Difference in color between DNG and JPG

[hammam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here are two versions of the same shot, taken as DNG + Jpeg basic with the M8. Elmarit 90, «Cloudy» WB, ISO 640, B+W IR-cut filter, firmware 1.102. The first one is the DNG file converted to tif, then reduced in size and «Saved for the Web». Absolutely no correction in C1 for the conversion. Exactly «as shot». The second one is the basic jpg recorded with it. Again no manipulation, except reduced size and «saved for the Web».

 

I am very surprised at the difference in color betweeen the two. I expected some, but not that much. The converted DNG is almost exactly as the real thing. The M8 seems to process the files heavily and erratically when compressing them to jpg. Doesn't it try to at least stay as close as possible to the DNG?

 

Any comment on that? Thanks.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[holgerf]

Here are two versions of the same shot, taken as DNG + Jpeg basic with the M8. Elmarit 90, «Cloudy» WB, ISO 640, B+W IR-cut filter, firmware 1.102. The first one is the DNG file converted to tif, then reduced in size and «Saved for the Web». Absolutely no correction in C1 for the conversion. Exactly «as shot». The second one is the basic jpg recorded with it. Again no manipulation, except reduced size and «saved for the Web».

 

I am very surprised at the difference in color betweeen the two. I expected some, but not that much. The converted DNG is almost exactly as the real thing. The M8 seems to process the files heavily and erratically when compressing them to jpg. Doesn't it try to at least stay as close as possible to the DNG?

 

Any comment on that? Thanks.

 

Hi Olivier,

 

The JPGs of the M8 are nearly no topic in this forum. Propably most of the M8 users want to get the best out of their gear.

 

However, in many circumstances I would prefer a quick JPG and nevertheless reasonable result, which is not possible to get with the M8.

 

To make it short: IMOI the JPGs cannot be used, the are just bu....it. I tried from the beginning up to yesterday with all different firmwares - always the same. Latest when green and/or yellow play a role: forget about.

 

You can see three examples that were made yesterday with latest firmware 1.102, Leica IR filters, no AWB but daylight, ISO 160, no colour corrections at all.

 

It is a big pity that beneath the excellent results with DNG the JGGS are really erratically and worse than those of many POS cameras.

 

Best

Holger

 

JPG

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

DNG

 

JPG

 

DNG

 

JPG

 

DNG

[Eoin]

You may or may not know that Leica changed the matrix values (used by some raw converters to reproduce the colour) in FW 1.06 & 1.09 to new values in 1.091, 1.092 & 1.102. I suspect the jpegs are based on these values while the likes of C1 is using the inbuilt profile which has not been updated since it's introduction. Have you tried processing the DNG through CS2-3 or lightroom both of which use camera raw to decipher the DNG and will read the new martix values?.

[robsteve]

I just tried it for myself and get similar results, even with coded lenses. It looks like the jpegs are not getting the same treatment as the DNG files. I was using lightroom.

 

I used a coded 50mm Summicron and B+W F-Pro 486. A Metz flash with Stofen diffused was used. The camera was set to encoded ON- UV-IR and I used the flash preset.

 

 

[holgerf]

You may or may not know that Leica changed the matrix values (used by some raw converters to reproduce the colour) in FW 1.06 & 1.09 to new values in 1.091, 1.092 & 1.102. I suspect the jpegs are based on these values while the likes of C1 is using the inbuilt profile which has not been updated since it's introduction. Have you tried processing the DNG through CS2-3 or lightroom both of which use camera raw to decipher the DNG and will read the new martix values?.

 

Eoin,

 

the problem is NOT with the DNGs which are treated differently by C1 not using the color matrix and Adobe RAW converter using it.

 

The problem is just that the colors of the JPGs are definityly wrong. You always have a kind of green cast and missing yellow which can be seen in all the samples of this thread,

 

Best

Holger

[Bob Ross]

Hi Oliver,

I thouth that I'd fool around with your two shots and ran an absolute difference composit. It turned out so inteesting I thought I'd share it. It seems that the JPEG engine not only changes colors, but it can also move apples...

Bob

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Bob--

Only a true mathematician would think to do that! Rather a telling phenomenon.

[wattsy]

To make it short: IMOI the JPGs cannot be used, the are just bu....it. I tried from the beginning up to yesterday with all different firmwares - always the same. Latest when green and/or yellow play a role: forget about.

 

I now only shoot DNG but during the first few weeks of using the M8 last year I shot DNG + JPEG. I was always struck by how much nicer the JPEG colour looked compared to the C1 converted DNG colour. Whether it was less 'lifelike' or not didn't interest me - it simply looked better.

[Max Penson]

You need to understand that there is not such thing as correct color. Saying the JPEG file has wrong colors is like saying kodakcrome has wrong colors. if anything, the colors are wrong with ACR/Lightroom.

 

You guys need need to understand that the M8 JPEG file has been processed to produce a certain look Leica wanted. This was done using a color LUT, which is very flexible. IMO, Leica designed the colors to look like kodakcrome, but I haven't compared it mathematically, it looks like it is similar.

