Superb new camera profiles and camera & film emulation presets (Cobalt-Image)

[Adam Bonn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:

The point being, though, if your profile is accurate enough and your white balance set well, you don't have to get into this for much of your work; granted, though, you may occasionally have to — meaning that one would like to avoid doing this, when possible. 
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Yes this, FWIW when I make a profile it serves to correct any deficiencies I find in the incumbent options and to incorporate edits I find myself making in a great many pictures.

Speaking personally I dislike having to round-robin between various apps to get what I want.

Not so long ago C1 was the tool for colour grading, now LR has stepped up, but what or who next?

If one learns how to create profiles that suit your own needs in your existing tools then you get to step off the merry-go-round.

 

  

[Guest Nowhereman]

5 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

Yes this, FWIW when I make a profile it serves to correct any deficiencies I find in the incumbent options and to incorporate edits I find myself making in a great many pictures...

I have no experience in making profiles. As we discussed earlier, Cobalt-Image state that they make profiles with 600 patches versus the 140 patches that X-Rite has. I have no way to judge this, so all I have said is that I find the Cobalt-Image DNG profiles for the M10 excellent — and implicitly assume that their claim of greater profile accuracy is correct.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Adam Bonn]

5 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:

Cobalt-Image state that they make profiles with 600 patches versus the 140 patches that X-Rite

Reading their blurb it seems that they use 3D LUT (typically used in reproduction profiles) generation to plot their desired chromaticity based on scans of film stock (for the emulation profiles anyway)

Could they have done this with 600 'patches'? Sure why not. (My hunch is that patches is perhaps not the best word for my understanding of the subject, maybe more hue reference values - something like that)

But that's waaaaaaaaaay beyond my understanding of this subject.

I'm quite pleased with how much I've learnt about all of this in the past 6-7 months (lockdown project), but whereas I'm too dumb to able to plot a LUT with all of its bends and stretches required to present the desired colour and tonal response within a specific colour space across a multitude of exposure values, I'm clever enough to know when to run with what I do know and make do with that!

If anyone using anybody's presets/profiles is happy with the results then they should run with it.

Equally if someone else uses (say) the WB, HSL and tone curve tools within their app of choice to get the picture how they want - that's basically the same thing same thing anyway (a preset &/or profile is after all nothing except a set of pre-defined tone and colour values)

There's always someone on the internet that doesn't like something and there's apparently no greater sin in photography than daring to be happy with something you've created and presented.

It's all just white noise. 

[jaapv]

I use it regularly and don’t find it too much of a hassle. 

[Guest Nowhereman]

"Ulysseita" has just posted some examples processed with the new version of the Kodachrome emulation package that is about to be released, taken with the M9 in bright and harsh light in Sicily, which I thought may be of interest: click here.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[otto.f]

1 hour ago, Nowhereman said:

"Ulysseita" has just posted some examples processed with the new version of the Kodachrome emulation package that is about to be released, taken with the M9 in bright and harsh light in Sicily, which I thought may be of interest: click here.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

The first examples which I can relate to the connotation of the word ‘Kodachrome’, 😄, but still from a photographer or a camera who tends to overexpose. Apart from that it has some nostalgic value which suggests some context or meaning on its own, nice. 

[Guest Nowhereman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@otto.f - I had the same reaction as you, that I would have underexposed some more in such harsh light — particularly if I had Kodachrome in my mind but, nevertheless, the bluish tinge looks familiar. By the way, when I saw the first Leica pamphlet on the M9, the one with the images of a boxer in Cuba, I had the thought that a digital camera, from which such good images in bright and harsh light, could be made, must be good. That's what compelled me to buy the M9.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[otto.f]

8 hours ago, Nowhereman said:

@otto.f - I had the same reaction as you, that I would have underexposed some more in such harsh light — particularly if I had Kodachrome in my mind but, nevertheless, the bluish tinge looks familiar. By the way, when I saw the first Leica pamphlet on the M9, the one with the images of a boxer in Cuba, I had the thought that a digital camera, from which such good images in bright and harsh light, could be made, must be good. That's what compelled me to buy the M9.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Yeah, I remember that issue of LFI. I wasn’t too enthousiastic about it at that time😄. My first impressions of the M9 were that I missed some bite in the images, which the M8 had with its 10Mp. The same thing is sort of happening with me now with the M10R, that’s what you get with a longer DR. But in the end I had a more than 10 years lasting happy relationship with my M9. 

