Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Capture One Q&A => Topic started by: Endeavour on October 13, 2017, 08:27:13 pm
-
Why is there no colour checker support in Capture One, like there is in Lightroom?
How do I ensure I get accurate colour reproduction in artwork when I cant run a profile between x-rite colorchecker and Capture One?
Do I just switch to Lightroom and ditch Capture One
-
Why is there no colour checker support in Capture One, like there is in Lightroom?
There isn't any 'color checker support' in Lightroom.
You can use separate software to create dcp camera profiles to use in Lightroom and ACR and these usually use a CC24 target (some packages can use other references too).
-
There isn't any 'color checker support' in Lightroom.
You can use separate software to create dcp camera profiles to use in Lightroom and ACR and these usually use a CC24 target (some packages can use other references too).
Correct, and Lumariver Profile Designer Repro Edition (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=118075.0) (LRPD) offers specific support for Capture One Pro (ICC profiles and tonecurves), and can create specific Reproduction profiles.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Yes, there's quite a few packages that will build camera ICC profiles.
It's also worth noting that the profiles generated for LR/ACR from most packages aren't really accurate enough for reproduction work anyway. Each one delivers different results.
-
Correct, and Lumariver Profile Designer Repro Edition (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=118075.0) (LRPD) offers specific support for Capture One Pro (ICC profiles and tonecurves), and can create specific Reproduction profiles.
Cheers,
Bart
Thats what I use :)
I was just curious why there is no straight support for colour matching in C1, it seems such a straightforward feature (putting the argument of 24 blocks not being enough aside)
-
(putting the argument of 24 blocks not being enough aside)
Except, this would seem to be at least part of Phase One's rationale.
A quote from C1 Technical support
"Using a Colour Checker does not guarantee all correct colours from the very limited patches on the color checker. In fact can lead to other oddities in color rendition. The out of the box result from Capture One should be very colour accurate. You can always use the Colour Editor if you want to tune specific colours."
Not to me, but on a thread in another place https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60141429
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with C1 (don't have the expertise) but I also assume, given they supply the specialist Cultural Heritage version of C1, they know a reasonable amount about producing accurate colour. Though I understand the main advantage of the CH version is to do with workflow.
Cheers,
Graham
-
I was just curious why there is no straight support for colour matching in C1, it seems such a straightforward feature
If it's so straight forward, why has no one offered this ?
I can't think of any image editing package that has any similar option.
The answer is that is incredibly more complex than just "let's match these colours".
putting the argument of 24 blocks not being enough aside
That in itself is a major issue.
-
Except, this would seem to be at least part of Phase One's rationale.
A quote from C1 Technical support
"Using a Colour Checker does not guarantee all correct colours from the very limited patches on the color checker. In fact can lead to other oddities in color rendition. The out of the box result from Capture One should be very colour accurate. You can always use the Colour Editor if you want to tune specific colours."
Not to me, but on a thread in another place https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60141429
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with C1 (don't have the expertise) but I also assume, given they supply the specialist Cultural Heritage version of C1, they know a reasonable amount about producing accurate colour. Though I understand the main advantage of the CH version is to do with workflow.
Cheers,
Graham
I suspect this has a lot to do with it.
(https://dtdch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/LAB_Redouts.jpg)
-
I suspect this has a lot to do with it.
Yes, I did notice this and they also talk about other colour management tools, but given the price and my needs, I haven't studied this version in detail.
Cheers,
Graham
-
I think the issues with C1's colour editor would need to be addressed first. No?
A lot of time spent keeping up with the deluge of new cameras, and not enough time devoted to big fixes and improvements.
That's the beauty of using the likes of Hasselblad's Phocus and it's inbuilt colour profiling. Only a handful of camera models to be concerned about.
While I love C1 for my Canon files, its one-size-fits-all commitment is something that would deter me from using it for medium-format and moving from Hasselblad.
D.
-
I think the issues with C1's colour editor would need to be addressed first. No?
A lot of time spent keeping up with the deluge of new cameras, and not enough time devoted to big fixes and improvements.
That's the beauty of using the likes of Hasselblad's Phocus and it's inbuilt colour profiling. Only a handful of camera models to be concerned about.
While I love C1 for my Canon files, its one-size-fits-all commitment is something that would deter me from using it for medium-format and moving from Hasselblad.
D.
Unfortunately I have a Hasselblad body with a P1 back, so Phocus is not much use to me
-
DTDCH Reproduction Color Guide (https://dtdch.com/color-reproduction-guide-cultural-heritage/)
^^ The Capture One workflow used by most of the prestigious libraries, museums, and archives in the US (presumably also elsewhere but my expertise is Cultural Heritage in the US).
