camera calibration profiles color & importing images

[mantra]

hi
i'm still running lightroom cc 2015 (6.14) , cc classsic seems buggy sometime

well i shoot canon mostly and nikon , when i 'm lucky leica and when i'm very very lucky medium format

the point , i use mostly lightroom cc for the first editing after bridge and photoshop

one problem i had in the last days with nikon and less with canon , was the colors

may i ask you few questions?

1) to have the most similar color compared to canon digital professional or nikon capture nx-d does it matter importing the image in lightroom selecting Embedded & Sidecar ?
i guess in this case lightroom should read the jpg and render the preview very similar to them

normally i select standard -> camera calibration neutral for nikon & for canon

2)
the problem ,if importing in lightroom selection Embedded and sidecar to have a better color match in bridge and photoshop , acr read the raw in a different way , so some picture look great in lightroom and not in bridge/photoshop acr

 

[Linwood Ferguson]

1) Under 2015, using Embedded & Sidecar is pretty pointless; what happens is it momentarily will show you the preview from the camera, but then as soon as you touch or view the image will build a standard preview. Under 7.0 it is possible to see only the camera's previews with that option, but even then it doesn't survive edits. Plus the preview from the camera is a very low quality; it will never be used for exports or prints. In other words, honestly, trying to use the camera preview is pointless with LR; if you really want (only) that, shoot JPG and import the JPG not raw. (But don't do that, it's not really a good strategy).

2) I didn't follow that completely, but I think it's the same issue, namely....

By default, Lightroom's editing is flat and uninteresting. Emphasis on "default". If you will choose better edits, or better default profile, you will see dramatic improvements. Most of us have a "standard" set of presets we use either all the time as a starting point, or that may vary by situation (I'm in the former, I have a "default" I apply as a preset to every image that gives me a starting point for editing).

In particular, try using Camera Standard or one of the other Camera (name) profiles instead of those starting with Adobe. Those are closer to the camera's own processing. Then consider adding in a bit of contrast in your own preset (I prefer to do it not with contrast but increased white point and decreased black point, and also some increased shadows and decreased highlights -- to me this adds some "pop" while also preserving highlight detail and enhancing shadow detail). Also maybe a bit of vibrance and clarity. I suspect you will find with some experimentation a setting that makes a good starting point for whatever your taste is in style.

If you get that the way you want it, just save those settings (including the profile) as a preset, and apply it on imports.

 

[mantra]

1) Under 2015, using Embedded & Sidecar is pretty pointless; what happens is it momentarily will show you the preview from the camera, but then as soon as you touch or view the image will build a standard preview. Under 7.0 it is possible to see only the camera's previews with that option, but even then it doesn't survive edits. Plus the preview from the camera is a very low quality; it will never be used for exports or prints. In other words, honestly, trying to use the camera preview is pointless with LR; if you really want (only) that, shoot JPG and import the JPG not raw. (But don't do that, it's not really a good strategy).

2) I didn't follow that completely, but I think it's the same issue, namely....

By default, Lightroom's editing is flat and uninteresting. Emphasis on "default". If you will choose better edits, or better default profile, you will see dramatic improvements. Most of us have a "standard" set of presets we use either all the time as a starting point, or that may vary by situation (I'm in the former, I have a "default" I apply as a preset to every image that gives me a starting point for editing).

In particular, try using Camera Standard or one of the other Camera (name) profiles instead of those starting with Adobe. Those are closer to the camera's own processing. Then consider adding in a bit of contrast in your own preset (I prefer to do it not with contrast but increased white point and decreased black point, and also some increased shadows and decreased highlights -- to me this adds some "pop" while also preserving highlight detail and enhancing shadow detail). Also maybe a bit of vibrance and clarity. I suspect you will find with some experimentation a setting that makes a good starting point for whatever your taste is in style.

If you get that the way you want it, just save those settings (including the profile) as a preset, and apply it on imports.

hi Ferguson
i guess i 'm doing confusion between cc 2017 and cc 2015
well i have taken photos with nikon d200/300D/700D/810D i have recently problem with colors , the jpg looks better while with canon 5d/5d II/III/ and IV the color and the camera raw profile match they look betters
i know under lightroom they look flat , but the colors are really differents
i see you use d4/d5 , i really like D3 and D5 , may i ask you which settings do you use under camera calibration profiles & sliders?
thanks

 

[Linwood Ferguson]

hi Ferguson
i guess i 'm doing confusion between cc 2017 and cc 2015
well i have taken photos with nikon d200/300D/700D/810D i have recently problem with colors , the jpg looks better while with canon 5d/5d II/III/ and IV the color and the camera raw profile match they look betters
i know under lightroom they look flat , but the colors are really differents
i see you use d4/d5 , i really like D3 and D5 , may i ask you which settings do you use under camera calibration profiles & sliders?
thanks

I use a custom profile for both made with a color checker, and I do not change the sliders under the profile generally at all.