Btw I bought the Cobalt C1 pack for the M10R the other day. For the first time I see real neutral, realistic colors coming from a CMOS Leica, instead of for instance Fujifilmish unnatural green grass or foliage. The bonus is that because the redundant yellows between the lines are gone, the perceived sharpness/microcontrast is also a bit  higher. Quite happy with it because now the white balance is the only thing I need to slide a bit in case the colors are too cold or too warm to me liking. .

[250swb]

On 7/13/2021 at 7:56 AM, otto.f said:

Btw I bought the Cobalt C1 pack for the M10R the other day. For the first time I see real neutral, realistic colors coming from a CMOS Leica, instead of for instance Fujifilmish unnatural green grass or foliage. 

If you are using the default M10 profile in Lightroom/Photoshop the horrible greens can be got rid of by using almost any of the other Adobe optional profiles instead. The 'Adobe Standard' profile for example does give a nod towards the M9 clean colour range in sunshine. Perhaps these Cobalt profiles are the way to go, I've tried to make the point before that presets from other makers don't work out of the box because you are adding a preset on top of a profile, and Leica don't do very good profiles. So the base image needs changing to something flatter and less colourful and then the preset can be used, but the advice flew over the top of the recipients head.

Some of the examples linked above from 'Ulysseita' are very good, almost spot on for the 'National Geographic look' when they used Kodachrome. There is however a whole other debate to be had about the nostalgic feeling 25% the audience has when looking at the images, and whatever it is the other 75% of the audience are seeing. Perhaps the problem is 'Kodachrome', a film few have seen printed or published, and even fewer used. It may make more sense to relate the results of Cobalt profiles to more  modern films that people have used, so a challenge, does anybody have links to similar Porta profile users etc. (and not the dogs breakfast that is the Miranda thread)?

[otto.f]

Thanks for clarifying this. I don’t use LR, so Cobalt is my only option for C1 to get rid of the yellow river. Amd there is quite a difference in results with Cobalt for M10 or M10R. But I’m not inclined to invest in Kodachrome claims. Thus far, in the past and now, Kodachrome was and is a very difficult to scan film, especially the 64ASA. So, how would any ICT-er succeed in emulating it. Anyway, I got the impression they compare it with scanned Kodachrome, not with projected Kodachrome. 

[Guest Nowhereman]

11 hours ago, otto.f said:

... don’t use LR, so Cobalt is my only option for C1 to get rid of the yellow river. And there is quite a difference in results with Cobalt for M10 or M10R...

Of course there is the option of making your own profiles, which I assume is no more difficult for C1 than for LR, or is it? I haven't wanted to make my own profiles and, as you know, have been happy with the base Cobalt-Image profiles for the M10. I'll get the new Kodachrome pack by the end of the month, and perhaps the Kodachrome one as well, which has been updated to version 2.

There is a posting today on the Fred Miranda forum comparing adobe profiles some of the base Cobalt-Image profiles as well as some of the film emulation profiles in the Kodak pack, which I find interesting, done by someone who is neither screaming nor putting people down. He uses a flower image, which I might not have done, but which does show the color rendition differences. Interestingly, he considers the film emulations as a starting point, which is an approach that I like.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[250swb]

So 'superb' is now a starting point and not an end result? I'm not having a go at you as you'd prefer to think, but with statements like "Interestingly, he considers the film emulations as a starting point, which is an approach that I like" this was where the thread was always going to end up, like a cat chasing its tail. These are good enough film emulations, thank you for bringing this to the attention of the forum, but where did defending a supposed 'attack' (by me) about the inaccuracies of the profiles turn to 'well, yeah, they are just a starting point'?

Edited July 15, 2021 by 250swb

[Guest Nowhereman]

4 hours ago, 250swb said:

So 'superb' is now a starting point and not an end result? I'm not having a go at you as you'd prefer to think, but with statements like "Interestingly, he considers the film emulations as a starting point, which is an approach that I like" this was where the thread was always going to end up, like a cat chasing its tail. These are good enough film emulations, thank you for bringing this to the attention of the forum, but where did defending a supposed 'attack' (by me) about the inaccuracies of the profiles turn to 'well, yeah, they are just a starting point'?

