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!

P30 AND P40+ BACKS SWITCHING C1 PROFILES

E

ericstaud

Guest
These color differences have a lot more to do with the individual color profiles and the installed IR filters than with the sensor. The P45 and P45+ both have very different color palettes despite sharing the same sensor. It would be nice to buy a back who's "out of the box" colors are really pleasing to you, but it is the one thing that is easiest to change with the Color Editor, Curves, and Hue/Saturation.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I'd like a slightly warmer profile for the new Dalsa backs I think. Though I'm sure that one familiar with the color tools of C-1 it can be achieved easily enough. I shoot mostly landscape and have always preferred the look of Kodachrome to that of Ektachrome. Others, I'm sure, feel just the opposite.
Interesting, that you call Kodachrome warmer than Ektachrome :)

I always felt the other way around and took Kodachrome if I wanted "cold" colors.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Crap I knew I should have not played with this . I'm liking the P40 too much, this may cost me some real money. That steel structure has me going on the P40+. I'm starting to reverse my thinking here.
Guy,

I like the P40+ too, I actually found that in my shots back at our workshop it was pretty similar in color to the P65+ which I would prefer even more :D

Not sure if I would buy a P40+ or a P45+ today :rolleyes:
 

Dale Allyn

New member
That was might point too, they all look very good. Problem is I like Kodachrome, Ektachrome, and Fuji...
David, that's why I'd love to see a choice of three profiles provided (in addition to the other specialty light source profiles which we have now). I'm not one to ask for a bunch of pre-canned stuff, but it would be cool (and convenient) to have a couple or three that give us a good starting point which is close to our preferences.
 

Dale Allyn

New member
Interesting, that you call Kodachrome warmer than Ektachrome :)

I always felt the other way around and took Kodachrome if I wanted "cold" colors.
Peter, it might be personal semantics, but for me Kodachrome was always a bit "richer" with stronger reds (even punchy at times) as well a blues (which could be called "cool" too). While Ektachrome tended more toward the greens, etc. However we describe the transparency films of our youth, I was not one to love Ektachrome's color for most of the subjects I shot. In many ways, though, it might have been the more "honest" of the two. ;)

Today, we have the luxury, as Eric points out, of achieving our goals via post processing choices. For what I shoot most of the time these days I tend to like the look of the P45+ as a good mix. If I had a P65+ (and I'd love to at some point) I'd probably be looking to achieve a similar color impression from it.
 

thomas

New member
These color differences have a lot more to do with the individual color profiles and the installed IR filters than with the sensor. The P45 and P45+ both have very different color palettes despite sharing the same sensor. It would be nice to buy a back who's "out of the box" colors are really pleasing to you, but it is the one thing that is easiest to change with the Color Editor, Curves, and Hue/Saturation.
exactly!
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I spent 4 hours trying to get the P65+ to match the P45+ colors and was never successful -- I got very close, but never exact. (eg; I could get the GMB patches to match in noon daylight, but then they were off later in the afternoon; and moreover, to get the colors to match, a few of the grays went off neutral.) So while the concept of "just create a profile" logically seems like it should mean a technical certainty we could match any other sensor we want, I for one am not in agreement that it can be practically accomplished...
 

thomas

New member
So while the concept of "just create a profile" logically seems like it should mean a technical certainty we could match any other sensor we want, I for one am not in agreement that it can be practically accomplished...
I agree. To match a different camera exactly is quite complicated. But to create a ceratin look that is characterizing a certain camera is not that hard.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I agree. To match a different camera exactly is quite complicated. But to create a ceratin look that is characterizing a certain camera is not that hard.
I would still say that's tougher than it sounds *IF* you have files from both cameras side-by-side to compare. What I will agree to is that you can generate a decided "look" with a custom profile.

But when push comes to shove, the hard fact is one sensor has an entirely different spectral response than another, and when you get them matched for one type light, they can be very different as soon as the lighting changes significantly...

Cheers,
 

thomas

New member
I would still say that's tougher than it sounds *IF* you have files from both cameras side-by-side to compare. What I will agree to is that you can generate a decided "look" with a custom profile.

