New M8 profiles in Adobe Camera Raw

[hoppyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have recently moved to PS CS4 and ACR 5.1.

Adobe has released new Beta camera profiles. One is meant to improve the rendition from Raw files from the existing profiles. One is meant to emulate how each camera's default converter program renders Raw files.. For the M8, I see significant differences in the default renditions compared to ACR4.4 which was the last M8 profile update.

These examples are from a grab shot in available window light. This is the M8 with 28 'cron ASPH. and UV/IR. For the purposes of the comparison, the exposure and AWB have not been altered from capture. All other processing identical. Subjectively I think that reds and yellows and skin tones are improved. The new profiles produce dramatically different output with sunsets and clouds, for example. The first is ACR4.4 M8 profile, the 2nd the new Adobe Standard Beta 2, the 3rd the new Camera Standard Beta 2

ACR44M8profile.jpg photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com

ACRAdobeStdB2M8profile.jpg photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com

ACRCameraStdB2M8Profile.jpg photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com

[Photoskeptic]

Geoff, of the three, for me anyway, the first is the best.

[hoppyman]

Geoff, of the three, for me anyway, the first is the best.

Photoskeptic, these are unaltered of course., rather than how I might develop the images. You can see some differences, clearly?

Can you define your preferences? You prefer the skin tones or saturation or whatever? No wrong answer, just providing examples on default conversions. Pressed, for me the second (Adobe standard beta 2) is my preference. On accuracy, the red in the third is easily better. Of course I know the fair skinned model (my daughter) and I have subjective prejudices.

histograms on the full sized files are dsramatically different.

[Philinflash]

Thanks, Geoff, for starting this thread. I, for one, did not know that Adobe Labs had new profiles available. I see that the new Beta does not work backwards with earlier Camera Raw processors but I wonder about OLD profiles working with Camera Raw 5.0; Adobe does not seem to say anything about that. In my early experimentation, the old profiles seem to have some effect in Camera Raw 5.0 but I do not know if it is the same as it was in earlier versions.

 

With respect to your inviting comment on your test shot, I would rather evaluate over a range of lenses, lighting situations, and subjects as opposed to just one. As I understand it, the profile is for the overall performance of the camera. I would not want to rely on any single profile that is optimum only in a narrow range of situations.

 

It is nice, however, to have a small library of profiles that I can try out on dng files.

[hoppyman]

Thanks, Geoff, for starting this thread. I, for one, did not know that Adobe Labs had new profiles available. I see that the new Beta does not work backwards with earlier Camera Raw processors but I wonder about OLD profiles working with Camera Raw 5.0; Adobe does not seem to say anything about that. In my early experimentation, the old profiles seem to have some effect in Camera Raw 5.0 but I do not know if it is the same as it was in earlier versions.

 

With respect to your inviting comment on your test shot, I would rather evaluate over a range of lenses, lighting situations, and subjects as opposed to just one. As I understand it, the profile is for the overall performance of the camera. I would not want to rely on any single profile that is optimum only in a narrow range of situations.

 

It is nice, however, to have a small library of profiles that I can try out on dng files.

Hi Philinflash! These are just offered for comparison on this specific example of course. In no way definitive. Nevertheless you can see that they are different starting points.

I can only speak about the M8. In ACR the profiles I have seen were at 3.6, 4,4 and now these two new Betas. LR2, I think is similar.

These are all based on 2 standard light scenarios as I understand it. ACR operates differently to Capture One 4 in that respect. There are profile editing functions available too. Also of course, with a color checker you can follow the identical method used by Adobe's Thomas Knoll to produce the profiles, if desired.

[thompsonkirk]

Another thread on this topic appeared in the M8 sub-forum (instead of here, where I suppose it belongs):

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/67537-new-beta-profiles-lr-2-a.html

 

The other thread also contains some images converted with different profiles.

 

Kirk

[Philinflash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Another thread on this topic appeared in the M8 sub-forum (instead of here, where I suppose it belongs):

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/67537-new-beta-profiles-lr-2-a.html

 

The other thread also contains some images converted with different profiles.

 

Kirk

 

I agree that thread should be in this sub-forum rather than M8; I ignored it completely because of the LR2 reference, which I do not use. Otherwise, some good stuff there.

[Philinflash]

...

These are all based on 2 standard light scenarios as I understand it. ACR operates differently to Capture One 4 in that respect. There are profile editing functions available too. Also of course, with a color checker you can follow the identical method used by Adobe's Thomas Knoll to produce the profiles, if desired.