@250swb - At the very beginning of this thread I made it clear that I only had bought the basic DNG profile pack for my M10 and that I found these profiles excellent. I also said I was interested in the Kodak film emulation package and that, from what I saw in the Fred Miranda thread I linked, the "Cobalt film emulations look like they are a lot more accurate than any of the older profile/preset packages available". That is not inconsistent with saying that they are a good starting point for further processing — as I consider that any digital film emulation is likely to be a starting point because any film can have a different look depending how it's been exposed and the nature of the light and colors in the image. Now, I'm not going to go through the preceding three pages to find exactly where I said something like that.

You seem to enjoy making points that put people down and, apparently, make you feel superior, as you did recently in another thread where you made fun of @Steven whose thread you said came back to where it started: you linked a ridiculous Wikipedia article about a mythical bird that flies in declining circles until it disappear up its own ass, which you asserted was like that thread. I responded with a rap, that I feel characterized what you do. I don't intend to read any more of your posts. 
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

[Cobram]

5 hours ago, Nowhereman said:

@250swb - At the very beginning of this thread I made it clear that I only had bought the basic DNG profile pack for my M10 and that I found these profiles excellent. I also said I was interested in the Kodak film emulation package and that, from what I saw in the Fred Miranda thread I linked, the "Cobalt film emulations look like they are a lot more accurate than any of the older profile/preset packages available". That is not inconsistent with saying that they are a good starting point for further processing — as I consider that any digital film emulation is likely to be a starting point because any film can have a different look depending how it's been exposed and the nature of the light and colors in the image. Now, I'm not going to go through the preceding three pages to find exactly where I said something like that.

You seem to enjoy making points that put people down and, apparently, make you feel superior, as you did recently in another thread where you made fun of @Steven whose thread you said came back to where it started: you linked a ridiculous Wikipedia article about a mythical bird that flies in declining circles until it disappear up its own ass, which you asserted was like that thread. I responded with a rap, that I feel characterized what you do. I don't intend to read any more of your posts. 
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Dear Nowwhereman,

I'm really glad you opened this thread. Cobalt profiles are interesting/promising and as I'm "obsessed" with colors I really think they deserve attention. They are maybe not the best in the world but considering there are only two guys trying to improve the work of big companies with battalion of engineers regarding color renditions... YES their work is remarkable. 

Again thank you for this thread. I got many useful information.

I will buy Kodak(chrome) and M9 CCD fever profiles (emulations) in next weeks. I use C1 v20, so now I'm thinking if I shall upgrade to C1 v21 before buying these profiles or after. Based on Cobalt homapage info I'm not sure profiles work in all C1 versions as they state they need to prepare tailor made versions. Need to ask Ulysetta.

In any case, (any) profiles are helpful and a nice contribution for amateur photographers like me. 

Thank you for your contribution Nowhereman.

[250swb]

5 hours ago, Nowhereman said:

You seem to enjoy making points that put people down and, apparently, make you feel superior, as you did recently in another thread where you made fun of @Steven whose thread you said came back to where it started: you linked a ridiculous Wikipedia article about a mythical bird that flies in declining circles until it disappear up its own ass, which you asserted was like that thread.

Each thread on its merit, I don't harbour grudges, I pretty much forget who I said what to right after saying it, and I don't refer to separate discussions unless they are relevant. I know this isn't standard forum practice, there are people who like to keep a chip on their shoulder and animosity alive. But as you bring it up there is one thing I'll note, you open a thread on a public forum and you don't get to act as the ringmaster, people are allowed to disagree without being constantly accused of attacks just because you consider the thread yours and for agreement with you alone. And if you want to find patterns look at your own snide remarks, and similar to your friend your attempts to stir up trouble between other people, goodness knows it's fit for the playground.

[Guest Nowhereman]

Today I read this post, which has an informative view on the Cobalt-Image profiles and from which I learned about the Cobalt Smart pack, an add-on to the basic DNG profiles. Cobalt Smart has additional profiles, among them Landscape, Portrait, and Vivid options, which someone told me offer a quite different look for when you want a more dramatic starting point than is provided by the basic profiles, rather than as an alternative to the film emulations. 

