Re: about "correct" NEF rendering

[LightCode]

about "correct" NEF rendering

As widely known,
the problem with proprietary RAW encodings, like Nikon NEFs, is that LR cannot render them "correctly",
that is as the proprietary software does. New released Camera Profiles allow very good approximations,
but there is still some work to do if you pretend the LR rendering to be identical to the Nikon one.
OK, there is something in all this story that sound odd to me: every RAW has an embedded JPEG preview
(the one appearing for a while, before the LR rendering). So, there exists an image (the JPEG preview)
that can be used as a reference for the rendering, LR doesn't know the exact Nikon recipe, but knows the results!

I wonder, shouldn't be that difficult to use the embedded JPEG preview for fine tuning the Camera Profile
settings and get the photo as it is expected to be following the proprietary RAW encodings.

I'm wrong? or just miss something?

Ste

 

[Replytoken]

Stefano,

I guess I do not consider proprietary the same as correct, nor could I really say what is "correct". Nikon renders their images in a manner that they find suitable for their purposes. I have no problem with their interpretation, but I cannot say that there is anything sacred about it. LR offers different interpretations. Some I like, some I do not. Its fine if you prefer what Nikon offers, obviously many people do, but I do not beleive that it sets any standard that should be used in some totally objective manner, especially since Nikon now offers so many color controls in their DSLR's.

Looking at it from a different point of view, by using LR as a foil to Nikon, I feel encouraged to decide what my "look" should be, and how it should be accomplished. LR has reminded me that Nikon's offering may be a good starting point, but its not the only game in town. Do I think that LR is perfect? No, but it does offer me a more comfortable set of tools to help me achieve what I am looking for. YMMV.

--Ken

 

[Denis Pagé]

It is little like asking which film is giving accurate colors. None respond the same to light. Take your pick!

 

[LightCode]

thanks for your replays,

I wrote "correct", to underlying the fact that its relative: Nikon, Canon, Pentax,
calibrate their cameras to achieve a particular colour response, a particular feeling,
every camera has its fingerprint, and it would be nice to be able to reproduce it,
at least as an option, or a starting point. At Adobe surely must think in that way,
since they spent time and money in developing the Camera Profiles, which mimic
pretty well the different camera responses.

I just think that should be easy to use the embedded JPEG previews to increase
the ability of LR to develop the RAWs in the same way the proprietary software do.
By the way, this is the only reason I still have Nikon Capture NX2 loaded in my computer...

Ste

 

[Brad Snyder]

Perhaps, but in 'return on investment' terms, each mfgr. has only one or two basic models to deal with, for which they know the engineering parameters in detail. Adobe is working with every (almost) raw-shooter on the market, and in the darkness of non-disclosure.

Yes, the SOOC JPG thumbnail has some info to be inferred, but I'd be surprised if compressed, reduced rez, 8 bit RGB data provides much help with full rez 12/14 bit sensor matrix data. But I don't actually know that, you may have a good point.

 

[Denis Pagé]

[quote author=LightCode link=topic=7151.msg487'1#msg487'1 date=1247159333]
I just think that should be easy to use the embedded JPEG previews to increase
the ability of LR to develop the RAWs in the same way the proprietary software do.
By the way, this is the only reason I still have Nikon Capture NX2 loaded in my computer...[/quote]
No easy and slow because it would be an iterative process: [list type=decimal]
[li]Develop with a profile[/li]
[li]Edit profile (like DNG Profile Editor) by comparing to JPEG[/li]
[li]Adjust profile[/li]
[li]Back to step 1 until...?[/li]
[/list] Maybe I misread but the proprietary software as the one built in camera do create the JPEG from raw data. Not the reverse. It does not use the JPEG at all; It just create it.

EDIT: Good point Brad 12/14 vs 8 bits...

 

[LightCode]

Of course the camera software develops the RAW data and creates the JPEG on the fly, based on the actual camera settings. When you open a NEF with Capture NX, you get exactly the same image of the JPEG produced by the camera. There is surely a waste on info because of the 12/14 bit translation to 8 bit, but still some values could be useful to fine tune the LR processing:
for example, when you open any RAW in LR the value of "Blacks" is fixed, its independent for from the histogram(s), and this is something you always have to check;
another example is the "Color Noise" value, its fixed again, regardless the ISO setting and, what more important, regardless the extent of the actual noise, which could be easily extracted from the embedded JPEG;

In any case, I agree with you about the fact it could be too much CPU demanding to be used

thanks, Stefano