The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

New camera profile making software

torger

Active member
As some of you may know I've had a command line open-source camera profile maker for a while, DCamProf. The Pentax 645z profile I casually made using it gained quite some interest, and I've noted for each new medium format camera that's not a Phase One or Hassy people are interested in profile alternatives (like the Fuji GFX50s), perhaps especially when using Lightroom, although some Capture One users and even Phase One users have made profiles too in situations when both neutral and attractive colors are required, for example in architecture and product photography, or if you just want a neutral starting point for your own creative post-processing.

While DCamProf has gained a community of tech-savvy users it's not too accessible to a broader audience due to that it's a command line tool. Therefore I have during the past year worked on a commercial project, a profile-making software called "Lumariver Profile Designer" which builds on the DCamProf technology but adds a GUI. It's not simply a GUI slapped on top of a command line tool, but a full integration and extended features. With this I hope the craft and art of profile making can reach a broader audience.

While it can make profiles automatically and I think most users will be satisfied with that, there is a depth of manual tuning possibilities which the most picky users with strong ideas of how colors should look like will use. The ability to design general-purpose camera profiles is what makes this software different from previous profile makers. For the sake of completeness it can be used to make scanner and reproduction profiles too (to copy artwork and similar), but the area where I think it truly breaks new ground is in general-purpose profile making.

Presentation here: http://www.lumariver.com/#LumariverPD
Introduction video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUt3jWs5vTk
User manual here: Lumariver Profile Designer
Download here: Lumariver
 

torger

Active member
So, I can finally get support for Leica S in Capture One? I guess I need the Pro version for that?
Uhm, I don't dare to say as I haven't tried that particular model. You could try before buying and see if you can generate a profile though and see in the profile comparison tab on a regular image if the result looks sane.

If I remember correctly the policy of Phase One is not to support competing medium format camera brands. With DNG format you can usually open the files, but last time I tested (when the Pentax 645z was new) the colors were distorted to a degree that it was impossible to make a sane profile. There are hacks out there to trick Capture One into believing that the camera is not a medium format one and then it should work.

However, I see it like this, if Phase One that makes the software don't want people to use a particular camera brand with their software it's their choice, I don't agree with it, but it's their software so in this project I haven't really looked into hacks to work around that. With Leica S and Pentax 645z, Hassy etc there's Lightroom and other alternatives. If one really really likes medium format and Capture One, I guess one should get a Phase One camera, that's what they want at least :). I think that Capture One is one of the strongest selling points for Phase One cameras, moreso than the cameras themselves, and I think Phase One knows that and that's why they lock out the other brands. It's much better to sell a camera for $50,000 than software for $200 and let the hardware sale go to Hassy or Leica...
 
For what it's worth, I love your v1.0.4 profiles for the 645z and have it set by default for all my images. The Adobe one is too dark and muddled, while embedded is too saturated.
However, the alternate version makes the shadows have a mottled green/magenta to them as though there is some part of chroma noise or moire that shouldn't be there.
 

gebseng

Member
Good to hear about your new software! Is the "Basic" version enough to produce ICCs for Capture One?

best,

geb
 

torger

Active member
Good to hear about your new software! Is the "Basic" version enough to produce ICCs for Capture One?
You need the Pro or Repro edition. The significantly cheaper Basic is there really only because Lightroom users are typically more casual folks and there is the free "Adobe DNG Profile Editor" to compete with. The Basic edition is an attempt to get a bit of volume sales from more casual users that may want more than the free Adobe DNG Profile Editor can provide (like a sane tone reproduction operator...) but don't really intend to dive into the more advanced features.

Capture One users, or really anyone not using Lightroom, are generally more demanding. C1 is in itself more expensive software and well, it's quite complicated to support due to their special handling of ICC which is different from all other ICC raw converters, so I pushed that to the more expensive Pro version.
 

dchew

Well-known member
My first attempt. I did have a crash problem using the full IQ3100 16 bit tiff. After cropping it and exporting it worked fine though.

Looks pretty good! In my opinion the out of the box colors from Phase can get a little 'neon' like the red seen here.
-The reds are much better
-Yellows and blues are better
-Some of the greens are but not sure about all of them.

Left is LeafLF5 Landscape for IQ3100 w/ Film Standard; Right is Lumariver with applied 'Film Standard' curve. I'm not sure I understand how that parts works, but I tried something and it seems to have worked!?

I will experiment a bit more. I want to try applying the Linear curve instead, since that is what I normally use as a default.

Thanks Torger.

Dave

 

torger

Active member
My first attempt. I did have a crash problem using the full IQ3100 16 bit tiff. After cropping it and exporting it worked fine though.
I found that bug now, there's an allocation error for very large TIFF files, so currently it doesn't work with 100MP TIFFs without shrinking/cropping. This will be fixed along with some other stuff in the next patch release which I hope to make this weekend.
 

torger

Active member
Released version 1.0.1:

New: Added CMP Digital Target 8, glossy and matte versions.
New: Added HutchColor HCT target.
New: Command-W on MacOS will close project window.
Fixed: wrong sub-target image shown in some situations.
Fixed: crash when opening huge TIFF files (IQ3 100MP...)
Fixed: broken file format on save (usually when using multi-target), windows-only bug.
 

torger

Active member
Looks pretty good! In my opinion the out of the box colors from Phase can get a little 'neon' like the red seen here.
-The reds are much better
-Yellows and blues are better
-Some of the greens are but not sure about all of them.