-
Thats what I use :)
I was just curious why there is no straight support for colour matching in C1, it seems such a straightforward feature (putting the argument of 24 blocks not being enough aside)
In general if you can meaningfully improve your total color response using a 24 patch prosumer target in a non rigorous manner (black walls and ceiling, exactly 45 degree controlled size source illumination, long lens, great measure taken to avoid glare, flare, etc), then your starting color profile was pretty crappy.
Making really great color profiles is a lot harder than it seems to most consumers. Most people get overly impressed with their results because they check the profile using the same colors they used to train/create the profile. That's like me telling you my mothers name was Kay, asking you for my mothers name, and concluding that you know a lot about my family when you say "Kay".
If you're doing a lot of of art reproduction I'd suggest looking into a Phase One back, DT Photon Cultural Heritage LED, and Capture One CH. Thats in use at Library of Congress, Smithsonian, Getty, National Archives, etc.
-
In general if you can meaningfully improve your total color response using a 24 patch prosumer target in a non rigorous manner (black walls and ceiling, exactly 45 degree controlled size source illumination, long lens, great measure taken to avoid glare, flare, etc), then your starting color profile was pretty crappy.
That's exactly the point, building a profile taking into account a specific shooting environment, almost always far from being optimal. On location reproduction work is what most photographers (C1 customers) have to deal with.
-
It's also worth noting that the profiles generated for LR/ACR from most packages aren't really accurate enough for reproduction work anyway. Each one delivers different results.
That's not an attribute for accurate color per se; we need at the very least, scene referred color which one can muster out of the ACR engine. Output referred color and coming up with actual colorimetric accuracy is a bitch! :P
http://www.color.org/scene-referred.xalter
-
Unfortunately I have a Hasselblad body with a P1 back, so Phocus is not much use to me
Well, you could just sell the H + P1 and buy a Hasselblad body with Hasselblad back and use Phocus with inbuilt Reproduction mode.
That is what I did.
-
Hi,
A round check essentially shows that capture was good. So, if a profile can reproduce the 24 patches of the colour checker correctly, compared to the reference data, it indicates that capture was good for it's intended purpose.
You can make a reproduction profile that is accurate, but it would be for specific lighting.
The image below was shot on a P45+, Adobe Standard Profile reproduces the deep blue purple correctly.
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/OLS_OnColor/SimpleCase/20150107-CF046070_AdobeStandard_vsmall.jpg)
With Capture One we got blue instead of deep purple:
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/OLS_OnColor/SimpleCase/20150107-CF046070_C1_vsmall.jpg)
Now, you may ask what the real colour is? This shows the colours reconstructed using Patchtool from spectral data:
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/OLS_OnColor/SimpleCase/Violet_vsmall.jpg)
My Sony A99 gave this representation with Adobe Standard:
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/OLS_OnColor/SimpleCase/20150107-CF046070_AdobeStandard_vsmall.jpg)
But it yielded this one with Capture One:
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/OLS_OnColor/SimpleCase/20150107-_DSC6397_C1_vsmall.jpg)
Now, that is some years ago, 2015. But I still see the same tendencies with C1's profiles.
This is from an old discussion on GetDPI, that also shows the same behavior:
https://www.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-and-digital-backs/59120-capture-one-lr6-post700029.html#post700029
(https://www.getdpi.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=120066&d=1469470968&thumb=1)
In the later case, it seems that choosing "Studio Flash" for WB gets the purples back, but it turns the leaves yellow. The posting uses white balance on a ColorChecker Passport grey card that is not shown in the image.
To sum up, there are cases where Capture One is not accurate and it is a sensible think to generate your own profiles. But, making good profiles may not be easy.
Best regards
Erik
In general if you can meaningfully improve your total color response using a 24 patch prosumer target in a non rigorous manner (black walls and ceiling, exactly 45 degree controlled size source illumination, long lens, great measure taken to avoid glare, flare, etc), then your starting color profile was pretty crappy.
Making really great color profiles is a lot harder than it seems to most consumers. Most people get overly impressed with their results because they check the profile using the same colors they used to train/create the profile. That's like me telling you my mothers name was Kay, asking you for my mothers name, and concluding that you know a lot about my family when you say "Kay".
If you're doing a lot of of art reproduction I'd suggest looking into a Phase One back, DT Photon Cultural Heritage LED, and Capture One CH. Thats in use at Library of Congress, Smithsonian, Getty, National Archives, etc.
-
Camera profiles can be tricky. Check the gradients in this image:
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDLook/20150407-CF046278.jpg)
This image was using a profile generated with DNG Profile Editor using Colour Checker Passport and some manual tuning. It shows some heavy posterisation.
