Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
paul.bridges.3388

Lightroom Q2 RAW problems

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Q2 RAW imports into Lightroom (DNG) are over-saturated red.  Can anyone explain why this is happening?  Is it a problem with the camera profile applied during conversion?  What is the favoured setting?

I’m really struggling to adjust this in post without screwing up the image elsewhere.  

As a newbie, i know just enough to be dangerous (apologies).

Can anyone share their workflow/settings perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having a Q2 and having Lightroom 6.14 (perpetual license), my first assumption is that the CCP (camera calibration profile) is either not there or not optimized for the Q2. That means LR is processing the DNG file using the in-built DNG profile, which in my experience has been off and produces garish colors on various Leica cameras I've used.

Before LR was updated with better profiles for my M-P240, SL, and CL bodies, I used the Xrite color checker and Passport software to create better CCPs: that gives a more balanced color rendering as a default.

Once LR had been updated with the Adobe standard based CCP for these cameras, the default color rendering was fine and I no longer needed the custom profiles I'd created. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Jayk said:

Are you using Lightroom Classic V8.2 or 8.3.? I think these are the only versions that support the Q2.

I think an earlier version - probably 6.x.  I’m away from my laptop and will need to check.

Does anyone have experience of V8.x and Q2?

Edited by paul.bridges.3388

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ramarren said:

LR is processing the DNG file using the in-built DNG profile, which in my experience has been off and produces garish colors on various Leica cameras I've used.

“Garish” is definitely the word and I’m not experienced enough to compensate.  I use LR for straightforward tweaks (shadow, highlight, contrast, clarity, etc)....and stay away from the tricky colour adjustments.  Hence I’m a bit stranded currently....

Lightroom performed so well with my SL...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I took some test shots in a Leica store  with the Q2 and also found that red is not only very saturated but has a different Hue/Shade to the Red colour in the JPEGs.

My recollection of the original scene suggests that the JPEG red was more accurate

I am using Lightroom 6.14 and the Camera profile is "Embeded". So I am not sure if the Lightroom settings are already accounted for in the "Embedded" data. ( I am not an expert in these matters)

So is it a case of  v6.14 is not optimised for the Q2, as per Jayk's suggestion?

I have almost managed to bring the Red colour under control with some adjustments to Red hue & saturation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This link provides information about which cameras are supported by Adobe Camera Raw.

https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/camera-raw/kb/camera-raw-plug-supported-cameras.html

I think it confirms only versions 8.2 onwards are optimised for the Q2. I also suspect that not only does tweaking the hue and saturation involve more work it is unlikely to match what is achieved by the optimised versions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jayk

So would this mean that version 6.14 will never be able to be used properly with the Q2?

I do get similar results regarding the Red colours with Raw Therapee as well, which I have only used on a couple of occassions to see if it was agood substitute for Lightroom 6.14.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Colourise said:

@Jayk

So would this mean that version 6.14 will never be able to be used properly with the Q2?

I do get similar results regarding the Red colours with Raw Therapee as well, which I have only used on a couple of occassions to see if it was agood substitute for Lightroom 6.14.

Yes, the embedded profile is the problem. Lightroom 6.14 Perpetual License will never  be updated again, according to Adobe, so there will never be an official Adobe CCP for the Q2. 

However, you can buy the Xrite Passport kit (about $120 from B&H and other sources) and with that generate a good CPP for the Q2 that plugs into Lightroom very easily. You set that as the default for Q2 raw files once you have it in place and from that point on you're done. Once you have the Passport package, you can also create profiles for more difficult lighting situations as well and use them when appropriate, both for the Q2 and for any other digital camera you might have or eventually buy. It's well worth the investment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ramarren said:

Yes, the embedded profile is the problem. Lightroom 6.14 Perpetual License will never  be updated again, according to Adobe, so there will never be an official Adobe CCP for the Q2. 

However, you can buy the Xrite Passport kit (about $120 from B&H and other sources) and with that generate a good CPP for the Q2 that plugs into Lightroom very easily. You set that as the default for Q2 raw files once you have it in place and from that point on you're done. Once you have the Passport package, you can also create profiles for more difficult lighting situations as well and use them when appropriate, both for the Q2 and for any other digital camera you might have or eventually buy. It's well worth the investment. 

Thanks for the guidance.  Is the Xrite Passport implementation as complicated to implement as it sounds (to a relative novice)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Jayk said:

 I also suspect that not only does tweaking the hue and saturation involve more work it is unlikely to match what is achieved by the optimised versions.

My amateur adjustments to LR 6.x red hue & saturation would seem to support this.  It gets closer but then knocks out other aspects of the image.  The impression I get is that the file starts to  “fall apart”.  Again, please forgive the lay language here.  I’m out of my depth....

Is consensus that an upgrade to LR 8.2 would solve this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, paul.bridges.3388 said:

Thanks for the guidance.  Is the Xrite Passport implementation as complicated to implement as it sounds (to a relative novice)?