Left is LeafLF5 Landscape for IQ3100 w/ Film Standard; Right is Lumariver with applied 'Film Standard' curve. I'm not sure I understand how that parts works, but I tried something and it seems to have worked!?
The default rendering should be very neutral. If neutral actually is "better" is a matter of taste of course, and it's not possible to satisfy all users with a single look. I prefer quite neutral renders out-of-the-box as a baseline for my own post-processing and that's actually quite hard to get without making your own profiles. With the IQ3100 you do have the C1 reproduction profiles, but those are adapted for linear curve and not general-purpose photography, obviously.

LRPD does allow applying a look in the profile too though, and the default render actually has a "base look" applied (called "Neutral+"), but it has very mild adjustments (which is how I like them).

The curve part of C1 profile making is a little messy due to C1's concept of having dual curves (user-selectable and a small part embedded in profile), but if you've followed the step-by-step guide in the manual it should have worked out fine :) . I could probably make it a bit easier if I hard-coded the software more towards C1, but as of now it's a generic ICC profile maker supporting all sorts of ICC software which means that C1 is just a special case with that special curve handling.
 

dchew

Well-known member
Thanks Anders,
Actually, I kinda like the Leaf Landscape profile for the IQ3100. But what I don't like are the curve options. Film Standard is too much and linear is too little.

I am experimenting with loading the Film Standard tiff for the "base curve" and then manually adjusting it down using the spline to make it softer. Not sure yet if I like the results better. They are different, and it will take some time experimenting with different images.

Let me know if there is a better way to accomplish this.

Ciao,
Dave
 

torger

Active member
Thanks Anders,
Actually, I kinda like the Leaf Landscape profile for the IQ3100. But what I don't like are the curve options. Film Standard is too much and linear is too little.

I am experimenting with loading the Film Standard tiff for the "base curve" and then manually adjusting it down using the spline to make it softer. Not sure yet if I like the results better. They are different, and it will take some time experimenting with different images.

Let me know if there is a better way to accomplish this.
Isn't there an in-between curve between film standard and linear? Like some open shadow variant or something? It's generally better to increase contrast in the profile than reducing it. If it's a smaller adjustment it probably doesn't matter, but as the ICC is integer math expanding something that has been compressed (reducing contrast) means losing precision, while it's retained if the other way around (increasing contrast).

Changing curve is a powerful way to change the overall look, so indeed it's not so easy to see if one likes it or not at first. It takes some time to get used to.

If you generally do manual post-processing I think it can be a good idea to have a bit softer contrast and neutral or even slightly desaturated colors in the profile, based on the same principle it's better to compress color information (increase contrast, increase saturation) after the profile than the other way around.

If you make a large change from film standard and there really is only film standard and linear to change from it can actually be a better idea to use the linear and increase contrast from there, even if you will be making a large contrast increase. The profile will then become totally useless with the film standard curve though (extreme contrast).
 

yaya

Active member
Thanks Anders,
Actually, I kinda like the Leaf Landscape profile for the IQ3100. But what I don't like are the curve options. Film Standard is too much and linear is too little.

I am experimenting with loading the Film Standard tiff for the "base curve" and then manually adjusting it down using the spline to make it softer. Not sure yet if I like the results better. They are different, and it will take some time experimenting with different images.

Let me know if there is a better way to accomplish this.

Ciao,
Dave
The Leaf profiles for the IQ are meant to be used with the Auto Curve...that way the correct pipeline/ algorithm are employed. You can then use the curve tool to tweek and save a preset.
Also, Linear curve is best used during capture to ensure correct exposure and maximum DR.

BR
Yair
 

dchew

Well-known member
Isn't there an in-between curve between film standard and linear? Like some open shadow variant or something? It's generally better to increase contrast in the profile than reducing it. If it's a smaller adjustment it probably doesn't matter, but as the ICC is integer math expanding something that has been compressed (reducing contrast) means losing precision, while it's retained if the other way around (increasing contrast).
Yes, there is one called "Film Extra Shadow". My issue with the Film Standard curve is not shadows but highlights. Film Extra Shadow opens the shadows but the top end of the curve is the same (to my eyes anyway). When faced with a high DR scene we have a few choices:
  1. Ensure highlights are not blown and use Film Standard. No "red" in the exposure warning during capture. When I do this I usually have to modify several things to open shadows and get the image the way I like. Also almost always have to use the HDR sliders to calm down the highlights.
  2. Let the highlights clip a little on the histogram during capture and use the Linear Curve in C1. This has been my default because I can capture a bit more light this way. I still have to modify the image quite a bit since it is so flat, but I feel more in control.
  3. Use LRPD to create a profile with a curve in between. I think theoretically this would help me because I would not have to modify the image so much with Curves and/or Levels. This is what I've been experimenting with the last several days.
Based on your response, I re-created a profile in LRPD by loading the "Effects No Color Correction" / Linear Curve tiff. Then instead of loading a base curve I chose "Curve: Custom Spline" and created a replacement curve that was similar in shadows but less aggressive with highlights than the "C1 Film" template. Using that in C1 with the Linear Curve setting is so far quite nice, so thank you for the comments above. The colors are almost identical to the Leaf Landscape profile, but with a contrast and DR that looks promising. If nothing else it is another option as a starting point.

Dave
 
Last edited:
Top