    Willy
    0
  • SFA
    Reading another thread with a similar message to relate I wonder if there might be some anomaly related to the graphics card and/or driver for it in combination with the current Windows configuration and whatever updates Capture One has required at the Windows level.

    You might find that, for example, turning off Hardware Acceleration in the Preferences has an effect. (Or turning it ON if it is off but that is less likely!) If so that could point to a GPU driver anomaly of some sort.

    Beyond that simple experiment you may well need to dig down into the log files to see if any clues appear there. I would strongly recommend that you raise a Support Case when taking that path.

    HTH.


    Grant
    0
  • Willy Knuever
    Grant,

    At that time the viewer displayed that grey color the output RGB file was correct. It was only the viewer with that bad behavior.

    AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series; Intel Core i7-2600 CPU@ 3.40 GHz; 32 GB RAM; Eizo ColorEdge Monitor.

    Kind regards,
    Willy
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="NN383" wrote:
    Grant,

    At that time the viewer displayed that grey color the output RGB file was correct. It was only the viewer with that bad behavior.

    AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series; Intel Core i7-2600 CPU@ 3.40 GHz; 32 GB RAM; Eizo ColorEdge Monitor.

    Kind regards,
    Willy


    Willy,

    As I understand it the viewer and output processes are different in the way they may or may not make use of the GPU according what is being asked of them. Thus the separate on and off options in the preferences.

    I have no idea about Radeons but from all I read GPU driver compatibility anomalies are not restricted to one brand or the other.

    What is going on in all of that processing with all of the possible hardware options has so much potential for something to fail I am constantly surprised any if it works at all.

    Try a couple of system reboots - I find that even fixes Windows update induced anomalies fomr time to time - and if that fails to give any advantage go to the Radeon web site and see what possible updates there are for the drivers for your card. Or maybe even downdates - updates don't always work as intended.

    If that does not clear the problem create a Support Case with Phase and let them take you through the process of discovering where the problem appears to rest.

    HTH.


    Grant
    0
  • James31
    @Grant

    Are you sure that there is not other effect in play - you have not, for example, set an alternative value for the default profile or saturation level or something for the 5D3 settings? Or some other value perhaps?


    Of course I am not shure, I simply made an upgrade from a working version to the next version (9.2.) and I had immediatly the problem without touching anything ... than I downgraded again until the service upgrade 9.2.1 - I installed the 9.2.1. the rest you already know ... at the moment I work again with 9.1.2 without any troubles....
    0
  • Kevin Mack
    My current guess is that the problem, which I'm experiencing too in 9.2.1 using the Canon EOS-70D Generic ICC profile, is that it's an initialization error of some sort.

    Different users are reporting the problem with different hardware, but the consistent detail with each case is that switching the ICC profile to any profile other than that which matches the as-shot profile corrects it. This suggests to me that the software may not be loading the profile correctly if the requested profile matches the profile used when the image was shot, but if another profile is specified, the software then successfully loads the new profile. (Separate thread discussing the same issue: )

    This is purely a guess, of course, since I'm not reading the source code, but it doesn't seem to be an issue with a specific profile, but rather an issue with the relationship between the displayed profile and the original. James31, for example, is reporting desaturated colors on the 5D Mark 3 profile, which on my machine displays properly, but meanwhile, the 70D profile is desaturated for me.

    Hardware is nVidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti, running driver version 368.81 (current as of this writing)
    0
  • ChrisM
    [quote="kmack" wrote:
    My current guess is that the problem, which I'm experiencing too in 9.2.1 using the Canon EOS-70D Generic ICC profile, is that it's an initialization error of some sort.

    Yes, it looks that way, and it randomly happens upon start-up. Restarting a few times will solve it, but it is a very inconvenient bug. Switching input profiles helps getting the profile to load for the specific image, but it does not have to do with using an input profile different from the generic (default) profile: if you have a custom profile assigned to all images, it will give you the the same issue. Also, there is a lot of peculiar "flickering", when switching between input profiles: initially loading correctly for a split second end then flashing to the desaturated rendering.

    It appears to be a windows thing: on mac it does not happen.

