Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: X-Rite ColorChecker Passport  (Read 21964 times)
Hermie
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 207


« on: September 15, 2009, 02:32:09 AM »
ReplyReply

http://www.xrite.com/company_press_room.aspx?News=594
http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx?ID=1257

http://www.outbackphoto.com/CONTENT_2007_0...port/index.html
Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1888


WWW
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2009, 03:15:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Interesting. I'm not sure it offers me much more than using my existing color checker and Adobe's DNG profile editor, but maybe there's more in the detail.

Nice to see a realistic price point too.
Logged
Czornyj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1369



WWW
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2009, 04:16:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Hermie

Really cool - it wasn't convinient to put the old CC24 into photo bag, and the mini version was too small and only good for macro purposes.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2009, 04:17:11 AM by Czornyj » Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1888


WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 15, 2009, 04:29:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Czornyj
the mini version was too small
Not my experience. So small it takes up very little room in the camera bag, so is always with me, and can be held at arms length and a sample shot easily taken with everything except long zooms and telephotos.
Also cheap enough not worry too much about the risk of loss or damage.
Logged
Czornyj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1369



WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2009, 04:41:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Rhossydd
Not my experience. So small it takes up very little room in the camera bag, so is always with me, and can be held at arms length and a sample shot easily taken with everything except long zooms and telephotos.
Also cheap enough not worry too much about the risk of loss or damage.

So or so the new CC Passport looks nice. It's a shame that the software looks rather disappointing - it only makes camera profiles, the DNG Profile Editor is much more complex.
Logged

BlackSmith
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32



WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2009, 11:58:44 AM »
ReplyReply

This isn't what Eric Chan was referring to in a previous post is it? This product doesn't seem to show the guts of what's going on under the hood at all.
On the other hand the DNG profile editor must always start from a base profile. There is nothing preventing someone from using this passport product to generate a new profile and subsequently tweak it in the DNG profile editor, right?

Sean
Logged
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2009, 05:56:55 PM »
ReplyReply

I fully intend to do just that and retire my mini checker (which works fine thank you with the DNG Profile Editor) that has been making custom profiles at weddings for me since the DNG Profile Editor was released pretty much.
Logged

howardm
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 718


« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2009, 07:42:22 PM »
ReplyReply

the Passport software has been posted.

http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx...;SoftwareID=917

It's a 181MB download.  WTF?  Seems, um, bloated.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2009, 08:24:30 PM by howardm » Logged
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984


WWW
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2009, 08:28:06 PM »
ReplyReply

The new Passport looks great, from a size and convenience standpoint.  I'm wondering, though, if it uses a different process or yields any different results than one would get from using a standard ColorChecker and DNG Profile Editor.  Is the profiling software the same, under the hood?
Logged

JeffKohn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1671



WWW
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2009, 09:49:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: howardm
the Passport software has been posted.

http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx...;SoftwareID=917

It's a 181MB download.  WTF?  Seems, um, bloated.
So I guess there's nothing to stop people from using this software to create profiles using one of the other color checker's. I wonder how it compares to the DNG Profiler.
Logged

Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1888


WWW
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2009, 02:34:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: JeffKohn
So I guess there's nothing to stop people from using this software to create profiles using one of the other color checker's. I wonder how it compares to the DNG Profiler.
Seems to be the case. I've just downloaded and installed it and tried it out on a couple of images. The workflow with Lightroom is certainly better than using Adobe's own editor, but......
My initial impression is that the results are inferior to using the Adobe DNG editor, giving rather over saturated reds and purples. Although different cameras may give different results.

I'll stick to the Adobe product then. Although I'd buy the passport set for it's neat color checker if I ever needed to replace my current mini color checkers.
Logged
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2101


« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2009, 07:29:56 AM »
ReplyReply

This is indeed one of the tools to which I was referring.

To answer some questions asked in this thread:

Correct, you can certainly create a profile with X-Rite's Passport software, then tweak it in Adobe's DNG Profile Editor if you wish. Tutorial 3 on the DNG PE page explains how to do this: http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_P...l_base_profiles

No, Adobe's DNG Profile Editor and X-Rite's Passport software do not share the same automated profile-building technology under the hood. The profile-building methods were developed separately and independently. Hence you can expect that profiles built from the same measurement data (i.e., from a single chart shot, or pair of chart shots) from the two software programs will differ somewhat. Similar to how you can measure a printer profile target, obtaining a single set of measurement data, but produce rather different printer profiles by using different software (e.g., ProfileMaker vs MonacoPROFILER).