But when push comes to shove, the hard fact is one sensor has an entirely different spectral response than another, and when you get them matched for one type light, they can be very different as soon as the lighting changes significantly...
yes, I agree
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Doesn't this also say something about creating a custom white balance for the shot? There's some days that I'll wind up using multiple custom WB over span of several hours at different locations.

Never really worried about WB till I moved from the P30+ to the P45+ of course I also moved to a technical camera as well. Sometimes I can "get by" using daylight however I learned quickly that for my sanity it was just as easily for me to shoot a quick custom white balance and know I'd be okay.

Is there more of a need for custom white balancing on a TC than others? Could be the lack of a mirror? Either way it's now part of my capture workflow.

Don
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
No easy answer Don, but WB and a profile while inter-related as respects color are entirely different animals...

For landscape, I rarely shoot a WB frame because color is almost totally subjective --- IOW whatever is pleasing to you is automatically "good" color for that landscape.

However, when in the studio, I will shoot a WB for every new set as it's the only way to insure repeatable, accurate results in the subject matter.

A profile determines how the camera interprets the color that was actually present at the time of capture and is variable on several fronts, one of which being the color temperature of the lightsource.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
Thanks Jack. That's the huge difference for me as my studio is where ever I happen to be. While I agree "in principle" with what you said regarding landscape colors I've experienced too many times getting funky results when I didn't shoot a custom white balance so I've made it an automatic part of my workflow. Similar to the recording of data for each shot (don't know if you remember me doing that just prior to lunch at Carmel..)

Different stokes for - well you get the idea...

Don
 

thomas

New member
Is there more of a need for custom white balancing on a TC than others?
I prefer to shoot a grey card for WB with the Cambo (not with the Contax) as with the tech camera you often have weird colours to start with (because of colour cast among others). Actually I don't really "need" it... but it's often just less confusing and you can set a good WB prior to LCC and apply it to all captures within a session. So you can see something "useful" though LCC is not yet applied.
 

Digitalcameraman

Active member
Don looking at the P30+ and P40+ in CS4 you may notice the P30+ looks to have a touch more saturation and less DR by about 1/3 of a stop. The P40+ files are more open in the shadows and the profile has a little less saturation which obviously we can tweak. At least that is what I am seeing and the P45+ even has more saturation. Must be how these profiles are set in C1
Guy:

Good topics. I just wanted to add my experience over the last 12 years of selling p1 cameras we have always battled this when customers want to upgrade from one back to another. First thing they do is compare the 2 captures and see that there is a difference. As many have stated the different chips Dasal and Kodak can look different because of the way the profile responds to the brand of chip. For many they can adapt to the new look of the new camera but for some change creates too many questions and extra color work. They want more resolution but not more color correction work.

In most cases as you guys have noticed the dynamic range also look different too. This is caused by the camera profile being applied. When using C1 it is very intelligent so it picks a default color profile that was designed for that particular camera. If you open the image say in Lightroom and do not have LR apply a camera profile, you will see that the color and dynamic range is very similar to all the chips. But we have all become very a custom to the beautiful rending quality C1 produces as it tags the particular profile to correspond to the model # of the back you are using. I have seen many times in demos that if the customer is really keen on continuing to use his RAW processor of choice, if it is not C1, the first look at the image when opened, is very weak in contrast and color saturation. This is because the file is being opened Raw and no Camera (input) profile is being applied. Sure with a little massaging people can use controls to get this to look they want it to look, but it takes a few extra steps and when you have 500 images this becomes a workflow problem.

Most recently I showed P45+ and P65+ to a customer who shoots for soft drink companies (coke) and he and his clients are used to the color of red cans that his P25 was producing for 5 years. He did not like the color of the reds produced with P45+ or P65+.

