supperman Posted July 18, 2006 Author Share #21 Posted July 18, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Peter, Sorry, but can you do a comparison of the 'plastic' look of the Canon shot versus the FX01? Personally I don't think many companies have got the in-camera jpg processing as well done as Canon IMHO, and it's definitely better than Panasonic/Leica jpgs. Looking at your photos, I actually prefer the Canon ones better than even the DMR, which gave almost radioactive looking leaves. Pretty shocking actually. But I think especially for digicams, colour is more influenced by the saturation/contrast settings you have. And in this case, metering as well, since it looks like the Canon is 1/2-1 stop brighter than the others. But I should also qualify that I had an S400 looong time ago, and I was disappointed that it didn't get violets at all (came out just blue). I haven't tried my DLux2... maybe I should. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 18, 2006 Posted July 18, 2006 Hi supperman, Take a look here Canon lens beats Leica lens?!!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
petermcwerner Posted July 19, 2006 Share #22 Posted July 19, 2006 Looking at your photos, I actually prefer the Canon ones better than even the DMR, which gave almost radioactive looking leaves. I am not judging by feelings and personal preference, but assessing color fidelity. I am looking at the screen and have the pot with the plant standing near the screen. I am an orchid collector and VP of the Swiss Orchid Society, so in this context I am interested in producing a picture that looks as much as possible like the real flower. My orchid photos are for documentation and I cannot publish a picture that does not render the color of the flower as seen by the human eye. The Canon rendition just does not look at all like the flower. The flower does have what you call the "radioactive look" you do not like. But perhaps you prefer plastic flowers to live orchids... My orchid photos can be seen on Orchids of The World and Angraecum Encyclopedia Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 19, 2006 Share #23 Posted July 19, 2006 ...The petals and sepals in the ixus picture have that "plastic" look that is sometimes attributed to the rendition of the human skin in portraits made with Canon cameras... Agreed. Canon pictures often give me the feeling that some plastic polish is spread on the subject matters. In your Canon pic above excessive reflections on the petals could be due to some over exposing and/or over sharpening as well. ...I actually prefer the Canon ones better than even the DMR, which gave almost radioactive looking leaves... Funny that we may have so different tastes, Max. Now is it me or is there some green cast in the DMR picture? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemcl Posted July 19, 2006 Share #24 Posted July 19, 2006 I'm new here, so just for the record we are all on the same page as far as color management goes, yes? Everybody calibrates and profiles their display with some sort of optical device and views images in a program that is color profile aware? And JPEG images from the cameras we are talking about are viewed with the sRGB profile, right? Otherwise it gets very difficult to have a meaningful discussion about color rendition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
supperman Posted July 19, 2006 Author Share #25 Posted July 19, 2006 No, it's not the flowers that look radioactive, but the leaves. It's the sort of bright green that reminds me of Sony Disney colours. But you're probably right about issue with colour fidelity because as the review mentioned, the Canon camera does tend to boost colour saturation on the default setting, although it seems like it's the opposite in your case. But the good thing about digital is that it's much easier to make colour corrections than to pull out details where there is none. And LCT, if you haven't realised, the surface of plants is waxy and smooth. But can you show a picture where the human skin is supposed to look 'plastic'? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petermcwerner Posted July 19, 2006 Share #26 Posted July 19, 2006 In your Canon pic above excessive reflections on the petals could be due to some over exposing and/or over sharpening as well. No postprocess sharpening to any of the pictures and camera setting in all cases to "natural" or corresponding where available. The luminosity is roughly the same for both cameras - the Canon overemphasizes the red channel, as can be seen from the below histograms. Peter Luminosity - Canon ixus 750 (Powershot SD550) Red Channel - Canon ixus 750 (Powershot SD550) Luminosity - Panasonic FX01 (Leica c-lux) Red Channel - Panasonic FX01 (Leica c-lux) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
petermcwerner Posted July 19, 2006 Share #27 Posted July 19, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Everybody - views images in a program that is color profile aware? - JPEG images ... are viewed with the sRGB profile, right?. views images in a program that is color profile aware? On the web we all view images as rendered by the various browsers, probably IE for the majority (Opera in my case). When preparing for the publication on the web, I looked at the images in PS CS2 JPEG images ... are viewed with the sRGB profile Before saving for web in PS, all images were converted to sRGB where necessary Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 19, 2006 Share #28 Posted July 19, 2006 ...It's the sort of bright green that reminds me of Sony Disney colours... Yes i see what you mean, looks like the DMR pic has some green cast as i said above Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucemcl Posted July 19, 2006 Share #29 Posted July 19, 2006 views images in a program that is color profile aware?On the web we all view images as rendered by the various browsers, probably IE for the majority (Opera in my case). When preparing for the publication on the web, I looked at the images in PS CS2 That sounds like you are doing just about the best that can be done Peter. Ideally the viewers of the images will pull them from the web and look them over in PS or another program that can use the sRGB profile for the image and the appropriate display profile. Note that if the profile is included with the image when posting to the web then Safari and similar Macintosh web browsers will be able to render the color correctly, assuming their display is calibrated and profiled properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.