Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: Camera Calibration profiles: think of them as color palettes not as absolutes  (Read 56433 times)

Ellis Vener

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2151
    • http://www.ellisvener.com

I've been a long time advocate of creating a custom profile for your camera using an #Xrite 24-patch target and using either (or both) Xrite's #ColorCheckerPassport software or #AdobeDNGProfile Editor. What I have found that works best when you go that route (and I think you should) is to create a dual illuminant one using 3200˚K light or household type incandescent light bulbs burn at around 2800˚K on the low end and daylight (cloudy or clear) or electronic flash at the high end.

These DNG based profiles (which can be applied to non-DNG raw formats) are not true ICC profiles but unless your photographing products or doing copy work where absolute control over color relationships are a must, they work well at delivering pleasing color*.

That's fine and dandy but here's the point: I want to encourage you to at least try the other profiles to see which basic color palette (the "Profile") works best before you start adjusting any of Lightroom or ACR's sliders. You might discover something you like.

If you prefer the #Datacolor approach to profiling a set up, using their target and software to set the Hue/Saturation and Luminosity sliders rather than the Camera Calibration settings, that's fine too - use whatever works best for you and the photos you are making 

*I've read through and know enough to understand the acres of the thorny brambles that make up the arguments against DNG profiling. If you want to rehash those arguments and trot out your charts and equations be my guest and start your own thread. While I understand the fine points of those arguments, and know that there are some circumstances in which they absolutely apply I make and judge photographs in the real world and for those purposes the DNG based profiles work fine.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2015, 04:07:55 pm by Ellis Vener »
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/

That's fine and dandy but here's the point: I want to encourage you to at least try the other profiles to see which basic color palette (the "Profile") works best before you start adjusting any of Lightroom or ACR's sliders.
That's why it would be so nice IF the selection of camera profiles where at the top, rather than the bottom of the GUI in Lightroom. I agree, set profile first, then mess with sliders.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436

That's how I see and use camera profiles, Ellis. Gave up on absolute accuracy long time ago. I get by on the 4 that I have which comprise ACR 4.4, Adobe Standard, a custom DNG Single illuminant Daylight and Dual Illuminant profile and find I use all of them as color graders and/or restorers.

On certain high contrast scenes like big sunset clouds and brightly lit plants and flowers I like switching between Adobe Standard and a custom DNG and sometimes revert back to the old ACR 4.4 which opens up and clarifies shadow detail more than a custom. I use HSL panel to adjust to taste.

For instance below is a recent edit where I see the advantages of Adobe Standard increasing luminance in highlights without clipping on sunset clouds but distorts (twists?) hues on other objects such as the pumpkin. I also use Adobe Standard to neutralize interiors lit by spiky 2800K fluorescent lights in order to get rid of the green. To boost saturation a bit without having to use slider tools I'll select the Dual Illuminant DNG profile as I did on the pumpkin even though it's shot in daylight.
Logged

AFairley

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1486

That's why it would be so nice IF the selection of camera profiles where at the top, rather than the bottom of the GUI in Lightroom. I agree, set profile first, then mess with sliders.
+1
Logged

Simon Garrett

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 742

That's why it would be so nice IF the selection of camera profiles where at the top, rather than the bottom of the GUI in Lightroom. I agree, set profile first, then mess with sliders.

Another +1.  Much easier if the "Basic" panel were next to "Camera Calibration".  I often try different profiles along with adjustments in the Basic Panel. 
Logged

ButchM

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 749

That's why it would be so nice IF the selection of camera profiles where at the top, rather than the bottom of the GUI in Lightroom. I agree, set profile first, then mess with sliders.

Something I recall you and others requested (and I and many others supported) many versions ago.

Apparently that concept has fallen upon deaf ears.
Logged

Rand47

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1882

That's why it would be so nice IF the selection of camera profiles where at the top, rather than the bottom of the GUI in Lightroom. I agree, set profile first, then mess with sliders.

+2  I never really thought about it, but you're exactly right about this.  As soon as I read your post, I thought, DUH! ... of course!!

Eric, Adobe, are you listening?

Rand
« Last Edit: January 28, 2015, 11:02:35 pm by Rand47 »
Logged
Rand Scott Adams

stevebri

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220

+1

I've added a plus one to keep this post up there for others to read...

Getting into the habit of creating custom profiles just makes things better from first tweaks to final output, as Ellis says, give it a try.

