Topic: DCamProf for dummies? (Read 56019 times)

torger · « **Reply #60 on:** September 11, 2015, 05:26:47 pm »

Quote from: AlterEgo on September 11, 2015, 02:45:45 pm

did you check how embedded "transfer function" (the data in that special tiff meta data tag) changes when you make .tiffs in C1 with different exposure corrections (in C1's UI) x different curves

No I didn't observe that (I shall add to the docs to not change exposure for the curve extraction), but I'm not surprised. ACR does something similar just as in-camera JPEGs of my Canon (probably most other cameras too), to make a smoother "film-like" transition into clipping the curve is modulated to brighten and desaturate the highlights.

Hopefully / likely the curve modulation will be the same as long as we don't change the exposure correction between linear.tif and curve.tif

torger · « **Reply #61 on:** September 11, 2015, 05:36:13 pm »

Quote from: Macao on September 11, 2015, 03:35:56 pm

Hello i want testing DCamProf ...but i dont have colorchecker passport

Where i can download colorchecker passport raw image for Single-illuminant profile ....before buy the colorchecker.

..thanks

As a starter, follow the workflow described at (also tips about out imaging resource where you find CC24 shots):
http://www.ludd.ltu.se/~torger/photography/camera-profiling.html#the_easy_way

or if using Capture One:
http://www.ludd.ltu.se/~torger/photography/camera-profiling.html#the_easy_way_c1

Macao · « **Reply #62 on:** September 12, 2015, 06:29:08 am »

Thanks...

i follow this guide

http://www.juzaphoto.com/topic2.php?l=it&t=1473256

I use this command

dcraw -v -r 1 1 1 1 -o 0 -H 0 -T -W -g 1 1 StdA.nef

dcraw -v -r 1 1 1 1 -o 0 -H 0 -T -W -g 1 1 D50.nef

dcraw -v -r 1 1 1 1 -o 0 -H 0 -T -W -g 1 1 D65.nef

scanin -v -dipn StdA.tif ColorCheckerPassport.cht cc24_ref.cie
scanin -v -dipn D50.tif ColorCheckerPassport.cht cc24_ref.cie
scanin -v -dipn D65.tif ColorCheckerPassport.cht cc24_ref.cie

dcamprof make-profile -i StdA -w all 1.3,1,2,1.5,1 -l 0.1,0.1 StdA.ti3 StdA.json

dcamprof make-profile -i D50 -w all 1.3,1,2,1.5,1 -l 0.1,0.1 D50.ti3 D50.json

dcamprof make-profile -i D65 -w all 1.3,1,2,1.5,1 -l 0.1,0.1 D65.ti3 D65.json

dcamprof make-dcp -n "Nikon D610" -d "X-rite-StdA-D50" -t acr StdA.json D50.json X-D610-StdA-D50.dcp
dcamprof make-dcp -n "Nikon D610" -d "X-rite-D50-D65" -t acr D50.json D65.json X-D610-D50-D65.dcp

torger · « **Reply #63 on:** September 12, 2015, 01:02:19 pm »

The commands look fine. I haven't read the guide (I need google translate for that), but it seems to be made by someone experienced in the subject.

Macao · « **Reply #64 on:** September 16, 2015, 05:30:28 pm »

Thanks..but i have a problem with red...

X-rite software

http://i.imgur.com/wCMAlUS.jpg

Dcamprof 0.97

http://i.imgur.com/ir9mi2I.jpg

The machine is red...not purple...Thanks

torger · « **Reply #65 on:** September 17, 2015, 03:24:15 am »

It seems like you have not calibrated for daylight, I assume this is the StdA profile?

In my first edit I thought it could be the difference of CAT (disable it with -C to make-profile), but the difference is much larger than that. If you look at the colorchecker in the background, it looks pretty off alltogether in the dcamprof image. The effect looks similar to when you use a daylight profile in StdA light or the other way around. Are you sure you are using X-D610-StdA-D50.dcp and not the other? If you are there could be some issue with the illuminant tags in the profile, if you post the dcp file I can have a look. The first illuminant should be StdA and the second should be D50. If it's the other way around or wrong tags you can get this effect.