I apologize but I am not quite able to parse the above, are you saying that as you changed from 2015 to 2017 your colors changed? For the same image?

There was no change that I'm aware of in 2017 (LR7) with respect to profiles. In 7.1 they added the auto-tone, which will significantly change how things look if you use it, relative to either 2015 or 7.0, but has no effect if you do not use it.

Camera profiles are specific to a camera, so the Adobe Standard profile if applied to a Canon 5D or a Nikon D4 are actually different profiles. Adobe tried to make the result look similar, hence the name. The idea was anything from any camera started out roughly the same, and you could edit them (more or less) without worrying about which camera. After lots of complaints about "flat" the "Camera standard" on the other hand was aimed at producing something more similar to what comes out of the camera, so if applied you would not expect two cameras to look the same, but rather more "normal" for that camera.

But all this is old news, and with regard to LR6 vs LR7.0 and LR 7.1, none of this should have changed.

The only significant change is that in 7.0 "embedded" previews (not profiles) can persist, so you can use them and have them display in Library until you do something to make them go away. in LR6 that was not true, they persisted for a few seconds but were always replaced as soon as you looked at it. In LR7 it leaves a little icon on the display which, if hovered over, tells you it is the embedded preview.

Now those embedded previews, if you are seeing them, can look VERY different as it's JPG straight out of the camera. But as soon as you click something to make it produce a regular LR preview, they go away.

Is it those you are seeing that is different?

Linwood

 

[mantra]

I use a custom profile for both made with a color checker, and I do not change the sliders under the profile generally at all.

Hi Linwood

i did it too for my canon ,but i many cases there are unless for me , for example for portraits or studio photos i take several shots with machbeth card and i do several photos with the card and after i take the shots
but they are unless in landscape or architecture at least i have used 1dx II and 1dx , 5d mark 4 and so on

sadly i haven't nikon profiles just because even are great cameras (i would love test deeply the 850D) , i don't own nikon gear , but sometime i have to use them

I apologize but I am not quite able to parse the above, are you saying that as you changed from 2015 to 2017 your colors changed? For the same image?

There was no change that I'm aware of in 2017 (LR7) with respect to profiles. In 7.1 they added the auto-tone, which will significantly change how things look if you use it, relative to either 2015 or 7.0, but has no effect if you do not use it.

yes they look different , in both cases i used embeded and sidecars , on v7 the colors look better
maybe under 7 i got better colors results because for

The only significant change is that in 7.0 "embedded" previews (not profiles) can persist

Is it those you are seeing that is different?

yes i guess so

and another thing , under nikon in the settings i don't use normal or vivid but custom with custom settings maybe this is the reason the color are so different , i will try to set to normal the next time

about your camera profiles , do you use take a snapshop with the macbeth card and after take the photos?
or do you have some profiles taken in different situations with different light temperatures with the lens you use mostly?

ps beautiful nature photos, i 'm watching your photo art gallery
thanks

 

[Linwood Ferguson]

[LR6 vs LR7] yes they look different , in both cases i used embeded and sidecars , on v7 the colors look better
maybe under 7 i got better colors results because for

[Embedded profiles in 7 that persist]
yes i guess so

So this may very much be the issue, but it's not a terribly useful diversion.

Embedded previews were added in 7.0 to speed the import process, so people could import 1000 photos and cull them quickly using the embedded previews, e.g. using them for focus, composition, etc., but not fine editing.

The embedded preview use and persistence in 7.0 was never intended to provide a result, just an intermediate step.

The test to see if that is indeed what you are seeing is to look at an image you like, and then (in 7.x) build a standard preview, and see if that "breaks" it so it no longer looks good. If so, then yes - you are seeing the camera's image at first, then lightroom's image.

and another thing , under nikon in the settings i don't use normal or vivid but custom with custom settings maybe this is the reason the color are so different , i will try to set to normal the next time

Are you speaking of the Profile name? There is no Adobe "custom" profile, unless it is one you created, or got from a third party.

about your camera profiles , do you use take a snapshop with the macbeth card and after take the photos?
or do you have some profiles taken in different situations with different light temperatures with the lens you use mostly?

