Capture One Colors Compared to Lightroom

[John Hollenberg]

I have been comparing default colors of LR and C1 (when both are white balanced on same neutral object for the same raw file).  I noticed that green trees are more toward the yellow side in C1 (fairly subtle), and also that brown fur (of Elk shot in Yellowstone recently) tends significantly toward the red side, as do brown grasses.  This was comparing Adobe Standard camera profile to C1 on Canon 5DSR.  Experimenting a bit, I found colors were quite a bit closer if I chose Camera Portrait profile in LR (under Calibration) and even closer if I chose Camera Standard in LR, although in the latter the fur was even slightly redder than C1.

All this got me wondering if there are other profiles available for Capture One besides the one that comes with Capture One 10.  Any insight appreciated.

[Jeffery Salter]

Hi John.

Can you clarify a bit more?  Are you comparing prints or viewing the images on a screen?  What do the color read-out numbers say?

I was never very happy with skin tones, especially the area between the hair line and skin when I owned my Canon 5DSR (using the Capture 9 canon profile)  I actually went back to using my 5D mark III.

I have spoken to some architecture photographers in my region and they are very happy with the Canon 5DSR.  I never thought to ask if they were using LR or C1.

Anyway.  Just a few random thoughts.

[John Hollenberg]

Hi John.

Can you clarify a bit more?  Are you comparing prints or viewing the images on a screen?  What do the color read-out numbers say?

I am viewing images on screen, putting LR and C1 side by side on the screen so the images are next to each other.  Probably I should post a screen shot when I get home tonite.  Monitor is calibrated with Spectraview.  I don't do any people photography, so don't care about skin tones.

[scyth]

All this got me wondering if there are other profiles available for Capture One besides the one that comes with Capture One 10.  Any insight appreciated.

DIY ( dcamprof, argyll / makeinputicc, old profilemaker, etc ... even $500 BasiCColor Input) or you can simply use "camera profile" from a different camera if you like that

[scyth]

I am viewing images on screen, putting LR and C1 side by side on the screen so the images are next to each other.  Probably I should post a screen shot when I get home tonite.  Monitor is calibrated with Spectraview.  I don't do any people photography, so don't care about skin tones.

there is no need, it is a well known fact that most of profiles (excluding repro for example from C1 HE for some backs, etc) that P1 ships with C1 do reflect their own vision of how color transform shall be in certain tones...  in some cases for some camera models a concerted effort by users on C1 U2U forum led to C1 modifying something... but DIY is the way to go

[E.J. Peiker]

I don't have a 5Ds(R) so I can't check but for the 5D Mk III, in the color tab under ICC profile there are two different 5D Mk III profiles, one is way different from the other.  You might check there if you haven't already.  That said, in general the Adobe profile that most closely resembles the Gretag Macbeth color checker, according to an Adobe employee, is the Camera Neutral profile.  Perhaps that will match more closely.

[G*]

Hi,

what you describe is also what I experienced with my Nikon – although only after a while I spent in ignorance.

I ”woke up“ when I shot a late-winter landscape. On that day I had seen first glimpses of green in the woods, but on my photos (D800E), processed in C1 with the standard profile for the camera, there was only brownish mush.

I started to investigate that issue within my possibilities. As far as I can judge (which is not far) it seems to be a typical behavior of C1. My impression is that there is a kind of color-sink towards skin-tones in C1’s engine, regardless of profiles used.

I found a workaround for my D800E by copying the Nikon profile from NX2 (see quote below from an earlier post), but this does not seem to work anymore on my current system. For me, colors improved to ”tolerable“ this way, and I work with that profile to this day.

I wish there was a database for dcamprof-made profiles for C1.

Best, G*




QUOTE:

- Preparation: Make invisible folders and files in the finder visible: Start the Terminal app: Copy/paste "defaults write com.apple.finder AppleShowAllFiles TRUE;killall Finder": Push the return-button. Quit.
- Open a *.NEF file with Capture NX2
- Have a look at the folder *main volume*/private/temp in the Finder ("private" is one of the formerly "invisible" folders).
- Search for the folder "Nkn****" that has been created when you started Capture NX2. Look inside.
- You will find an *.icm file that has just been generated by Capture NX2. As much as I know it is uniquely tailored to the opened *.NEF file, its ISO, its WB, its picture control settings, whatever. Its name will be rather cryptic, but you might identify the name of your camera as part of the string. Anyway, copy that file.
- Paste it in the ColorSync/Profiles folder (*main volume*/*user*/*your user*/Library/ColorSync/Profiles).
- Name it according to CaptureOne’s rules, i.e. begin with the Name of your camera. For example "NikonD800-*********". Whatever comes after the "-" may be to your liking. You can quit Capture NX now, btw.
- Next time you start CaptureOne you will be able to choose the new profile from the drop-down menu "icc profile". Since a tone-curve is already part of the profile you better choose "linear response" instead of the CO film-curves.

That’s it. Sounds more complicated than it is.
Should work also with ViewNX software, which is free.
All information is provided without guarantee. Please be careful with your machine, get someone you trust to help you if you’re afraid to damage your computer. I have no idea what the steps would be on a Windows machine.
To hide the hidden folders and files again use the line "defaults write com.apple.finder AppleShowAllFiles FALSE;killall Finder" in Terminal.