 

The way I understand it, there are two White Balance scenarios that Adobe seems to peg as the standards for tungsten-type light and 'natural' light. Then, the profile is meant to optimize for those.

 

I haven't gotten around to producing profiles with the color checker, essentially put off by its outrageous price. OK, I can afford it, but I have principles, too. How do they justify charging so much for some printing on a bit of card stock?

 

Some others on the Forum have done some good work with profiles for the M8 with the earlier profile editor and my cursory check is that at least one still functions in the new Camera Calibration function of Camera Raw 5.1 (having just downloaded that up-date on Camera Raw 5.0 that came with CS4).

 

All of this boils down to subjective values and desired photographic effects. In that regard, I can see the profile-to-profile differences in your test shot, Geoff, but I can't really say I prefer one over another.

[piero]

file #2 seems more balanced, imagining the colour of the hair.

file #3 lacks the contrast of previous two files.

 

it seems I would prefer #2

 

Although to evaluate the available profiles one should test under more controlled lighting circumstances, including a colour checker.

IMHO

[Shootist]

I see that the new Beta does not work backwards with earlier Camera Raw processors but I wonder about OLD profiles working with Camera Raw 5.0;

 

 

Not sure what you mean. There was no camera profiles other then what Adobe supplied with ACR before ACR 4.5. You could save tint/color/saturation settings and load them as Presets but these are not really camera profile. You can still use your old presets with the ACR 4.5/4.6 and more then likely ACR 5.1.

Whatever camera profile you make with the Adobe profile editor program you can load into ACR 4.5 and above, that includes ACR 5/.1.

[hoppyman]

Folks for anyone interested.

I have now run the calibration script from Chromaholics for my M8. Subjectively the colour is improved-more natural especially for skin tones.

The white, greys and black on the color checker photo I took are very neutral when measured now.

I have PS CS4 with ACR5.1. The Chromaholics script does not officially support ACR 5.1 but it runs fine.

My settings

Shadow tint 3

Red Hue -2

Red Sat 9

Green Hue 4

Green Sat 45

Blue Hue 22

Blue Sat 3

 

Note the big shifts in Green Sat and Blue Hue.

Anyone else experimenting here and care to share your numbers?

I haven't tried the DNG profile editor beta as yet

[Shootist]

What camera profile did you use to start with? 4.4, 3.6 or one of the beta profiles?

Without knowing that the numbers you posted are irrelevant.

Thanks.

 

 

Folks for anyone interested.

I have now run the calibration script from Chromaholics for my M8. Subjectively the colour is improved-more natural especially for skin tones.

The white, greys and black on the color checker photo I took are very neutral when measured now.

I have PS CS4 with ACR5.1. The Chromaholics script does not officially support ACR 5.1 but it runs fine.

My settings

Shadow tint 3

Red Hue -2

Red Sat 9

Green Hue 4

Green Sat 45

Blue Hue 22

Blue Sat 3

 

Note the big shifts in Green Sat and Blue Hue.

Anyone else experimenting here and care to share your numbers?

I haven't tried the DNG profile editor beta as yet

[ammitsboel]

Folks for anyone interested.

I have now run the calibration script from Chromaholics for my M8. Subjectively the colour is improved-more natural especially for skin tones.

The white, greys and black on the color checker photo I took are very neutral when measured now.

I have PS CS4 with ACR5.1. The Chromaholics script does not officially support ACR 5.1 but it runs fine.

My settings

Shadow tint 3

Red Hue -2

Red Sat 9

Green Hue 4

Green Sat 45

Blue Hue 22

Blue Sat 3

 

Note the big shifts in Green Sat and Blue Hue.

Anyone else experimenting here and care to share your numbers?

I haven't tried the DNG profile editor beta as yet

 

So far I've never heard of a setting done with a script calibrator that was any good unless you shoot in the same studio with the same lighting?

[hoppyman]

What camera profile did you use to start with? 4.4, 3.6 or one of the beta profiles?

Without knowing that the numbers you posted are irrelevant.

Thanks.

Glad you got something out of trying them out

My default is 4.4, since the others are Beta. I'm not seeing pleasing skintones from those as I've tried them on more images. Remember too that this is my subjective judgement.

In any case the script is free, you need to take a suitable photo of a color checker of course.

I'd welcome any numbers or samples from anyone, including anything from the profile editor