Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Sony RX100 DNG custom camera profiles - download  (Read 8030 times)
thierrylegros396
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 672


« Reply #20 on: September 15, 2012, 01:36:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Paolo,

I've tried your profiles and they are very close to mine Wink

Only 2 patches are different, 3 = blue sky is slightly lighter, and 9 = moderate red slightly darker than mine.

But in practical images, I see almost no differences.

Both profiles give more "saturated" colors than Adobe Standard.

Thierry
Logged
thierrylegros396
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 672


« Reply #21 on: September 15, 2012, 02:01:06 PM »
ReplyReply

so you tried at least to measure the patches on your target with colorimeter... now, we are talking about Adobe .dcp profiles here (there are only so few COTS solutions to build such profiles... adobe's, xrite's, QP's, datacolor's - am I missing something ?) - so what was the software that you used to build those and how do you know the difference between your measurements and what hardcoded in that software for those patches... it is not like that software can accept a custom .cie file w/ your measurements of your own target, is it ? so how do you know whether it was "enough" or not ... I am genuinely interested


you need to use different target - because to use the same target which was used to build a profile is not exactly a test, is it ? and what was "perfect software implemented target" - was it something supplied w/ the product that you used to build a .dcp profile and was using the exact data that this software is using for patches ?

I use Munsell X-Rite Colorchecker with Adobe software "DNG Profile Editor" to build profile from a dng file and use it in Lightroom 4.2 RC.
"perfect software implemented target" is a home made target done with sRGB values of the patches given by X-Rite.
You may freely download the "DNG Profile Editor" in Adobe Website Wink Wink
Logged
mac_paolo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 423


« Reply #22 on: September 15, 2012, 05:44:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Paolo,

I've tried your profiles and they are very close to mine Wink

Only 2 patches are different, 3 = blue sky is slightly lighter, and 9 = moderate red slightly darker than mine.

But in practical images, I see almost no differences.

Both profiles give more "saturated" colors than Adobe Standard.

Thierry
Good, when similar cameras are close to be exactly the same is a good sign.
Some colors are "just" more saturated (or with different hue), but I definitely see great improvement in caucasian flesh tones.
Adobe standard is way too magenta while custom profile render natural skin color.

The only downside I found so far with my custom profiles is that, under very yellow lights (extremely low Kelvin) with problematic spectrum (not tungsten), some shadows on the skin become way too magenta. Only a tint adjustment towards green seems to resolve that.
Less saturated Adobe standard seems to be almost immune to this.
Logged
deejjjaaaa
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 965



« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2012, 10:45:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I use Munsell X-Rite Colorchecker with Adobe software "DNG Profile Editor" to build profile from a dng file and use it in Lightroom 4.2 RC.
so you really do not know what is hardcoded there for patches  Cry
Logged
thierrylegros396
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 672


« Reply #24 on: September 16, 2012, 03:19:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Good, when similar cameras are close to be exactly the same is a good sign.
Some colors are "just" more saturated (or with different hue), but I definitely see great improvement in caucasian flesh tones.
Adobe standard is way too magenta while custom profile render natural skin color.

The only downside I found so far with my custom profiles is that, under very yellow lights (extremely low Kelvin) with problematic spectrum (not tungsten), some shadows on the skin become way too magenta. Only a tint adjustment towards green seems to resolve that.
Less saturated Adobe standard seems to be almost immune to this.

I also have problems with some brown turning to magenta with mud in strong lighting conditions.

The only solution I've found is to decrease magenta saturation in "color selective sliders".

My (and also others) Canon S90 has yellow tendency in poor lighting conditions, so perhaps that the magenta tendency is a characteristic of the RX100 sensor !

Good Night  Wink

Thierry
« Last Edit: September 16, 2012, 03:20:54 PM by thierrylegros396 » Logged
mac_paolo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 423


« Reply #25 on: September 17, 2012, 07:10:51 AM »
ReplyReply

The only solution I've found is to decrease magenta saturation in "color selective sliders".
Have you tried adding a bit of Kelvin to color temperature and move the tint a slightly bit on the green side.
Visually the difference is minimal but those magenta spikes usually disappear this way. Smiley
Logged
jcking
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #26 on: December 16, 2012, 06:11:27 AM »
ReplyReply

thanks for posting these.
I just tried the ISO 125 profile and to my eye it is a big improvement over the standard Adobe profiles.

John
Logged
h00ligan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #27 on: December 21, 2012, 03:54:20 AM »
ReplyReply

I was planning on making a few with colorchecker  for various environments.  I don't really know about making profiles beyond that....are there better methods?

The cc has allowed me to equalize colors when cross brand shooting pretty well.
Logged
mac_paolo
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 423


« Reply #28 on: December 21, 2012, 04:27:56 AM »
ReplyReply

I was planning on making a few with colorchecker  for various environments.  I don't really know about making profiles beyond that....are there better methods?

The cc has allowed me to equalize colors when cross brand shooting pretty well.
CC24 and QPcard, I'd say.
I own just the CC24 so I made the DNG profile with it and DNG Profile Editor.
Logged
BruceM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #29 on: September 12, 2013, 02:12:30 AM »
ReplyReply

I don't own an RX-100 but I have been looking at some sample RAW files and the Camera Profiles that people here have made. I do own a Passport ColorChecker and make profiles for my Canon S-100 camera. Some comments:

If you are using a G-M color target and DNG Profile Editor to make profiles, you may be able to download the ColorChecker Passport software and use that as well, even if you don't have a Passport.

I am very happy with the color rendition I get with the ColorChecker software. However it doesn't seem to do anything at all for tonality. In my camera, there is no tone curve included in the created profile.

A free program called dcpTool is great for mixing, matching, and generally tweaking camera profiles. It is not easy to use, but worth the time it takes to learn.

http://dcptool.sourceforge.net/Introduction.html

I use it to copy the tone curves from the Camera Standard and other profiles into my Passport CC profiles. It can be used for "cross processing" and other purposes as well.
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4118



« Reply #30 on: September 12, 2013, 05:25:49 AM »
ReplyReply

I have heard it said Smiley that the ACR/Lightroom color is not the best. I do wonder why that could be so given that Adobe's revenues certainly outrank jazz bands like Raw Developer or RPP which are ICC based ...  Maybe the DNG model is not quite appropriate for Raw.

Hmm, usually we say GIGO, but this is more a case of crawl into a sewer and come out dirty, CISCOD to coin an acronym.   Grin

Edmund
« Last Edit: September 12, 2013, 05:29:04 AM by eronald » Logged
BruceM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« Reply #31 on: September 12, 2013, 06:53:35 PM »
ReplyReply

How are you helping RX100 owners get better color from their images? If you are not, then there is no reason to post in this thread.

This isn't some sports forum where fans of one team hurl insults back and forth with fans of another team.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad