Nikon D800 and LR Color Calibration?

[ustein]

>So then you just shot Tiff all the time

Shooting TIFF does not make sense. Larger files at lower quality. Can the D800 even still shoot TIFF? I guess Guy ment the converted TIFF.

>instead of the "small" DNG files at about 42Mb?

Nikon shoots NEF and not(!) DNG. You could convert to DNG but this only would make sense if you never use different raw converters than ACR/Lightroom.

 

[Thorkil]

Uwe, yes sorry, ment NEF. Just shot in Tiff. And with a 107Mb file. But if thats means lower quality, I won't.
Yes, perhaps just the conversion to Tíff and the 1200 in wide + that ICC profile called sRGB IEC61966-2.1 in C1
Thorkil

 

[ustein]

Don't even understand the cameras support TIFF.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Yes my bad I guess I missed the word converted. Shoot in raw NEF 14 bit uncompressed than convert in C1 to 16bit Prophoto color space as a Tif . That is my master file than work from there.

Just meet a forum member in Jerome shot some images with the 24 1.4 and 200 mm both lenses that I have not shot a lot for forum posting. Post later

 

[ustein]

>Shoot in raw NEF 14 bit uncompressed

Do you really think you lose something if you don't compress? Any evidence it is visible?

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Great question Uwe there is less file but not sure anyone truly knows outside Nikon engineers. Be interesting to hear for sure.

 

[ustein]

They claim it is a lossless compression. If it is data lossless then we are in good shape. But this can also may mean the notion of visually lossless and that can be a can of worms. I would be surprised if any nature shot would suffer but that compression.

 

[D&A]

Yes my bad I guess I missed the word converted. Shoot in raw NEF 14 bit uncompressed than convert in C1 to 16bit Prophoto color space as a Tif . That is my master file than work from there.

Guy, if I understand you correctly, then I basically follow much the same workflow (except of course use of a diifferent RAW converter).... with regards to converting NEFs into Tiffs (of course after I first adjust the RAw images) I'll do this if I know I'm going to work on a group of files by opening, adjusting and closing them a number of times, which would be destructive to jpegs. From there, depending how may files there are to store or to provide client with, I might make a set of jpegs from the Tiffs.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Guy Mancuso]

It's funny I actually do that myself . I will output all my Tiffs than I may do additional work in Photoshop which I really try to avoid but than I will make my jpegs through a action that I set up on every job to output jpegs for clients. Usually those jpegs are strictly for viewing, PowerPoint and web. I always tell them use the Tifs for the printers.

Now in C1 with recipes you can create all kinds of files setups so say a master, a PowerPoint size, web and you can change color space and all that. Than the program will process all the recipes at the same time. This saves a lot of time. But here is the rub you never get to Photoshop to do additional work so many times I won't use it this way .

 

[D&A]

It's funny I actually do that myself . I will output all my Tiffs than I may do additional work in Photoshop which I really try to avoid but than I will make my jpegs through a action that I set up on every job to output jpegs for clients. Usually those jpegs are strictly for viewing, PowerPoint and web. I always tell them use the Tifs for the printers.

Thats precisely what I do and also tell clients. Now don't tell me mint chocolate chip is your favorite flavor ice cream...LOL!

Dave (D&A)

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Damn straight bud it is. Lol

 

[Thorkil]

Thank you very much for the advices, I have to try later on
Thorkil

 

[richard.L]

They claim it is a lossless compression. If it is data lossless then we are in good shape. But this can also may mean the notion of visually lossless and that can be a can of worms. I would be surprised if any nature shot would suffer but that compression.

it is DATA lossless ... from the nikon SDK.

 

[glenerrolrd]

I surely must be missing something in this discussion . My read of the OP was D800 and LR Color Calibration . Skip to WHAT IS THE PROBLEM IF YOU DON T WANT ANY CONTEXT.

As I understand it you have 5 steps to get this right :

1. Get the exposure right . Exposure affects the perception of color.

2. WB to a neutral mid tone . Different ways to do this ..use a grey card,whibal,passport ..start with AWB,daylight,custom ..good arguments for each . Have found that one usually works great for a particular situation but may not be best for every situation. WB includes temp and tint . Agree completely that WB can totally screw up the perception of color .

3. Camera calibration ...isn t this unique to Adobe ? I know other raw developers can use ICC profiles etc ...but in this discussion we are talking about LR . In the absence of a camera profile ...you are relying on the raw conversion software “Standard Camera Profile “ .

(SKIP THIS PART IF YOU DON T CARE ABOUT ALTERNATIVES) Just to close this off. My experience with C1 is that they try to get the raw conversion perfect in one step . They operate more like a custom preset than a camera profile . When I put a developed file from LR next to a C1 file they tend to be similar (obviously depends on a lot of variables but they look finished . ) This can be good or bad depending on the application . But readers need to appreciate that preset tone curves can be helpful but its a design decision for the application team. NX2 seems to be very focused on color accuracy and maximum information and most Nikon users that get into this conclude that its either critical for them or they can better be served by LR,C1 etc. Both of which are much more complete solutions.

WHATS THE POINT? ...Captures taken with a D800 and processed in LR4 using the Adobe standard camera profile ....seem to produce overly saturated colors and red s in particular are difficult . At a fixed kelvin say 5500 ...files tend toward yellow (not as much as previous Nikon s but the bias is still there ) .

This is a manufacturer color bias . Nikon favors a warmer rendering . Leica favors neutral (or cooler by comparison) rendering . (As an aside this has been an ongoing debate inside Leica for years ..we talked about this on the factory tour. The DMR was targeted at Kodachrome 64 but the M s had a neutral color pallet . ) Don t let this aspect bog down the discussion ..color isn t perceived consistently in all cultures .

My opinion and thats all it is ...the goal here is to render a neutral MacBeth Color Chart . No question your eyes can play tricks on you ,monitors aren t always perfect , viewing light affects color . ( separate issue .....please skip the lectures on printing ..this is about getting the file color balanced ...don t add another element to the confusion . There are many uses of a file ). But help me here ...doesn t the MB color chart convert to a numeric al value ...I am sure I am missing some detail but the point is we should be able to agree on the value for a mid tone grey for example .

SO WHATS THE PROBLEM? Well stated in the OP . When using a color checker to create a custom camera profile (make it easy mid daylight) and applying it to captures taken in the same light ..the results look over saturated and heavy on the RED . We aren t getting a nice neutral rendering to start with. So I would say that either some of us don t know how to create a camera profile or something is amiss in the profile creator or LR4 ? This is the heart of the problem.

4. If I could get a nice neutral rendering with a simple linear contrast curve . Wow now I can create a preset that matches the subject and lighting . We have this with the S2 ...Adobe creates a somewhat flat but neutral file using Adobe standard . Then we use presets that vary by ISO and we get a very nice standard conversion (wash t this way at all in the beginning). These Presets can easily be shared and do essentially what C1 does in one step .

5. OK now I can flavor to the specifics .. if I want the skin pink or the sky deep blue ..I can alter the HSL to taste ..if I do it all the time its another preset .

Sorry about the long post but we aren t getting to an answer to the OP and its pretty important . If camera calibration out of LR does t work well with camera profiles ..then we are left mixing color with a trained eye or giving in to other raw convertors . Or we can just throw up our hands and say “see Nikon color sucks “ . (FYI I know this can be solved by using Nx2 thats what the fashion guys do in many cases ..but when using multiple systems it would be a real benefit to stay in LR).

 

[ustein]

>So I would say that either some of us don t know how to create a camera profile or something is amiss in the profile creator or LR4 ? This is the heart of the problem.

Yes, but it seems more of a problem with LR4 and Nikon D800 images.

 

[danielmoore]

I'm still in the finding out phase with the D800E but the best tonal separation and color I'm getting so far is within Capture NX2. I'm a C1 user but for some uses that may have to change. NX2's default output is more than a little better in the landscapes/architectural shots I've played with so far, especially the greens. NX2 used to be a glluttonous resource pig and I'm happy to say the latest version flies, even on a 5 year old dual core 2.5GHz laptop (granted with an SSD installed). I spent some time dialing in C1 to try and match NX2 but it's not happening yet, the R,G and B histograms reveal a significantly different default treatment.
----------
Debating starting a new thread but it's all about color so here goes. I'm starting to think C1 has more accurate color and NX2 more pleasing. I did some testing in late day direct sun and early afternoon shade. I'm attaching a comparison that was color managed carefully throughout (Adobe 1998), converted to sRGB for safety now, showing the unedited, default output from both programs.

There's so much more than NX2 being warmer going on. Contrast is handled better, midtones have more separation. Too bad NX2 sharpening looks like sh*t. I let C1 do that to the .tif output to keep the playing field level.
Anyone can run a file through a trial version of NX2 (60 days at this point) but if you care to try this one for yourself it's here, at least until the bandwidth runs out.

I also want to add that I'm not advocating one over the other. All I care about 95% of the time is the fastest route to the most pleasing image. Period.

 

[kuau]

Daniel,
On your d800/e what did you have the camera profile set on since NX2 will apply all those setting from the camera by default, even sharpening d lighting, etc.
Just curious.
I will also find some notes on sharpening in NX2, I believe using the hi-pass filter yields better results the USM if I remember correctly.
Steven

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Exactly what I am finding C1 is the most neutral and natural looking. That green in NX2 is toasted

 

[richard.L]

Exactly what I am finding C1 is the most neutral and natural looking. That green in NX2 is toasted

not green... the yellow is UP, about 6 cc Hth

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Yes I meant the green foliage is way off.