S
Logged

kers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4388
    • Pieter Kers

That's why it would be so nice IF the selection of camera profiles where at the top, rather than the bottom of the GUI in Lightroom. I agree, set profile first, then mess with sliders.
+1
you are right,
It is the first choice to make and should be on top..
I find i have enough choices with camera profiles already (d810) so don't see a reason yet to make them myself...
( also i do not trust myself doing it right ; even adobe made mistakes with their first d810 profiles)
As a starting point i like the soft 'camera neutral' best on the d810
Logged
Pieter Kers
www.beeld.nu/la

mouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260

I have made more than a few camera profiles using the DNG profile editor (single and dual illuminant).
It seems to me that there is an important bit of information missing in the instructions for this tool. 

Immediately after opening an image, in the right panel, there is a drop down list for "Base Profile".  Here one can select from a number of Adobe profiles for your camera.  After one makes this selection. the next step is to select the "Chart" tab and proceed from there to construct the profile.  What I have found is that the selection of the "Base Profile" has an visible effect (sometimes very significant) on the resulting profile prodced by the editor.

 Can anyone comment?

Sorry if this diverges too much from the original topic.
Logged

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995

Can anyone comment?

just google messages from Eric Chan about the matter... creation of dcp profiles using Adobe DNG PE will use some essential parts from the base profile selected in order to avoid serious errors from users who really think that they are creating something new (  :D  ), specifically for daylight type illumination (placebo effect is the best sales engine) ...

for example :

Eric Chan :: ( http://forums.adobe.com/message/5198903#5198903 ) @ Apr 2, 2013


Quote
   DNG Profile Editor lets you define color edits (in the first tab) using a set of color control points.  These control points in turn define a color lookup table used to perform the color correction when processing a (raw) image.

    When you use a Base Profile, the resulting color table in the final profile is a combination of the base profile's color table, plus the color table defined by any edits that you've added in the first tab (using the Chart Wizard counts as adding edits to that first tab).

    The reason you can get different and less smooth results if you apply the Chart Wizard iteratively is because you are applying lookup table after lookup table.  The current color table-building method used by DNG PE has some limitations regarding smoothness of color profiles if two color control points are placed too closely (this can happen with the Chart Wizard, or if you specify two points manually that are close to each other).  These problems can become more noticeable if you apply the DNG PE iteratively.

 Eric Chan :: (  http://forums.adobe.com/message/3395534#3395534 ) @ Jan 11, 2011

Quote
   ...we decided to build tools to allow users to develop their own preferred colors. One such tool is the DNG Profile Editor. It has its limits, of course. One limitation...is that you need to already have a suitable starting color matrix for a camera; otherwise the lookup tables will not work well. For most camera models, Adobe has already built such starting color matrices...

« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 04:47:40 pm by AlterEgo »
Logged

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436

 
Quote
  ...we decided to build tools to allow users to develop their own preferred colors. One such tool is the DNG Profile Editor. It has its limits, of course. One limitation...is that you need to already have a suitable starting color matrix for a camera; otherwise the lookup tables will not work well. For most camera models, Adobe has already built such starting color matrices...

Going by the huge differences (hue twists?) seen in the "pumpkin" image above using custom DNG (ACR 4.4 Base Profile source color matrices in DNG PE Chart Wizard) VS Adobe Standard, I'ld suggest those having issues with their final custom DNG profile start off with a different default Base Profile which I believe requires you select it first in ACR/LR and set that as the new Default setting for all Raw images. That way when you do the initial Raw conversion to DNG that new source Base Profile is included when opening in the DNG Profile Editor Chart Wizard.

I have only my one camera (Pentax K100D) to assume that Adobe appears to create their Base Profiles differently that are specific to each camera model. I don't know if Adobe Standard does the same orange to yellow hue twist for other cameras but if it does I'ld think I'ld switch to ACR 4.4 or any other Adobe made Base Profile other than Adobe Standard.

Just FYI but years back I read in the same Adobe forums by either Eric Chan or Chris Cox that Adobe uses more sophisticated methods and hardware to create their Base Profiles than what can be done in DNG PE Chart Wizard. They didn't get into specifics but after years of close examination of my two (ACR 4.4 & Adobe Standard) and how they adjust colors on my Raw images, I'm taking their word for it.



« Last Edit: January 30, 2015, 06:38:59 pm by Tim Lookingbill »
Logged

mouse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260

Quote
Eric Chan: When you use a Base Profile, the resulting color table in the final profile is a combination of the base profile's color table, plus the color table defined by any edits that you've added in the first tab (using the Chart Wizard counts as adding edits to that first tab).

OK, this is as I expected.  It leaves open the question: are there any guidelines when choosing a Base Profile?.  Or, is it simply try 2 or 3 different ones, use the Chart Wizard, and select the edited profile you like best?
Logged

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436

OK, this is as I expected.  It leaves open the question: are there any guidelines when choosing a Base Profile?.  Or, is it simply try 2 or 3 different ones, use the Chart Wizard, and select the edited profile you like best?