I take a profile for each different lighting spectra, e.g. an arena which may have LED light, or a stadium that has Mercury Vapor light. I also do one for daylight. Then I combine them (e.g. so I have a dual profile that interpolates between daylight and night light at a baseball stadium, for example.

I do not take them for each shoot, that's WAY too much work. These are not white balance, these are for light spectra differences. That's not a good way to say it -- white balance is about color temperature from black body radiation, i.e. a smooth bell-like curve of the spectra. But LED, Mercury and Sodium lights, florescent, etc. are not smooth spectra, they may be much brighter at some colors than others, but not along a smooth curve. Indeed you might be high in red and in blue, but weak in the middle in yellow or green. So by taking a profile in that lighting, the profile tends to "true up" the spectra somewhat to a more normal curve, which afterwards is more amenable to adjusting white balance as usual.

But the bottom line is all I need is one test in that typical light, and I use it for years (well, until that venue gets new lighting). Combined with flicker control in the newer cameras which means I hit the light's cycle at the same point, this goes a long way to more true colors.

But... but... this is more about sports than normal photography. Sports venues tend to have awful and varying lights. So take with a suitable grain of salt.

On the other hand, if shooting with two cameras regardless of lighting, I find using a custom profile for each makes them match better.

ps beautiful nature photos, i 'm watching your photo art gallery
thanks

Thank you. Nature was a while ago, haven't done much lately.

 

[mantra]

Are you speaking of the Profile name? There is no Adobe "custom" profile, unless it is one you created, or got from a third party.
.

hi
no i'm talking about nikon in camera settings , i don't remember the d3 and d5 , but in the other camera i can setup color stlyle , normal ,vivid, landscape and i have selected custom and change sharpen , colors and so on
maybe that's because the look so differents
weird capture one , i haven't bought it , i tried the colors are amazing
cheers

 

[Linwood Ferguson]

Ah, just to be sure we're saying the same things, in-camera profiles (picture controls in Nikon terms) have no impact on Adobe's edited images whatsoever, only in the embedded preview or out-of-the-camera JPG's.

It does take a while to get Adobe "programmed" to one's tastes in color. I understand Adobe's rationale from long ago, but I think they made a big mistake that other vendors are capitalizing on, making the out-of-the-box settings for raw conversion much more vivid and interesting compared to Lightrooms.

 

[Zenon]

I have read a lot of complaints at other sites about Adobe Standard looking flat. It is. I always say if you are testing at least try one your cameras profiles which are very close. Adobe expects you to tweak or use a profiler like Colourchecker Passport or use the Camera's profile.

I use Canon and I like Camera Standard. I can't remember if a camera profile auto applies at import by simply selecting it in a previous session. I have it and several other adjustments auto apply via the Develop Default Settings for quite some time now.

 

[mantra]

hi

I have read a lot of complaints at other sites about Adobe Standard looking flat. It is. I always say if you are testing at least try one your cameras profiles which are very close. Adobe expects you to tweak or use a profiler like Colourchecker Passport or use the Camera's profile.

I use Canon and I like Camera Standard. I can't remember if a camera profile auto applies at import by simply selecting it in a previous session. I have it and several other adjustments auto apply via the Develop Default Settings for quite some time now.

hi ,yes adobe did a great job with canon
with some old nikon not so well , i have compared to capture one and dxo and they look great ,in lightroom they look weird but accetable
well lucky me i have used old nikon ,adobe has good profiles for the new camera
thanks

 

[Zenon]

That was the first thing I noticed about Capture when I trialed it in October. I auto applied the camera profile, it's version of colour, NR, etc. If someone was testing both for the first time they would probably say wow to Capture and ugh to LR at first glance. Depends on how much patience one has when testing some may never get to the Calibration window.

 

[mantra]

That was the first thing I noticed about Capture when I trialed it in October. I auto applied the camera profile, it's version of colour, NR, etc. If someone was testing both for the first time they would probably say wow to Capture and ugh to LR at first glance. Depends on how much patience one has when testing some may never get to the Calibration window.

hi
i have used recently capture one and it doesn't apply the camera profile, i had to select on of them ,i had to select nikon , i could select even canon or leica , when i selected the right profile the colors are really amazing
thanks

 

[Zenon]

When I looked at it I was pretty sure I had seen Canon 5D4. Possibly it was just telling me which camera. I guess must have applied C1's colour profile. Not sure if it takes the camera into account or not when it does but it applied a profile of some type that had more saturation than Adobe Standard.

I did not look very hard at the colour settings because I'm not that concerned about it when testing.