I suspect one of:
A) the wrong profile loaded (your D50-D65 rather than StdA-D50)
B) wrong illuminant tags
C) wrong order of illuminants
D) right order of illuminants, but wrong order of actual matrices/LUTs

If say StdA.ti3 would actually contain test data from daylight, then you could get this effect.

Normally color between different profile makers should look almost identical at first glance, only when really looking for differences one can see that they are there. When there is as large difference like here then there is most likely some problem in the profile-making process. There could be some bug in DCamProf illuminant tag transfer, I haven't tested that much as I generally provide the illuminants in the last make-dcp step, like this:

dcamprof make-dcp -n "Nikon D610" -d "X-rite-StdA-D50" -i StdA -I D50 -t acr StdA.json D50.json X-D610-StdA-D50.dcp

Macao · « **Reply #66 on:** September 17, 2015, 07:32:23 am »

thank you for your patience..

I use this command

dcraw -v -o 0 -4 -r 1 1 1 1 -T StdA.nef
dcraw -v -o 0 -4 -r 1 1 1 1 -T D65.nef

scanin -v -dipn StdA.tif ColorChecker.cht cc24_ref.cie
scanin -v -dipn D65.tif ColorChecker.cht cc24_ref.cie

dcamprof make-profile -i StdA -w all 1.3,1,2,1.5,1 StdA.ti3 StdA.json
dcamprof make-profile -i D65 -w all 1.3,1,2,1.5,1 D65.ti3 D65.json

dcamprof make-dcp -n "Nikon D610" -d "X-rite-StdA-D65" -t acr StdA.json D65.json X-D610-StdA-D65.dcp

I upload my test raw files...
https://www.dropbox.com/s/0lkuvp8utmrz60v/Test.rar?dl=0

torger · « **Reply #67 on:** September 17, 2015, 08:34:25 am »

Here's my result with your files:
http://torger.dyndns.org/macao.jpg

Here's with your profile in the archive:
http://torger.dyndns.org/macao-old.jpg

And here's my result with CAT disabled (mostly difference in red lightness):
http://torger.dyndns.org/macao-nocat.jpg

And here's a basic sanity check, no relaxation, only StdA, no CAT
http://torger.dyndns.org/macao-stda-max.jpg

The lightness varies quite much depending on various optimization settings and curve differences, but the hue is mostly the same on all. Let me know, is it too little yellow and too much magenta in the car paint?

Could you also compare the red patch on the color checker and say how similar it is to the car paint? From the image it seems like it's highly similar, almost the same.

I can see in the plots and the stats that it struggles to match the red patch in the color checker. Before LUT correction it's 8 DE off (it's quite much), but it becomes significantly better after LUT. You can run:

dcamprof make-profile -r dump1 -i StdA -w all 1.3,1,2,1.5,1 StdA.ti3 StdA.json

And then look at the patch matching images in the dump1 directory. The fm-patch-errors-DE-h.tif is before LUT sorted after hue, patch-errors-DE-h.tif is after LUT.

torger · « **Reply #68 on:** September 17, 2015, 08:58:25 am »

In the first problem image you showed, the front of the car looks more purple than the rear. This could be a clipping handling bug, which may have improved to 0.9.11.

In your original image, is the rear part of the car the correct color, or is it also too magenta?

EDIT: checked your profile in the archive and yes it has a clipping bug, green channel drops to 0 when the red color clips, making it more magenta. This does not happen on the profile I rendered.

You can try with the attached profile, it's rendered using your commands.

torger · « **Reply #69 on:** September 17, 2015, 09:27:10 am »

One warning: as far as I know X-Rite software makes a linear colorimetric profile and just applies a curve with no compensation. This makes reds become orange.

So in the first pair of images you posted I would expect that X-Rite's result is too orange.