I'm not aware of any guidelines.

Based on my observation I'ld suggest you start with a Base Profile that renders the Color Checker Chart visually as close to the original as possible with the most balance with regard to HSL or go by the Lab numbers. Before the conversion of the CCchart target image to DNG format choose different Base Profiles that do this the best.

ACR 4.4 as a Base Profile for my camera always opens up the shadows a bit with more definition on a wider range of images of varying dynamic ranges. Sometimes the custom DNG profile built from ACR 4.4 BP gives better results in this regard depending on the amount of contrast and saturation in the shadows. For my camera ACR 4.4 is the most stable and color balanced with the least shadow noise artifacts.
Logged

Peter_DL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 544

It leaves open the question: are there any guidelines when choosing a Base Profile?.

The results obtained with the DNG PE / Chart Wizard may indeed show some unexpected dependencies.
From what we found the profiles vary significantly depending on:
1.)  camera-exposure, +/- EV.
2.)  the version of the DNG PE (1.0.0.39 vs. 1.0.0.46).
3.)  the Base Profile used, sometimes at least.

Starting with Adobe Standard as the Base Profile, when running the Chart Wizard the entry for the "Base Profile" in the Color Tables tab automatically changes from Adobe Standard to something named "ColorChecker".  My understanding is that the Adobe Standard profile is cut down to the baseline matrix profile (equivalent to the former ACR 4.x profiles) before the Hue/Sat.-corrections from the Chart Wizard are build on it.

The first thing I do after running the Chart Wizard is to Clear all Color Adjustments and to export the resulting profile under the title "base matrix" (w/Base Tone Curve set to Camera Raw Default).  Or, let’s call it "color palette # 1" in the sense suggested by the OP.

The Chart Wizard can then of course be launched again to add its Hue/Sat.-corrections. FWIW.
The results are the same as with the first run of the Chart Wizard above.

Walking along the same procedure but with Camera Standard as the Base Profile, we have seen that the results can be exactly the same as above with Adobe Standard (which means that the Camera Standard profile is cut down as well by the Chart Wizard to the same baseline matrix profile before the Hue/Sat.-corrections are build on it), but we also had cases where the results, the profiles and the logic were completely spoiled. I'm staying away from the Camera Matching Profiles as a starting point to run the Chart Wizard.

--
Logged

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436


The results obtained with the DNG PE / Chart Wizard may indeed show some unexpected dependencies.
From what we found the profiles vary significantly depending on:
1.)  camera-exposure, +/- EV.
2.)  the version of the DNG PE (1.0.0.39 vs. 1.0.0.46).
3.)  the Base Profile used, sometimes at least.

Starting with Adobe Standard as the Base Profile, when running the Chart Wizard the entry for the "Base Profile" in the Color Tables tab automatically changes from Adobe Standard to something named "ColorChecker".  My understanding is that the Adobe Standard profile is cut down to the baseline matrix profile (equivalent to the former ACR 4.x profiles) before the Hue/Sat.-corrections from the Chart Wizard are build on it.

The first thing I do after running the Chart Wizard is to Clear all Color Adjustments and to export the resulting profile under the title "base matrix" (w/Base Tone Curve set to Camera Raw Default).  Or, let’s call it "color palette # 1" in the sense suggested by the OP.

The Chart Wizard can then of course be launched again to add its Hue/Sat.-corrections. FWIW.
The results are the same as with the first run of the Chart Wizard above.

Walking along the same procedure but with Camera Standard as the Base Profile, we have seen that the results can be exactly the same as above with Adobe Standard (which means that the Camera Standard profile is cut down as well by the Chart Wizard to the same baseline matrix profile before the Hue/Sat.-corrections are build on it), but we also had cases where the results, the profiles and the logic were completely spoiled. I'm staying away from the Camera Matching Profiles as a starting point to run the Chart Wizard.

--

Peter, that sounds very confusing and no where close to how the 4 step CCchart works for me which is quite simple and straight forward with version 1.0.0.46.

First step open the DNG CCchart target image

Second step place color circles over corner patches

Third step pick single or dual illuminant table (dual illuminant requires two CCchart DNG format targets: D65 & 2800K)

Fourth step Create Color Table

There is no clearing of "Color Matrices" (Hue Sat slider panel) procedure prior to this unless it was set as a new custom "Default" in ACR/LR during the CCchart target image conversion to DNG.