I don't know how complicated it sounds to a novice. :) Here's what I did ... this is on macOS Mojave, but I'm sure it's similar to doing this on Windows: 

  • Installed the latest ColorChecker Passport software from xritephoto.com (v2) (My version was very old, it's been a long time since I updated.)
  • Started LR 6.14 and checked that the installed version of the plugin was 2.0 with the File > Plugin Manager command.
  • Clicked a raw file with a shot of the Passport ColorChecker.
  • Chose File > Export... 
  • Clicked "ColorChecker Camera Calibration" in the dialog. 
  • Put in a name for the calibration (I used "Leica CL - Passport v2")
  • Clicked the Export button

After a few moments processing, a dialog told me to restart LR in order to activate the new CCP. I did. It appears as a menu choice in the Develop module Camera Calibration panel in the menu next to Profile:  ... Seems simple enough for most uses to me. 

If you want to get fancy, you can read about the "dual illuminant" and other features, make use of them. Of course, you can tailor the profile by making your exposure of the ColorChecker in different illumination, or with a fixed white balance setting, etc etc. But for general use, I used a ColorChecker image that I'd made on a sunny day with a slight, high altitude overcast to use as a base. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, paul.bridges.3388 said:

My amateur adjustments to LR 6.x red hue & saturation would seem to support this.  It gets closer but then knocks out other aspects of the image.  The impression I get is that the file starts to  “fall apart”.  Again, please forgive the lay language here.  I’m out of my depth....

Is consensus that an upgrade to LR 8.2 would solve this?

Switching to any version of Lightroom later than v6.14 means switching to Lightroom CC and buying it via a subscription. That's something I've resisted doing. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, paul.bridges.3388 said:

Thanks for the guidance.  Is the Xrite Passport implementation as complicated to implement as it sounds (to a relative novice)?

 

No.  At least I didn't find it so.  Take raw (dng) picture of target.   Launch the color checker camera calibration app.  I used the "dng" tab.  Drag the DNG of the image you took into the app.  Tweak the corners of the automatically generated crop if necessary.  Click the Create Profile button. Done.

Restart Lightroom if it is already running.

There are other ways to generate the profile.   I found the above to be pretty easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, marchyman said:

 

No.  At least I didn't find it so.  Take raw (dng) picture of target.   Launch the color checker camera calibration app.  I used the "dng" tab.  Drag the DNG of the image you took into the app.  Tweak the corners of the automatically generated crop if necessary.  Click the Create Profile button. Done.

Restart Lightroom if it is already running.

There are other ways to generate the profile.   I found the above to be pretty easy.

This makes total sense and sounds straightforward enough.  Thank you!

Is it right to assume that creating a profile this way is more accurate than relying on the standard profile in LR 8.x? I have a subscription for Adobe Creative and so able to upgrade to 8.2 readily enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The CCPs created by the Xrite Passport software and the ones created by Adobe are different, but what "accurate" means is a value judgement. The Xrite profiles are intended to produce consistent rendering of the ColorChecker chart and are probably more 'colormetrically' accurate if the original exposure was captured properly under the appropriate lighting; Adobe's profiles are supposed to provide a pleasing balance as the basis for raw conversion and image editing, which may or may not necessarily be as accurate to that reference standard. 

It really doesn't make too much difference in the end, unless you're doing forensic or product photography where absolute accuracy is critical. Either profile converts the raw files to a reasonable middle point as a default that leaves a lot of editing flexibility while being reasonably on the money for the vast majority of conventional photos. Neither is as radically garish as the built-in profile, and doesn't stress the limits of the tools to obtain a pleasing color/saturation/contrast/etc balance.

Remember that in raw conversion, the color defaults are always supposed to be a starting point that works for an average mix of subject/color/contrast/lighting. You're supposed to tailor the defaults to what you want as a finish rendering. It's a convenience if those defaults are close to what your finish rendering requires as it saves time in editing, and it's important that those defaults allow the editing tools to have a good range of adjustment so as not to limit what you can get out of the photo. 

 

Edited by ramarren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You could try the following:

Select a suitable image that you feel is over saturated/developed,

Switch to the develop module and go to Camera Calibration section at the bottom,

Ensure the Process is 2012 (Current) and the Profile is Embedded,

Make the adjustments that you feel gives you the look you require,

Hold down the alt key (on a Mac, not sure about a PC) and the Reset button should change to Set Default. Click on this and a dialog box will appear,

Check that it states your camera correctly and you can then save this as the default profile for your camera.

 

Regards

Edited by Bobitybob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, paul.bridges.3388 said:

Is it right to assume that creating a profile this way is more accurate than relying on the standard profile in LR 8.x?

As ramarren wrote: different.  I posted the differences in a Q forum thread back in 2016:

 

 

It compares images using the Leica Profile, Adobe standard as it existed in 2016, and a generated profile.   It will give you an idea as to what might change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, marchyman said:

As ramarren wrote: different.  I posted the differences in a Q forum thread back in 2016:

 

 

It compares images using the Leica Profile, Adobe standard as it existed in 2016, and a generated profile.   It will give you an idea as to what might change.

That’s really interesting - thank you.  So the exact symptoms that I’m experiencing.  Did you settle on OOC Jpg or persevere with DNG conversion profiles.  I’ve always edited Raw but won’t if the camera conversion is so much better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...