Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: bellevuefineart on February 06, 2025, 07:26:18 pm
-
Hi
We're currently using Lumariver to make camera profiles and scanner profiles, and have been for some time. But what surprised me when I look around is that there seems to be very few, or in fact no options at all if you want to make non-linear profiles for art reproduction. Specifically art reproduction. For standard camera profiles, it seems to be enough to use the Xrite ColorChecker Camera Calibration software, and it's the default plugin for both Lightroom and Capture One. But for art reproduction profile which requires more exacting specifications, it seems there's really nothing out there except the Lumariver software.
Is anyone here doing art reproduction? Do you use other tools?
-
ICC or DCP profiles? DCP profiles are not scene-referred.
-
Either. We make both dcp and icc profiles. dcp for our cameras and icc for our scanners. Both of these for the purpose of art reproduction.
-
Again, DCP profiles by design are the output referred. ICC profiles don't have to be. Output referred = pleasing color (like differing transparencies).
http://www.color.org/ICC_white_paper_20_Digital_photography_color_management_basics.pdf
-
For standard camera profiles, it seems to be enough to use the Xrite ColorChecker Camera Calibration software, and it's the default plugin for both Lightroom and Capture One. But for art reproduction profile which requires more exacting specifications, it seems there's really nothing out there except the Lumariver software.
I would say that ICC camera profiles are far more suited to art reproduction than general photography reproduction.
Is anyone here doing art reproduction? Do you use other tools?
Any of the tools that can make camera ICC profiles. For this purpose, cameras are little different to scanners.
(From feedback I get, yes, ArgyllCMS is used for such purposes.)
-
I have used Basiccolor Input 6 Pro since 2020 to make .dcp files for artwork repro. Currently using this with the GFX100 & shooting tethered with Lightroom.
The app works well and I'm happy with Input 6 - it has options for making .dcp and scanner profiles, support for many targets and other features specifically for art repro.
-
If colour accuracy is important to you then buy a Hasselblad X1D or X2D. The Phocus software has built in colour calibration using standard colour Checkers but honestly, the camera is so accurate straight out of the box that it is unnecessary.
-
The Phocus software has built in colour calibration using standard colour Checkers but honestly, the camera is so accurate straight out of the box that it is unnecessary.
How accurate is that? ;)
-
How accurate is that? ;)
What, the Colour Checkr, the camera or the software? The cameras are hand calibrated at the factory.
This is an old video of the Phocus process.Chapter 16 of 16
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxEDn4ueFJE
There is a video on how they calibrate the cameras in the factory but I can't find it at the moment.
-
What, the Colour Checkr, the camera or the software? The cameras are hand calibrated at the factory.
This is an old video of the Phocus process.Chapter 16 of 16
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxEDn4ueFJE
There is a video on how they calibrate the cameras in the factory but I can't find it at the moment.
Color accuracy is expressed in a number. What is that number (and how many color samples)? Color accuracy: A color you shot (it's lab value) and the color you get (it's lab value) and the difference = accuracy or not. That's what I'm asking.
-
What, the Colour Checkr, the camera or the software? The cameras are hand calibrated at the factory.
Calibrated to what lighting and spectral content ?
- very few cameras have colorimetric spectral sensitivities, so the usefulness of any calibration will depend heavily on how well the spectral characteristics of what it has been calibrated to matches what it is actually intended to shoot. A color checker chart under one illumination may be a good start, but it is not the be all and and end all of accuracy.
-
Color accuracy is expressed in a number. What is that number (and how many color samples)? Color accuracy: A color you shot (it's lab value) and the color you get (it's lab value) and the difference = accuracy or not. That's what I'm asking.
Probably best to watch the video.
There is also this much more detailed one.
Hasselbad Phocus Reproduction Mode Walkthrough
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZthFo98HTk
-
Probably best to watch the video.
There is also this much more detailed one.
Hasselbad Phocus Reproduction Mode Walkthrough
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZthFo98HTk
Does the video provide a dE (numeric) report?
Maybe you should watch this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy0BD5aRV9s&feature=youtu.be
-
Does the video provide a dE (numeric) report?
Maybe you should watch this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jy0BD5aRV9s&feature=youtu.be
Not that interested really. It is a 4 minute, either watch or don't.
-
Calibrated to what lighting and spectral content ?
- very few cameras have colorimetric spectral sensitivities, so the usefulness of any calibration will depend heavily on how well the spectral characteristics of what it has been calibrated to matches what it is actually intended to shoot. A color checker chart under one illumination may be a good start, but it is not the be all and and end all of accuracy.