    Chris
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    I'm having the same or very similar problem. If I use a profile from a different camera, things resaturate and seem normal, but the next time i use C1, whatever I changed to exhibits the problem and changing to a different profile solves it, but the next time I come in I have to switch profiles again. In other words something is happening when opening C1 which causes the issue with the current profile. It appears to be a display issue ... what I found interesting is that the well saturated preview will appear and then they will slowly update to the undersaturated greyish look. But any other process doesn't seem affected, for example, processing (exporting the images as jpgs are unaffected, nothing has actually changed. This is an issue that was new with the 9.2 update. I was hoping for some resolution with 9.2.1, but no apparent change.

    It happens that in this case I'm also using a Canon 5Dm3. I'm also using the MAC version of C1, but haven't since 9.2 was released.
    0
  • okapia
    Sounds like the same problem I suddenly started having over the past couple of days, and I'm using the ICC profile for the Nikon D5500. Normal thumbnails, large preview is the dull washed out version, but the colors are totally different from what's exported as a jpg or into Photoshop as a tif. It's impossible to work like this, but in my case no amount of restarts have fixed it.

    Downgrading is unappealing because 9.2 fixed a recurring crash bug I was experiencing in 9.1.2, so I'm not sure what I'm going to do for a temporary workaround. 😕
    0
  • Kevin Mack
    From another thread on the same topic, it sounds as though Phase One is aware of the issue and working on it. I bet we'll see the fix in 9.2.2

    [quote="lilo shinet" wrote:
    it's done today. Phase One answered very quickly they know about that bug and work to fix it.
    Lilo
    0
  • okapia
    I hope it comes soon, kmack.

    As others suggested, switching to a different ICC profile and switching back worked to fix the colors, but it has to be done for every image and has to be redone everytime I reload. A couple of times my camera's ICC profile didn't look right after switching and I'd have to combine it with restarting. That's been part of my workflow over the past couple of days, then when I opened the program last night all the photos in my catalog were displaying just fine on their own. Then this afternoon they were back to the dull washed out look, and now after about a dozen restarts they look right again. So restarting does seem to temporarily fix the issue sometimes, but it's random and not most of the time. At least not in my case.
    0
  • SFA
    Out of interest, which version of Windows are people running?


    Grant
    0
  • Willy Knuever
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    Out of interest, which version of Windows are people running?


    Grant


    Windows 10 Pro 64

    Willy
    0
  • okapia
    Windows 7, 64-bit.
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    [quote="NN383" wrote:
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    Out of interest, which version of Windows are people running?


    Grant


    Windows 10 Pro 64

    Willy


    I previously was using WIN7 Pro 64 ... and am now using WIN10 Pro 64. Same exact problem though on both versions. no difference
    0
  • SFA
    Is it safe to assume that everyone has created a Support case?

    Grant
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    Is it safe to assume that everyone has created a Support case?

    Grant

    I didn't ... I thought they would probably be reading these threads. Hopefully my decision to switch completely over from Lightroom will pay off for my images even though my work has gone to almost all black and white for more than a month now.
    0
  • SFA
    [quote="Smiles" wrote:
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    Is it safe to assume that everyone has created a Support case?

    Grant

    I didn't ... I thought they would probably be reading these threads. Hopefully my decision to switch completely over from Lightroom will pay off for my images even though my work has gone to almost all black and white for more than a month now.


    If you want the personal attention that your problems likely require then the chances are that various log files and system specs will come into play.

    This forum is provided by Phase as a User to User facility. Nothing more should be assumed. They are not geared up to full time monitoring of the forum - but support via support cases is free and usually prompt and you get a record of everything that is discussed in the case itself.

    It if also monitored and managed and analysed so connections can be made for cases with the same or similar symptoms. Much better than trying to wrangle anything out of forum posts.

    So create that Support Case and let the Phase team help you find a solution.

    Grant
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    [quote="Smiles" wrote:
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    Is it safe to assume that everyone has created a Support case?

    Grant

    I didn't ... I thought they would probably be reading these threads. Hopefully my decision to switch completely over from Lightroom will pay off for my images even though my work has gone to almost all black and white for more than a month now.


    If you want the personal attention that your problems likely require then the chances are that various log files and system specs will come into play.

    This forum is provided by Phase as a User to User facility. Nothing more should be assumed. They are not geared up to full time monitoring of the forum - but support via support cases is free and usually prompt and you get a record of everything that is discussed in the case itself.