In my opinion the P25 flash profile had too much yellow in the reds which made them look very warm. They has become a custom to liking that. When presented with an image from p45+ or P65+ the red was much more neutral but unpleasing to the photographers and his clients. The H25 is even more dramatic and has also created some issues for a food client that wants the new chips to look like his H25. Especially when he is looking to use on a 2nd set during heavy food production. This food shooter really loves the color he has been using for 5 years and asked his biggest client one day in a blind test to pick the best image shot with both backs H25 and P45+. He then went on to ask his client if he sent them images from both cameras would that be an issue and he immediately said yes. He went on to comment that when they shot film on 2 sets it always matched. And that is why they never used 2 different film types when shooting a catalog.

In the past we would pick different profiles and apply them trying to make the P45+ and p65+ images look like the P25. On some images that looked okay but for the most part there was a color cross over, much the way you see in color printing where the highlights may be slightly green and the shadows slightly magenta. This causes more problems that cannot be fixed, even with a lot of PS tricks.

All this time (12 years) we have inquired to the engineers at P1 why they cannot make 2 camera backs match in color, even if it is from the same type of Kodak chip. There answer was to use Color Editor to tweak the colors slightly so they resemble the color lets say the P25 was producing. And this works better, in my opinion, than trying to use different profiles.

It really gets down to subject matter and color content. With a landscape images we are looking for pleasing color that creates the mood of the image. In catalog and advertising applications, reproducing accurate colors at the camera level and in the printed piece is really critical for manufactures of clothes, leathers, paint on cars, and any shade of color. I cannot tell you how many times Color Editor has saved my butt and camera sale in major accounts.

I wanted to also say that I have made custom camera profiles with many products but Color Eye 20/20 from integrated-color.com seems to be the best I have used. It is very simple to use and produces very accurate colors from the camera. We just have to keep it in perspective because sometimes neutral colors and accurate custom white balance does not always produce images that we feel have the mood that film produced. Food and interiors are two perfect examples of this.

We can put a man on the moon but we cannot make 2 different vintages of camera backs match in color. That is the lesson I learned and wanted to pass on. Take a look at all the flat screens the next time you are at a electronics store and you will see the same issue.


Chris Snipes
Phase One Reseller
Image Production, Inc

www.imageproduction.com
[email protected]
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks Chris very informative. I was chatting with Jack about this yesterday on the phone and we both conquer the same thing they are different and no question about it and maybe the best solution is create a style with color editor or a preset and apply those type of changes. Now I have not used the skin tone tool very much at all either and that maybe a solution as well. Now what I notice is the Kodak sensors looking at the Red patch has slightly more yellow to it and the Dalsa seems slightly more neutral. The color on the P40+ is very good overall but on blue skies it seems to grey them somewhat. Seems color editor to the rescue there if that is the blue you like. I find this subject a very important one and going through the forums no one really has touched on it in depth. Why that is frankly is beyond me, seems to be a extremely important part of the MF system. Seriously I have to thank C1 for being so damn good and when you actually own a Phase back and have tried several of them you soon realize how good C1 really is besides all the BS on the forums about this crap and that junk about it. No other raw convertor I have found to be this deadly accurate and more important adjustable. One main reason i went Phase was because i always loved C1 from my 1ds days which was the only program that had a true Red on Canon files. This still maybe true today not sure but going back to the subject at hand. There certainly is some difference between the chips and as you mentioned you can get in a cross over issue if not careful. Personally i would buy either one and that P40+ is maybe the best back for me overall, although I love my P30 + but someday I will move up. As you mentioned it seems these differences are something to look at than just buying the specs of a back as well.

Well off to the studio than on a 5 hour shooting flight in a falcon 900 business jet. i have a busy day with my gear. Gotta love it when your out there with some of the best gear in the market creating images. Somedays i love being a shooter and others yuk. LOL All part of the business
 

thomas

New member
Just took Doug's comparision shots from the CI page and played aorund a little bit.
Took me less than 10 minutes to tune the P45+ towards the P40+.
Certainly not dead on but you wouldn't necessarily say that these are two different "cameras" / "films" (anymore)...

#1 default
#2 P45+ colour corrected
 
Last edited:
Top