Linear colorimetric (no curve):

Linear with Adobe's curve, without any compensation, note how red has become more orange (it's not a huge difference, it will depend a bit on your screen how easy it is to see)

Same curve, but now with DCamProf neutral tone reproduction operator

Macao · « **Reply #70 on:** September 18, 2015, 10:10:36 am »

Torger..thank you

0.9.11=very good

Mario

Hening Bettermann · « **Reply #71 on:** December 02, 2015, 05:20:09 pm »

Hi!
I am trying to learn dcamprof.
First off: WOW! What a piece of work! And what a detailed documentation! Many many thanks Torger!
Right now I try to glare-match a flat-fielded .ti3, using this command:

./dcamprof-v0.10.4 testchart-ff -L cc24-ff.ti3

but as a result I get something that looks like the manpage, no output. What am I missing?

edit:
The above was based on my reading of the documentation of the program itself,
http://www.ludd.ltu.se/~torger/dcamprof.html#glare_matching.
I see now that the profiling tutorial
http://www.ludd.ltu.se/~torger/photography/camera-profiling.html#step5_glare
uses a layout.json file:
dcamprof testchart-ff -L cc24-layout.json cc24-ff.ti3 cc24-ffgm.ti3
Where do I find that .json file, and how can I produce one for the ColorCheckerSG target? (I want to try to merge these 2 targets).

Frederic_H · « **Reply #72 on:** December 03, 2015, 01:43:56 am »

They are located in the data-examples folder.

Hening Bettermann · « **Reply #73 on:** December 03, 2015, 06:24:12 am »

Thank you, Frederic!

Hening Bettermann · « **Reply #74 on:** December 04, 2015, 04:27:20 pm »

I am trying to create a profile based on a flat-fielded tif and .ti3. The syntax of the make-profile command is given as:
dcamprof make-profile [flags] <input-target.ti3> <output-profile.json
so I tried:
./dcamprof-v0.10.4 make-profile -i D50 -C cc24-layout.json cc24-ff.ti3
profile.json
As a result I get the manpage.
The strange thing is that I have earlier successfully created a profile using this command:
./dcamprof make-profile -g cc24-layout.json cc24-ff.ti3 profile.json
Why not now? it was another tif and .ti3, but the current one looks o.k., I attach a .zip.
Can anybody help?

Hening Bettermann · « **Reply #75 on:** December 05, 2015, 12:25:49 pm »

Well I repeated with
./dcamprof make-profile -g cc24-layout.json cc24-ff.ti3 profile.json
and that worked. Obviously, dcamprof considered the glare to be too high for a profile without glare matching.
Relief!

Hening Bettermann · « **Reply #76 on:** December 09, 2015, 03:48:40 pm »

Hi!
Could anybody advice how to create a layout.json file for the ColorChecker Passport? Looking at cc24-layout.json, I see some problems: It would have 3 different values for column count, row height, row width. How would the extra rows/patches (beyond the CC24) be called? And which patches would be identified as black and white? I assume the extremes in the neutral row at the bottom of the extra part?
Thank you for your help!

sebbe · « **Reply #77 on:** December 09, 2015, 05:49:30 pm »

There is a cc24-layout.json in the "data-examples" folder. Anders says you should use it. If you are using or not, you will find the structure in there, don't you?

Hening Bettermann · « **Reply #78 on:** December 10, 2015, 10:02:37 am »

Hi sebbe,
thank you for your comment.
Yes I have tried to follow Anders' advice to model a .json layout file after the one for the cc24. The cc24-layout.json looks like this:

// Layout specification for X-Rite ColorChecker Classic
// Can be used for flat-field correction and glare modeling
{
"RowCount": 4,
"ColCount": 6,
"RelativeRowHeight": 1.0,
"RelativeColWidth": 1.0,
"HasColOffset": false,

"WhitePatches": [ "D01" ],
"BlackPatches": [ "D06" ],
"MiddleGrayPatches": [ "D04" ]
}

Hence my question: how handle a target which has 3 different values for ColCount (=row lenght, I assume), Relative RowHeight and RelativeColWidth. I assume row hight and column width describe the size of the patches, of which there are 3 different ones in the CC Passport.

Good light!

sebbe · « **Reply #79 on:** December 11, 2015, 03:37:51 am »

Hey Hening

I'm not very into creating my own testchart, and it looks like you did your own. Otherwise you just can take Anders version for the CC24.

I was looking into the documentation. There are two commands in dcamprof, that may help you in understanding the layout.json: make-testchart and testchart-ff. I didn't look more into it, maybe I'm wrong...

Author Topic: DCamProf for dummies? (Read 56019 times)