Due to technical limitations, camera profiles are necessarily imperfect, and hence each software must make tradeoffs in terms of which color characteristics it is optimizing for. Since different software programs tend to optimize for different things, it is natural that the resulting profiles will also behave somewhat differently.
Logged

K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 650


« Reply #12 on: September 23, 2009, 07:39:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: howardm
the Passport software has been posted.

http://www.xrite.com/product_overview.aspx...;SoftwareID=917

It's a 181MB download.  WTF?  Seems, um, bloated.

Your link is no longer valid.
Logged
Colorwave
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 984


WWW
« Reply #13 on: September 23, 2009, 09:12:05 PM »
ReplyReply

LOL
Looks like they didn't intend to be giving it away to those without the new color checker.  I guess those who were able to download it before they put it behind a login page slipped under the radar.
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8581



WWW
« Reply #14 on: September 24, 2009, 01:29:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: madmanchan
Hence you can expect that profiles built from the same measurement data (i.e., from a single chart shot, or pair of chart shots) from the two software programs will differ somewhat.

They do. In the testing I did with the 5DMII, I preferred the X-Rite profiles but the differences were pretty subtle. What’s really nice is the ability to do this all within LR. Now if I could get that app to update new profiles without quitting (which old versions of Photoshop had as well), that be cool. Its too bad X-Rite didn’t provide an editor and yes, its nice you can still use Adobe’s.

The off colored white squares are also somewhat useful in some cases where you’d rather just keep clicking on a patch with the WB tool instead of messing with tint/temp slider but either will work.

I did zero testing in building ICC profiles for obvious reasons to some <g>.

The best thing about the product is having all those targets together in a small and protected container. If you’ve got a Macbeth and want DNG profiles, there’s a free solution thanks to Adobe. Otherwise, the product is really buying you some targets.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #15 on: September 24, 2009, 02:55:35 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: digitaldog
The best thing about the product is having all those targets together in a small and protected container. If you’ve got a Macbeth and want DNG profiles, there’s a free solution thanks to Adobe. Otherwise, the product is really buying you some targets.

Heck yeah! a lot better than getting my assistant to do the same thing in the past but without the convenience, oh and trying to hold that mini checker without finger tip shadows on the colour squares, or stopping a very expensive piece of card from dying at the edges (like mine had). I'm probably going to carry on using DNG Profile Converter, I use ACR not LR but for the convenience it's worth it for me, far easier to tell a bride to hold the case than do what my assistant is doing below! Expecting my passport by the end of this week and I've already sold the old chart to a friend who may actually pay me one day...

Logged

josephchiang
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2009, 12:15:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I've tried to create a camera profile for my D3 using the ColorChecker Mini and I get an error message in DNG Profile Editor, saying "Unable to set white balance using gray patches.  Please use the four color circles to identify the four corner patches of the chart and try again."

Could I be getting this error message because the Mini has larger borders around the targets?

Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8581



WWW
« Reply #17 on: October 20, 2009, 12:17:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: josephchiang
Could I be getting this error message because the Mini has larger borders around the targets?

Shouldn’t be the case. It sounds like either its having issues identifying the four corners or the WB is way off.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
josephchiang
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #18 on: October 20, 2009, 12:39:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Andrew,

How are things?  I spoke with you at ProPhoto and I'm now trying to create camera profiles using the flash units I have and the ColorChecker Mini.  I ETTR when shooting the Mini and then turned down the Exp to -.83 to bring the White Target back to white with texture 97%/97%/97% (wasn't sure what percentage was equivalent to 255/255/255).

No matter whether I reposition the circles or not, I still get the error message I posted before.  I also tried turning down the exposure some more, as well as up and still get the error message in the DNG PE.  Not sure what I'm doing wrong.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8581



WWW
« Reply #19 on: October 20, 2009, 01:11:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: josephchiang
I ETTR when shooting the Mini and then turned down the Exp to -.83 to bring the White Target back to white with texture 97%/97%/97% (wasn't sure what percentage was equivalent to 255/255/255).

No matter whether I reposition the circles or not, I still get the error message I posted before.  I also tried turning down the exposure some more, as well as up and still get the error message in the DNG PE.  Not sure what I'm doing wrong.

100% would be 255 (more or less).

Also, I see some purple hook goodies next to the patches and that might be the issue. The software may be expecting black.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad