DPP better than ACR?

[Vladimirovich]

Probably not as we find people who build their own DNG profiles almost always report a better result than using the 'canned' profile.

oh, yes... specifically when they use PE and Adobe's own base profile... so they actually tells us that they do not like Adobe's rendering (represented by LUTs) or in most cases they act like kids enjoying their new colorful toy (colorchecker).

[Vladimirovich]

whereas Adobe Standard is way off.

because "standard" profiles were not designed for anything like "reproduction", but rather they reflect Adobe's (certain people) ideas how colors shall be rendered... and that's different from "camera profiles" for selected cameras (C&N and may be few others) even in how profiles designed inside... there were a number of topics about that @ http://forums.adobe.com/community/cameraraw - look for postings from Vit Novak (he tends to post in relevant topics).

[digitaldog]

...or in most cases they act like kids enjoying their new colorful toy (colorchecker).

Toy as in a possible size or you are making a broad statement about a tool that has been successfully used in the photo and film industry for a number of tasks for decades?

[Bullfrog]

Toy as in a possible size or you are making a broad statement about a tool that has been successfully used in the photo and film industry for a number of tasks for decades?

Digital Dog -
I'm admittedly overwhelmed with the need to buy more stuff and when I got X-rite - I contemplated the colour checker but passed.  

Can you tell me why (in a for dummies type language) I need this?

Thanks for any advise.

[digitaldog]

Can you tell me why (in a for dummies type language) I need this?

You'd want this if you decided to create custom DNG profiles. Or if you wanted a color reference target to compare say what you see on-screen to a print (within gamut limitations of each). If you wanted to white balance using a pretty spectrally neural patch or, in the case of the Passport, using the 'off white' group to WB visually. The Passport doesn't take up space or weigh much at all, it's a useful "first shot" reference to include for later processing as defined above.

[Vladimirovich]

Toy as in a possible size or you are making a broad statement about a tool that has been successfully used in the photo and film industry for a number of tasks for decades?

broad statement about 99% of users.. not all people who purchase a sniper rifle are capable snipers (but many think they are)... you understand the point.

[Vladimirovich]

You'd want this if you decided to create custom DNG profiles.

may be advise him to hit adobe U2U forums like http://forums.adobe.com/community/cameraraw and read relevant topics where VitNovak and Eric Chan were participating before suggesting to proceed immediately "to create custom DNG profiles"... way better investment of the time

[digitaldog]

broad statement about 99% of users.. not all people who purchase a sniper rifle are capable snipers (but many think they are)... you understand the point.

Actually no. Not all people who purchase a sniper rifle are capable snipers true, but the "tool" in this case isn't the culprit but the person using the tool. That's an issue with the user, not the tool itself. I'd be hard pressed to knock a sniper rifle (whatever that is <g>) because the person using it isn't a capable sniper (whatever that means).

So someone who isn't capable of correctly using either a sniper rifle or a ColorChecker have turned those products into toys?

[digitaldog]

may be advise him to hit adobe U2U forums like http://forums.adobe.com/community/cameraraw and read relevant topics where VitNovak and Eric Chan were participating before suggesting to proceed immediately "to create custom DNG profiles"... way better investment of the time

It's always been a better of investment of my time. Note too, I didn't suggest he has to make a DNG profile, I stated factually that the target under discussion is a necessary component in making a profile IF he decides to create one.

[Bullfrog]

It's always been a better of investment of my time. Note too, I didn't suggest he has to make a DNG profile, I stated factually that the target under discussion is a necessary component in making a profile IF he decides to create one.

Understood and thanks to both for the info.  I need to read the website and educate myself before I decide.  This DNG profile topic has been presented to me a few times in colour calibration and printing and its obviously a hill I need to climb.  Just have to get my head around it.
Thanks again

[Vladimirovich]

not the tool itself.

true... but I was calling it a toy only in such hands and not by itself... I am sure we have here certain people who can use it properly (you can of course), but of "hoi polloi" users do not...

[digitaldog]

I need to read the website and educate myself before I decide

If you are not using an Adobe raw converter (or one that supports DNG profiles), you can skip that part. The target is still very useful even if you never build such a profile.

[digitaldog]

true... but I was calling it a toy only in such hands and not by itself...

Better. It's not a toy, it's a tool that can act like a toy in the wrong hands. Let's put the 'blame' where it belongs.

[Vladimirovich]

I need to read the website and educate myself before I decide. 

some time ago I tried to tag some interesting discussions w/ a tag in @ Adobe forums to facilitate the search

http://forums.adobe.com/tags#/?tags=profiles

PS: not all topics there were tagged by me.

[Bullfrog]

some time ago I tried to tag some interesting discussions w/ a tag in @ Adobe forums to facilitate the search

http://forums.adobe.com/tags#/?tags=profiles

PS: not all topics there were tagged by me.

Thanks. You read my mind - because I clicked on the forum link and thought...wow..another full day to surf through the minutia.  Learning is one thing - finding what is relevant to learn a whole new ballgame.

I do understand both your perspectives - I am not yet convinced colour checker passport is essential - for ME - because in the final analysis,  who will know.  Who will care?  If it provides better accuracy to original shot - is that accuracy important to my audience.  

However, I realize I could be summarily dismissing a tool that if I took some time to learn, would greatly enhance my delivery.  

At present, in my uninformed state, I believe its another discipline which (I presume) adds to the time to capture-

[Vladimirovich]

I am not yet convinced colour checker passport is essential

it is not about colorchecker, but more about the tools like Adobe PE and how profiles are designed inside vs what you can do with Adobe PE (and less flexible tools like XRite OEM software... note that there are alternative solutions from QPCard, albeit their target is less nicely designed in terms of usability)

[Vladimirovich]

Learning is one thing - finding what is relevant to learn a whole new ballgame.

you just follow certain posters - they tend to participate in topics where you can learn something... I maintain a collection of personalities whose postings I follow on various forums to learn.

[digitaldog]

I do understand both your perspectives - I am not yet convinced colour checker passport is essential - for ME - because in the final analysis,  who will know.  Who will care?  If it provides better accuracy to original shot - is that accuracy important to my audience.

Actually it's not about accuracy in terms of what you get out of the raw processor. You can use the Macbeth as an accuracy test as I pointed out (my display and my print look the same). You can use it to white balance in different ways which again, isn't about accuracy. It's a visual reference for one. It's something you can include in shots where the illuminate may be on the odd side suggesting a way to white balance or build a DNG profile depending on your goals. You don't have to use any such target to get a pleasing image. It might make getting there easier, might not.

[Vladimirovich]

build a DNG profile depending on your goals.

and why not just convert the actual shot (w/o colorchecker) to DNG , bring that into PE and edit the profile (within the limitations of the current version of Adobe PE vs the current state of DNG profiles) with the actual colors in front of you... how having a chart (in many cases in a separate shot) will add something of greater value  vs just having actual shot, with actual colors present, that you want to have certain L&F... having a good quality (very neutral) WB patch from there is one thing, but chart itself ?

[digitaldog]

and why not just convert the actual shot (w/o colorchecker) to DNG , bring that into PE and edit the profile (within the limitations of the current version of Adobe PE vs the current state of DNG profiles) with the actual colors in front of you.

You could do that, might work well. But the editor isn't exactly intuitive and you're working on a profile on top of this. I suspect just creating a few DNG profiles for common illuminants that use your sensor is all you need (it's all I've ever needed).