QUOTE END

[pfigen]

It's hard to really compare C1 to Lr colorwise as they deal with color in very different ways. C1 uses actual ICC input profiles to define the basic response of the camera. C1 also has more complex and useful color correction tools with which to modify the look of your image. C1 does have a lot of "styles" you can apply separately that are basically different "looks". Personally, I don't use them but maybe someone does, so they're there. What C1 easily allows you to do is use the color correction tools to apply a look that you want for your camera as a default and save that as a new look baked into a new version of the ICC input profile. Very effective for things like moose fur being a tick too red. Basically you'd use a selective color adjustment. It's also interesting to note that the ICC input profiles for the 5D3 and 5DSR, even though they are named for their respective camera models, are indeed one and the same. It looks like the 5D4 follows in those footsteps as well, but I haven't gone to trouble of embedding and extracting to compare in ColorThink yet. Applying the 5D3 Generic to the 5D4 does not change the look of the image one bit, but you can really tell looking at the profile in detail in CT. It's also interesting that Adobe's first official support for the 5DS(R) yielded super contrasty images that a lot of people had trouble with until Adobe released a newer lower contrast "profile" for that camera. Use whatever makes you happy but personally, I have never liked the color and tonality from ACR or Lr, and if you're looking for maximum detail from your 50 megapixels, there's no contest - C1 and Iridient are hands down better than either Adobe or Canon's own software.

[John Hollenberg]

What C1 easily allows you to do is use the color correction tools to apply a look that you want for your camera as a default and save that as a new look baked into a new version of the ICC input profile. Very effective for things like moose fur being a tick too red.

How do you save a new look as your camera default?  I know how to use the color correction tools and easily tamed the reddish fur, but don't know how to save as a camera default.

[pfigen]

In the Color Editor, click on the three dots and choose Save as ICC profile.

[John Hollenberg]

In the Color Editor, click on the three dots and choose Save as ICC profile.

Wow, didn't know about that.  How does one set that profile to be the default?
Thanks.

[E.J. Peiker]

Wow, didn't know about that.  How does one set that profile to be the default?
Thanks.

Click on those exact same 3 dots and select Save as default profile for....

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Wow, didn't know about that.  How does one set that profile to be the default?

That's why color comparisons between Raw converters are an exercise in futility, one can adjust CaptureOne at will.

To set as Default for a camera model:
Base Characteristics ... and choose 'Set as Defaults for ...'  (see attached).
There you can also set the (default) tone-curve to Linear for more control over highlight rendering, and upgrade to the latest rendering engine.

Cheers,
Bart

[John Hollenberg]

if you're looking for maximum detail from your 50 megapixels, there's no contest - C1 and Iridient are hands down better than either Adobe or Canon's own software.

I didn't see any differences in detail between LR and C1 for my 5DSR when I did the comparison.  Can you be more specific or provide an example (not Fuji xtrans sensor)?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I didn't see any differences in detail between LR and C1 for my 5DSR when I did the comparison.  Can you be more specific or provide an example (not Fuji xtrans sensor)?

Hi John,

I don't have a 5DSR to demonstrate, but in the attached cropped animated example you'll see that my 1Ds Mark III resolves finer detail (closer to the circle that illustrates the Nyquist frequency, the sensor's resolution limit) with the CaptureOne conversion. It also produces cleaner conversions, with fewer artifacts. All examples are 400% zooms from Raw conversions of the same original Raw file, without additional sharpening and without false color or fringing suppression or noise reduction.

Other camera files exhibit similar resolution improvements, but it may be difficult to quantify if the test target is less critical.

Cheers,
Bart

[John Hollenberg]

I don't have a 5DSR to demonstrate, but in the attached cropped animated example you'll see that my 1Ds Mark III resolves finer detail (closer to the circle that illustrates the Nyquist frequency, the sensor's resolution limit) with the CaptureOne conversion. It also produces cleaner conversions, with fewer artifacts.

Interesting, but is there any evidence that one could see the difference in a normal photo (not a test chart) at 100% (actual pixels) on screen view, much less in print?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Interesting, but is there any evidence that one could see the difference in a normal photo (not a test chart) at 100% (actual pixels) on screen view, much less in print?

That depends on your post-processing, subject matter and output dimensions (and viewing distance). Resolution that is missing cannot be sharpened, and artifacts will reduce the ability to sharpen without making matters worse.

Cheers,
Bart

[Denis de Gannes]

That's why color comparisons between Raw converters are an exercise in futility, one can adjust CaptureOne at will.

To set as Default for a camera model:
Base Characteristics ... and choose 'Set as Defaults for ...'  (see attached).
There you can also set the (default) tone-curve to Linear for more control over highlight rendering, and upgrade to the latest rendering engine.

Cheers,
Bart

"That's why color comparisons between Raw converters are an exercise in futility"
Is this not one of the main reason for capturing the "RAW" data from the camera, so we are not just trapped with the Camera Manufacturers interpretation of the sensor capture.
It is one of mine. I would not pay for Raw conversion software that is just providing me with the same rendition as the Camera Firmware and the Application supplied with the camera by the camera manufacturer.
Making a Camera profile the default in multiple applications will not necessarily provide the same result since the processing engine of the application is different.
When I started shooting  Raw in 2004 I spent months of frustration comparing different raw conversion applications with OOC jpegs, now I no longer compare. I have always used at least three Raw conversion applications, the present are Lightroom, Capture One Pro, Qimage Ulimate (raw processing by David Coffin)

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

"That's why color comparisons between Raw converters are an exercise in futility"
Is this not one of the main reason for capturing the "RAW" data from the camera, so we are not just trapped with the Camera Manufacturers interpretation of the sensor capture.

Hi Denis,

I agree, the great benefit of a high-quality Raw converter is that it allows us to achieve our own creative intent with relative ease and lots of control, without having to worry too much about generating unwanted artifacts in the process, or being locked into a canned look. Capture One's Color Editor is a powerful tool.

Cheers,
Bart