 

By capturing DNG, you are actuality passing the role of color reproduction to the RAW software. If you use C1, you get similar mathematic capabilities, and so, have the potential to get the same colors as the JPEG file. The problems is that the ICC profile included in C1 is somewhat different than the colors the camera does, the results are similar but not exactly the same. Also, the Gamma is a bit different, which has an impact on the colors.

 

If you use other RAW software, such as ACR and Lightroom, you will no linger get M8 colors, because ACR and LR haven't got the needed mathematic capabilities to perform such color transformation. What you'll get is colors that are the best Leica could have done with the simple ( and embarrassing) color system (two 3x3 matrices) of LR and ACR.

 

So, If you'll want my advise, try Leica M8 color for awhile, be open, don't think about the color being wrong (because there isn't such thing), and enjoy the camera with one of the more interesting color look in the market. Try it....

[dannirr]

On all the pictures I took in Namibia, I too noticed a very green cast to the JPG (basic) files. So much so, that I did not use them for quick sorting as I would have liked to do (or do with my other cameras) as I needed to see subtle color patterns.

 

Perhaps I need to run them all through a quick,auto correct action in PS to make them more usable as quick proofs?

 

Danni

[holgerf]

You need to understand that there is not such thing as correct color. Saying the JPEG file has wrong colors is like saying kodakcrome has wrong colors. if anything, the colors are wrong with ACR/Lightroom.

 

You guys need need to understand that the M8 JPEG file has been processed to produce a certain look Leica wanted. This was done using a color LUT, which is very flexible. IMO, Leica designed the colors to look like kodakcrome, but I haven't compared it mathematically, it looks like it is similar.

 

By capturing DNG, you are actuality passing the role of color reproduction to the RAW software. If you use C1, you get similar mathematic capabilities, and so, have the potential to get the same colors as the JPEG file. The problems is that the ICC profile included in C1 is somewhat different than the colors the camera does, the results are similar but not exactly the same. Also, the Gamma is a bit different, which has an impact on the colors.

 

If you use other RAW software, such as ACR and Lightroom, you will no linger get M8 colors, because ACR and LR haven't got the needed mathematic capabilities to perform such color transformation. What you'll get is colors that are the best Leica could have done with the simple ( and embarrassing) color system (two 3x3 matrices) of LR and ACR.

 

So, If you'll want my advise, try Leica M8 color for awhile, be open, don't think about the color being wrong (because there isn't such thing), and enjoy the camera with one of the more interesting color look in the market. Try it....

 

Sorry Max, I cannot agree with some of your conclusion.

 

Of course you in principle are right to say that there is no "true" colour. But you may say that seldom or often a certain result meets your expectation of what is true or not. And in the case of the M8 JPEGs I stick to my finding that they are bu....it.

 

Whatever the circumstances are I shot samples: daylight, tungsten, low light, sunshine - the results had nothing to do with reality. Yes I use a calibrated monitor, so I can immediately compare on screen what I see in reality. And obviously it is the same greenish cast which can be seen in all examples in this thread, not only mine.

 

BTW I shot with Kodachrome all my analog life and I would be very pleased if the JPEGs would look like that.

 

And to point out once more: several PAS cameras I used (Canon Ixux, Leica D-lux, Leica C1) gave better results in terms of color rendition.

 

Still hoping for a better world and just stickung to DNG meanwhile

 

Holger

[jaapv]

DNG and Jpg fine? It has the ease of Jpg (although I must admit I find it just as easy and quick to process in C1,but each to his own workflow), and the option of high quality for the real keepers. I find, in practice that some cameras are "JPG-cameras" in daily use, like for instance the D2, whilst others,like the M8 and high-end Canons are "RAW cameras".

[hammam]

Max, how about Leica Jpegs just trying to stay as close to real life colors as possible. I know there are variants and that not one human eye sees colors in the exact same way as the next, but there are some basic references for colors, right? Why is it that my Nikon DSLRs' Jpegs are so much better? Heck, why is it that my Canon G7's Jpegs are so much better? Granted, the G7 does not have Raw or Tif, so the Jpegs better be good , but still.

 

I find the «moved apple» phenomenon fascinating. How can that happen since it's the same shot ?

 

The M8 has obviously some very «interesting» idiosyncrasies (I'm in a good mood, this is why I say «interesting»). Do you think they will ever get it right? Maybe they should have subcontracted the digital and electronic part in Asia. German mechanic, yes. German digital? Mmm...

 

I'll try DNG + Jpeg fine.

 

Yes, yes, I love the M8. It just infuriates me that it has so many whims.

[ho_co]

I find the «moved apple» phenomenon fascinating. How can that happen since it's the same shot ?

Best doublecheck that it is indeed the same shot. Looks to me as if you shot several apple shots and here confused the JPG of one with the DNG of another.

 

Yes, yes, I love the M8. It just infuriates me that it has so many whims.

I remember in the '60s that was one of the 'features' Citroen used to sell the 2CV: With a German car, they said, every time you get in it's the same. With the 2CV, it's like making love--something different each time.

 

--HC

[jaapv]

Yes, yes, I love the M8. It just infuriates me that it has so many whims.