The same image processed with Adobe Standard profile:
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDLook/20150407-CF046278-2.jpg)
No posterisation at all!
The next image is processed in Capture one with C1 built in profile:
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDLook/20150407-CF046278_C1.jpg)
Still some posterisation.
The fourth one Lightroom using a profile generated by DCamProf:
(http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDLook/20150407-CF046278_dcamprof.jpg)
All images, side by side: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/MFDLook/
Best regards
Erik
-
Well, you could just sell the H + P1 and buy a Hasselblad body with Hasselblad back and use Phocus with inbuilt Reproduction mode.
That is what I did.
Indeed. 8)
D.
-
Making really great color profiles is a lot harder than it seems to most consumers. Most people get overly impressed with their results because they check the profile using the same colors they used to train/create the profile. That's like me telling you my mothers name was Kay, asking you for my mothers name, and concluding that you know a lot about my family when you say "Kay".
I was thinking about this sentence for a few days now.
My biggest issue with the general and standard profile for my camera (a7RII) is, that I'm using different lenses on it. These lenses are from different companies (Voigtländer, Zeiss Loxia, Sony, Leica, Contax) and have a very different character (color, contrast, dynamic range, darks, whites, transitions, ...). If you use them on the same job you can get nuts when it comes to processing them with just the default profiles. For me it's much better to create mediocre profiles for each lens and have a starting point on all lenses that is equally than using an elaborated profile where I don't know anything about (not even the name "Kay"): Was it made for linear use? Which lens? What target? Any wide gammut compression? Some colors ranges changed systematically?
Is there a way to get more information about this? I just want to note I have only the Pro and not the CH version.
-
Hi,
Just shooting a WB target may help a lot with different lenses. You can get far just shoot a daylight WB for each lens.
You can use Lumariver Profile Designer to generate colour profiles. It is a bit more tricky with Capture One than with developers following the DNG/DCP route, but the C1 processing path is supported.
Best regards
Erik
I was thinking about this sentence for a few days now.
My biggest issue with the general and standard profile for my camera (a7RII) is, that I'm using different lenses on it. These lenses are from different companies (Voigtländer, Zeiss Loxia, Sony, Leica, Contax) and have a very different character (color, contrast, dynamic range, darks, whites, transitions, ...). If you use them on the same job you can get nuts when it comes to processing them with just the default profiles. For me it's much better to create mediocre profiles for each lens and have a starting point on all lenses that is equally than using an elaborated profile where I don't know anything about (not even the name "Kay"): Was it made for linear use? Which lens? What target? Any wide gammut compression? Some colors ranges changed systematically?
Is there a way to get more information about this? I just want to note I have only the Pro and not the CH version.
-
Thank you Erik.
I use Lumariver and did DCamProf before. I'm just wondering why people point on perfect light and setup but never talk about the lens that is in use. This week I had a Sony 85/1.4 GM, Zeiss Loxia 21/2.8, Leitz Wetzlar Summicron 50/2 and a Voigtländer 40/1.2 in my hand. All with the same body. If you process pictures of them for a single job with just one general profile you need many tries to get them into the same look.
I may only know the name "Kay" if it comes to accuracy on my profiles (for each lens one, for wideangle lenses I'll take one that comes close). But at least they give me the same starting point. Non of the default profiles of C1 do that. Therefore it's just unimportant how well Phase One do their default profiles. They are not usefull (for my purpose).
Hi,
Just shooting a WB target may help a lot with different lenses. You can get far just shoot a daylight WB for each lens.
You can use Lumariver Profile Designer to generate colour profiles. It is a bit more tricky with Capture One than with developers following the DNG/DCP route, but the C1 processing path is supported.
Best regards
Erik
-
Hi,
I would have guessed that WB would take care of lens differences, but you always learn something new.
Best regards
Erik
Thank you Erik.
I use Lumariver and did DCamProf before. I'm just wondering why people point on perfect light and setup but never talk about the lens that is in use. This week I had a Sony 85/1.4 GM, Zeiss Loxia 21/2.8, Leitz Wetzlar Summicron 50/2 and a Voigtländer 40/1.2 in my hand. All with the same body. If you process pictures of them for a single job with just one general profile you need many tries to get them into the same look.
-
Normally it does. But it really depends with what you're shooting. I don't think it's an issue if you just use the native glass of a camera brand. Therefore most will be happy with just one profile.
I'm on the way to my holidays. Maybe I have time to create a few comparison shots after I'm back. It's always better to explain with samples than complain with words. :)
Hi,
I would have guessed that WB would take care of lens differences, but you always learn something new.
Best regards
Erik
-
Maybe this would be helpful
https://blog.phaseone.com/profiling-monitor-eizo/