If you watch the Ch 16 video mentioned which is only 4 minutes that may answer your questions.
-
If you watch the Ch 16 video mentioned which is only 4 minutes that may answer your questions.
No, it doesn't.
Both Hasselblad and P1 are aimed at digital heritage market, so they have repro profiles and some (rather useless) tools for museum archivists, but contrarty to common misbelief they are no magic solution to the problem of evil. All it provides is a little a bit less work at a very steep price.
-
Not that interested really. It is a 4 minute, either watch or don't.
You are making a claim about color accuracy you thus far, can't back up colorimetrically.
-
You are making a claim about color accuracy you thus far, can't back up colorimetrically.
Well no, I was just posted my experience which is that a Hasselblad is far more colour accurate out of the box than a Canon or Nikon and you don't need to be a geek to see that. The customers can.
-
No, it doesn't.
Both Hasselblad and P1 are aimed at digital heritage market, so they have repro profiles and some (rather useless) tools for museum archivists, but contrarty to common misbelief they are no magic solution to the problem of evil. All it provides is a little a bit less work at a very steep price.
Mate, I have no idea what a "heritage market" is or the problem of evil, but a Hasselblad X1D is actually cheaper than a top level Canon and far more colour accurate.
-
Well no, I was just posted my experience which is that a Hasselblad is far more colour accurate out of the box than a Canon or Nikon and you don't need to be a geek to see that. The customers can.
Your belief is not evidence!
Color Accuracy is not ambiguous, the results are based on measurements and analysis whereby the accuracy of two colors, the color photographed at the scene, and some resulting digital color number, output somewhere, are compared. Then an accuracy metric (deltaE) can be provided. Stating the accuracy between two solid colors is a dE 2000 of 4 is just as precise as saying my backyard wall when measured, is 6 feet tall. Accurate color requires measurements and analysis and a numeric report of the accuracy.
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers,
you know something about it;but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express
it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind."-Lord Kelvin
-
“Science is not just about seeing, it’s about measuring, preferably with something that’s not your own eyes, which are inextricably conjoined with the baggage of your brain. That baggage is more often than not a satchel of preconceived ideas, post-conceived notions, and outright bias”.
Neil deGrasse Tyson
There IS a science of color (colorimetry, color science). Assuming your camera is 'accurate' falls outside science. This is telling in more than one way:
"Human psychology has a near-universal tendency to let belief be colored by desire".
— Richard Dawkins
-
Your belief is not evidence!
Color Accuracy is not ambiguous, the results are based on measurements and analysis whereby the accuracy of two colors, the color photographed at the scene, and some resulting digital color number, output somewhere, are compared. Then an accuracy metric (deltaE) can be provided. Stating the accuracy between two solid colors is a dE 2000 of 4 is just as precise as saying my backyard wall when measured, is 6 feet tall. Accurate color requires measurements and analysis and a numeric report of the accuracy.
"I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers,
you know something about it;but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express
it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind."-Lord Kelvin
You really need to go out more. You are making consecutive posts. If you watched the video then delta values are shown, but 99.9% of real world photographers don't really care.
-
You really need to go out more. If you watched the video then delta values are shown, but 99.9% of photographer don't really care.
No, there is one number for one patch; that isn't a dE report and tells us nothing about what you assume is color accuracy.
2nd, you really can't and should not speak for 99.9% of photographers; just speak for yourself (in this thread, where someone is asking about profiles, you suggest a camera system, then boast about "color accuracy" without data). “The right to be heard does not include the right to be taken seriously”. Anonymous
-
without data).
No I didn't write down values but I did watch Les Walkling do Dual Illuminant DNG on every camera in a class of about 20 people and even the same model of cameras are all over the place, because they are not calibrated. Hasselblad cameras are calibrated at the factory. The Op can decide if that interests him.
-
No I didn't write down values but I did watch Les Walkling do Dual Illuminant DNG on every camera in a class of about 20 people and even the same model of cameras are all over the place, because they are not calibrated. Hasselblad cameras are calibrated at the factory. The Op can decide if that interests him.
As you missed earlier, DNG profiles, dual or otherwise, are output referred and thus have nothing to do with accurate color. You must also study the vast but essential difference between calibration and profiling. The OP can follow the recommendations from the color professionals, too…
Rule on holes; when you are deep in one, stop digging.
-
For those with open minds about what a color accuracy report looks like:
-
For those with open minds about what a color accuracy report looks like:
Open mind! on this forum? Personally I sell photos not reports.
-
Open mind! on this forum? Personally I sell photos not reports.
I can sell both.
Keep digging.
-
I can sell both.
Keep digging.
8)