Cobalt Smart also has some monochrome profiles. Apparently, the basic monochrome one is similar to  the Adobe Monochrome profile, but the other ones, I am told, can be useful if you don't have the Cobalt Monochrom CCD and CMOS emulation packs. 

I'll get the Cobalt Smart and the Kodachrome and Kodak Films packs by the end of this month. Incidentally, I  don't have any connection to the developers or know them; but, like @Cobram, like the idea of supporting this tiny company that is doing interesting and valuable work.
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Edited July 18, 2021 by Nowhereman

[pedaes]

On 7/18/2021 at 3:24 PM, Nowhereman said:

the Kodachrome

Having the basic package, I also got an e-mail from Cobalt about the 'chrome profies with some very good 'drag the slider ' examples againsr Adobe Standard. Perhaps I am getting to familiar with digital benefits. A couple of the examples 'chrome-ised' did look good with more subdued colour, but must say several of the images looked 'flat' and with such a loss of contrast they looked terrible, IMHO. The red's change significantly but not sure they have them correct, nor am I sure of the Adobe starting point that use.

Again for the odd image, I would trust LrC adjustments. To put all images through this profile would be a strange choice (and why not make a profile to your interpretation of 'chrome), but hey, who's to say. Eye of beholder and all that.

Expect the examples are on the website to play with, and will be interested in what others think.

Their work is interesting, not sure it is valuable (to them maybe as it ain't cheap).

Edited July 19, 2021 by pedaes

[SrMi]

Cobalt has updated their Fuji Film and Kodachrome emulation with different curves:

LINEAR (linear info from the sensor with film emulation applied)
FLAT (base exposure curve, no contrast)
STD (full exposure curve and contrast)

I am looking forward to experimenting with them.

Cobalt also added basic packs for Leica CL and Leica X.

 

[Guest Nowhereman]

On 7/19/2021 at 2:44 PM, pedaes said:

Having the basic package, I also got an e-mail from Cobalt about the 'chrome profies with some very good 'drag the slider ' examples againsr Adobe Standard. Perhaps I am getting to familiar with digital benefits. A couple of the examples 'chrome-ised' did look good with more subdued colour, but must say several of the images looked 'flat' and with such a loss of contrast they looked terrible, IMHO. The red's change significantly but not sure they have them correct, nor am I sure of the Adobe starting point that use...

Padaes - I didn't get the email you're referring to and PM'ed Ulysseita about it: he didn't know what I was referring to, but was apparently going off on holiday. It's a tiny company,and they seem to be listening to their customers (on the Fred Miranda forum), which is a good thing.

Since my last post here, I bought the Kodak Films pack, but I have not used it enough to evaluate it. Just haven't had enough time and I'm in what someone else on LUF called the "Covid Hiatus". My only recommendation at this stage is the Cobalt Basic DNG Pack. Ulysseita suggested that for some people this may be enough, as opposed to the film emulation profiles.

I'm happy with the basic profiles and much prefer them, overall, to the Adobe Standard and Adobe Color for LR — meaning that, while often, similar the Cobalt profiles can have great differences for certain color combinations (red and yellow, etc) in certain types of light. I don't know how they may differ from custom profiles one can make oneself, as I've never done that.

Below and in the following two posts are three images that I shot in January 2000 in the harsh noontime light of Chiang Mai, with dappled sunlight/shade falling on skin tones that I found difficult with the Adobe LR profiles. The Cobalt profiles that I used are indicated below. I used a film emulation profile — Kodak Porta 400 (Linear) — for only one of the images. So far, I found the Linear version to be the best starting point; sometimes the Standard version was also a good starting point, but the Flat version was like you've described it.

The three young women ate tourists from Hunan, and spoke excellent American-accented English. They were taking selfies with an iPhone on a stand on the ground. As I was pressing the shutter on the first image, the one on the left quickly brought up her hand with my name card that I had just given her. (As usual please double-click for a better view of the images.)

M10 | DR Summicron 50 | ISO 200 | f/4 | 1/1000 | Cobalt Standard

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!

________________________
Frog Leaping photobook Edited July 26, 2021 by Nowhereman

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest Nowhereman]

M10 | DR Summicron 50 | ISO 200 | f/4 | 1/1000 | Cobalt Kodak Porta 400 (Linear)

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!

________________________
Frog Leaping photobook