 

Ah, the joys of Leica life. My M8 bottom plate is starting to show the same indentations of my teeth as my film M's had...

[Max Penson]

Max, how about Leica Jpegs just trying to stay as close to real life colors as possible.

 

 

No body does that! Not one camera on the market. Not because they can't, it is a very easy thing to do, but because you'll not like the results. Yes, that's right, it will look dull and boring to you. trust my, I know what I am saying.

 

I know there are variants and that not one human eye sees colors in the exact same way as the next, but there are some basic references for colors, right?

 

No, no references. The problem isn't with the human eye, but with the human memory. When you remember back at the landscape you just saw, you do not remember the colors as they actually were. however, when you look at the image you took from this landscape, if it is fateful to real life, you would say that the colors aren't as they were when you took the image. But in fact, you just remember the colors differently, and so when you see the image with real life colors, they will not look very real to you.

 

For that reason, camera makers have invested million of dollars, to study memory colors and culture differences. What they have come up with is the colors you see with your Nikon camera as good or pleasing. Now, as the camera is more professional, the colors will have "room" for post editing, but still, will not be faithful to real life.

 

The one and only color that needs to be faithful to real life is skin tone. and that, leica got more or less OK.

 

I find the «moved apple» phenomenon fascinating. How can that happen since it's the same shot ?

 

This has nothing to do with the sensor or something like that. Leica and everybody else are mapping color, they do so with huge lookup tables. Input color is inputed into this table and the result is the output color. Your apple has the yellow that is mapped to green in this table.

 

Now, all of you might say that this table is very wrong, because the colors are not the same as you remember it or as they were in real life, but I can ensure you, from someone that is deep in the camera business, leica has no trouble at all getting the color faithful to real life. It will take them 20 minutes to do as it will take me.

 

The color the M8 is producing is no contingence, it was designed that way. It may not resemble memory, but I find the colors very refresh after Nikon and Canon colors. You may like the colors or you may not. I look at it as a brave decision.

[Max Penson]

hammam,

 

could you make an experiment for me please. Remove the IR filter, set the menu to IR -OFF and photograph the apple. then, activate the IR-On setting in the menu, but do not put on the IR filter. photograph the apple one more time. use JPEG only please, I want to see if they made correction to the colors. Also, try to keep the apple at the middle of the frame.

 

If the results are not the same, a new C1 ICC has to be done for IR filters.

[hammam]

Best doublecheck that it is indeed the same shot. Looks to me as if you shot several apple shots and here confused the JPG of one with the DNG of another.

 

 

I remember in the '60s that was one of the 'features' Citroen used to sell the 2CV: With a German car, they said, every time you get in it's the same. With the 2CV, it's like making love--something different each time.

 

--HC

 

Tss, tss, tss... It's the exact same shot, DNG + jpeg basic. Hey, they have the same number. There.

[holgerf]

No body does that! Not one camera on the market. Not because they can't, it is a very easy thing to do, but because you'll not like the results. Yes, that's right, it will look dull and boring to you. trust my, I know what I am saying.

 

 

 

No, no references. The problem isn't with the human eye, but with the human memory. When you remember back at the landscape you just saw, you do not remember the colors as they actually were. however, when you look at the image you took from this landscape, if it is fateful to real life, you would say that the colors aren't as they were when you took the image. But in fact, you just remember the colors differently, and so when you see the image with real life colors, they will not look very real to you.

 

For that reason, camera makers have invested million of dollars, to study memory colors and culture differences. What they have come up with is the colors you see with your Nikon camera as good or pleasing. Now, as the camera is more professional, the colors will have "room" for post editing, but still, will not be faithful to real life.

 

The one and only color that needs to be faithful to real life is skin tone. and that, leica got more or less OK.

 

 

 

This has nothing to do with the sensor or something like that. Leica and everybody else are mapping color, they do so with huge lookup tables. Input color is inputed into this table and the result is the output color. Your apple has the yellow that is mapped to green in this table.

 

Now, all of you might say that this table is very wrong, because the colors are not the same as you remember it or as they were in real life, but I can ensure you, from someone that is deep in the camera business, leica has no trouble at all getting the color faithful to real life. It will take them 20 minutes to do as it will take me.

 

The color the M8 is producing is no contingence, it was designed that way. It may not resemble memory, but I find the colors very refresh after Nikon and Canon colors. You may like the colors or you may not. I look at it as a brave decision.

 

Max,

 

I admite your intellectual abilty to see the things as you want them to see, really!

 

Enjoy your day

Holger

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[hammam]

Max, I can get beautiful ripe apples with jpegs from Nikon and Canon. Why do I HAVE to use DNG if I want my Leica apples ripe as well? You say it's a conscious and informed decision from Leica? To degrade jpegs images? What is the exact motive behind that? These Leica people are even more unfathomable than I thought.

 

The more it goes, and the more they work at the crippled M8, the worse it gets for us, average Leica fans, with average means and average patience. That's what I say in another thread, they are working hard at making this M8 a highly specialized and very expensive system, to be sold only to very wealthy professionals. And they are going to shoo away potential ordinary buyers, like me. Woud I buy an M8 today after learning all that I learned in the last six months? NO!