At 9/10/2021 04:22 PM, Moose wrote:
>On 9/7/2021 5:41 PM, Wayne Shumaker wrote:
>>For the cameras that don't get the color the way you like, have you
>>experimented with the camera profiles? Or try creating one?
>
>This is an area of modest interest to me, but not because I wish to get "into"
>profiles. My interest is in why people are interested in doing so.
>
>I'm out in the world, I take a picture. The angle of the sun and content of
>the atmosphere are unique, and can't be repeated. The subject is of a color
>that can't actually be fully documented. Natural things change at least daily,
>often hourly. Paint ages and changes color.
>
>Sooooo . . . There is no actual "True Color" that may be referenced.
>
>Further, my eyes see quite differently than my cameras. They do all sorts of
>color compensation, for one thing.
>
>Sooooo . . . Even if there were an absolute reference, it would not agree with
>my experience.
>
>Anyone who views the photo does so on an imperfect screen or print. What I
>see, on my monitor, is not quite what you see, on yours.
>
>Sooooo . . . If I like the color; it agrees with my, highly fallible, memory,
>it's all good; and there is no one or device to disagree. If I don't like it,
>I make it look right; and there is no one or device to disagree.
>
>Sooooo . . . I shoot Daylight for almost everything, adjust WB to taste, a
>minority of the time, and don't worry about it.
>
>>This was an interesting article on using a Linear profile.
>>https://trentsizemore.com/blog/using-a-linear-camera-calibration-profile/
>
>This seems iffy to me. The sensor record passes a true linear image on to the
>firmware. If not converted for human viewing, it appears VERY dark. Take a
>look here, particularly at Figs. 5 & 6.
><http://www.guillermoluijk.com/tutorial/dcraw/index_en.htm>
> There is LOT of good info about Raw conversion in this article.
>
>Also read Ctein's very good articles,
>
>Why ISO Isn't ISO
><https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/09/why-iso-isnt-iso.html>
>
>and RAW is not RAW.
><https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/10/raw-is-not-raw.html>
>
>What this guy is showing is a different Gamma correction than the standard, a
>different mapping of original linear values in to something human viewable,
>not some sort of absolute. The effect of choices of Gamma is discussed down in
>the first above ref.
>
>"Iâ??d much rather have an unadjusted starting point (linear tone curve)" is
>simply not true.
>
>Curvilinear Pedant Moose
A linear profile, per the article, is not the same as just taking the bits
linearly, thus creating very dark images. Rather the article is referring to a
linear tone curve in the profile, not a linear gamma. The standard profile
boosts the mid tones while a linear one does not. Clearly if you look at the
two example images at
https://trentsizemore.com/blog/using-a-linear-camera-calibration-profile/ the
shadow and highlights are more balanced with regards to the mid-tones for the
linear profile version. A linear tone curve profile can counteract the need to
crank the shadow/highlights to "near 100%" to get them back in balance with the
mid-tones. The article shows how to take the standard profile and just replace
the mid-tone boost curve with a linear tone curve. You could start with any
other profile and do the same.
After looking more into profiles, one of my points was regarding AK's claim the
colors are just right out of the E-M5 camera. But he was using the
Standard/Adobe Profile as a comparison. I was just questioning, if the
difference is the profile one is using or the camera itself. And whether using
one of a camera specific profiles available in PS/LR might render Sony or Pany
colors better than an adobe profile. Hence whether the E-M5 better colors are
due to the camera or that the adobe/standard profiles happen match the camera
better. I suspect it is all in the profile. However, I don't have super color
vision.
I tend to do similar to what you say. I am not having any problems with color
from my Sonies. My education in profiles lead me to how to access the camera
specific profiles and found the Sony camera specific profiles work quite well
at getting closer to my desired look when using them instead of the adobe
profiles.
Clearly if you apply a mis-matched profile it can create a lot of extra
tweaking work later. A good matched profile can save a lot of time.
Maybe there can be a profile specific for -2 or -3 stop ISO invariant shots?
Just wondering - WayneS
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|