When you say "running the Chart Wizard" (I'm assuming where you place circles over the corner patches of the CCchart target image) and where you say it automatically switches from Adobe Standard to Color Checker, does the DNG CCchart target image preview change? If it doesn't you can't assume any matrices are being overridden or any Base Profile is being "cut down". Where did you get this understanding?

Your explanation sounds like you're suggesting the same "iterative" procedure that linked Adobe discussion says to avoid. Use the CCchart and don't mess with any other panels. That's all that should be done.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2015, 02:43:32 pm by Tim Lookingbill »
Logged

Peter_DL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 544

.. how the 4 step CCchart works for me which is quite simple and straight forward with version 1.0.0.46.

First step open the DNG CCchart target image
Second step place color circles over corner patches
Third step pick single or dual illuminant table (dual illuminant requires two CCchart DNG format targets: D65 & 2800K)
Fourth step Create Color Table

... Use the CCchart and don't mess with any other panels. That's all that should be done.

If you like your profile and the resulting colors, Tim,
I certainly won't disagree, - and under the main premise of this thread, just think of it as another color palette
and not as anything absolute, also in a technical sense because the profile is just one variant depending on several influencing factors, and some of it such as the points listed above may be unexpected.  Of course it requires more than one "run" to explore this.

So the question is about the merits of this camera calibration and the resulting profile(s) with all related if & then,
compared to the Adobe Standard profile, the Camera Matching profile, and – as another reference - what I called the baseline matrix profile in my previous post.  As for the latter, provided that the DNG of the CCchart was initially saved with the Adobe Standard profile, just add a fifth step: go to Edit in the top bar of the DNG-PE and Clear Color Adjustments, then export the profile.

--
Logged

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995

what I called the baseline matrix profile
in recent Adobe Standard profiles "matrix" part is not enough really (unlike it used to be before)... more color transform work is shifted to LUTs, so if you use dcptool and strip LUTs the result will be not as they used to be.
Logged

Tim Lookingbill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2436

Quote
As for the latter, provided that the DNG of the CCchart was initially saved with the Adobe Standard profile, just add a fifth step: go to Edit in the top bar of the DNG-PE and Clear Color Adjustments, then export the profile.

I just did what you suggested and the only "Cleared Color Adjustments" were the adjustments built and seen in the Color Table panel by the CCchart Wizard tables built on top of the initial DNG "Preview" that is created and inextricably connected to the Base Profile chosen as a Default in ACR/LR be it ACR 4.4 or Adobe Standard. You can't clear Adobe Standard tables in the DNG CCchart source image because the preview doesn't change which is an indication the internal Color Tables have not been cleared. You can only clear the adjustments made by the Chart Wizard. The Color Table drop down menu lists other profiles (that change the preview) to use as replacement starting points but that's exactly what was done during the creation of the DNG when choosing Adobe Standard or any other Default profile in ACR/LR.

You're not making the connection and you're adding confusion by disconnecting the color tables that form the initial Default preview in ACR/LR that the Chart Wizard builds the recipe from when placing the four corner dots over the chart. The Chart Wizard has to make a new set of Color Tables going by how screwed up the colors are by the Default embedded (ACR 4.4 or Adobe Standard) profile when positioning the four corner dots placed over the CCchart target preview.

The least corrections (the least screwed up by the chosen Default profile) the less the CCchart Wizard has to create huge fixes in the new recipe seen in the Color Table panel which makes for a better profile overall with the least amount of generated artifacts when using as the new custom replacement Default Profile.

There is a reason why we need to make a custom DNG profile using a starting profile as Default in ACR/LR (which can't be turned off, only replaced but used as a reference starting point for the Wizard) and the reason is that the initial preview is screwed up by the current Default Profiles provided by Adobe. The best Adobe profile to choose as a starting point before converting to CCchart target DNG is the profile that makes the CCchart look the most accurate.

That way any additional edits in the DNG PE Color Table panel that are built on top of the new CCchart Wizard Color Table recipe like say better skin tones (which is iterative) won't add as much color distortion or artifacts embedded in the final edited custom profile.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2015, 03:15:03 am by Tim Lookingbill »
Logged

Peter_DL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 544

in recent Adobe Standard profiles "matrix" part is not enough really (unlike it used to be before)... more color transform work is shifted to LUTs, so if you use dcptool and strip LUTs the result will be not as they used to be.

in recent Adobe Standard profiles the HSV Lut part has indeed become larger,
and unlike with former Adobe Standard profiles it can't be completely removed anymore via the DNG PE Chart Wizard + Clear Color Adjustments,
but then the Lut is still getting downsized that way, it is different from the starting Lut with Adobe Standard, which finally makes it a different profile
- as confirmed by looking inside the profiles with the dcpTool, or from what I see in practice in LR/ACR.

Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up