    It if also monitored and managed and analysed so connections can be made for cases with the same or similar symptoms. Much better than trying to wrangle anything out of forum posts.

    So create that Support Case and let the Phase team help you find a solution.

    Grant


    Well of course you are correct technically, but I have to balance my time in some manner ... and in my judgement since someone stated that phase one was aware of the issue and working on it, and given the number of owners of Canon 5d Mark iii's ... I decided it would probably just be adding to their AND my busy schedule. In this situation I would say I wanted to see how responsive they were/are to customers ON THE FORUM, because even though this IS a user to user forum, a great company like Phase One can't possibly NOT be reading at least the more obvious threads that affect larger numbers of users (which i'm sure this MUST be). So hey ... maybe I'm wrong, so I reported a few minutes ago.
    0
  • okapia
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    Is it safe to assume that everyone has created a Support case?

    Grant

    They said they were aware of the bug a few days ago and were already working on it, so I've been checking the site everyday to see if they've made progress. Haven't heard anything else yet.
    0
  • Willy Knuever
    I made a Support Case. This is the answer from the team:

    “This is a problem in 9.2.1 that we're working on resolving. At the moment the only fix is to return to 9.2, or, less desireably, use a session temporarily to access the files.â€

    Willy
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    [quote="okapia" wrote:
    [quote="SFA" wrote:
    Is it safe to assume that everyone has created a Support case?

    Grant

    They said they were aware of the bug a few days ago and were already working on it, so I've been checking the site everyday to see if they've made progress. Haven't heard anything else yet.



    I've limped along thinking there would be an update coming along earlier. Finally I just installed the earlier release 9.1.2 which they provided a link to in their reply telling me it was a know problem. I wish I would have done it earlier because things seem fine now and I'm trying to remember why I felt so compelled to stick with 9.2.1.

    Color is normal again .. and I can work again. ahh.
    0
  • ChrisM
    What I have noticed regarding this problem of loading the .icc camera profile incorrectly on start-up, is that it most likely has to do with (user created) presets having been applied on import. I have presets for my cameras, that specify e.g. the film curve, that I apply when importing new images to the catalogues. After having removed these presets from all images, and setting all the desired presets manually on the imported images in the catalogue, the problem disappeared. Switching to another catalogue where the "import preset" was still tied to the images, the problem reappeared (without closing and restarting CO1 btw.). Again: removing the preset from all images and restoring the lost settings manually, all problems are gone.

    So there clearly is a problem in v9.2.1 with loading settings that were applied by presets on import, correctly. All settings applied manually in v9.2.1 are loaded correctly, including the camera profile.
    It also applies to import presets that were applied on import using v9.2.1 itself, so I don't think it has to do with presets applied in older versions not loading correctly in CO1v9.2.1
    Anyway: the workaround seems to be: remove all presets from all images, and apply all settings manually via the "copy/paste to all variants" method.

    Chris
    0
  • Permanently deleted user
    [quote="ChrisM" wrote:
    What I have noticed regarding this problem of loading the .icc camera profile incorrectly on start-up, is that it most likely has to do with (user created) presets having been applied on import. I have presets for my cameras, that specify e.g. the film curve, that I apply when importing new images to the catalogues. After having removed these presets from all images, and setting all the desired presets manually on the imported images in the catalogue, the problem disappeared. Switching to another catalogue where the "import preset" was still tied to the images, the problem reappeared (without closing and restarting CO1 btw.). Again: removing the preset from all images and restoring the lost settings manually, all problems are gone.

    So there clearly is a problem in v9.2.1 with loading settings that were applied by presets on import, correctly. All settings applied manually in v9.2.1 are loaded correctly, including the camera profile.
    It also applies to import presets that were applied on import using v9.2.1 itself, so I don't think it has to do with presets applied in older versions not loading correctly in CO1v9.2.1
    Anyway: the workaround seems to be: remove all presets from all images, and apply all settings manually via the "copy/paste to all variants" method.

    Chris



    it's true that I was applying presets on import. I'll have to try your solution...
    0
  • Kevin Mack
    Confirmed that 9.3 appears to correct this problem.
    0

投稿コメントは受け付けていません。